Attacks of Opportunity troubles [Archive] - Wizards Community

Attacks of Opportunity troubles [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Nezkrul
03-11-07, 05:26 PM Ok, so I know the table in the PhB in the combat section which describes which actions provoke attacks of opportunity.

For move actions, the action of "Move" is a "yes" and for full round actions, the action of "Run" is a "yes".

When I pointed this out to my DM, he said that his ruling is his interpretation of the RAW, no matter how much I tried to tell him that he's wrong in that what he interprets isn't even written in the rules, and he could not give me a straight answer when I told him that I would like to know where in the book it says this.

His ruling is that "Run"ning into a threatened square provokes an AoO because you lose your dexterity bonus to armor class during the action; and that simply "Move"ing into a threatened square does not provoke an AoO.

When I pointed out it was a houserule that I could live with even though it gives even more value to light armor over heavier armors, he got very defensive, claiming it as his interpretation of the RAW.

Is he right or am I right, RAW, that running through (the act of moving through) threatened squares provokes, but any kind of movement "into" a threatened square does not?
paladin2019
03-11-07, 05:56 PM Any movement out of a threatened space provokes an AoO, except for the first if the only actions taken are movement. Running provokes an AoO, because the act provokes just like a ranged attack provoke by virtue of being a ranged attack.

Running into a threatened area does provoke an AoO; not because of the movement, but because running provokes and the character is now in a situation the attack can be made. In this case, if the threatening creature attacked immediately, the running character would not provoke for moving out of the threatened space because the one AoO allowed for movement would have already been made.

This is the same rationale as "firing a bow provokes, but unless you do it in a threatened area, who cares."
TheMagister
03-11-07, 06:10 PM Who says that running provokes AoOs? Show me. (I don't think you'll be able to.)
paladin2019
03-11-07, 06:16 PM Who says that running provokes AoOs? Show me. (I don't think you'll be able to.)

Open your PHB to the BACAC*. Look under full-round actions. Find the line that says "Run". Scan to the next column where it says "Yes". Scan back up to where it says "Attack of Opportunity?". If you need more clarity, continue scanning the combat chapter until you come to the appropriate headings and subheadings for run.

*Big Assed Cnsolidated Action Chart
ibayboy
03-11-07, 08:25 PM If the opponent runs into a threatened square, provokes an AoO, then continues to run out of the square. Does he provoke a second time for moving out of a threatened square. Of course a character would need Combat Reflexes to actually take the second AoO.
ClementWillowbreaker
03-11-07, 08:46 PM Running provokes because it is movement. Movement only provokes when it is OUT of a threatened square. The table is a simplification. Look up the actual paragraph on Running and quote the sentence that says it provokes any differently than normal movement. You won't be able to. It's on p144. Have fun.
Nezkrul
03-11-07, 09:30 PM Running provokes because it is movement. Movement only provokes when it is OUT of a threatened square. The table is a simplification. Look up the actual paragraph on Running and quote the sentence that says it provokes any differently than normal movement. You won't be able to. It's on p144. Have fun.

This was the basis for my question of "where does it state that running into a threatened area provokes" and my DM couldn't give me a straight answer other than "because I said so" and I said, well then I guess I can live with the houserule... at which point he became venomously defensive stating that it isn't a houserule that that it is simply his interpretation of the RAW... enter big circular argument of me asking where in the RAW does it say that...

I pointed out "Move" and "Run" both say yes in the column, movement only provokes when leaving a threatened square, not when entering a threatened square from a nonthreatened square, and the description of "Run" doesn't mention what he was saying. Again no straight answer...
Kradlo
03-11-07, 09:48 PM It's good to quote things accurately. I was the GM at the game in question, and I made my ruling. The Run action does provoke an attack of opportunity, which means that if you perform the action in a threatened square, which includes running into a threatened square, you provoke an AoO.

I made certain to inform the player before his action was taken, so that he would know the potential consequences. I never try to blindside a player with the rules.

My ruling was made calmly, and not "venomously." The other players at the table agreed, and the player in question continued to try to argue. As a GM, I don't have a problem with a player that wants to clarify a rules question. But once the issue is answered, that's it.

This is not a house rule (I make my house rules very clear), but my interpretation of the Rules As Written. Ultimately, the GM is responsible for arbitrating the rules, and the player in question doesn't get the clue.

I gave a straight answer to the question, which the player didn't like. As a GM, I'm obliged to be fair and consistent in my rulings, and I am. The other players were all having fun, with the sole exception of this one.
Kradlo
03-11-07, 10:17 PM To be as fair about the issue as possible, I've done a check of the FAQ and past articles on the Wizards website. The FAQ was silent on the issue, but All About Movement (Part 2) mentioned it.

