Wizards Custserv response on Total Defense

[Legildur]

My apologies if you already knew the following, but I thought I saw a thread a few days back (damn the lack of search) asking whether or not Total Defense allowed you to make an AOO. I thought that Caliban's response looked pretty good, but I decided to check with Wizards Customer Service (Alex W. at custserv@wizards.com) to be sure. And here is the response (answers in bold):


I am uncertain about some aspects of a the Total Defense action:

1. What is the maximum distance you can move while using Total Defense? I think that for a human fighter wearing a chain shirt and lightly encumbered that it would be a maximum of 30'.

You could move your normal movement. So 30' in your above example.

2. Does a character using Total Defense threaten an area?

Yes.


3. If the answer to (2) is yes, then I assume that they can flank an opponent if their movement stops in the appropriate square.

Yes you may flank.

4. If the answer to (2) is yes, then can they take an AOO? If so, what is the penalty to the attack roll? (-4 as per fighting defensively?)

You still threaten the area around you, so you can make AOO. You would suffer the -4 penalty since you are using Total Defense.

<edit to amend title>

 

[shilsen]

Sounds reasonable

That's exactly the way I've been running it. Of course, since none of the players or monsters ever actually used total defense, it hasn't mattered

 

[milo]

I was thinking about making a character who never attacks and just stands there with a really high AC to soak up attacks

 

[Legildur]

Which is exactly what I use my puny halfling Rog7 for when up against creatures immune to critical hits and sneak attacks (except undead and their touch attacks of course).

Just stand around with an AC 30 (and can't be flanked) and let them swing

 

[Cloudgatherer]

This isn't a "sage" (as in Skip Williams) response. I'd suggest renaming the thread to reflect this.

 

[Deadguy]

I can accept this 'ruling' and would be happy enough to use it. But it isn't the way I have been handling it. I guess I have taken the action's name to heart: Total Defence, meaning no taking risks, and avoiding all offenise action in case I let down my guard.

So what's the rationale for a person fighting Total Defence still threatening AoOs and providing flanking?

 

[Barcode]

Re: Sage response on Total Defense

You still threaten the area around you, so you can make AOO. You would suffer the -4 penalty since you are using Total Defense. [/B]

"the -4 penalty"? Sounds like custserv thinks you are talking about fighting defensively, not total defense. I'd clarify to them that you are referring to total defense and see if the answer is the same.

 

[Gromm]

Total defense = no attacks.
Fighting defensively is a totally different matter. You can't get AoO with total defense, you have no modifier to your attack rolls, because you have no attack rolls. Any action that effects your attack rolls lasts till your next round (ie Power Attack, Expertise, Fighting Defensively, etc).
Total Defense, if I recall, is a Full Round action which means you get a 5' step and no more (as is the case with ALL full round actions, full attack, etc- unless the Full round action involves movement ie running, charge, etc).

And don't trust cust.service, if I recall they know less about the rules than anyone. On the old boards we had post upon post upon post of examples of them not knowing the simplest of rules.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Total defense = no attacks.
Fighting defensively is a totally different matter. You can't get AoO with total defense, you have no modifier to your attack rolls, because you have no attack rolls. Any action that effects your attack rolls lasts till your next round (ie Power Attack, Expertise, Fighting Defensively, etc).
Total Defense, if I recall, is a Full Round action which means you get a 5' step and no more (as is the case with ALL full round actions, full attack, etc- unless the Full round action involves movement ie running, charge, etc)./quote]
Some would disagree with you on the AoO part.

And don't trust cust.service, if I recall they know less about the rules than anyone. On the old boards we had post upon post upon post of examples of them not knowing the simplest of rules.

They know more about rules than non-roleplayers, but that's about it. If you're unlucky, you'll get a deceptive answer. If you're lucky, the response will be so poorly written that you won't understand that it's wrong. (I've had bad experiences.)

 

[Legildur]

Okay, I've asked ALex W. to clarify that he isn't confusing it with Fighting Defensively, and I'll let you know in due course.

Maybe someone could send the same questions to the Sage for me?

It seems to me that Fighting Defensively and Total Defense are the same thing, but that the former allows a standard action (move + attack at -4 penalty) compared with the latter's standard action (move + no attack, but still threaten).

So you trade an attack for an additional +1 Dodge bonus to AC (or +2 to AC if Tumble ranks of 5+). Either form allows you to threaten and AOO at -4.