Deliberatly provoking Attacks of Opportunity [Archive] - Wizards Community

Deliberatly provoking Attacks of Opportunity [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
oreththecentaur
08-21-07, 01:37 PM Heres the situation, our party is fighting a tough monster and or swords aren't working. So it's up to the wizard to finish off the beastie. The wizard however can't safely cast a spell without provoking. So our fighter takes one for the team and initiates a sunder attempt, thus provoking an attack of opportunity. (Let's assume the beastie doesn't have combat reflexes.) The sunder is unsuccessful but the fighters distraction buys the wizard enough time to safely cast a spell, and finishes off the beastie.

Now suppose the fighter had improved sunder. Can him choose to provoke the AoO anyway, an order to let the wizard cast his spell uninterupted.

Similarly, if a character with spring attack moves towards an enemy can they choose to provoke an AoO if it benefits their situation. I ask because my spring attacking scouts AC is 5 higher than anyone else on our level 7 party. It seems like a valid strategy.

So my question is,
Can you choose to provoke an attack of opportunity, while initiating a grapple, trip, sunder or spring attack even if you have a feat that says you don't?
deathbane
08-21-07, 02:22 PM Heres the situation, our party is fighting a tough monster and or swords aren't working. So it's up to the wizard to finish off the beastie. The wizard however can't safely cast a spell without provoking. So our fighter takes one for the team and initiates a sunder attempt, thus provoking an attack of opportunity. (Let's assume the beastie doesn't have combat reflexes.) The sunder is unsuccessful but the fighters distraction buys the wizard enough time to safely cast a spell, and finishes off the beastie.

Now suppose the fighter had improved sunder. Can him choose to provoke the AoO anyway, an order to let the wizard cast his spell uninterupted.

Similarly, if a character with spring attack moves towards an enemy can they choose to provoke an AoO if it benefits their situation. I ask because my spring attacking scouts AC is 5 higher than anyone else on our level 7 party. It seems like a valid strategy.

So my question is,
Can you choose to provoke an attack of opportunity, while initiating a grapple, trip, sunder or spring attack even if you have a feat that says you don't?

The feat just means you know how to do such things and still keep your defense up, in this case the fighter left an opening to distract the monster. Logically that works.
tarkin
08-21-07, 03:40 PM Yes, this is legal.

And very dangerous if the monster has Combat Reflexes.
NeueRegel
08-21-07, 03:45 PM You didn't mention the "nature of the beastie". (Pardon the pun!)

But your DM should never forget that Nobody "has" to take an AoO if he/she/it doesn't want to. If said "beastie" is of high intelligence and/or wisdom, and recognizes the greater danger inherent in the spell caster, he/she/it might well choose to hold onto that one AoO granted per round. This is not necessarily metagaming on the DM's part, if he is playing the beastie correctly. If it's a dumb idiot beastie, then it is absolutely probable it takes any AoO as soon as it's presented, without strategy or forethought.

Happy gaming.
Neue
NeueRegel
08-21-07, 03:50 PM Oh, I forgot to address the original question.

Yes, you can choose to fail to "NOT provoke an AoO" just as easily as you can choose to fail a saving throw or whatever else. Sure.

But "provoking" the attack does not mean "force" the attack, if the beastie is smart enough to hold onto it.

Neue
oreththecentaur
08-21-07, 03:56 PM Yes, you can choose to fail to "NOT provoke an AoO" just as easily as you can choose to fail a saving throw or whatever else. Sure.

But "provoking" the attack does not mean "force" the attack, if the beastie is smart enough to hold onto it.

Touche,

How about this setup. Using spring attack, I approach my target who has reach 10, choosing to provoke an AoO, then i succeed the DC15 tumble check to avoid provoking, would i be entitled the +4 bonus to my attack that the acrobatic backstab feat provides?
Platstud
08-21-07, 04:05 PM I'm going to play Devil's advocate here.

