AoO and Ranged Attacks [Archive] - Wizards Community

AoO and Ranged Attacks [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
GawainBS
09-28-07, 04:48 AM Hello

I was wondering, if you have Combat Reflexes, and an archer makes a full attack (more than one attack) within your reach, do you get AoO's for each attack?
I'm a bit in the dark here wether or not this counts as one or more opportunity.
Përsonally, I think you do get an AoO for each shot.

Thanks!
ShadowF
09-28-07, 06:08 AM No, Just the first attack. If he was smart he would take a 5ft step first.
Shadowfax7
09-28-07, 06:55 AM Hello

I was wondering, if you have Combat Reflexes, and an archer makes a full attack (more than one attack) within your reach, do you get AoO's for each attack?
I'm a bit in the dark here wether or not this counts as one or more opportunity.
Yes, you get an AoO for each opportunity that presents itself up to your Dex bonus. However, if the archer can't 5' step (even after the 1st attack), he can also change his full attack action to a standard action after the first attack (in case he didn't realize he would be drawing an AoO).
Dheran
09-28-07, 10:35 AM I was wondering, if you have Combat Reflexes, and an archer makes a full attack (more than one attack) within your reach, do you get AoO's for each attack? If you really follow the RAW (Rules As Written), you get zero AoOs against an archer making a full attack. The game authors only listed "ranged attack provokes AoO" under Standard Actions in the Combat chapter, and specified that a full attack doesn't provoke AoOs under Full-Round Actions. (This is on Table 8-2: Actions in Combat, but the text doesn't disagree.)

Was this what was intended? Nope. But it is what they wrote.
tarkin
09-28-07, 11:44 AM Interesting catch there Dheran.

They really should have stated it "Full Attack, Melee = No" and "Full Attack, Ranged = Yes"
Dheran
09-28-07, 11:59 AM Interesting catch there Dheran. Yeah. It's unfortunate for me, as it turns out. I generally treat RAI (Rules As Intended) arguments as mere wishful thinking, but this WotC boner is so blatant even I can't ignore it. And thus the camel's nose is already in the tent. :weep:
GawainBS
09-28-07, 12:19 PM Thanks for the replies. Ofcourse, I'll go with RAI.
1 ton ghost
09-28-07, 12:28 PM fundamental interpretation of any text is a dangeous venture. just look at your typical Bible beater or jihadist. unless we're talking math and other sciences, you should always question the authority.

you SHOULD draw an AoO for any ranged attack. i believe that was the initial design as you have to steady yourself to project a ray (as in physics, not spell) to a fixed point which means you're a bit more vulnerable. you can't dance about in a 5ft square easilly lest you have an errant shot. lining up your shot makes you vulnerable simply put. believe me, i know all too well.
more importantly, ranged attacks are usually from points of cover, treelines, trenches, etc. in the distance, hence "ranged". you metaphorically are getting a little extra AC (save a shield) at the cost of some melee prowess
that and you don't have a melee weapon to fend off the occaisional thrust. did they not grant us Quick Draw, drop said bow/x-bow to draw melee, move to better cover (or close a door altogether), etc?

Full Rnd or Stnrd Act. is irrelevant. it's exploiting a loophole which is implied for other actions, not just combat. combat is pretty black/white as wounds and the like aren't subjective (in game anyway). you're either hurt (hit) or not (miss).
from this standpoint, this is why they have exceptions in feats, (Su) and (Ex) abilities. for every rule, there's almost always a countermeasure, you just have to dig for it.

for your Combat Reflexes, yeah, but only 1 attack/offender. multiple AoO's must be parceled out to other enemies. this prevents ppl from swarming you en masse basically. now, if you were to be 'ported into an archer line or have a readied action against said archers when all of them volley and the like, yeah, it's open season especially w/ Cleave.

