AoO Prone>Kneeling>Standing [Archive] - Wizards Community

AoO Prone>Kneeling>Standing [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Frozeman
09-27-07, 03:25 PM One of the guys I play with thinks tripping is broken because of the number of AoOs you take getting up and figures that if you get tripped in combat you may as well just stay down and play possum. To combat this when he was GMing he found the kneeling or sitting entry on the armour class modifiers table pg 151 PHB and decided that you could avoid an AoO by on your turn take a move action to go from prone to kneeling, then either attack from the kneeling position and get up the rest of the way on your next turn, or use you second move action to get up the rest of the way. So adding a choice to get up in two move actions without an AoO, while accepting a -2AC in the middle stage. What do you think, I can't find anything about moving into or out of the kneeling condition, is this legal or balanced?
tarkin
09-27-07, 03:47 PM It is one AoO for getting from Prone directly to standing.

That is not a big deal, really.

Also, the AoO happens before the action, so you can't use an AoO to trip someone while they are getting up.

No matter what, at the end of their action they are standing up.

I would not allow the kneeling thing, it looks like too much house rules. All sorts of things start happening, such as "can you trip a kneeling guy?" and "Can he take a 5ft step or crawl or otherwise move while kneeling" and lots of other questions.

But I might consider simply House Ruling that "You can get up as a full round action that does not provoke an AoO" That would be similar to the Withdrawal rule.
tyrecian
09-27-07, 06:42 PM actually the idea that he is using a move action to kneel and then stand, woule seem to indicate that he is taking 2 AoOp. Which would probably upset your GM very much.

That is quite a pickle, since tripping is designed to be a battle maneuver that is better than just swinging a sword (like PA'ing, or grappling, or disarming an enemy that relies on weapons or Sunderring the same, these are the very reason these things exist!). Sounds like your GM is just nerfing the ability because he is finding it tough to combat it through ingenuity.

Tarkin says: But I might consider simply House Ruling that "You can get up as a full round action that does not provoke an AoO" That would be similar to the Withdrawal rule. that is pretty good, makes tripping like a sort of daze, but gives you the ability to keep them down, since they are using the whole round, a good tripper would own that poor guy since he is just standing, in the end AoOp might be a better idea than taking the trip every turn and then getting the AoO anyways, as well as iterative attacks that see you prone in the same place (at -4 to AC).

If this problem is super persistent, and the GM begins to use it against you as well, perhaps the solution is to create a feat, such as Quickstand which would allow standing as a move action, but draw no AoO, or even as a free action, like a backflip karate maneuver.

There is a feat somewhere that allows you to fight from prone with no penalties, that is a nice one too. Might even be called prone fighting, takes the AC penalty down, and the attack mod penalty as well.

Don't get down, i had a DM that hated my tripping ranger. He kept throwing elves at us in this forrest and i kept tripping them. Finally he cut me down using archers and pet wolves (ring of wolves in melee to trip me, and then archers outside the wolves to cut me down). The wolves ate me, but it was pretty funny to see his face when i realized the archers were in the woods and 'went prone' :) (+4 to AC v/s range, +4 to AC from soft cover from wolves, +2 to AC from terrain, the archers couldnt hit me) his wolves never got to trip me, and it foiled his fun sort of, but he still loved killing my ranger that day :D
Dheran
09-27-07, 07:48 PM Going from kneeling to standing as a move action without provoking an AoO comes from Rules of the Game: All About Movement (Part Two) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040618a). There's some Dungeon or Dragon adventure that specifies moving from prone to kneeling as a move action without provoking an AoO; it involves archers behind a low wall, IIRC. So with two move actions you should be able to avoid AoOs entirely going from prone to standing. Personally this seems like an overcautious choice, but if you're willing to take a whole round just to avoid one AoO I don't see any rules problem.
Jaxgaret
09-27-07, 11:20 PM Going from kneeling to standing as a move action without provoking an AoO comes from Rules of the Game: All About Movement (Part Two) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040618a). There's some Dungeon or Dragon adventure that specifies moving from prone to kneeling as a move action without provoking an AoO; it involves archers behind a low wall, IIRC. So with two move actions you should be able to avoid AoOs entirely going from prone to standing. Personally this seems like an overcautious choice, but if you're willing to take a whole round just to avoid one AoO I don't see any rules problem.