While I do agree that it is fully reasonable that you could allow the AoO, that's not actually supported by RAW.

When you strike at an object held or carried by an opponent (such as a weapon or shield), you do not provoke an attack of opportunity.

It say, "You do not," not, "You may choose not to."

Yes, you can choose to fail to "NOT provoke an AoO" just as easily as you can choose to fail a saving throw or whatever else. Sure.

This argument is fallacious. There is a rule that says, "You may choose to fail a saving throw," not, "You may choose to fail a saving throw or whatever else."
Platstud
08-21-07, 04:06 PM Touche,

How about this setup. Using spring attack, I approach my target who has reach 10, choosing to provoke an AoO, then i succeed the DC15 tumble check to avoid provoking, would i be entitled the +4 bonus to my attack that the acrobatic backstab feat provides?

I'd have to see the wording of the feat, but I would think so.
oreththecentaur
08-21-07, 04:15 PM It say, "You do not," not, "You may choose not to."

This is very true, But i think you are looking at it the wrong way, We are not talking about actions that don't provoke. What we are dealing with is actions that say "this provokes unless you recieve training to prevent it," and asking can we ignore the training.

A monk with improved trip has learnt to position himself close to an enemy and move in without exposing himself to counterattack. But if he wanted to he could just walk up to the enemy and try to grab him.

I think any player should be allowed a free action to povoke an AoO. hehe. it is flavorful and a powerful ability in the right set up.

The wording of Acrobatic Backstab is "If you succeed in using tumble to avoid an opponents AoO, you recieve a +4 bonus to your next attack against that foe, as long as that attack occurs before the end of your current turn.
mvincent
08-21-07, 04:29 PM Can you choose to provoke an attack of opportunity, while initiating a grapple, trip, sunder or spring attack even if you have a feat that says you don't?That seems within the spirit of the rules.
Platstud
08-21-07, 04:52 PM This is very true, But i think you are looking at it the wrong way, We are not talking about actions that don't provoke. What we are dealing with is actions that say "this provokes unless you recieve training to prevent it," and asking can we ignore the training.

A monk with improved trip has learnt to position himself close to an enemy and move in without exposing himself to counterattack. But if he wanted to he could just walk up to the enemy and try to grab him.

I think any player should be allowed a free action to povoke an AoO. hehe. it is flavorful and a powerful ability in the right set up.

I fully agree with you. I was simply making the point that by RAW, it's not supported. Of course, following RAW without using reason would make for some pretty stupid games.

Actually, on further reflection, I think that you should have to choose either to use the feat or not. If you permit the AoO, then you don't get any other benefits from the feat(such as +4 to trip, etc.).

The wording of Acrobatic Backstab is "If you succeed in using tumble to avoid an opponents AoO, you recieve a +4 bonus to your next attack against that foe, as long as that attack occurs before the end of your current turn.

Same as above. If you permit the AoO, you can't use the rest of the feat.
oreththecentaur
08-21-07, 05:09 PM Actually, on further reflection, I think that you should have to choose either to use the feat or not. If you permit the AoO, then you don't get any other benefits from the feat(such as +4 to trip, etc.).

Yeah i see your point, but i'd just argue that the +4 bonus is a secondary unrelated benefit. hehehe.
deathbane
08-21-07, 07:32 PM I'm going to play Devil's advocate here.

While I do agree that it is fully reasonable that you could allow the AoO, that's not actually supported by RAW.

It say, "You do not," not, "You may choose not to."

This argument is fallacious. There is a rule that says, "You may choose to fail a saving throw," not, "You may choose to fail a saving throw or whatever else."