Dheran, "camel's nose"? not familiar w/ that euphimism. kindly explain plz
GawainBS
09-28-07, 12:37 PM No, it's not one AoO/enemy. That's a relic from 3.0. You can get multiple AoO's/enemy, but they must each be for a different triggering action.
Ex.: Moving 30ft through a threatened area of one enemy, only provokes one AoO for leaving a threatened square, since the "leaving of the other 25ft (5 squares)" is essentially the same action. So, OotS was wrong in a comic.
http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/initiativeAndAoO.html#combat-reflexes-and-additional-attacks-of-opportunity
tarkin
09-28-07, 12:39 PM Once the camel's nose is in the tent, you can't keep the rest of him out.

For me, the camel is in the tent and has fallen asleep.

This is just one of MANY reasons why I use RAI, not RAW. RAW is not playable (it does not even say that dead characters can't move/attack/cast spells because they did not want to confuse people about undead)
EjoThims
09-28-07, 01:06 PM Never noticed that before. This allows for multiple views, from all ranged attacks provoking, to none when making a full attack, to only the first provoking when making a full attack.

I don't really think this error breaks a RaW perspective. There are far sillier things that a strict RaW will allow, but 'as intended' is far, far more open to individual interpretation, and the RaW, as silly as it can be, is still the best standard of comparison between different games.

After having this pointed out, in my own games, I'll likely rule it as that first ranged attack provokes, but the rest in a full attack don't, since you only get one AoO per action, just like with movement.

Edit: Removed mistakes I had made while posting hurriedly.
ShadowF
09-28-07, 02:54 PM Never noticed that before. This allows for multiple views, from all ranged attacks provoking, to none when making a full attack, to only the first provoking when making a full attack.

No, it doesn't.

Most (if not all), play it as all ranged attacks provoke, but I don't really think this breaks a RaW perspective. There are far sillier things that a strict RaW will allow, but 'as intended' is far, far more open to individual interpretation, and the RaW, as silly as it can be, is still the best standard of comparison
between different games.

Technically you are breaking the RAW allowing for allowing AoO for every single range attack. Even in the artical in GawainBS presented argues that the Full ranged attack the opponent would only get one AoO because the mentally challenged ranger is doing the same action which provoked the original AoO. If he shot the Arrow then moved according to some web articals be WotC the opponent would get 2 AofOs 1 for range attack 2 moving out of enemy threaten square that is not a 5ft step.

No, it's not one AoO/enemy. That's a relic from 3.0. You can get multiple AoO's/enemy, but they must each be for a different triggering action.
Ex.: Moving 30ft through a threatened area of one enemy, only provokes one AoO for leaving a threatened square, since the "leaving of the other 25ft (5 squares)" is essentially the same action. So, OotS was wrong in a comic.
http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/initiativeAndAoO.html#combat-reflexes-and-additional-attacks-of-opportunity

If he was only going on the information in the PHB then your incorrect. PHB pg 135.
Edit: sorry on that one i miss read a passage
EjoThims
09-28-07, 03:11 PM Technically you are breaking the RAW allowing for allowing AoO for every single range attack. Even in the artical in GawainBS presented argues that the Full ranged attack the opponent would only get one AoO because the mentally challenged ranger is doing the same action which provoked the original AoO. If he shot the Arrow then moved according to some web articals be WotC the opponent would get 2 AofOs 1 for range attack 2 moving out of enemy threaten square that is not a 5ft step.

Ah, I see my mistake in my haste, now. When making a ranged full attack, it's that single action on the defender's part, so only one AoO can be provoked regardless.

However, there are still multiple ways to take what this fault in the charts could mean.

Some will see it as granting one AoO when making a full attack with ranged attacks, no matter how many attacks are made. Some will see it as a single ranged attack provokes, but a full attack with ranged attack(s) doesn't. Even this last could be interpretted to allow one AoO on a full attack, as the first attack could also be that single attack.

If he was only going on the information in the PHB then your incorrect. PHB pg 135.

3.5 PHB 135 says nothing about only getting one AoO per opponent. It does however say that you only get one per round. This is, of course, superceded by the Combat Reflexes feat, which also does not limit it to one attack per opponent, though it does note that you can still only make one AoO per oppurtunity.
ShadowF
09-28-07, 03:20 PM LEarn to read the edit.
EjoThims
09-28-07, 03:23 PM Hard to do when the edit comes while I'm making the post.