Running represents an all-out effort to move as fast as possible, so you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) when running -- you're putting your effort into speed, not defense. Running by itself doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, but you are moving when running and you provoke attacks of opportunity if you leave a threatened square while running.

So, by the Wizard interpretation, my ruling was incorrect. I'll keep that in mind for future game sessions.

At the time, I made my ruling based on the rules as written, as this was an area that was fairly gray. My ruling was made without an attempt to place the player in question at a disadvantage.

I don't claim to be all-knowing and all-wise, but I do my best to be fair and equitable.
Nom
03-11-07, 10:56 PM Unfortunately, the so-called BACAC is less clear than it could be. "Move" has a "yes" for "provokes AoO", when technically it clearly should be "no", since a move action only provokes an AoO if you leave a threatened square (note 1). Given this, it is certainly possible that the same exception / error applies to running; Skip clearly rules this one.
Steevo
03-12-07, 01:51 AM When I pointed out it was a houserule that I could live with even though it gives even more value to light armor over heavier armors, he got very defensive, claiming it as his interpretation of the RAW.

Is he right or am I right, RAW, that running through (the act of moving through) threatened squares provokes, but any kind of movement "into" a threatened square does not?

Who cares? You said yourself you can live with the ruling, so if the DM wants to claim it's RAW, even if it's not, just let it go and play the fracking game. As long as everyone at the table can agree on the rules being used, it doesn't really matter whether or not they're written in the book anywhere.
Kratch
03-12-07, 04:11 AM First off, Paladin2019 gave a perfectly reasonable, and might i add RAW, example of an interpretation of the rules in question (even if it has been proven wrong since). It is an interpretation and not a houserule. If you people can't see the difference, then your just being stuborn, believeing that your way is right and there is no room for seeing things a different way (and thats exceptionally close minded if you ask me). But more importently, the DM is required to make rules interpretations throughout the session, he's required tokeep track of a great deal of other things as well, so when the DM makes an on the spot descission and deams that rule final, that descission should be accepted as the current rule and then debated outside game time. Debating it dureing game time is just making things unfun for everyone. The DM should be willing to consider an alternate rules interpretation, but if there is room for multiple interpretations (and there are a lot of RAW that have multiple interpretations), the DM is entitled to make his descision and it should end there untill the gaming time is over.
TheMagister
03-12-07, 07:34 AM The DM should be willing to consider an alternate rules interpretation, but if there is room for multiple interpretations (and there are a lot of RAW that have multiple interpretations), the DM is entitled to make his descision and it should end there untill the gaming time is over.

Quoted for truth.

I play with a buncha friends, and not every single one of them is a rules-hound like I am.

Sometimes it's hard to bite your tongue and say, "Yes, sir."

...

It's beyond my capabilities to totally keep sarcasm out of my voice while so doing. I've tried, but I'm guilty as charged on that one.

TM
mugguod
03-12-07, 10:10 AM I can find anything in the SRD that says Running is treated differently than ordinary movement for the purposes of AoOs.

Therefore, Moving/Running OUT OF a threatened square provokes. Moving/Running INTO a threatened square does not. [Exceptions: 5-ft Step, and Withdraw]

So if you run up to a monster as a full round action, you would only provoke an AoO, if the monster had 10-ft reach. You would, however, loose you Dex bonus to AC until your next action.
Kratch
03-12-07, 02:40 PM I can find anything in the SRD that says Running is treated differently than ordinary movement for the purposes of AoOs.

Therefore, Moving/Running OUT OF a threatened square provokes. Moving/Running INTO a threatened square does not. [Exceptions: 5-ft Step, and Withdraw]

So if you run up to a monster as a full round action, you would only provoke an AoO, if the monster had 10-ft reach. You would, however, loose you Dex bonus to AC until your next action.

That is in fact the case, and may easily seem to be the most obvious interpretation, but it is not the only possible interpretation (see Paladin2019's first post as a reasonable alternative interpretation). The RAW is loaded with such variable interpretation rules, and to deny that and claim any other interpretation beyond your interpretation is wrong and thus a houserule is simply being arogant.