It said "you do not" because it is assuming that a player would never put themselves in a position to be hurt, and out of the box thinking like this is not accounted for when the feat was written, just like improved evasion says that even if you fail the reflex save it is only half damage, but if a player tells me he is not going to move then he will take full damage. There is no way to logically explain that someone stood with their hands on their hips, and just took half damage. Some things just aren't in the rule book.

you may disregard the post if you want. I did not see the devil's advocate part.
Shaggy_Shaggs
08-21-07, 11:32 PM I think the relevant issue here is whether the RAW says you must use feats just because you have them. If it doesn't, the wording of the feats is fairly irrelevant isn't it?
ArcTan
08-22-07, 12:01 AM ...Why can't you provoke an AoO just by moving?
ibayboy
08-22-07, 03:44 AM Touche,

How about this setup. Using spring attack, I approach my target who has reach 10, choosing to provoke an AoO, then i succeed the DC15 tumble check to avoid provoking, would i be entitled the +4 bonus to my attack that the acrobatic backstab feat provides?

This thread is discussing just that...

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=909722

The skill trick Acrobatic Backstab requires you to use tumble to pass through an enemy space, so its DC25, and i don't think SpA will help anyway.
Karla
08-22-07, 07:13 AM Similarly, if a character with spring attack moves towards an enemy can they choose to provoke an AoO if it benefits their situation. I ask because my spring attacking scouts AC is 5 higher than anyone else on our level 7 party. It seems like a valid strategy.

The spring attack only prevents AoO from that opponent due to movement - "moving in this way does not provoke an AoO from the defender you attack". Should you choose to Sunder or Disarm or whatever then you will still provoke a potential AoO despite the Spring Attack.
fatal error
08-22-07, 07:21 AM On the other hand, if all you care about is provoking an AoO, you could just concentrate, or pretend to be drinking a potion.
Karla
08-22-07, 07:34 AM How about this setup. Using spring attack, I approach my target who has reach 10, choosing to provoke an AoO, then i succeed the DC15 tumble check to avoid provoking, would i be entitled the +4 bonus to my attack that the acrobatic backstab feat provides?

I don't think it works with a Spring attack - "moving in this way does not provoke an AoO" seems pretty definitive.

Whether you could do it with normal movement, tumbling to avoid the AoO in the first 5' of reach and provoking the AoO in the second would depend on the exact interpretion of the Acrobatic Strike text. Does "using Tumble to avoid an opponent's AoO" mean avoiding it for one square of potential-AoO movement or avoiding it completely during your approach? Personally I'd expect a DM to rule the latter otherwise it makes little sense.

(Incidentally, does Acrobatic Strike work on flat-footed opponents or those who have already expended their AoO this round? Arguably as written it doesn't but that means it's harder to hit a flat-footed opponent than one in combat stance which seems kind of counter-intuitive!)
ibayboy
08-22-07, 08:31 AM I don't think it works with a Spring attack - "moving in this way does not provoke an AoO" seems pretty definitive.

Whether you could do it with normal movement, tumbling to avoid the AoO in the first 5' of reach and provoking the AoO in the second would depend on the exact interpretion of the Acrobatic Strike text. Does "using Tumble to avoid an opponent's AoO" mean avoiding it for one square of potential-AoO movement or avoiding it completely during your approach? Personally I'd expect a DM to rule the latter otherwise it makes little sense.

(Incidentally, does Acrobatic Strike work on flat-footed opponents or those who have already expended their AoO this round? Arguably as written it doesn't but that means it's harder to hit a flat-footed opponent than one in combat stance which seems kind of counter-intuitive!)

The text of the skill trick Acrobatic Backstab says you have to tumble through an enemies space, not his threatened area. Spring Attack only prevents AoO's from the normal movement part of your turn. So the skill trick should work. Whether it works when they're flatfooted, i don't know, not that it matters they lost their Dex anyway.
Lawkeeper
08-22-07, 08:43 AM I don't think it works with a Spring attack - "moving in this way does not provoke an AoO" seems pretty definitive.

Whether you could do it with normal movement, tumbling to avoid the AoO in the first 5' of reach and provoking the AoO in the second would depend on the exact interpretion of the Acrobatic Strike text. Does "using Tumble to avoid an opponent's AoO" mean avoiding it for one square of potential-AoO movement or avoiding it completely during your approach? Personally I'd expect a DM to rule the latter otherwise it makes little sense.