;)
ShadowF
09-28-07, 03:33 PM However, there are still multiple ways to take what this fault in the charts could mean.

Some will see it as granting one AoO when making a full attack with ranged attacks, no matter how many attacks are made. Some will see it as a single ranged attack provokes, but a full attack with ranged attack(s) doesn't. Even this last could be interpretted to allow one AoO on a full attack, as the first attack could also be that single attack.

I guess if they aren't that intuitive to figure out when it says moving through threatened squares only counts as one AoO then yeah I can see that. If an AoO was provoked every time for a full round action who would be that retard to sit in one spot and unload, unless they had God like AC.
EjoThims
09-28-07, 03:40 PM I guess if they aren't that intuitive to figure out when it says moving through threatened squares only counts as one AoO then yeah I can see that.

:confused:

I think you misread my post there.
GawainBS
09-28-07, 06:31 PM I guess if they aren't that intuitive to figure out when it says moving through threatened squares only counts as one AoO then yeah I can see that. If an AoO was provoked every time for a full round action who would be that retard to sit in one spot and unload, unless they had God like AC.

Well, I'm thinking more about something with a lot of reach and Large and in Charge or some such. Granted, it isn't very common, but it definitly is possible.
ShadowF
09-29-07, 04:03 AM Im not deneying it's possible, but no rational being is going to take that much AoO damage (fully knowing how you are calling the rules) and then again take the enemies full round attack thats just suicide. PC or NPC. If your running a NPC that is doing that kind of action your giving away too much free Exp. If a PC is sitting thier knowing the rules and decides to do that ensure that person has plenty of back up characters.
GawainBS
09-29-07, 06:08 AM Im not deneying it's possible, but no rational being is going to take that much AoO damage (fully knowing how you are calling the rules) and then again take the enemies full round attack thats just suicide. PC or NPC. If your running a NPC that is doing that kind of action your giving away too much free Exp. If a PC is sitting thier knowing the rules and decides to do that ensure that person has plenty of back up characters.

It was in fact a rules-question, nothing more.
Zarith
09-29-07, 08:07 AM It seems like this falls under the idea of one "given opportunity". Moving through multiple threatened squares in one round (as stated in the example) and firing multiple arrows in a threatened square in one round seems like the same idea to me.

From the SRD

Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity
If you have the Combat Reflexes feat you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.
GawainBS
09-29-07, 08:10 AM It seems like this falls under the idea of one "given opportunity". Moving through multiple threatened squares in one round (as stated in the example) and firing multiple arrows in a threatened square in one round seems like the same idea to me.

From the SRD

Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity
If you have the Combat Reflexes feat you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.

For me, two shots still count as two opportunities. I posted this part of the SRD myself a few post higher, so I know what it says.:)
Zarith
09-29-07, 08:25 AM For me, two shots still count as two opportunities. I posted this part of the SRD myself a few post higher, so I know what it says.:)

Sorry, missed it. It seems to be part of the same action to me. Move action or Full attack.
GawainBS
09-29-07, 10:33 AM Sorry, missed it. It seems to be part of the same action to me. Move action or Full attack.

Moving is one action (one sequence), while firing a bow with a full attack action is one action, but several sequences. At least, that's how I see it.
Zarith
09-29-07, 11:19 AM Moving is one action (one sequence), while firing a bow with a full attack action is one action, but several sequences. At least, that's how I see it.