I agree.

Really, spending what amounts to a full-round action just to avoid AoOs while standing up doesn't sound game-breaking.

It even works in a flavor sense - instead of jumping up to your feet directly from a prone position, ready to attack, you're switching first to a defensive crouch/kneel, then shifting to a stance from which you can attack next turn.
Nom
09-28-07, 02:18 AM No matter what, at the end of their action they are standing up.Not if you reduce them to fewer than 0 hp. ;)
1 ton ghost
09-28-07, 01:22 PM -Kip Up (big ass Tumble DC) to stand as free action (CmpAdv i think)
-tumble in a crawl (technically prone) then rise in a non-threatened square
-draw an attack another way (grapple, etc) so when you rise they don't get the +4 vs. you for being prone and rising

i like the kneeling option, though i would/have ruled on it differently before and for different reasons. that is, haven't used it vs. rising and trip, more for height of wall (cover) and ranged attacks namely. another reason x-bow can be very useful (affords you more cover in relation to you physically and the cover in question; horizontal surface, horizontal weapon). but, we use 3rd ed cover as there are more forms thereof (1/4, 1/2, 3/4, 9/10, full, etc), this encourages more problem-solving and initiative on PCs behalf.

Kneeling: not quite a move action to rise since you're not quite prone, but didn't want to allow Full-Rnd. actions. we'd often treat it as 10ft. of move to rise, still draws an attack, just not at +4 (prone), but you're getting some cover vs. ranged, just not the cover vs. ranged you'd get while prone.
mvincent
09-28-07, 02:01 PM Going from kneeling to standing as a move action without provoking an AoO comes from Rules of the Game: All About Movement (Part Two) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040618a). There's some Dungeon or Dragon adventure that specifies moving from prone to kneeling as a move action without provoking an AoO; it involves archers behind a low wall, IIRC.Excellent information. Thank you Dheran.

So with two move actions you should be able to avoid AoOs entirely going from prone to standing. Personally this seems like an overcautious choice, but if you're willing to take a whole round just to avoid one AoO I don't see any rules problem.The OP also presents an option to use two move actions over two turns... attacking in between. If you don't have multiple attacks (from BAB or TWF'ing), this could mean sacrificing very little.

Also, this could be a useful tactic if your opponent packs a big whallop that you really don't want to take more of.

Good catch Frozeman!
Jaxgaret
09-28-07, 03:31 PM -Kip Up (big ass Tumble DC) to stand as free action (CmpAdv i think)

Just how much is "big ass" these days? :)
mvincent
09-28-07, 03:37 PM Just how much is "big ass" these days? :)35 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/skills.htm#tumble)
1 ton ghost
09-28-07, 03:54 PM 35 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/skills.htm#tumble)

a "badonkadonk" of a number if you will. 35 will suffice...
thanks btw, didn't have any gaming text @ work here.
Frozeman
09-28-07, 06:05 PM What mvincent noticed is the problem that came up. I've never played a trip monkey, I'm just trying to decide if I'm going to allow this in a game I'm going to run starting next week. The problem with it being two move action is that at low level (below 6) it costs you almost nothing to avoid the AoO. When you are tripped you get to your knees and attack, then the next round you get to your feet and attack. You don't lose any attacks. The guy who was playing the tripper felt that his character was totally nerfed by the rule.
mvincent
09-28-07, 06:26 PM The guy who was playing the tripper felt that his character was totally nerfed by the rule.Then the opposition probably shouldn't use it... until the tripper build starts to become abusive (which it can be in the right hands).