(Incidentally, does Acrobatic Strike work on flat-footed opponents or those who have already expended their AoO this round? Arguably as written it doesn't but that means it's harder to hit a flat-footed opponent than one in combat stance which seems kind of counter-intuitive!)
It doesn't matter. You use Tumble before you know whether the opponent has or will use his AoO. Because Tumble makes you avoid provoking an AoO - and not avoiding an AoO.
Acrobatic Strike has to be understood as "if you successfully use the Tumble skill to avoid provoking an AoO from an enemy" to make it compatible with the skill's core rules.
Big_Mac
08-22-07, 08:55 AM Heres the situation, our party is fighting a tough monster and or swords aren't working. So it's up to the wizard to finish off the beastie. The wizard however can't safely cast a spell without provoking. So our fighter takes one for the team and initiates a sunder attempt, thus provoking an attack of opportunity. (Let's assume the beastie doesn't have combat reflexes.) The sunder is unsuccessful but the fighters distraction buys the wizard enough time to safely cast a spell, and finishes off the beastie.

Now suppose the fighter had improved sunder. Can him choose to provoke the AoO anyway, an order to let the wizard cast his spell uninterupted.

Similarly, if a character with spring attack moves towards an enemy can they choose to provoke an AoO if it benefits their situation. I ask because my spring attacking scouts AC is 5 higher than anyone else on our level 7 party. It seems like a valid strategy.

So my question is,
Can you choose to provoke an attack of opportunity, while initiating a grapple, trip, sunder or spring attack even if you have a feat that says you don't?

Just a minor point. If your spell caster has enough ranks in Concentration it should not matter. He can cast defensively and complete that spell and avoid the AoO. He will just have to make his skill role. The DC of which is 10 + the level of the spell being cast. Remember that Skill checks are not automatic success on 20 or automatic failure on a 1. So a Spell caster with a 10 con at 1st level should have 4 ranks in concentration. So there by he only needs a 7 to succeed to cast a 1st level spell.
Lawkeeper
08-22-07, 09:14 AM Just a minor point. If your spell caster has enough ranks in Concentration it should not matter. He can cast defensively and complete that spell and avoid the AoO. He will just have to make his skill role. The DC of which is 10 + the level of the spell being cast. Remember that Skill checks are not automatic success on 20 or automatic failure on a 1. So a Spell caster with a 10 con at 1st level should have 4 ranks in concentration. So there by he only needs a 7 to succeed to cast a 1st level spell.
Minor nitpick : the DC is 15 + spell level. So, a 1st-lvl caster with an 8 Con (common for arcane spellcasters, especiallly grey elf wizards) with his modifier of +3 only succeeds on a 13+ for his 1st-lvl spells - basically, 40% chances of success.

Off course, the higher the level, the better a spellcaster becomes at defensive casting (his modifier improving twice faster than the DC rises), but it still takes a Con8, 6th-lvl caster to succeed on 10+, and even at 20th level he will only succeed on a 2+ for his 9th-lvl spells.
Big_Mac
08-22-07, 09:32 AM Minor nitpick : the DC is 15 + spell level. So, a 1st-lvl caster with an 8 Con (common for arcane spellcasters, especiallly grey elf wizards) with his modifier of +3 only succeeds on a 13+ for his 1st-lvl spells - basically, 40% chances of success.

Off course, the higher the level, the better a spellcaster becomes at defensive casting (his modifier improving twice faster than the DC rises), but it still takes a Con8, 6th-lvl caster to succeed on 10+, and even at 20th level he will only succeed on a 2+ for his 9th-lvl spells.

I do not have the PHB or SRD available to me and thought it was DC was 10+spell level to cast on the defensive.
Platstud
08-22-07, 09:57 AM I do not have the PHB or SRD available to me and thought it was DC was 10+spell level to cast on the defensive.