I can see what you're saying. It's funny I've never had this come up in any of my campaigns, gotta love the 5' step. I think I'll stick with the 1 AoO for a full round attack.
1 ton ghost
09-29-07, 12:35 PM you might want to reconsider when there are 2 incoming poisoned arrows, scorching rays, or acid arrows.
i usually say each attack provokes but it doesn't often come up. you might draw 1 AoO, but why 2? i mean, 5ft out and if it's difficult terrain, it's not worth drawing typically.

and if AoO's are resolved before primary attack is initialized then they have the "out" of stopping short on the follow up shot that construes a Full-Attack.
if this is Rapid-Shot however (-2/ea) and the first shot draws an AoO, it sucks cuz' you have the option to not take the 2nd, thusly ommitting 2nd AoO but you took a -2 for nothing on the first...
ShadowF
09-29-07, 04:50 PM For me, two shots still count as two opportunities. I posted this part of the SRD myself a few post higher, so I know what it says.:)

It's not worth looking at it that way its foolish your punishing an already gimped Ranger while some one can run circles around a creature only provokes one AoO.
ShadowF
09-29-07, 05:03 PM Hard to do when the edit comes while I'm making the post.

;)

Sorry about that :embarrass
GawainBS
09-29-07, 05:13 PM It's not worth looking at it that way its foolish your punishing an already gimped Ranger while some one can run circles around a creature only provokes one AoO.

And the benefit of running circles around someone would be...?
ShadowF
09-30-07, 02:07 AM And the benefit of running circles around someone would be...?

The Benefit of punishing a gimped Class would be ..... ?
GawainBS
09-30-07, 06:34 AM It's not punishing a specific class. If you are referring to the Ranger, he's hardly gimped. Besides, a ranged attacker that gets himself in the reach of a melee combatatant and hasn't got a means to get out of it, generally deserves punishment. (Some specific Battlefield-control-reach builds aside, it isn't that hard.)
Zarith
09-30-07, 07:30 AM Don't forget, the multiple AoO will only occur when confronting an enemy that has multiple AoO's per round (combat reflexes) and pushed into a position where the attacker can't move, that isn't going to happen every combat. Either way you handle it, I don't see it having a serious impact on the game.
GawainBS
09-30-07, 07:34 AM It's a just a rules conundrum I had in my head, nothing more.:)
Patrick Draken-Korin
09-30-07, 04:20 PM Rarely applicable rules are like freak accidents though; they only show up when you aren't expecting them (otherwise it can't be called a freak occurrence).

