Post/Author/DateTime	Post
heavenisme 04-10-08, 12:26 PM	So my friend has "Thicket OF Blades" from the Tome Of Battle book. 1.He states that if an attacker moves into his space they provoke attacks of oppertunity. Is this true? I read the power and it appears that only when opponents leave your space. 2. How about if he moves back 5ft then they will provoke then as they must move to attack. . . Please help out on this.
fatal error 04-10-08, 02:27 PM	1: No, unless you have a reach weapon. You get the AoO when the opponent takes movement whilst in your threatened area. If he moves just into your threatened area and no more, then he's not moving while in the threatened area. 2: I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here. If the enemy is in the PC's threatened area, and moves out of it, the PC gets an AoO. This AoO happens before the enemy leaves the threatened square, so the PC doesn't need to move to make his attack.
InkBlot 04-10-08, 04:14 PM	You only provoke when you exit a threatened square. This is the standard rule, and Thicket Of Blades follows it. So my friend has "Thicket OF Blades" from the Tome Of Battle book. 1.He states that if an attacker moves into his space they provoke attacks of oppertunity. Is this true? I read the power and it appears that only when opponents leave your space. Assuming that by "his space" he meant "the spaces which he threatens," then you are correct and your friend is wrong. Characters only provoke an attack of opportunity if they move out of a square you threaten. If by "his space" he meant "the space he occupies," then he was right. You can't walk through a space occupied by an enemy, and trying to do so provokes an attack of opportunity. The tumble skill can let someone slip through an enemy's space, and helps avoid provoking an attack of opportunity, but Thicket Of Blades would trump that and let you take an AoO on someone tumbling through your space. If your friend's character wields a reach weapon, then his threatened squares form a square-shaped-ring ten feet away from him. If an attack with less reach wanted to attack your friend's character, then the attacker would need to pass through his ring of threatened squares. When the attack leaves the threatened area and steps up next to your friend, he would provoke. The attack of opportunity occurs while the enemy is leaving the threatened square (before he's officially out of the threatened square). If your friend's character has more than five feet of reach but isn't wielding a normal reach weapon (e.g., someone cast enlarge on him, he's wielding a spiked chain, he's playing a large-sized monstrous race), then everything works pretty much as above. There's only one big difference: his threatened squares would be all the squares out to the extent of his reach, rather than a ring with no threatened squares in the middle. 2. How about if he moves back 5ft then they will provoke then as they must move to attack. If your friend moved his character back five feet, it would simply reset the situation to the one in your first question. The enemy would only provoke if your friends character has more than 5 feet of reach.
Dheran 04-11-08, 12:08 PM	The tumble skill can let someone slip through an enemy's space, and helps avoid provoking an attack of opportunity, but Thicket Of Blades would trump that and let you take an AoO on someone tumbling through your space. This is an entirely debatable position, InkBlot. The difficulty is that both ability statements (the skill and the stance) are absolute. So Tumble trumps Thicket of Blades because it saysTumble at one-half speed as part of normal movement, provoking no attacks of opportunity while doing so. And Thicket of Blades trumps Tumble, because it makes an absolute statement that an enemy's movement does provoke. Obviously you can't have it both ways. I default to Tumble winning out, because it's a well-known part of the core rules and if some later designers wanted it not to apply as usual, I think they should explicitly call out an exception. Anything else is just sloppy game design -- and we know that rarely happens in D&D, right? ;)
aelryinth 04-12-08, 01:54 PM	This is an entirely debatable position, InkBlot. The difficulty is that both ability statements (the skill and the stance) are absolute. So Tumble trumps Thicket of Blades because it says And Thicket of Blades trumps Tumble, because it makes an absolute statement that an enemy's movement does provoke. Obviously you can't have it both ways. I default to Tumble winning out, because it's a well-known part of the core rules and if some later designers wanted it not to apply as usual, I think they should explicitly call out an exception. Anything else is just sloppy game design -- and we know that rarely happens in D&D, right? ;) I, of course, go to the other position. Tumble changes the normal act of provoking AoO to not doing so. Thicket trumps it by 'upgrading' the act, as it were. Feats trump skills all the time. There's feats that trump intimidation by making you immune to fear, for example. I also believe Thicket trumps Spring Attack and the other feats about drawing no AoO. Those feats/manuvers always work on the paradigm that normally, they cause AoO's, but doing this, now you don't. With Thicket, they cancel out, and the 'norm' takes over. It's the only reasonable way to address the two contradictions. ===Aelryinth
kalstrand 04-13-08, 02:02 PM	I rule that Thicket adds 5' step to the list of actions that provoke an AoO therfore tumble and Spring Attack function normally.
aelryinth 04-13-08, 05:54 PM	I rule that Thicket adds 5' step to the list of actions that provoke an AoO therfore tumble and Spring Attack function normally. mmm. Well, it's not what the feat says, but whatever works for you. The power of Tumble is vastly overblown...Thicket is at least one attempt to tone it back some. ==Aelryinth
Zog_Jakome 04-13-08, 06:52 PM	also keep in mind that only three core classes have tumble as a class skill and only one of them is chosen very often (in my games at least) I have ruled in my game that thicket of blades works against 5' steps because normally 5' steps does not provoke attacks of opportunity. this works great against a spellcaster trying to take a 5' step back to cast a spell or anyone stepping back to drink a potion. but it does not work against a rogue tumbling to a position to gain a sneak attack.
kalstrand 04-13-08, 11:40 PM	mmm. Well, it's not what the feat says, but whatever works for you. The power of Tumble is vastly overblown...Thicket is at least one attempt to tone it back some. ==Aelryinth What is not what the feat says or are you talking about the maneuver? If you mean the maneuver and accidentally used feat you are right the maneuver says all movement provokes, but when using tumble it says that it doesn't provoke. In this situation you have to pick one or the other. My choice is that Thicket simply allows a 5' step to provoke.
mplindustries 04-14-08, 12:37 AM	For what its worth, I agree that Thicket should force tumble and spring attack to provoke. I'm not sure that it does, but I think it should. I honestly think that the function of Thicket was to absolutely force all movement--no matter what--to provoke. The wording is a little weak for that, but I've always read it as adding a totally new AoO, not just adding additional circumstances for a movement-provoked AoO. The key is that Thicket specifies that "any opponent you threaten that takes any sort of movement...provokes an attack of opportunity from you." Now, the normal AoO rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm) state: "Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing an action within a threatened square." Note the difference. Normally, you provoke the "movement" AoO by moving out of a threatened square. However, the wording of Thicket of Blades says nothing about moving out of the square, just that they move at all. In other words, I think it actually falls under the second category: that of performing an action within a threatened square (this time, moving). For example: 1) Your opponent moves without any attempt to prevent an AoO. They provoke an AoO because moving out of a threatened square provokes, and because you're using Thicket of Blades. (Now, I also rule that since its the same action that provoked two different AoOs, it still counts as only one opportunity, so you can't take two AoOs on them.) 2) Your opponent moves 10' laterally, and all squares involved are threatened by you. They provoke for the first step because moving out of a threatened space provokes, and because you're using Thicket of Blades. Moving out of the second square does not provoke because it still explicitly counts as the first movement, but taking any kind of movement while in a threatened square still provokes (if you have Combat Reflexes) because of Thicket of Blades. 3) Your opponent uses spring attack or tumble. Obviously, moving out of a threatened square does not provoke with those abilities, but I think taking any sort of movement in a threatened square does, because its the normal movement based AoOs that are prevented (Unless you want to argue that someone with Mobile Spellcasting can tumble and cast a spell at the same time and not provoke).