It's 15+Spell Level.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#castingDefensively

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
oreththecentaur 08-21-07, 01:37 PM	Heres the situation, our party is fighting a tough monster and or swords aren't working. So it's up to the wizard to finish off the beastie. The wizard however can't safely cast a spell without provoking. So our fighter takes one for the team and initiates a sunder attempt, thus provoking an attack of opportunity. (Let's assume the beastie doesn't have combat reflexes.) The sunder is unsuccessful but the fighters distraction buys the wizard enough time to safely cast a spell, and finishes off the beastie. Now suppose the fighter had improved sunder. Can him choose to provoke the AoO anyway, an order to let the wizard cast his spell uninterupted. Similarly, if a character with spring attack moves towards an enemy can they choose to provoke an AoO if it benefits their situation. I ask because my spring attacking scouts AC is 5 higher than anyone else on our level 7 party. It seems like a valid strategy. So my question is, Can you choose to provoke an attack of opportunity, while initiating a grapple, trip, sunder or spring attack even if you have a feat that says you don't?
deathbane 08-21-07, 02:22 PM	Heres the situation, our party is fighting a tough monster and or swords aren't working. So it's up to the wizard to finish off the beastie. The wizard however can't safely cast a spell without provoking. So our fighter takes one for the team and initiates a sunder attempt, thus provoking an attack of opportunity. (Let's assume the beastie doesn't have combat reflexes.) The sunder is unsuccessful but the fighters distraction buys the wizard enough time to safely cast a spell, and finishes off the beastie. Now suppose the fighter had improved sunder. Can him choose to provoke the AoO anyway, an order to let the wizard cast his spell uninterupted. Similarly, if a character with spring attack moves towards an enemy can they choose to provoke an AoO if it benefits their situation. I ask because my spring attacking scouts AC is 5 higher than anyone else on our level 7 party. It seems like a valid strategy. So my question is, Can you choose to provoke an attack of opportunity, while initiating a grapple, trip, sunder or spring attack even if you have a feat that says you don't? The feat just means you know how to do such things and still keep your defense up, in this case the fighter left an opening to distract the monster. Logically that works.
tarkin 08-21-07, 03:40 PM	Yes, this is legal. And very dangerous if the monster has Combat Reflexes.
NeueRegel 08-21-07, 03:45 PM	You didn't mention the "nature of the beastie". (Pardon the pun!) But your DM should never forget that Nobody "has" to take an AoO if he/she/it doesn't want to. If said "beastie" is of high intelligence and/or wisdom, and recognizes the greater danger inherent in the spell caster, he/she/it might well choose to hold onto that one AoO granted per round. This is not necessarily metagaming on the DM's part, if he is playing the beastie correctly. If it's a dumb idiot beastie, then it is absolutely probable it takes any AoO as soon as it's presented, without strategy or forethought. Happy gaming. Neue
NeueRegel 08-21-07, 03:50 PM	Oh, I forgot to address the original question. Yes, you can choose to fail to "NOT provoke an AoO" just as easily as you can choose to fail a saving throw or whatever else. Sure. But "provoking" the attack does not mean "force" the attack, if the beastie is smart enough to hold onto it. Neue
oreththecentaur 08-21-07, 03:56 PM	Yes, you can choose to fail to "NOT provoke an AoO" just as easily as you can choose to fail a saving throw or whatever else. Sure. But "provoking" the attack does not mean "force" the attack, if the beastie is smart enough to hold onto it. Touche, How about this setup. Using spring attack, I approach my target who has reach 10, choosing to provoke an AoO, then i succeed the DC15 tumble check to avoid provoking, would i be entitled the +4 bonus to my attack that the acrobatic backstab feat provides?