I think I'll go with 1 AoO per ranged full attack, unless further weirdness gets in the way. Like what? I just don't know, that's why it's weirdness.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
GawainBS 09-28-07, 04:48 AM	Hello I was wondering, if you have Combat Reflexes, and an archer makes a full attack (more than one attack) within your reach, do you get AoO's for each attack? I'm a bit in the dark here wether or not this counts as one or more opportunity. Përsonally, I think you do get an AoO for each shot. Thanks!
ShadowF 09-28-07, 06:08 AM	No, Just the first attack. If he was smart he would take a 5ft step first.
Shadowfax7 09-28-07, 06:55 AM	Hello I was wondering, if you have Combat Reflexes, and an archer makes a full attack (more than one attack) within your reach, do you get AoO's for each attack? I'm a bit in the dark here wether or not this counts as one or more opportunity. Yes, you get an AoO for each opportunity that presents itself up to your Dex bonus. However, if the archer can't 5' step (even after the 1st attack), he can also change his full attack action to a standard action after the first attack (in case he didn't realize he would be drawing an AoO).
Dheran 09-28-07, 10:35 AM	I was wondering, if you have Combat Reflexes, and an archer makes a full attack (more than one attack) within your reach, do you get AoO's for each attack? If you really follow the RAW (Rules As Written), you get zero AoOs against an archer making a full attack. The game authors only listed "ranged attack provokes AoO" under Standard Actions in the Combat chapter, and specified that a full attack doesn't provoke AoOs under Full-Round Actions. (This is on Table 8-2: Actions in Combat, but the text doesn't disagree.) Was this what was intended? Nope. But it is what they wrote.
tarkin 09-28-07, 11:44 AM	Interesting catch there Dheran. They really should have stated it "Full Attack, Melee = No" and "Full Attack, Ranged = Yes"
Dheran 09-28-07, 11:59 AM	Interesting catch there Dheran. Yeah. It's unfortunate for me, as it turns out. I generally treat RAI (Rules As Intended) arguments as mere wishful thinking, but this WotC boner is so blatant even I can't ignore it. And thus the camel's nose is already in the tent. :weep:
GawainBS 09-28-07, 12:19 PM	Thanks for the replies. Ofcourse, I'll go with RAI.
1 ton ghost 09-28-07, 12:28 PM	fundamental interpretation of any text is a dangeous venture. just look at your typical Bible beater or jihadist. unless we're talking math and other sciences, you should always question the authority. you SHOULD draw an AoO for any ranged attack. i believe that was the initial design as you have to steady yourself to project a ray (as in physics, not spell) to a fixed point which means you're a bit more vulnerable. you can't dance about in a 5ft square easilly lest you have an errant shot. lining up your shot makes you vulnerable simply put. believe me, i know all too well. more importantly, ranged attacks are usually from points of cover, treelines, trenches, etc. in the distance, hence "ranged". you metaphorically are getting a little extra AC (save a shield) at the cost of some melee prowess that and you don't have a melee weapon to fend off the occaisional thrust. did they not grant us Quick Draw, drop said bow/x-bow to draw melee, move to better cover (or close a door altogether), etc? Full Rnd or Stnrd Act. is irrelevant. it's exploiting a loophole which is implied for other actions, not just combat. combat is pretty black/white as wounds and the like aren't subjective (in game anyway). you're either hurt (hit) or not (miss). from this standpoint, this is why they have exceptions in feats, (Su) and (Ex) abilities. for every rule, there's almost always a countermeasure, you just have to dig for it. for your Combat Reflexes, yeah, but only 1 attack/offender. multiple AoO's must be parceled out to other enemies. this prevents ppl from swarming you en masse basically. now, if you were to be 'ported into an archer line or have a readied action against said archers when all of them volley and the like, yeah, it's open season especially w/ Cleave. Dheran, "camel's nose"? not familiar w/ that euphimism. kindly explain plz
GawainBS 09-28-07, 12:37 PM	No, it's not one AoO/enemy. That's a relic from 3.0. You can get multiple AoO's/enemy, but they must each be for a different triggering action. Ex.: Moving 30ft through a threatened area of one enemy, only provokes one AoO for leaving a threatened square, since the "leaving of the other 25ft (5 squares)" is essentially the same action. So, OotS was wrong in a comic. http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/initiativeAndAoO.html#combat-reflexes-and-additional-attacks-of-opportunity
tarkin 09-28-07, 12:39 PM	Once the camel's nose is in the tent, you can't keep the rest of him out. For me, the camel is in the tent and has fallen asleep. This is just one of MANY reasons why I use RAI, not RAW. RAW is not playable (it does not even say that dead characters can't move/attack/cast spells because they did not want to confuse people about undead)