Howland Reed 04-14-08, 01:41 AM	the maneuver says all movement provokes, but when using tumble it says that it doesn't provoke. In this situation you have to pick one or the other. Since they're both absolutes, why should one trump the other? Why don't they just cancel out...which would mean that the normal default rule is used, which is that it provokes?
SupaTalka 04-14-08, 02:13 AM	Hi aelryinth, funny to see you in a Thicket of Blades thread ;-) The way I personally rule it is this. There are 4 CORE rules for moving without provoking AoO's: Withdraw, 5' step, Tumble and Spring Attack. Thicket SPECIFICALLY mentions within its text: 1) Thicket of Blades by text TRUMPS 5' step. 2) Thicket of Blades by text TRUMPS Withdraw. 3) Thicket of Blades by text does not mention Tumble. 4) Thicket of Blades by text does not mention Spring Attack. It mentions those two cases, and does not mention any other. These things all exist in CORE rules. Therefore, I rule that since Thicket DOES NOT SAY IT TRUMPS TUMBLE ETC, it does not. Most especially since it DOES MENTION other things it DOES TRUMP which normally would not allow for an AoO. There's a rules precedent with the Close Quarters Fighting feat, for example. It not only mentions you still get your AoO on a creature with Improved Grab, it mentions that *any grappling even one that would not normally allow for an AoO, is still effected by CQF.* Thicket of Blades does say any movement, but it does not have that second clause 'Any movement, even movement that normally would not allow an AoO.' It does NOT have THAT text! Also, the entire current of all the RAW D&D rules operates in a positive manner. You're only allowed to do what it says you're allowed to do. [Just because it doesn't say you CAN'T do something, does not mean you automatically can.] The text of what the feat does is clear, as are the EXCEPTIONS that apply to it, IMO.
mplindustries 04-14-08, 10:02 AM	Hi aelryinth, funny to see you in a Thicket of Blades thread ;-) The way I personally rule it is this. There are 4 CORE rules for moving without provoking AoO's: Withdraw, 5' step, Tumble and Spring Attack. Thicket SPECIFICALLY mentions within its text: 1) Thicket of Blades by text TRUMPS 5' step. 2) Thicket of Blades by text TRUMPS Withdraw. 3) Thicket of Blades by text does not mention Tumble. 4) Thicket of Blades by text does not mention Spring Attack. It mentions those two cases, and does not mention any other. These things all exist in CORE rules. Therefore, I rule that since Thicket DOES NOT SAY IT TRUMPS TUMBLE ETC, it does not. Most especially since it DOES MENTION other things it DOES TRUMP which normally would not allow for an AoO. There's a rules precedent with the Close Quarters Fighting feat, for example. It not only mentions you still get your AoO on a creature with Improved Grab, it mentions that *any grappling even one that would not normally allow for an AoO, is still effected by CQF.* Thicket of Blades does say any movement, but it does not have that second clause 'Any movement, even movement that normally would not allow an AoO.' It does NOT have THAT text! Also, the entire current of all the RAW D&D rules operates in a positive manner. You're only allowed to do what it says you're allowed to do. [Just because it doesn't say you CAN'T do something, does not mean you automatically can.] The text of what the feat does is clear, as are the EXCEPTIONS that apply to it, IMO. My only problem with this very common line of thinking is that the text says "any movement" and then says, "even a five foot step." This does not give the exception, it gives an exception. By saying, "even a five foot step," it is suggesting there are more situations that it works in, they just felt it important to mention this one as it would be the most controversial or whatever. The second part, about Withdraw, is actually a totally separate rule, because rather than provoke for the movement, it allows you to threaten the space normally, which would cause the movement to provoke anyway. In other words, the first part, about movement provoking, by your line of reasoning would only change the fact that a 5' step provokes, even though it specifies a 5' step as only one of the movements that now provoke. It must do more than just cause a 5' step to provoke, or else it would say, "5 foot steps now provoke" or something like that instead of its current wording.
SupaTalka 04-14-08, 11:10 AM	It's true it says "any movement" but does it say "any movement, even movement which would normally not provoke an AoO"? It does not. Remember, PHB pg 144, a 5' step PER RULES is NOT a move action. It's listed as "no action" and "miscellaneous action". That's why they MUST list it as an exception for Thicket of Blades, because it's working on something *it cannot work on*. 5ft. step is *not* strictly movement, but Thicket lists it specifically as an exception. That and *only that* is what allows Thicket to work. This is exactly the same with the Withdraw action. Withdrawing is a Full-Round Action, not a move action, so "any movement" technically would not apply to it. Once again, that's why Thicket must specifically mention how it interacts with Withdrawing. I'll point you to PHB pg 141 table 8-2. Look at the "Move Action" section. Look at footnote 1. Read this carefully. "Regardless of the action, if you move out of a threatened square, you usually provoke an AoO. This column indicates whether the action itself, not moving, provokes an attack of opportunity." Emphasis mine. There are a ton of things which incorporate "movement" that are move actions but are "not moving". Like drawing a weapon, mounting a horse, or opening a door. We can all see that the character "moves" their body to do one of these actions. Is that "any sort of movement?" Of course not, because "any sort of movement" has no rules meaning. There are Standard/Move/Full actions which either provoke or do not provoke. Now look at page 145 PHB. Under the "miscellaneous actions" section "Use Skill" is one of the misc actions. It says check the skill description. Now, Tumble specifically says it is part of normal movement, so we know it is a move action and we know that Thicket of Blades would provide an AoO...except Tumble specifies it is movement that does not provoke an AoO. What does this tell us? It tells us we're right back at the beginning. But I'm right back to my original conclusion: Thicket of Blades does not say it specifically trumps the Tumble *exception*. Meanwhile, Thicket goes out of its way to mention how it works on a Full-Round Action(Withdraw) and Miscellaneous Action(5' step) that normally do not provoke AoOs. Nowhere in Thicket of Blades does it mention that it works *regardless of exceptions* on move actions. Yes it works on "all movement" - a phrase which has limited rules meaning. But does it work *regardless of exception*? I don't see how you can say yes. "All" does not mean "regardless of exception" as mentioned next. I'll point again to Close-Quarters Fighting Feat. It says in *no uncertain terms* "Any grapple attempt provokes an AoO, even one that normally would not allow for an AoO, this includes Improved Grab and any other ability that normally would not allow an AoO." CQF does not simply say "all" grapple attempts. The feat goes out of its way to show that it explicitly works in all cases. Thicket does not do this. It's poorly worded like many of the things in ToB as we all know. But poor wording is not an excuse to make a ruling. Thicket does not allow for the exception, therefore the exception still works. I believe the Rules Compendium covers this under the section called "Exception Based Rules". I would provide a page number but I lent the book out last session. Does anyone else have the Rules Compendium that can tell us about the "Exception Based Rules" section in detail? It might help. Also, Spring Attack most certainly is 100% unaffected by Thicket. It's movement *as part of an attack action* and is covered under the Miscellaneous Actions section. So it's not a move action and therefore should be untouchable.