Think of it as a tool to keep in reserve.
Howie23
09-28-07, 06:29 PM What mvincent noticed is the problem that came up. I've never played a trip monkey, I'm just trying to decide if I'm going to allow this in a game I'm going to run starting next week. The problem with it being two move action is that at low level (below 6) it costs you almost nothing to avoid the AoO. When you are tripped you get to your knees and attack, then the next round you get to your feet and attack. You don't lose any attacks. The guy who was playing the tripper felt that his character was totally nerfed by the rule.

When this conversation has come up in the past there are those who have had the opinion that two move actions to avoid the AoO was sufficient cost. Others have thought that there should be an AoO associated with one or the other. The two quoted sources (Rules of the Game and the unidentified article/module from one of the magazines) document that this comes up as an issue. Neither are something that I would consider authoritative, but others might. I wouldn't argue any ruling a DM gave me on this subject.

Tripping has a pretty big impact on combat, and it would probably be more balanced if it were nerfed a bit. The guy playing the tripper..well, if he has Improved Trip, he still gets his follow up attack for free. So, in a one-on-one combat at single attack BAB: he trips and attacks, the other guy stands. He trips and attacks, the other guy stands... still seems pretty effective. At higher BABs, he trips and gets his attacks, the other guy stands... and so on. His downside is that he might get tripped back or need to drop a weapon. That's what he views as having been nerfed, right? :)

David
ToastedAmphibian
09-28-07, 06:42 PM Your tripper should learn the value of the 5'ft step then. You trip someone, they kneel and hit you. So, full attack them, trip them obviously, then step back. You lose an AoO, they lose an attack. Or, get a bloody reach weapon.
tyrecian
09-28-07, 06:47 PM standing over 2 rounds? Nah, i would, as a GM, have to rule that a kneeling person could be made prone again, since it is-- by this definition we are seeing-- not prone. Plus the tripper would get a +2 modifier to his attack (or rather the knelt PC/NPC will lose to AC)...