EjoThims 09-28-07, 01:06 PM	Never noticed that before. This allows for multiple views, from all ranged attacks provoking, to none when making a full attack, to only the first provoking when making a full attack. I don't really think this error breaks a RaW perspective. There are far sillier things that a strict RaW will allow, but 'as intended' is far, far more open to individual interpretation, and the RaW, as silly as it can be, is still the best standard of comparison between different games. After having this pointed out, in my own games, I'll likely rule it as that first ranged attack provokes, but the rest in a full attack don't, since you only get one AoO per action, just like with movement. Edit: Removed mistakes I had made while posting hurriedly.
ShadowF 09-28-07, 02:54 PM	Never noticed that before. This allows for multiple views, from all ranged attacks provoking, to none when making a full attack, to only the first provoking when making a full attack. No, it doesn't. Most (if not all), play it as all ranged attacks provoke, but I don't really think this breaks a RaW perspective. There are far sillier things that a strict RaW will allow, but 'as intended' is far, far more open to individual interpretation, and the RaW, as silly as it can be, is still the best standard of comparison between different games. Technically you are breaking the RAW allowing for allowing AoO for every single range attack. Even in the artical in GawainBS presented argues that the Full ranged attack the opponent would only get one AoO because the mentally challenged ranger is doing the same action which provoked the original AoO. If he shot the Arrow then moved according to some web articals be WotC the opponent would get 2 AofOs 1 for range attack 2 moving out of enemy threaten square that is not a 5ft step. No, it's not one AoO/enemy. That's a relic from 3.0. You can get multiple AoO's/enemy, but they must each be for a different triggering action. Ex.: Moving 30ft through a threatened area of one enemy, only provokes one AoO for leaving a threatened square, since the "leaving of the other 25ft (5 squares)" is essentially the same action. So, OotS was wrong in a comic. http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/initiativeAndAoO.html#combat-reflexes-and-additional-attacks-of-opportunity If he was only going on the information in the PHB then your incorrect. PHB pg 135. Edit: sorry on that one i miss read a passage
EjoThims 09-28-07, 03:11 PM	Technically you are breaking the RAW allowing for allowing AoO for every single range attack. Even in the artical in GawainBS presented argues that the Full ranged attack the opponent would only get one AoO because the mentally challenged ranger is doing the same action which provoked the original AoO. If he shot the Arrow then moved according to some web articals be WotC the opponent would get 2 AofOs 1 for range attack 2 moving out of enemy threaten square that is not a 5ft step. Ah, I see my mistake in my haste, now. When making a ranged full attack, it's that single action on the defender's part, so only one AoO can be provoked regardless. However, there are still multiple ways to take what this fault in the charts could mean. Some will see it as granting one AoO when making a full attack with ranged attacks, no matter how many attacks are made. Some will see it as a single ranged attack provokes, but a full attack with ranged attack(s) doesn't. Even this last could be interpretted to allow one AoO on a full attack, as the first attack could also be that single attack. If he was only going on the information in the PHB then your incorrect. PHB pg 135. 3.5 PHB 135 says nothing about only getting one AoO per opponent. It does however say that you only get one per round. This is, of course, superceded by the Combat Reflexes feat, which also does not limit it to one attack per opponent, though it does note that you can still only make one AoO per oppurtunity.
ShadowF 09-28-07, 03:20 PM	LEarn to read the edit.
EjoThims 09-28-07, 03:23 PM	Hard to do when the edit comes while I'm making the post. ;)
ShadowF 09-28-07, 03:33 PM	However, there are still multiple ways to take what this fault in the charts could mean. Some will see it as granting one AoO when making a full attack with ranged attacks, no matter how many attacks are made. Some will see it as a single ranged attack provokes, but a full attack with ranged attack(s) doesn't. Even this last could be interpretted to allow one AoO on a full attack, as the first attack could also be that single attack. I guess if they aren't that intuitive to figure out when it says moving through threatened squares only counts as one AoO then yeah I can see that. If an AoO was provoked every time for a full round action who would be that retard to sit in one spot and unload, unless they had God like AC.
EjoThims 09-28-07, 03:40 PM	I guess if they aren't that intuitive to figure out when it says moving through threatened squares only counts as one AoO then yeah I can see that. :confused: I think you misread my post there.
GawainBS 09-28-07, 06:31 PM	I guess if they aren't that intuitive to figure out when it says moving through threatened squares only counts as one AoO then yeah I can see that. If an AoO was provoked every time for a full round action who would be that retard to sit in one spot and unload, unless they had God like AC. Well, I'm thinking more about something with a lot of reach and Large and in Charge or some such. Granted, it isn't very common, but it definitly is possible.