mplindustries 04-14-08, 08:17 PM	I think you may have missed what I was emphasizing. First of all, of course a 5' step is movement. It does not have to be a move action, or the specific action "Move" to be movement. According to the SRD: Movement (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm): There are three movement scales, as follows. * Tactical, for combat, measured in feet (or squares) per round. * Local, for exploring an area, measured in feet per minute. * Overland, for getting from place to place, measured in miles per hour or miles per day. So, if you can measure it in feet or squares per round, its movement. If you move 5', no matter how you do it, thats movement, becuase its 5 feet/round. Second, I want to point out once again that Thicket of Blades does not cause the Withdraw action to provoke. Withdrawing already provokes, because its just normal movement. The catch of withdrawing is that normally, the space you start in is not considered threatened. Thicket of Blades just allows you to still threaten that first space. That is why Withdraw gets special attention. Third, here's my real point. Just to confirm, your argument is basically, "It doesn't specifically mention it works on stuff other than the 5' step." Correct? What about "all movement" doesn't suggest to you that it works "all" the time? You cite Close Quarters Fighting, and while it does have more conclusive wording, that doesn't mean it wouldn't have worked if it just said "all grapples." All means all. There is no parsing the word "all." It is literally all inclusive. The 5' step is listed as a single example of movement that provokes an AoO. Again, I ask, if tumble and spring attack both still stop the AoO from Thicket of Blades, then what exactly does Thicket of Blades do? Why would it say, "all movement" if it really meant "just this one particular instance of movement (i.e. the 5' step)?" The withdraw clause is completely separate, and as I mentioned Withdraw does not work on the "does not provoke" axis, it works on the "does not threaten" axis. That leaves, in your eyes, the 5' step as the one and only movement based AoO that Thicket causes to provoke. All other movement (especially by your bizarre definition of movement), already provokes an AoO or has wording that somehow stops Thicket from stopping it. Why would it not just say then, "When you are in the Thicket of Blades stance, enemies provoke an AoO for taking a 5' step, and the Withdraw action does not prevent you from threatening that first square" or something like that? I think its very clear that it was intended for Thicket to do more. "All movement" means "all movement." I understand that by RAW, it causes contradictions because it is the unstoppable force hitting the immovable object, and I do agree there should be something somewhere that clears it up, but by RAI, it is clear that Thicket must do more than just cause 5' steps to provoke. Another angle, I think, would be to look at it as "last in last out." Thicket of Blades came after Spring Attack and Tumble. Presumably, the writers of Thicket were aware of Spring Attack. So, first in, Spring Attack, says "I don't provoke," but Thicket says, "oh, but all movement provokes, sorry." Thicket wins. If Spring Attack came after Thicket, then I could see maybe arguing Thicket didn't work because the authors of Spring Attack would know about Thicket and said, "Well this ability doesn't provoke, even though I know Thicket exists." Hopefully I was more clear this time in my points.
aelryinth 04-14-08, 11:33 PM	The above is very good reasoning. You'd have to be pretty silly to think the designers of the book on Melee upgrades ignored the mockery that Tumble and the -By feats made of melees trying to command and threaten the area they are in. The wording of Thicket is very clear that the two specific modes of movement are called out as examples...Thicket plainly is supposed to do MORE then just the two, not just add them to the mess. And heya, Talka. ==+Aelryinth
SupaTalka 04-15-08, 10:56 AM	Sigh. Under 5ft step, phb pg 144. it specifically says taking a 5' step never provokes an attack of opportunity. It says *never*. So since Thicket of Blades works on *all movement* (even movement forms that do not allow for AoO's) why did the designers specifically mention that it works on 5' step? Why did they go out of their way to specify ONE CASE if they thought "all movement" would cover it? Do you see what I'm saying? It says "all movement." They could have added one more sentence that said "No matter the kind of movement, even if the movement would normally not allow for AoO's, Thicket of Blades still allows for AoO's". But they *do not* do that. All they do is cite 5' step, and an addendum to withdraw. As it's written the Immovable Object vs. Unstoppable Force debate of two absolutes is settled for us. 5ft step, something that *never* provokes, and Thicket, something that makes "all movement" provoke is settled within the confines of the text. But it does not allow for an inclusion of Tumble, Spring Attack, Improved Bull-Rush, and a ton of other cases because it does not say it does. Yes, Improved Bull-Rush would also be trumped by Thicket of Blades if "all movement", even movement that does normally not allow provoking - now provokes. I wonder how many more feats/skills/misc I can find that Thicket of Blades would work on if it ignored everything in its way. Improved Overrun. (not that anyone ever uses it...) I just don't believe it. Oh, maintaining a grapple. If someone in Thicket Stance was grappled, on the following round when the grappler moved into their space, which normally does not allow for an AoO, bam they *could* get an AoO. Is that an AoO within the confines of grapple OR an AoO within the confines of Thicket of Blades? So they can use any weapon they want, because it's "any movement"? (I kid, I kid) I hope you can see where this is going. There are *so many* things that Thicket would completely ignore...it just does not seem appropriate. This is starting to sound more like RAI than RAW. Here I'll reiterate my primary point: two diametrically opposing *always* conditions are specifically pointed out as Thicket taking precedence. But there is no text that conclusively extends that ruling to all other similar situations. (and there are a great deal of other situations, adding one more phrase "even if normally AoO's would not be allowed", could have been added easily yet it is not there) When is the Sage going to throw down on this?
mplindustries 04-15-08, 02:07 PM	You reiterated your original points quite well, but again, did not answer the burning question. You've said quite a lot what Thicket of Blades doesn't do, but what does it actually do, in your opinion? By what you're saying, the only thing it does is cause 5' steps to provoke (again, the Withdraw clause is totally separate and for a different reason). Why would it call out 5' steps as one example if it only did that one thing? Name one thing, by your logic, other than 5' steps, that Thicket of Blades causes to provoke. Let me pose this a different way. As you've pointed out, 5' steps are totally iron clad. "It never provokes and attack of opportunity." So, what if I said to you, "Grease stains never come out of clothes. Well, this brand new Blammo brand detergent removes all stains, even grease!" Would you think, "Boy, Blammo really does remove all stains since it even brought to my attention the toughest stain I can think of!" Or would you think, "Well, I guess Blammo removes grease, but it didn't specifically mention grass stains or permanent marker or any other tough stain. Even though grease stains are as tough or tougher to remove than all those others, since it didn't mention them, it clearly doesn't remove them." I personally think, but calling out one amazing, normally impossible example and saying "even this," I'd pretty readily believe that it would work on all movement, just like it says. Additionally, I see no problems arising from it working on those other things (i.e. the Improved Overrun and, well I assume you have other examples?). Not only is it still of an appropriate power level, the grappling part wouldn't work anyway because a grappled person doesn't threaten anymore, so it wouldn't make a difference if they provoked entering your square. There is actually no reason for them to have mentioned the movement doesn't provoke from your target because they can't take the AoO anyway. Edit: As far as the sage is concerned, he is not an official source, so it wouldn't make a difference what he said even if he agreed with me. Plus, he answers frequently asked questions. I don't think this is of as much concern to people as you think. The general consensus is that it works on all movement. You are in the minority. PS - I really appreciate having an intelligent adversary. My last good debate was painful at best due to opponent stupidity.
aelryinth 04-15-08, 08:58 PM	The reason why feats are not mentioned is very simple...then you'd have to mention each and every single feat, manuver, trick and whatsis, now and into the eternal future. Obviously, that's not going to happen. Furthermore, he specifically cites two examples of movement that normally never provoke...and now they do. The wording also makes clear that these are not the ONLY movements that provoke. So what do you do? You look for other sorts of movement that normally don't provoke, and, all things being equal, now they do. That includes tumble, the move-by feats, and various ToB manuvers. Thicket is open-ended, it is NOT close-ended, as detractors like to argue. Look at the wording of the stance and consider it carefully. RAI, I read it as "A melee taking this feat commands the area around him, and no silly tricks that let people avoid his AoO's if they get close are going to work here." ===Aelryinth
OrderedXaos 04-15-08, 11:03 PM	I would make tumble provoke (which i believe is RAW) Unless you were tumbling with Step of the Wind that is ;)
zerombr 04-16-08, 07:45 AM	I just got this from CustServ Someone attempting to tumble through an area threatened by a Crusader with Thicket of Blades will provoke an attack of opportunity from the Crusader; this trumps the usual successful tumble skill check result of not provoking attacks of opportunity. Individual cases however should be adjudicated by your DM. Please let me know if you need anymore help! not that they wont disagree with each other anyway...