In this case, there is no advantage to kneeling and attacking (unless you were going to offset your kneeling -2 penalty with combat expertise), and standing and attacking each round, as kneeling the tripper will still continue to trip you. Well, there is the advantage that you will only be -2 on your attacks and not -4 from prone. Only advantage i see though.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Frozeman 09-27-07, 03:25 PM	One of the guys I play with thinks tripping is broken because of the number of AoOs you take getting up and figures that if you get tripped in combat you may as well just stay down and play possum. To combat this when he was GMing he found the kneeling or sitting entry on the armour class modifiers table pg 151 PHB and decided that you could avoid an AoO by on your turn take a move action to go from prone to kneeling, then either attack from the kneeling position and get up the rest of the way on your next turn, or use you second move action to get up the rest of the way. So adding a choice to get up in two move actions without an AoO, while accepting a -2AC in the middle stage. What do you think, I can't find anything about moving into or out of the kneeling condition, is this legal or balanced?
tarkin 09-27-07, 03:47 PM	It is one AoO for getting from Prone directly to standing. That is not a big deal, really. Also, the AoO happens before the action, so you can't use an AoO to trip someone while they are getting up. No matter what, at the end of their action they are standing up. I would not allow the kneeling thing, it looks like too much house rules. All sorts of things start happening, such as "can you trip a kneeling guy?" and "Can he take a 5ft step or crawl or otherwise move while kneeling" and lots of other questions. But I might consider simply House Ruling that "You can get up as a full round action that does not provoke an AoO" That would be similar to the Withdrawal rule.
tyrecian 09-27-07, 06:42 PM	actually the idea that he is using a move action to kneel and then stand, woule seem to indicate that he is taking 2 AoOp. Which would probably upset your GM very much. That is quite a pickle, since tripping is designed to be a battle maneuver that is better than just swinging a sword (like PA'ing, or grappling, or disarming an enemy that relies on weapons or Sunderring the same, these are the very reason these things exist!). Sounds like your GM is just nerfing the ability because he is finding it tough to combat it through ingenuity. Tarkin says: But I might consider simply House Ruling that "You can get up as a full round action that does not provoke an AoO" That would be similar to the Withdrawal rule. that is pretty good, makes tripping like a sort of daze, but gives you the ability to keep them down, since they are using the whole round, a good tripper would own that poor guy since he is just standing, in the end AoOp might be a better idea than taking the trip every turn and then getting the AoO anyways, as well as iterative attacks that see you prone in the same place (at -4 to AC). If this problem is super persistent, and the GM begins to use it against you as well, perhaps the solution is to create a feat, such as Quickstand which would allow standing as a move action, but draw no AoO, or even as a free action, like a backflip karate maneuver. There is a feat somewhere that allows you to fight from prone with no penalties, that is a nice one too. Might even be called prone fighting, takes the AC penalty down, and the attack mod penalty as well. Don't get down, i had a DM that hated my tripping ranger. He kept throwing elves at us in this forrest and i kept tripping them. Finally he cut me down using archers and pet wolves (ring of wolves in melee to trip me, and then archers outside the wolves to cut me down). The wolves ate me, but it was pretty funny to see his face when i realized the archers were in the woods and 'went prone' :) (+4 to AC v/s range, +4 to AC from soft cover from wolves, +2 to AC from terrain, the archers couldnt hit me) his wolves never got to trip me, and it foiled his fun sort of, but he still loved killing my ranger that day :D
Dheran 09-27-07, 07:48 PM	Going from kneeling to standing as a move action without provoking an AoO comes from Rules of the Game: All About Movement (Part Two) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040618a). There's some Dungeon or Dragon adventure that specifies moving from prone to kneeling as a move action without provoking an AoO; it involves archers behind a low wall, IIRC. So with two move actions you should be able to avoid AoOs entirely going from prone to standing. Personally this seems like an overcautious choice, but if you're willing to take a whole round just to avoid one AoO I don't see any rules problem.
Jaxgaret 09-27-07, 11:20 PM	Going from kneeling to standing as a move action without provoking an AoO comes from Rules of the Game: All About Movement (Part Two) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040618a). There's some Dungeon or Dragon adventure that specifies moving from prone to kneeling as a move action without provoking an AoO; it involves archers behind a low wall, IIRC. So with two move actions you should be able to avoid AoOs entirely going from prone to standing. Personally this seems like an overcautious choice, but if you're willing to take a whole round just to avoid one AoO I don't see any rules problem. I agree. Really, spending what amounts to a full-round action just to avoid AoOs while standing up doesn't sound game-breaking. It even works in a flavor sense - instead of jumping up to your feet directly from a prone position, ready to attack, you're switching first to a defensive crouch/kneel, then shifting to a stance from which you can attack next turn.
Nom 09-28-07, 02:18 AM	No matter what, at the end of their action they are standing up.Not if you reduce them to fewer than 0 hp. ;)