Platstud 08-21-07, 04:05 PM	I'm going to play Devil's advocate here. While I do agree that it is fully reasonable that you could allow the AoO, that's not actually supported by RAW. When you strike at an object held or carried by an opponent (such as a weapon or shield), you do not provoke an attack of opportunity. It say, "You do not," not, "You may choose not to." Yes, you can choose to fail to "NOT provoke an AoO" just as easily as you can choose to fail a saving throw or whatever else. Sure. This argument is fallacious. There is a rule that says, "You may choose to fail a saving throw," not, "You may choose to fail a saving throw or whatever else."
Platstud 08-21-07, 04:06 PM	Touche, How about this setup. Using spring attack, I approach my target who has reach 10, choosing to provoke an AoO, then i succeed the DC15 tumble check to avoid provoking, would i be entitled the +4 bonus to my attack that the acrobatic backstab feat provides? I'd have to see the wording of the feat, but I would think so.
oreththecentaur 08-21-07, 04:15 PM	It say, "You do not," not, "You may choose not to." This is very true, But i think you are looking at it the wrong way, We are not talking about actions that don't provoke. What we are dealing with is actions that say "this provokes unless you recieve training to prevent it," and asking can we ignore the training. A monk with improved trip has learnt to position himself close to an enemy and move in without exposing himself to counterattack. But if he wanted to he could just walk up to the enemy and try to grab him. I think any player should be allowed a free action to povoke an AoO. hehe. it is flavorful and a powerful ability in the right set up. The wording of Acrobatic Backstab is "If you succeed in using tumble to avoid an opponents AoO, you recieve a +4 bonus to your next attack against that foe, as long as that attack occurs before the end of your current turn.
mvincent 08-21-07, 04:29 PM	Can you choose to provoke an attack of opportunity, while initiating a grapple, trip, sunder or spring attack even if you have a feat that says you don't?That seems within the spirit of the rules.
Platstud 08-21-07, 04:52 PM	This is very true, But i think you are looking at it the wrong way, We are not talking about actions that don't provoke. What we are dealing with is actions that say "this provokes unless you recieve training to prevent it," and asking can we ignore the training. A monk with improved trip has learnt to position himself close to an enemy and move in without exposing himself to counterattack. But if he wanted to he could just walk up to the enemy and try to grab him. I think any player should be allowed a free action to povoke an AoO. hehe. it is flavorful and a powerful ability in the right set up. I fully agree with you. I was simply making the point that by RAW, it's not supported. Of course, following RAW without using reason would make for some pretty stupid games. Actually, on further reflection, I think that you should have to choose either to use the feat or not. If you permit the AoO, then you don't get any other benefits from the feat(such as +4 to trip, etc.). The wording of Acrobatic Backstab is "If you succeed in using tumble to avoid an opponents AoO, you recieve a +4 bonus to your next attack against that foe, as long as that attack occurs before the end of your current turn. Same as above. If you permit the AoO, you can't use the rest of the feat.
oreththecentaur 08-21-07, 05:09 PM	Actually, on further reflection, I think that you should have to choose either to use the feat or not. If you permit the AoO, then you don't get any other benefits from the feat(such as +4 to trip, etc.). Yeah i see your point, but i'd just argue that the +4 bonus is a secondary unrelated benefit. hehehe.
deathbane 08-21-07, 07:32 PM	I'm going to play Devil's advocate here. While I do agree that it is fully reasonable that you could allow the AoO, that's not actually supported by RAW. It say, "You do not," not, "You may choose not to." This argument is fallacious. There is a rule that says, "You may choose to fail a saving throw," not, "You may choose to fail a saving throw or whatever else." It said "you do not" because it is assuming that a player would never put themselves in a position to be hurt, and out of the box thinking like this is not accounted for when the feat was written, just like improved evasion says that even if you fail the reflex save it is only half damage, but if a player tells me he is not going to move then he will take full damage. There is no way to logically explain that someone stood with their hands on their hips, and just took half damage. Some things just aren't in the rule book. you may disregard the post if you want. I did not see the devil's advocate part.