oh, and as for there not being anything in the SRD to say running is treated differently then movement, the combination of the text of running (implying your opening yourself up) combined with the chart saying it provokes an AoE, just like it says moveing, drinking a potion and standing from prone all provoke AoE's gives enough potential that it's not improbable for someone to believe they provoke for simply doing it in a threatened square, or does standing up from prone only cause an AoE if you do it leaveing a threatened square (and note, i not only know it does provoke wether you move or not, i also know you can't stand up and be leaving the threatened square at the same time.)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Nezkrul 03-11-07, 05:26 PM	Ok, so I know the table in the PhB in the combat section which describes which actions provoke attacks of opportunity. For move actions, the action of "Move" is a "yes" and for full round actions, the action of "Run" is a "yes". When I pointed this out to my DM, he said that his ruling is his interpretation of the RAW, no matter how much I tried to tell him that he's wrong in that what he interprets isn't even written in the rules, and he could not give me a straight answer when I told him that I would like to know where in the book it says this. His ruling is that "Run"ning into a threatened square provokes an AoO because you lose your dexterity bonus to armor class during the action; and that simply "Move"ing into a threatened square does not provoke an AoO. When I pointed out it was a houserule that I could live with even though it gives even more value to light armor over heavier armors, he got very defensive, claiming it as his interpretation of the RAW. Is he right or am I right, RAW, that running through (the act of moving through) threatened squares provokes, but any kind of movement "into" a threatened square does not?
paladin2019 03-11-07, 05:56 PM	Any movement out of a threatened space provokes an AoO, except for the first if the only actions taken are movement. Running provokes an AoO, because the act provokes just like a ranged attack provoke by virtue of being a ranged attack. Running into a threatened area does provoke an AoO; not because of the movement, but because running provokes and the character is now in a situation the attack can be made. In this case, if the threatening creature attacked immediately, the running character would not provoke for moving out of the threatened space because the one AoO allowed for movement would have already been made. This is the same rationale as "firing a bow provokes, but unless you do it in a threatened area, who cares."
TheMagister 03-11-07, 06:10 PM	Who says that running provokes AoOs? Show me. (I don't think you'll be able to.)
paladin2019 03-11-07, 06:16 PM	Who says that running provokes AoOs? Show me. (I don't think you'll be able to.) Open your PHB to the BACAC. Look under full-round actions. Find the line that says "Run". Scan to the next column where it says "Yes". Scan back up to where it says "Attack of Opportunity?". If you need more clarity, continue scanning the combat chapter until you come to the appropriate headings and subheadings for run. Big Assed Cnsolidated Action Chart
ibayboy 03-11-07, 08:25 PM	If the opponent runs into a threatened square, provokes an AoO, then continues to run out of the square. Does he provoke a second time for moving out of a threatened square. Of course a character would need Combat Reflexes to actually take the second AoO.
ClementWillowbreaker 03-11-07, 08:46 PM	Running provokes because it is movement. Movement only provokes when it is OUT of a threatened square. The table is a simplification. Look up the actual paragraph on Running and quote the sentence that says it provokes any differently than normal movement. You won't be able to. It's on p144. Have fun.
Nezkrul 03-11-07, 09:30 PM	Running provokes because it is movement. Movement only provokes when it is OUT of a threatened square. The table is a simplification. Look up the actual paragraph on Running and quote the sentence that says it provokes any differently than normal movement. You won't be able to. It's on p144. Have fun. This was the basis for my question of "where does it state that running into a threatened area provokes" and my DM couldn't give me a straight answer other than "because I said so" and I said, well then I guess I can live with the houserule... at which point he became venomously defensive stating that it isn't a houserule that that it is simply his interpretation of the RAW... enter big circular argument of me asking where in the RAW does it say that... I pointed out "Move" and "Run" both say yes in the column, movement only provokes when leaving a threatened square, not when entering a threatened square from a nonthreatened square, and the description of "Run" doesn't mention what he was saying. Again no straight answer...
Kradlo 03-11-07, 09:48 PM	It's good to quote things accurately. I was the GM at the game in question, and I made my ruling. The Run action does provoke an attack of opportunity, which means that if you perform the action in a threatened square, which includes running into a threatened square, you provoke an AoO. I made certain to inform the player before his action was taken, so that he would know the potential consequences. I never try to blindside a player with the rules. My ruling was made calmly, and not "venomously." The other players at the table agreed, and the player in question continued to try to argue. As a GM, I don't have a problem with a player that wants to clarify a rules question. But once the issue is answered, that's it. This is not a house rule (I make my house rules very clear), but my interpretation of the Rules As Written. Ultimately, the GM is responsible for arbitrating the rules, and the player in question doesn't get the clue. I gave a straight answer to the question, which the player didn't like. As a GM, I'm obliged to be fair and consistent in my rulings, and I am. The other players were all having fun, with the sole exception of this one.