Ace_of_time 04-16-08, 09:49 AM	Tumble is not a move action by it self it is just used with a move action. The ability I think says Any move provokes AoO. even 5' steps as long as the person is threated. The key is the "any sort of movement" in the entry. You also aren't allowed a withdraw action.
ToastedAmphibian 04-17-08, 12:09 AM	Lol, so..... how many people here would give an AoO to the crusader if a mage used dimenson door next to him? (Assuming that he DID make his defensive casting check) Plane Shift? What if i the psionic power that lets me change places with an allie? If my ally was in his threatened square, and i wasnt, who does he get to attack; me, my friend, both, neither? What if i was threatened but my friend wasnt? What if we where both threatened? Can anyone argue that a "Teleport" is not movment, despite the -port suffix?
mplindustries 04-17-08, 03:31 AM	Can anyone argue that a "Teleport" is not movment, despite the -port suffix? I'm surprised this needs to be done. Teleportation, by its very definition, implies a lack of movement. It is instaneous, so when you figure speed (Distance/Time), and your Time = 0, your speed is unsolvable. No moving is done. You simple are elsewhere.
ToastedAmphibian 04-17-08, 04:51 PM	"port"=move Transport=Move acrost Portable=moveable ect. tela=distant Telagraph=Distance writing Telephone=Distant Hearing Television=Distant seeing Teleport=Distant Move. You moved, a distance. And you probably spent a standard action to do it. It dosnt say "All non instantaneous movment provkes....."
aelryinth 04-17-08, 07:50 PM	"port"=move Transport=Move acrost Portable=moveable ect. tela=distant Telagraph=Distance writing Telephone=Distant Hearing Television=Distant seeing Teleport=Distant Move. You moved, a distance. And you probably spent a standard action to do it. It dosnt say "All non instantaneous movment provkes....." You have a non-argument. tell me when he entered or left a square by crossing it's boundaries. Answer: You can't. he didn't cross any boundaries. he's simply somewhere else. He went from one square to another, without going thru/in/out of anything in between. ---Aelryinth
ToastedAmphibian 04-17-08, 08:21 PM	Tell me when my character hit the other character. Tell me when your character left the square he is in and intered the one next to it. Every time you move, you leave one area and come out somehwere else. If you wish to put your question in terms of squares and boundaries, then ill have to put my answer in terms of minis. My character left the square he was in and entered another square WHEN I MOVED IT THERE. Perhapes everyone needs to define MOVMENT then. To me, movment is anything that causes you to be in a square of the grid other than the one you where in prior to the event happening. If the floor suddenly drops out from under you, you moved. If you want to argue what is ment by "Any Movment" then you must first pick and agree upon a definition of "Movment" THAT is my argument. My definition for DnD tactical movment would be: Going to a square that isnt the square you where in immediatly before you went there.
Dheran 04-17-08, 09:09 PM	I also believe Thicket trumps Spring Attack and the other feats about drawing no AoO. Those feats/manuvers always work on the paradigm that normally, they cause AoO's, but doing this, now you don't. With Thicket, they cancel out, and the 'norm' takes over. It's the only reasonable way to address the two contradictions. So basically you're just adding + and - qualifiers, if I understand your reasoning. This would mean that if you use the Spring Attack feat and also Tumble, you've got +2 to avoid AoOs versus just -1 for Thicket of Blades, yielding a positive sum: you don't provoke AoOs.
Ace_of_time 04-17-08, 09:48 PM	I can't believe I have to point out that traveling is not the issue. Casting, beside having to cast defensively so he doesn't get an AoO for casting in a threated space, is a standard action. (or full round without some kind of feat that lets you cast faster.) And it would depend on what the spell does for you. Casting fly wouldn't count as a move but if you then tried to fly away that would. Of coarse the book is very unclear on most of the abilities as to how they really work.
mplindustries 04-18-08, 02:25 AM	Tell me when my character hit the other character. Tell me when your character left the square he is in and intered the one next to it. Every time you move, you leave one area and come out somehwere else. If you wish to put your question in terms of squares and boundaries, then ill have to put my answer in terms of minis. My character left the square he was in and entered another square WHEN I MOVED IT THERE. Perhapes everyone needs to define MOVMENT then. To me, movment is anything that causes you to be in a square of the grid other than the one you where in prior to the event happening. If the floor suddenly drops out from under you, you moved. If you want to argue what is ment by "Any Movment" then you must first pick and agree upon a definition of "Movement" THAT is my argument. My definition for DnD tactical movment would be: Going to a square that isnt the square you where in immediatly before you went there. I actually defined movement earlier in the thread...it requires you to have a measureabe speed. The distance you moved through teleportation would divide by 0, because it took no time, and is unsolvable. You have no speed, you have no movement. It is in fact instant because it says so here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#teleportation): Teleportation is instantaneous travel through the Astral Plane. Additionally, all teleportation spells are very careful to use the word "transported" or other such words rather than "moved." Regardless of where this silliness goes, are you actually saying that, because teleportation might be construed as movement somehow (which its not), that means tumble and spring attack beat Thicket of Blades? If not, I don't know where you're going with this. If so, please show how this argument follows.
aelryinth 04-18-08, 01:07 PM	So basically you're just adding + and - qualifiers, if I understand your reasoning. This would mean that if you use the Spring Attack feat and also Tumble, you've got +2 to avoid AoOs versus just -1 for Thicket of Blades, yielding a positive sum: you don't provoke AoOs. No, because you have Spring Attack and Tumble doing the same thing thru different methods...they are denying AoO from movement. They are not denying movement^2, which is what you seem to be implying. Furthermore, they aren't bonuses, and there's nothing in the rules that say they stack...because that would be very silly. Tumble does help a Spring Attacker not get hit by AoO's from someone other then his target, however. However, when two absolutes contradict one another, they generally are considered to neutralize one another, and the default is restored...which means the AoO's go off. ==Aelryinth
ToastedAmphibian 04-18-08, 05:41 PM	I actually defined movement earlier in the thread...it requires you to have a measureabe speed. The distance you moved through teleportation would divide by 0, because it took no time, and is unsolvable. You have no speed, you have no movement. It seems that you arnt even satisfied with your own definition of movment. If i use sudden leap, what is my speed? And what is the speed of a 5ft step. It is in fact instant because it says so here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#teleportation): How can you travel through something with out moving? Additionally, all teleportation spells are very careful to use the word "transported" or other such words rather than "moved." Regardless of where this silliness goes, are you actually saying that, because teleportation might be construed as movement somehow (which its not), that means tumble and spring attack beat Thicket of Blades? If not, I don't know where you're going with this. If so, please show how this argument follows. Hm, i guess im just insane for having trouble grasping the concept of travel with out movment. I think of teleportation as going from A to B with out passing through the points BETWEEN A nad B. That dosnt say to me that you didnt move, but that you moved through a ditinctly Diffrent place. But thats beside the point. You keep speaking of speed. Speed requiers a unit of time. Duration in DND is measured in rounds. If you use dimension door to "Instantly" travel 60ft, and that is the only distance you move that round, then your speed that round was "60ft per round", on your current plane atleast. I guess your actual speed would be "60ft and 2 planes of existence per round" Now, a swift action is also close to instantaneous. And yet, moving as a swift action provokes an AoO. My point is that alot of methods exist for movment in DND, and unless your willing to entertain the idea that teleportation provokes an AoO, then the argument of "You moved, and it says ALL movment, so you trigger an AoO" is rather meaningless as youve already pointed out one exception to the rule. Thats the great thing about an absolute. They actually CAN be proven incorect through one peice of negative evidence. I only see three possibilites; (As a side note, i dont specifically mean YOU in the literal sense, but am actually using it as a pronoun adressing anyone who may be reading it at that time) 1. You conceed that all movment means all movment, and teleportations provke an AoO 2. You conceed that teleportations do not provoke an AoO and thus it cannot actually mean ALL, as exceptions can and do exist 3. You argue that movment through a teleportation effect is not movment. A direct contradiction as Movment=Movment is a direct aplication of an algebraic fact.