Shaggy_Shaggs 08-21-07, 11:32 PM	I think the relevant issue here is whether the RAW says you must use feats just because you have them. If it doesn't, the wording of the feats is fairly irrelevant isn't it?
ArcTan 08-22-07, 12:01 AM	...Why can't you provoke an AoO just by moving?
ibayboy 08-22-07, 03:44 AM	Touche, How about this setup. Using spring attack, I approach my target who has reach 10, choosing to provoke an AoO, then i succeed the DC15 tumble check to avoid provoking, would i be entitled the +4 bonus to my attack that the acrobatic backstab feat provides? This thread is discussing just that... http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=909722 The skill trick Acrobatic Backstab requires you to use tumble to pass through an enemy space, so its DC25, and i don't think SpA will help anyway.
Karla 08-22-07, 07:13 AM	Similarly, if a character with spring attack moves towards an enemy can they choose to provoke an AoO if it benefits their situation. I ask because my spring attacking scouts AC is 5 higher than anyone else on our level 7 party. It seems like a valid strategy. The spring attack only prevents AoO from that opponent due to movement - "moving in this way does not provoke an AoO from the defender you attack". Should you choose to Sunder or Disarm or whatever then you will still provoke a potential AoO despite the Spring Attack.
fatal error 08-22-07, 07:21 AM	On the other hand, if all you care about is provoking an AoO, you could just concentrate, or pretend to be drinking a potion.
Karla 08-22-07, 07:34 AM	How about this setup. Using spring attack, I approach my target who has reach 10, choosing to provoke an AoO, then i succeed the DC15 tumble check to avoid provoking, would i be entitled the +4 bonus to my attack that the acrobatic backstab feat provides? I don't think it works with a Spring attack - "moving in this way does not provoke an AoO" seems pretty definitive. Whether you could do it with normal movement, tumbling to avoid the AoO in the first 5' of reach and provoking the AoO in the second would depend on the exact interpretion of the Acrobatic Strike text. Does "using Tumble to avoid an opponent's AoO" mean avoiding it for one square of potential-AoO movement or avoiding it completely during your approach? Personally I'd expect a DM to rule the latter otherwise it makes little sense. (Incidentally, does Acrobatic Strike work on flat-footed opponents or those who have already expended their AoO this round? Arguably as written it doesn't but that means it's harder to hit a flat-footed opponent than one in combat stance which seems kind of counter-intuitive!)
ibayboy 08-22-07, 08:31 AM	I don't think it works with a Spring attack - "moving in this way does not provoke an AoO" seems pretty definitive. Whether you could do it with normal movement, tumbling to avoid the AoO in the first 5' of reach and provoking the AoO in the second would depend on the exact interpretion of the Acrobatic Strike text. Does "using Tumble to avoid an opponent's AoO" mean avoiding it for one square of potential-AoO movement or avoiding it completely during your approach? Personally I'd expect a DM to rule the latter otherwise it makes little sense. (Incidentally, does Acrobatic Strike work on flat-footed opponents or those who have already expended their AoO this round? Arguably as written it doesn't but that means it's harder to hit a flat-footed opponent than one in combat stance which seems kind of counter-intuitive!) The text of the skill trick Acrobatic Backstab says you have to tumble through an enemies space, not his threatened area. Spring Attack only prevents AoO's from the normal movement part of your turn. So the skill trick should work. Whether it works when they're flatfooted, i don't know, not that it matters they lost their Dex anyway.