ShadowF 09-29-07, 04:03 AM	Im not deneying it's possible, but no rational being is going to take that much AoO damage (fully knowing how you are calling the rules) and then again take the enemies full round attack thats just suicide. PC or NPC. If your running a NPC that is doing that kind of action your giving away too much free Exp. If a PC is sitting thier knowing the rules and decides to do that ensure that person has plenty of back up characters.
GawainBS 09-29-07, 06:08 AM	Im not deneying it's possible, but no rational being is going to take that much AoO damage (fully knowing how you are calling the rules) and then again take the enemies full round attack thats just suicide. PC or NPC. If your running a NPC that is doing that kind of action your giving away too much free Exp. If a PC is sitting thier knowing the rules and decides to do that ensure that person has plenty of back up characters. It was in fact a rules-question, nothing more.
Zarith 09-29-07, 08:07 AM	It seems like this falls under the idea of one "given opportunity". Moving through multiple threatened squares in one round (as stated in the example) and firing multiple arrows in a threatened square in one round seems like the same idea to me. From the SRD Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity If you have the Combat Reflexes feat you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.
GawainBS 09-29-07, 08:10 AM	It seems like this falls under the idea of one "given opportunity". Moving through multiple threatened squares in one round (as stated in the example) and firing multiple arrows in a threatened square in one round seems like the same idea to me. From the SRD Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity If you have the Combat Reflexes feat you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus. For me, two shots still count as two opportunities. I posted this part of the SRD myself a few post higher, so I know what it says.:)
Zarith 09-29-07, 08:25 AM	For me, two shots still count as two opportunities. I posted this part of the SRD myself a few post higher, so I know what it says.:) Sorry, missed it. It seems to be part of the same action to me. Move action or Full attack.
GawainBS 09-29-07, 10:33 AM	Sorry, missed it. It seems to be part of the same action to me. Move action or Full attack. Moving is one action (one sequence), while firing a bow with a full attack action is one action, but several sequences. At least, that's how I see it.
Zarith 09-29-07, 11:19 AM	Moving is one action (one sequence), while firing a bow with a full attack action is one action, but several sequences. At least, that's how I see it. I can see what you're saying. It's funny I've never had this come up in any of my campaigns, gotta love the 5' step. I think I'll stick with the 1 AoO for a full round attack.
1 ton ghost 09-29-07, 12:35 PM	you might want to reconsider when there are 2 incoming poisoned arrows, scorching rays, or acid arrows. i usually say each attack provokes but it doesn't often come up. you might draw 1 AoO, but why 2? i mean, 5ft out and if it's difficult terrain, it's not worth drawing typically. and if AoO's are resolved before primary attack is initialized then they have the "out" of stopping short on the follow up shot that construes a Full-Attack. if this is Rapid-Shot however (-2/ea) and the first shot draws an AoO, it sucks cuz' you have the option to not take the 2nd, thusly ommitting 2nd AoO but you took a -2 for nothing on the first...
ShadowF 09-29-07, 04:50 PM	For me, two shots still count as two opportunities. I posted this part of the SRD myself a few post higher, so I know what it says.:) It's not worth looking at it that way its foolish your punishing an already gimped Ranger while some one can run circles around a creature only provokes one AoO.
ShadowF 09-29-07, 05:03 PM	Hard to do when the edit comes while I'm making the post. ;) Sorry about that :embarrass
GawainBS 09-29-07, 05:13 PM	It's not worth looking at it that way its foolish your punishing an already gimped Ranger while some one can run circles around a creature only provokes one AoO. And the benefit of running circles around someone would be...?
ShadowF 09-30-07, 02:07 AM	And the benefit of running circles around someone would be...? The Benefit of punishing a gimped Class would be ..... ?
GawainBS 09-30-07, 06:34 AM	It's not punishing a specific class. If you are referring to the Ranger, he's hardly gimped. Besides, a ranged attacker that gets himself in the reach of a melee combatatant and hasn't got a means to get out of it, generally deserves punishment. (Some specific Battlefield-control-reach builds aside, it isn't that hard.)
Zarith 09-30-07, 07:30 AM	Don't forget, the multiple AoO will only occur when confronting an enemy that has multiple AoO's per round (combat reflexes) and pushed into a position where the attacker can't move, that isn't going to happen every combat. Either way you handle it, I don't see it having a serious impact on the game.
GawainBS 09-30-07, 07:34 AM	It's a just a rules conundrum I had in my head, nothing more.:)
Patrick Draken-Korin 09-30-07, 04:20 PM	Rarely applicable rules are like freak accidents though; they only show up when you aren't expecting them (otherwise it can't be called a freak occurrence). I think I'll go with 1 AoO per ranged full attack, unless further weirdness gets in the way. Like what? I just don't know, that's why it's weirdness.