Dheran 04-18-08, 09:59 PM	However, when two absolutes contradict one another, they generally are considered to neutralize one another, and the default is restored...which means the AoO's go off. I understand, but we're not talking about two absolutes; we're now in the realm of three contradictory absolutes, with two of them on the "negating AoOs" side. If Tumble and Thicket of Blades neutralize each other, then we're left with just the default + Spring Attack -- so no AoO from the person you attack.
aelryinth 04-18-08, 11:11 PM	I understand, but we're not talking about two absolutes; we're now in the realm of three contradictory absolutes, with two of them on the "negating AoOs" side. If Tumble and Thicket of Blades neutralize each other, then we're left with just the default + Spring Attack -- so no AoO from the person you attack. No, we aren't. Spring Attack and Tumble do the same thing, and they do not stack. they introduce a condition where no AoO's occur. Thicket introduces a condition where such does occur. It neutralizes each independently, they don't get to 'gang up' on him. ===Aelryinth
mplindustries 04-19-08, 02:32 AM	Thats the great thing about an absolute. They actually CAN be proven incorect through one peice of negative evidence. I only see three possibilites; (As a side note, i dont specifically mean YOU in the literal sense, but am actually using it as a pronoun adressing anyone who may be reading it at that time) 1. You conceed that all movment means all movment, and teleportations provke an AoO 2. You conceed that teleportations do not provoke an AoO and thus it cannot actually mean ALL, as exceptions can and do exist 3. You argue that movment through a teleportation effect is not movment. A direct contradiction as Movment=Movment is a direct aplication of an algebraic fact. 4. You agree that if teleportation actually is "movement" (as far as D&D's definition and the RAW/RAI of Thicket of Blades is concerned), then it would provoke an AoO from Thicket of Blades. However, you still don't believe that teleport actually counts as movement, because while it is generally agreed upon by most, it is difficult to find the language to precisely describe why to someone who refuses to accept the common understanding that movement involves crossing space whereas teleportation explicitly skips the space and changes your position without moving (so you move your figure, but your character doesn't actually do any physical moving). Also, you typed "movment" something like a dozen times. I think your "e" might be stuck, and it amuses me. And saying that a swift action is almost instantaneous and thus relevant is crazy, considering division by any number, no matter how small is solvable, whereas division by 0, the time it takes to complete an instantaneous action, is not. Regardless, I think this whole line of reasoning is quite a stretch. (Edit: You're sort of right on speed, though, because the first point that I should have re-read earlier, specifies that speed is measured in feet/round)
aelryinth 04-20-08, 02:46 PM	Also note, Sudden Leap does NOT state that the movement from the jump is 'free'...thus, it actually counts against your movement/rd, which kind of defeats the purpose of the manuver. ===Aelryinth
Ace_of_time 04-20-08, 03:20 PM	How are youe starting a spring attack on a person in their threated space. Didn't know you could use spring attack in a threated space?:confused:
aelryinth 04-20-08, 05:43 PM	you have to move before and after the attack with Spring Attack. they are using Sudden Leap to move away (this doesn't take a move ACTION, but does count as movement for the round), then either Spring Attacking or charging back with what's left of their movement. Helps to have a lot of spare move, of course. ===Aelryinth
Ace_of_time 04-21-08, 09:36 AM	The entry from Thicket Of Blades says from any sort of movement. If it counts as movement for the round then it would provoke an AoO. The entry doesn't say the move has to count as a move action, as long as you are counted as moving.
ToastedAmphibian 04-21-08, 09:24 PM	Also note, Sudden Leap does NOT state that the movement from the jump is 'free'...thus, it actually counts against your movement/rd, which kind of defeats the purpose of the manuver. ===Aelryinth ?? Where does it say there is a limit on the distance you may move in a round? The only limit i can think of concerns how far you can move using a move action. You can move twice that on a charge. 4x that if you run unencumbered, ect. Nowhere do i recall it saying that you cannot exceen that distance in a given round, nor do rember reading that you can only move so far using a swift action. Perhapes that is a 3.0 thing? Im actually not trying to be argumentative on this, im truley curious as to where people get this from. My DM tried to say the same thing, and he often gets 3.0 rules confused with 3.5 rules (Like the whole 1 AoO per round per TARGET thing)
ToastedAmphibian 04-21-08, 09:32 PM	4. You agree that if teleportation actually is "movement" (as far as D&D's definition and the RAW/RAI of Thicket of Blades is concerned), then it would provoke an AoO from Thicket of Blades. However, you still don't believe that teleport actually counts as movement, because while it is generally agreed upon by most, it is difficult to find the language to precisely describe why to someone who refuses to accept the common understanding that movement involves crossing space whereas teleportation explicitly skips the space and changes your position without moving (so you move your figure, but your character doesn't actually do any physical moving). I fail to see how this is distinct from 3. Your arguing that moving through a teleportation effect is not moving. Yes, i agree movment typically involves moving through one space to arrive at another. But what if i move to just the adjacent space? How far do i have to move to pass through a space as oppose to just entering the space next to me? Whats the smallest unit of space? Anyways, vague metaphysical arguments aside, telportation says that it takes you THROUGH the astral plane. So, you left one spot, whent through another space, and arived somewhere else. It is the common understanding that when a object passes through something, it is moving. (Or it is a stationary object that is partially inside what your saying it goes through, such as a road going through a tunnel, but i think we both agree that your character is not a stationairy object that happens to exist partially on the astral plane......) Also, you typed "movment" something like a dozen times. I think your "e" might be stuck, and it amuses me. Hmm. it amuses me too, actualy. I have no idea why i habitually misspell movment.. er, movement. Odd.... Anyways, one more odd and possibly irrelevant tidbit, and then i will attempt to silence myself... y/0 isnt exactly unsolvable... you just have to use a limit. The limit of Y/X as X aproaches 0+ is equal to infinity. The speed of insantaneous movment is Infinit. Infinit does exist...... kinda...