Kradlo 03-11-07, 10:17 PM	To be as fair about the issue as possible, I've done a check of the FAQ and past articles on the Wizards website. The FAQ was silent on the issue, but All About Movement (Part 2) mentioned it. Running represents an all-out effort to move as fast as possible, so you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) when running -- you're putting your effort into speed, not defense. Running by itself doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, but you are moving when running and you provoke attacks of opportunity if you leave a threatened square while running. So, by the Wizard interpretation, my ruling was incorrect. I'll keep that in mind for future game sessions. At the time, I made my ruling based on the rules as written, as this was an area that was fairly gray. My ruling was made without an attempt to place the player in question at a disadvantage. I don't claim to be all-knowing and all-wise, but I do my best to be fair and equitable.
Nom 03-11-07, 10:56 PM	Unfortunately, the so-called BACAC is less clear than it could be. "Move" has a "yes" for "provokes AoO", when technically it clearly should be "no", since a move action only provokes an AoO if you leave a threatened square (note 1). Given this, it is certainly possible that the same exception / error applies to running; Skip clearly rules this one.
Steevo 03-12-07, 01:51 AM	When I pointed out it was a houserule that I could live with even though it gives even more value to light armor over heavier armors, he got very defensive, claiming it as his interpretation of the RAW. Is he right or am I right, RAW, that running through (the act of moving through) threatened squares provokes, but any kind of movement "into" a threatened square does not? Who cares? You said yourself you can live with the ruling, so if the DM wants to claim it's RAW, even if it's not, just let it go and play the fracking game. As long as everyone at the table can agree on the rules being used, it doesn't really matter whether or not they're written in the book anywhere.
Kratch 03-12-07, 04:11 AM	First off, Paladin2019 gave a perfectly reasonable, and might i add RAW, example of an interpretation of the rules in question (even if it has been proven wrong since). It is an interpretation and not a houserule. If you people can't see the difference, then your just being stuborn, believeing that your way is right and there is no room for seeing things a different way (and thats exceptionally close minded if you ask me). But more importently, the DM is required to make rules interpretations throughout the session, he's required tokeep track of a great deal of other things as well, so when the DM makes an on the spot descission and deams that rule final, that descission should be accepted as the current rule and then debated outside game time. Debating it dureing game time is just making things unfun for everyone. The DM should be willing to consider an alternate rules interpretation, but if there is room for multiple interpretations (and there are a lot of RAW that have multiple interpretations), the DM is entitled to make his descision and it should end there untill the gaming time is over.
TheMagister 03-12-07, 07:34 AM	The DM should be willing to consider an alternate rules interpretation, but if there is room for multiple interpretations (and there are a lot of RAW that have multiple interpretations), the DM is entitled to make his descision and it should end there untill the gaming time is over. Quoted for truth. I play with a buncha friends, and not every single one of them is a rules-hound like I am. Sometimes it's hard to bite your tongue and say, "Yes, sir." ... It's beyond my capabilities to totally keep sarcasm out of my voice while so doing. I've tried, but I'm guilty as charged on that one. TM
mugguod 03-12-07, 10:10 AM	I can find anything in the SRD that says Running is treated differently than ordinary movement for the purposes of AoOs. Therefore, Moving/Running OUT OF a threatened square provokes. Moving/Running INTO a threatened square does not. [Exceptions: 5-ft Step, and Withdraw] So if you run up to a monster as a full round action, you would only provoke an AoO, if the monster had 10-ft reach. You would, however, loose you Dex bonus to AC until your next action.
Kratch 03-12-07, 02:40 PM	I can find anything in the SRD that says Running is treated differently than ordinary movement for the purposes of AoOs. Therefore, Moving/Running OUT OF a threatened square provokes. Moving/Running INTO a threatened square does not. [Exceptions: 5-ft Step, and Withdraw] So if you run up to a monster as a full round action, you would only provoke an AoO, if the monster had 10-ft reach. You would, however, loose you Dex bonus to AC until your next action. That is in fact the case, and may easily seem to be the most obvious interpretation, but it is not the only possible interpretation (see Paladin2019's first post as a reasonable alternative interpretation). The RAW is loaded with such variable interpretation rules, and to deny that and claim any other interpretation beyond your interpretation is wrong and thus a houserule is simply being arogant. oh, and as for there not being anything in the SRD to say running is treated differently then movement, the combination of the text of running (implying your opening yourself up) combined with the chart saying it provokes an AoE, just like it says moveing, drinking a potion and standing from prone all provoke AoE's gives enough potential that it's not improbable for someone to believe they provoke for simply doing it in a threatened square, or does standing up from prone only cause an AoE if you do it leaveing a threatened square (and note, i not only know it does provoke wether you move or not, i also know you can't stand up and be leaving the threatened square at the same time.)