Lawkeeper 08-22-07, 08:43 AM	I don't think it works with a Spring attack - "moving in this way does not provoke an AoO" seems pretty definitive. Whether you could do it with normal movement, tumbling to avoid the AoO in the first 5' of reach and provoking the AoO in the second would depend on the exact interpretion of the Acrobatic Strike text. Does "using Tumble to avoid an opponent's AoO" mean avoiding it for one square of potential-AoO movement or avoiding it completely during your approach? Personally I'd expect a DM to rule the latter otherwise it makes little sense. (Incidentally, does Acrobatic Strike work on flat-footed opponents or those who have already expended their AoO this round? Arguably as written it doesn't but that means it's harder to hit a flat-footed opponent than one in combat stance which seems kind of counter-intuitive!) It doesn't matter. You use Tumble before you know whether the opponent has or will use his AoO. Because Tumble makes you avoid provoking an AoO - and not avoiding an AoO. Acrobatic Strike has to be understood as "if you successfully use the Tumble skill to avoid provoking an AoO from an enemy" to make it compatible with the skill's core rules.
Big_Mac 08-22-07, 08:55 AM	Heres the situation, our party is fighting a tough monster and or swords aren't working. So it's up to the wizard to finish off the beastie. The wizard however can't safely cast a spell without provoking. So our fighter takes one for the team and initiates a sunder attempt, thus provoking an attack of opportunity. (Let's assume the beastie doesn't have combat reflexes.) The sunder is unsuccessful but the fighters distraction buys the wizard enough time to safely cast a spell, and finishes off the beastie. Now suppose the fighter had improved sunder. Can him choose to provoke the AoO anyway, an order to let the wizard cast his spell uninterupted. Similarly, if a character with spring attack moves towards an enemy can they choose to provoke an AoO if it benefits their situation. I ask because my spring attacking scouts AC is 5 higher than anyone else on our level 7 party. It seems like a valid strategy. So my question is, Can you choose to provoke an attack of opportunity, while initiating a grapple, trip, sunder or spring attack even if you have a feat that says you don't? Just a minor point. If your spell caster has enough ranks in Concentration it should not matter. He can cast defensively and complete that spell and avoid the AoO. He will just have to make his skill role. The DC of which is 10 + the level of the spell being cast. Remember that Skill checks are not automatic success on 20 or automatic failure on a 1. So a Spell caster with a 10 con at 1st level should have 4 ranks in concentration. So there by he only needs a 7 to succeed to cast a 1st level spell.
Lawkeeper 08-22-07, 09:14 AM	Just a minor point. If your spell caster has enough ranks in Concentration it should not matter. He can cast defensively and complete that spell and avoid the AoO. He will just have to make his skill role. The DC of which is 10 + the level of the spell being cast. Remember that Skill checks are not automatic success on 20 or automatic failure on a 1. So a Spell caster with a 10 con at 1st level should have 4 ranks in concentration. So there by he only needs a 7 to succeed to cast a 1st level spell. Minor nitpick : the DC is 15 + spell level. So, a 1st-lvl caster with an 8 Con (common for arcane spellcasters, especiallly grey elf wizards) with his modifier of +3 only succeeds on a 13+ for his 1st-lvl spells - basically, 40% chances of success. Off course, the higher the level, the better a spellcaster becomes at defensive casting (his modifier improving twice faster than the DC rises), but it still takes a Con8, 6th-lvl caster to succeed on 10+, and even at 20th level he will only succeed on a 2+ for his 9th-lvl spells.
Big_Mac 08-22-07, 09:32 AM	Minor nitpick : the DC is 15 + spell level. So, a 1st-lvl caster with an 8 Con (common for arcane spellcasters, especiallly grey elf wizards) with his modifier of +3 only succeeds on a 13+ for his 1st-lvl spells - basically, 40% chances of success. Off course, the higher the level, the better a spellcaster becomes at defensive casting (his modifier improving twice faster than the DC rises), but it still takes a Con8, 6th-lvl caster to succeed on 10+, and even at 20th level he will only succeed on a 2+ for his 9th-lvl spells. I do not have the PHB or SRD available to me and thought it was DC was 10+spell level to cast on the defensive.
Platstud 08-22-07, 09:57 AM	I do not have the PHB or SRD available to me and thought it was DC was 10+spell level to cast on the defensive. It's 15+Spell Level. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#castingDefensively