mplindustries 04-21-08, 10:40 PM	?? Where does it say there is a limit on the distance you may move in a round? For what its worth, I agree with you, here. I can't find a limit on movement per turn, only per action. I fail to see how this is distinct from 3. Your arguing that moving through a teleportation effect is not moving. Yes, i agree movment typically involves moving through one space to arrive at another. But what if i move to just the adjacent space? How far do i have to move to pass through a space as oppose to just entering the space next to me? Whats the smallest unit of space? You moved 5' to get to an adjacent square (from the center of your first square, to the center of the next). The smallest unit of space, as far as moving is concerned, I think is 5', but I will admit thats just a general understanding, not from a quoteable reference. Anyways, vague metaphysical arguments aside, telportation says that it takes you THROUGH the astral plane. So, you left one spot, whent through another space, and arived somewhere else. It is the common understanding that when a object passes through something, it is moving. (Or it is a stationary object that is partially inside what your saying it goes through, such as a road going through a tunnel, but i think we both agree that your character is not a stationairy object that happens to exist partially on the astral plane......) This actually has a lot of merit. I now realize you said this before, but I didn't notice. However, while your position is more clear, my answer is even easier. The movement takes place on the Astral plane. You don't threaten the Astral Plane (normally), so Thicket can't help you. Now, if you somehow managed to threaten the Astral Plane, I think it'd be perfectly reasonable to get an AoO when your enemy teleports (though, now, I'd be inclined to say this would be the case even without Thicket of Blades). Anyways, one more odd and possibly irrelevant tidbit, and then i will attempt to silence myself... y/0 isnt exactly unsolvable... you just have to use a limit. The limit of Y/X as X aproaches 0+ is equal to infinity. The speed of insantaneous movment is Infinit. Infinit does exist...... kinda... However, now you're not solving Y/0, you're solving the limit of Y/X as X approaches 0 (or something like that) ;P
ToastedAmphibian 04-21-08, 10:52 PM	This actually has a lot of merit. I now realize you said this before, but I didn't notice. However, while your position is more clear, my answer is even easier. The movement takes place on the Astral plane. You don't threaten the Astral Plane (normally), so Thicket can't help you. Now, if you somehow managed to threaten the Astral Plane, I think it'd be perfectly reasonable to get an AoO when your enemy teleports (though, now, I'd be inclined to say this would be the case even without Thicket of Blades). The problem with that, however, is that attacks of opportunity take place before the action that provokes them. Before you started moving on the astral plane, you where in a threatened square. You moved OUT of the threatened square...... You moved 5' to get to an adjacent square (from the center of your first square, to the center of the next). The smallest unit of space, as far as moving is concerned, I think is 5', but I will admit thats just a general understanding, not from a quoteable reference. Well, no. Acording to my understanding of the definitions for movment you gave me, and your asignment of 5' as being the smallest unit of space, you did not MOVE. You left one space and ended up in another space 5ft away. But seeing as you did not cross any other spaces on the way there, you didnt move..... see? movement involves crossing space Acording to this line of reasoning, a 5ft step does not provoke with thicket of blades, making the stance really really useless.
mplindustries 04-22-08, 12:31 AM	The problem with that, however, is that attacks of opportunity take place before the action that provokes them. Before you started moving on the astral plane, you where in a threatened square. You moved OUT of the threatened square...... Sort of. It wasn't actually threatened when you moved out of it though. Unless you're considering the shift to the Astral plane as movement. The metaphysics of that argument hurt my think place. Well, no. Acording to my understanding of the definitions for movment you gave me, and your asignment of 5' as being the smallest unit of space, you did not MOVE. You left one space and ended up in another space 5ft away. But seeing as you did not cross any other spaces on the way there, you didnt move..... see? Acording to this line of reasoning, a 5ft step does not provoke with thicket of blades, making the stance really really useless. Well, its a nice try, but I said crossing space, not squares. You did cross 5' of space, that space just happened to be half one square and half another. I also need to apologize here, because I don't run games with a map, so trying to think of things in terms of squares is making my language sloppy.
ToastedAmphibian 04-22-08, 04:42 PM	Well, its a nice try, but I said crossing space, not square Who said square? I didnt mention squares... atleast i dont think i did. The smallest unit of space, as far as moving is concerned, I think is 5', I left one unit of space, and arrive in teh next unit of space, crossing no units of space in between. Thus i couldnt have moved :} Now, i agree that this argument is completly silly, but im rather enjoying it. If your not, jsut say so and ill stop bothering, but otherwise ill just keep going till i talk myself into a corner or get bored...
aelryinth 04-22-08, 08:05 PM	?? Where does it say there is a limit on the distance you may move in a round? The only limit i can think of concerns how far you can move using a move action. You can move twice that on a charge. 4x that if you run unencumbered, ect. Nowhere do i recall it saying that you cannot exceen that distance in a given round, nor do rember reading that you can only move so far using a swift action. Perhapes that is a 3.0 thing? Im actually not trying to be argumentative on this, im truley curious as to where people get this from. My DM tried to say the same thing, and he often gets 3.0 rules confused with 3.5 rules (Like the whole 1 AoO per round per TARGET thing) Well, I'm looking at the manuver....you can Jump as a swift action. That's fine. However, Jump is considered a part of normal movement...it counts against your allowed movement. Does Sudden leap suddenly give you +30 (assume your base moveis 30') for the round? No, it doesn't say anything like that. It says you can pull off a jump as a swift action. Therefore, it isn't manufacturing extra movement out of thin air. Otherwise, with a high Jump check/skill, you could very easily double or more your movement for the round...which seems far beyond the power of the skill. So, it seems to me that you'd have to abide by the movement restrictions of whatever kind of action you take in a round. The movement of the jump has to apply against something...so it must be applying against your normal move action(s). Thus if you Sudden Leap 10', you still have a Move Action and Attack action left, and can still take a Standard Action. You've only got 20' of move to use up, since you spent 10' on the jump, but you've got the total of your actions still to happen. Among other things, this would prevent you from using Sudden Leap to replace the 5' step a Full Attack allows you, because you couldn't jump more then 5' without using up too much movement. Conversely, it would still allow you to charge...just not charge as far (the best benefit that I can see, since with a charge all move normally has to be in a straight line)...and even this could be debated, since a normal charge, sans an extra move action, forces all movement for the round to be in a straight line to qualify for a charge. I'd probably rule that you could Sudden Leap after the charge, but I'm not sure about before it...you're effectively allowing a charge with ad irection change, and I'm not sure that's in the power of the manuver. Now, if you want to say the extra Jump is extra movement, this becomes a hellaciously powerful manuver for its level. Even at low levels, it's easy for a Fighter to get a 20+ jump check, which basically means the ability to bounce from one opponent to the next, use up no movement, full attack, and still have a 5' step left. Or perform a double move and do a running jump as a free action at the end to generate an additional 30-40 of movement, which could easily hit 50+ at higher levels. He'd be like a human jumping bean, violating all sorts of movement restrictions. I'm not sure the manuver was designed to do that. In effect, I think the manuver is poorly worded on how it interacts with other movement restrictions. If you want to play it wide open with no limitations on it whatsoever, it's actually an extremely powerful and flexible manuver. It combines enhanced direction changing, the ability to 'break up' forced movement directions, free movement, and use of swift actions all at once. My personal attitude is that Sudden Leap is an 'extra', that allows you to take a Standard Action, and then Jump before or after it as long as you have movement left to employ. It is, in effect, a poor man's Spring Attack, which seems right in line with its level. It doesn't allow you to bend the rules for 5' steps, nor to get around the straight-line reqs of a charge, or exceed your normal movement limits for a round. ===Aelryinth
mplindustries 04-22-08, 09:44 PM	I left one unit of space, and arrive in teh next unit of space, crossing no units of space in between. Thus i couldnt have moved :} Now, i agree that this argument is completly silly, but im rather enjoying it. If your not, jsut say so and ill stop bothering, but otherwise ill just keep going till i talk myself into a corner or get bored... Ok...sort of. However, that requires "units of space" to be discrete (is that the word I'm looking for? It sounds good). Hence why I assumed you were talking in squares. Without squares or similar constructs, any movement of 5' or more crosses at least one "unit of space," because any point in space lies within an infinite number of "units of space." Well, I'm looking at the manuver....you can Jump as a swift action. That's fine. However, Jump is considered a part of normal movement...it counts against your allowed movement. Does Sudden leap suddenly give you +30 (assume your base moveis 30') for the round? No, it doesn't say anything like that. It says you can pull off a jump as a swift action. Therefore, it isn't manufacturing extra movement out of thin air. Otherwise, with a high Jump check/skill, you could very easily double or more your movement for the round...which seems far beyond the power of the skill. So, it seems to me that you'd have to abide by the movement restrictions of whatever kind of action you take in a round. The movement of the jump has to apply against something...so it must be applying against your normal move action(s)... ...My personal attitude is that Sudden Leap is an 'extra', that allows you to take a Standard Action, and then Jump before or after it as long as you have movement left to employ. It is, in effect, a poor man's Spring Attack, which seems right in line with its level. It doesn't allow you to bend the rules for 5' steps, nor to get around the straight-line reqs of a charge, or exceed your normal movement limits for a round. ===Aelryinth I think I found what is causing your contention. Under the Jump (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/jump.htm) skill, it says: "Distance moved by jumping is counted against your normal maximum movement in a round." However, as I said before, I could find absolutely no mention of what your "normal maximum movement in a round" actually is. In truth, all I could find is your maximum movement per action (which is generally derived from your base speed). The maneuver itself says, "You can make a Jump check as a swift action and move the distance determined by your check result." This, I think, is very clearly, not a normal jump check, and it does not let you make a normal jump as a swift action. It has you make a Jump check and use the result for something as a swift action. For one, it is not part of a move action. It is a totally separate action. Two, you move the distance indicated by the jump check. Period. It makes no mention of any sort of limitation at all. What would happen if you had a jump check, of say, 60 (somehow), which equals 30' (you can't get a running start during a swift action, so its a standing jump without Leaping Dragon Stance). Now, if you are wearing Full Plate or you're a Dwarf or something like that, you have a speed of 20'. Does that mean, that by your ruling, you would leap 20' as a swift action, then have a full round of actions in midair before you were able to land next turn? What kind of action would it take next turn to end the jumping movement? Another swift, or a move? The fact is, the manuever says, "move that distance." You should move that distance. It is a special use of the Jump skill and you can't use the normal Jump limitations to adjucate it. Its kind of like the feat Stand Still. You roll damage and all as normal, and then that damage translates into an effect. However, it is not a normal damage roll. You do not apply DR, you don't get to use "rider effects" (like poison). Its a special case. Plus, I don't think any of the things you mentioned doing with Sudden Leap would be unbalanced in the least (I also think you were forgetting to double the DCs for not using Leaping Dragon Stance). Regardless, even if you don't accept this, it'd be nice to see where you're coming from. Could you link or quote something that describes what your movement limit is for a round? Like I said earlier, I can only find a limit per action.