1 ton ghost 09-28-07, 01:22 PM	-Kip Up (big ass Tumble DC) to stand as free action (CmpAdv i think) -tumble in a crawl (technically prone) then rise in a non-threatened square -draw an attack another way (grapple, etc) so when you rise they don't get the +4 vs. you for being prone and rising i like the kneeling option, though i would/have ruled on it differently before and for different reasons. that is, haven't used it vs. rising and trip, more for height of wall (cover) and ranged attacks namely. another reason x-bow can be very useful (affords you more cover in relation to you physically and the cover in question; horizontal surface, horizontal weapon). but, we use 3rd ed cover as there are more forms thereof (1/4, 1/2, 3/4, 9/10, full, etc), this encourages more problem-solving and initiative on PCs behalf. Kneeling: not quite a move action to rise since you're not quite prone, but didn't want to allow Full-Rnd. actions. we'd often treat it as 10ft. of move to rise, still draws an attack, just not at +4 (prone), but you're getting some cover vs. ranged, just not the cover vs. ranged you'd get while prone.
mvincent 09-28-07, 02:01 PM	Going from kneeling to standing as a move action without provoking an AoO comes from Rules of the Game: All About Movement (Part Two) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040618a). There's some Dungeon or Dragon adventure that specifies moving from prone to kneeling as a move action without provoking an AoO; it involves archers behind a low wall, IIRC.Excellent information. Thank you Dheran. So with two move actions you should be able to avoid AoOs entirely going from prone to standing. Personally this seems like an overcautious choice, but if you're willing to take a whole round just to avoid one AoO I don't see any rules problem.The OP also presents an option to use two move actions over two turns... attacking in between. If you don't have multiple attacks (from BAB or TWF'ing), this could mean sacrificing very little. Also, this could be a useful tactic if your opponent packs a big whallop that you really don't want to take more of. Good catch Frozeman!
Jaxgaret 09-28-07, 03:31 PM	-Kip Up (big ass Tumble DC) to stand as free action (CmpAdv i think) Just how much is "big ass" these days? :)
mvincent 09-28-07, 03:37 PM	Just how much is "big ass" these days? :)35 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/skills.htm#tumble)
1 ton ghost 09-28-07, 03:54 PM	35 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/skills.htm#tumble) a "badonkadonk" of a number if you will. 35 will suffice... thanks btw, didn't have any gaming text @ work here.
Frozeman 09-28-07, 06:05 PM	What mvincent noticed is the problem that came up. I've never played a trip monkey, I'm just trying to decide if I'm going to allow this in a game I'm going to run starting next week. The problem with it being two move action is that at low level (below 6) it costs you almost nothing to avoid the AoO. When you are tripped you get to your knees and attack, then the next round you get to your feet and attack. You don't lose any attacks. The guy who was playing the tripper felt that his character was totally nerfed by the rule.
mvincent 09-28-07, 06:26 PM	The guy who was playing the tripper felt that his character was totally nerfed by the rule.Then the opposition probably shouldn't use it... until the tripper build starts to become abusive (which it can be in the right hands). Think of it as a tool to keep in reserve.
Howie23 09-28-07, 06:29 PM	What mvincent noticed is the problem that came up. I've never played a trip monkey, I'm just trying to decide if I'm going to allow this in a game I'm going to run starting next week. The problem with it being two move action is that at low level (below 6) it costs you almost nothing to avoid the AoO. When you are tripped you get to your knees and attack, then the next round you get to your feet and attack. You don't lose any attacks. The guy who was playing the tripper felt that his character was totally nerfed by the rule. When this conversation has come up in the past there are those who have had the opinion that two move actions to avoid the AoO was sufficient cost. Others have thought that there should be an AoO associated with one or the other. The two quoted sources (Rules of the Game and the unidentified article/module from one of the magazines) document that this comes up as an issue. Neither are something that I would consider authoritative, but others might. I wouldn't argue any ruling a DM gave me on this subject. Tripping has a pretty big impact on combat, and it would probably be more balanced if it were nerfed a bit. The guy playing the tripper..well, if he has Improved Trip, he still gets his follow up attack for free. So, in a one-on-one combat at single attack BAB: he trips and attacks, the other guy stands. He trips and attacks, the other guy stands... still seems pretty effective. At higher BABs, he trips and gets his attacks, the other guy stands... and so on. His downside is that he might get tripped back or need to drop a weapon. That's what he views as having been nerfed, right? :) David
ToastedAmphibian 09-28-07, 06:42 PM	Your tripper should learn the value of the 5'ft step then. You trip someone, they kneel and hit you. So, full attack them, trip them obviously, then step back. You lose an AoO, they lose an attack. Or, get a bloody reach weapon.
tyrecian 09-28-07, 06:47 PM	standing over 2 rounds? Nah, i would, as a GM, have to rule that a kneeling person could be made prone again, since it is-- by this definition we are seeing-- not prone. Plus the tripper would get a +2 modifier to his attack (or rather the knelt PC/NPC will lose to AC)... In this case, there is no advantage to kneeling and attacking (unless you were going to offset your kneeling -2 penalty with combat expertise), and standing and attacking each round, as kneeling the tripper will still continue to trip you. Well, there is the advantage that you will only be -2 on your attacks and not -4 from prone. Only advantage i see though.