ToastedAmphibian 04-22-08, 09:45 PM	Well, I'm looking at the manuver....you can Jump as a swift action. That's fine. However, Jump is considered a part of normal movement...it counts against your allowed movement. Does Sudden leap suddenly give you +30 (assume your base moveis 30') for the round? No, it doesn't say anything like that. It says you can pull off a jump as a swift action. Therefore, it isn't manufacturing extra movement out of thin air. Otherwise, with a high Jump check/skill, you could very easily double or more your movement for the round...which seems far beyond the power of the skill. So, it seems to me that you'd have to abide by the movement restrictions of whatever kind of action you take in a round. The movement of the jump has to apply against something...so it must be applying against your normal move action(s). Thus if you Sudden Leap 10', you still have a Move Action and Attack action left, and can still take a Standard Action. You've only got 20' of move to use up, since you spent 10' on the jump, but you've got the total of your actions still to happen. Among other things, this would prevent you from using Sudden Leap to replace the 5' step a Full Attack allows you, because you couldn't jump more then 5' without using up too much movement. Conversely, it would still allow you to charge...just not charge as far (the best benefit that I can see, since with a charge all move normally has to be in a straight line)...and even this could be debated, since a normal charge, sans an extra move action, forces all movement for the round to be in a straight line to qualify for a charge. I'd probably rule that you could Sudden Leap after the charge, but I'm not sure about before it...you're effectively allowing a charge with ad irection change, and I'm not sure that's in the power of the manuver. Now, if you want to say the extra Jump is extra movement, this becomes a hellaciously powerful manuver for its level. Even at low levels, it's easy for a Fighter to get a 20+ jump check, which basically means the ability to bounce from one opponent to the next, use up no movement, full attack, and still have a 5' step left. Or perform a double move and do a running jump as a free action at the end to generate an additional 30-40 of movement, which could easily hit 50+ at higher levels. He'd be like a human jumping bean, violating all sorts of movement restrictions. I'm not sure the manuver was designed to do that. In effect, I think the manuver is poorly worded on how it interacts with other movement restrictions. If you want to play it wide open with no limitations on it whatsoever, it's actually an extremely powerful and flexible manuver. It combines enhanced direction changing, the ability to 'break up' forced movement directions, free movement, and use of swift actions all at once. My personal attitude is that Sudden Leap is an 'extra', that allows you to take a Standard Action, and then Jump before or after it as long as you have movement left to employ. It is, in effect, a poor man's Spring Attack, which seems right in line with its level. It doesn't allow you to bend the rules for 5' steps, nor to get around the straight-line reqs of a charge, or exceed your normal movement limits for a round. ===Aelryinth Movment limits? Allowed movment? (Errr.. movement) What are you talking about? To the best of my knowledge, these are not DnD terms. Speed Your speed tells you how far you can move in a round and still do something, such as attack or cast a spell. Your speed depends mostly on your race and what armor you’re wearing. Hmm, i did a little searching and found this in the SRD. Interestgnly enough, it seems to imply that a falling character gets no turn, as he must use his turn moving down. It also implies that a human falls faster than a gnome, and that an elf in full plate falls faster than one with out..... Odd. But then, the top of the page does designate it as a "Summary". As another side note, however you read suden leap, it dosnt seem like you would get a 5ft step with it. You moved, wether with a move action or otherwise, so no 5ft step for you.
Dheran 04-23-08, 03:32 PM	Interestgnly enough, it seems to imply that a falling character gets no turn, as he must use his turn moving down. That's not right. In D&D terms, you can think of gravity as a "mount". It moves at a speed that its characteristics define, and you go with it. You take your turn as normal, with the constraint that your move action(s) can't be used for actual movement.
ToastedAmphibian 04-23-08, 03:49 PM	That's not right. In D&D terms, you can think of gravity as a "mount". It moves at a speed that its characteristics define, and you go with it. You take your turn as normal, with the constraint that your move action(s) can't be used for actual movement. No no no, i think you missunderstand me, although you did articulate my point for me. Im not arguing that they dont get a turn. Im arguing that the sentence i quoted says that they dont get a turn. And thus what i quoted cannot really be completly correct and as such shouldnt really be a strong fondation on which to base other ruleings. For what its worth, CustServ has repeatedly stated that you dont double the DC for jump checks made for tiger claw manuevers. Alot of manuevers, especially at low level, would be really useless. Leap at the moon for instance. Make a jump check equal to your targets AC. If you dont have a running start, double that? Ouch. if you had a jump check, of say, 60 (somehow) Thri-Kreen
aelryinth 04-23-08, 08:51 PM	Ok...sort of. However, that requires "units of space" to be discrete (is that the word I'm looking for? It sounds good). Hence why I assumed you were talking in squares. Without squares or similar constructs, any movement of 5' or more crosses at least one "unit of space," because any point in space lies within an infinite number of "units of space." I think I found what is causing your contention. Under the Jump (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/jump.htm) skill, it says: "Distance moved by jumping is counted against your normal maximum movement in a round." However, as I said before, I could find absolutely no mention of what your "normal maximum movement in a round" actually is. In truth, all I could find is your maximum movement per action (which is generally derived from your base speed). The maneuver itself says, "You can make a Jump check as a swift action and move the distance determined by your check result." This, I think, is very clearly, not a normal jump check, and it does not let you make a normal jump as a swift action. It has you make a Jump check and use the result for something as a swift action. For one, it is not part of a move action. It is a totally separate action. Two, you move the distance indicated by the jump check. Period. It makes no mention of any sort of limitation at all. What would happen if you had a jump check, of say, 60 (somehow), which equals 30' (you can't get a running start during a swift action, so its a standing jump without Leaping Dragon Stance). Now, if you are wearing Full Plate or you're a Dwarf or something like that, you have a speed of 20'. Does that mean, that by your ruling, you would leap 20' as a swift action, then have a full round of actions in midair before you were able to land next turn? What kind of action would it take next turn to end the jumping movement? Another swift, or a move? The fact is, the manuever says, "move that distance." You should move that distance. It is a special use of the Jump skill and you can't use the normal Jump limitations to adjucate it. Its kind of like the feat Stand Still. You roll damage and all as normal, and then that damage translates into an effect. However, it is not a normal damage roll. You do not apply DR, you don't get to use "rider effects" (like poison). Its a special case. Plus, I don't think any of the things you mentioned doing with Sudden Leap would be unbalanced in the least (I also think you were forgetting to double the DCs for not using Leaping Dragon Stance). Regardless, even if you don't accept this, it'd be nice to see where you're coming from. Could you link or quote something that describes what your movement limit is for a round? Like I said earlier, I can only find a limit per action. MPLindustries has the SRD quote. We're coming at it from different directions. You're saying the extra movement of the jump is just that...completely extra, regardless of how much movement it is. I'm saying it completely has to abide by the normal movement rules on distances, and there's nothing in the manuver that says it ignores normal limits on movement. What it is effectively allowing you to do is subdivide your move action with a jump in the middle, probably used to change direction when normally you could not. Note that on every other manuver that allows you to change/exceed normal limits, those are specifically cited as being allowed...Sudden Leap does nothing of the sort. It's also very low level, and so shouldn't be given all those 'extras' you are piling onto it. And yes, FYI, if you have a jump that exceeds your movement available in a round, you end your turn in midair and can't do anything until your jump is completed. ==Aelryinth
Ace_of_time 04-23-08, 09:31 PM	Teleportation: A teleportation spell transports one or more creatures or objects a great distance. The most powerful of these spells can cross planar boundaries. Unlike summoning spells, the transportation is (unless otherwise noted) one-way and not dispellable. Teleportation is instantaneous travel through the Astral Plane. Anything that blocks astral travel also blocks teleportation. Although they spell moves your body through another plane, you don't really move your body the spell does. He would have to threaten the spell.;)
ToastedAmphibian 04-23-08, 09:54 PM	You can Always jump during a move action.... I dont know of any normal limits on movment with a swift action. You think my interpretation gives it ablites that arnt listed. I think your interpretation applies penalties that arnt apropriate. You think my interpretation makes it too powerfull. I think your interpretation makes it completly useless. I think we might have to agree to disagree here.... At very low levels, it is realy not very usefull, barring odd circumstances/optomizations. At first level, a character with 18 strenght and max ranks in jump can move... 1-5 squares, in a straight line, provoking AoO on the way, once per fight probably. Or they could take a level of barbarian instead of warblade, and get pounce. Or they could take a level of wizard, and learn mage armor, grease, or burning hands. Or they could get burning brand. Obviously, it gets better as you gain levels. Some manuevers dont. Thoes are the ones you trade out. Same thing with spells really. Some you stop using as you gain levels, others you dont (Mage Armor)
ToastedAmphibian 04-23-08, 10:02 PM	Although they spell moves your body through another plane, you don't really move your body the spell does. He would have to threaten the spell. If i bull rush you, you still provoke an attack of opportunity, so the argument that movment only provokes an AoO if your moving under your own power really dosnt have any validity. You didnt move your body, but your body still moved. As such, your body was involved in movment. Thicket of Blades says that provokes...
wraithstrike 04-23-08, 10:22 PM	If i bull rush you, you still provoke an attack of opportunity, so the argument that movment only provokes an AoO if your moving under your own power really dosnt have any validity. You didnt move your body, but your body still moved. As such, your body was involved in movment. Thicket of Blades says that provokes... Moving in D&D is through squares. Even the bull rush is moving you through squares, even though it is unwanted. If teleporting counts as movement then a scout can teleport instead of move and get his skirmish since he would be moving under his own power, however if you tried to get a DM to allow you to teleport 10 feet by some item or even a spell he would probably throw the book at you. If teleporting counted for movement then it would provoke an AoO without thicket of blades since the only way to move out of a threatened square by is to 5-foot step, withdraw, tumble, and spring attack. Are you going to argue that teleporting provokes an AoO all the time? They specifically list the 5 foot step and withdraw because they are common ways of moving out of a threatened area with provoking an AoO.
Ace_of_time 04-23-08, 11:25 PM	If i bull rush you, you still provoke an attack of opportunity, so the argument that movment only provokes an AoO if your moving under your own power really dosnt have any validity. You didnt move your body, but your body still moved. As such, your body was involved in movment. Thicket of Blades says that provokes... So bull rush= teleportation?:confused: So is there a 25% chance of hitting the spell instead of the person being teleported?:D Maybe that would even work on Ethereal Jaunt! What if you are standing on a pit trap? The trap is set off while you are fighting someone using that move. Your saying that the person should get an AoO against you because you left your square?:confused:
ToastedAmphibian 04-24-08, 01:13 AM	So bull rush= teleportation? So is there a 25% chance of hitting the spell instead of the person being teleported? Maybe that would even work on Ethereal Jaunt! Nooo...... you where saying that Teleportation=something moving you Im saying that bullrush=somethign moving you ......i guess, phrased that way, Teleportation does equal bullrush... My point is that, just because you ddint move yourself dosnt mean you didnt move. Having something else move you does not deny someone the AoO you generate. What if you are standing on a pit trap? The trap is set off while you are fighting someone using that move. Your saying that the person should get an AoO against you because you left your square? No im not. Im saying thats retarded. Im also saying that, if you claim "all movment" means "ALL MOVMENT" then you must also claim that teleportation and falling in pit-traps triggers Thicket of Blades. If you dont think that teleportation or falling in a pit trap should trigger Thicket of Blades, then you need to define what All Movment (MOVEMENT, god damnit... why did you curse me such mp?) means. If teleporting counts as movement then a scout can teleport instead of move and get his skirmish since he would be moving under his own power, .... Yes, that seems completly correct to me.... If you go though the trouble of teleporting as a move/swift/free action, i see no reason to begrudge you your 3d6 skirmish damage... Whats wrong with that?
wraithstrike 04-24-08, 09:15 AM	.... Yes, that seems completly correct to me.... If you go though the trouble of teleporting as a move/swift/free action, i see no reason to begrudge you your 3d6 skirmish damage... Whats wrong with that? The way skirmish works is the scouts moves in such a way as to provide an opening to a vital area. If movement in general worked then he would be able to use mounted movement to qualify, but that does not work. Just reappearing in a different area does not equal movement. Movement in the case of thicket.... was intended to be physical modes of transportation. I am trying to find an example between movement and just being in a different place. Movement in D&D refers to some form of locomotion, while teleporting just says you are here now. And I ask you once again---->Are you going to argue that teleporting provokes an AoO all the time?* *refer to my last post
mplindustries 04-24-08, 10:32 AM	MPLindustries has the SRD quote. We're coming at it from different directions. You're saying the extra movement of the jump is just that...completely extra, regardless of how much movement it is. I'm saying it completely has to abide by the normal movement rules on distances, and there's nothing in the manuver that says it ignores normal limits on movement. What it is effectively allowing you to do is subdivide your move action with a jump in the middle, probably used to change direction when normally you could not. Note that on every other manuver that allows you to change/exceed normal limits, those are specifically cited as being allowed...Sudden Leap does nothing of the sort. It's also very low level, and so shouldn't be given all those 'extras' you are piling onto it. And yes, FYI, if you have a jump that exceeds your movement available in a round, you end your turn in midair and can't do anything until your jump is completed. ==Aelryinth Again, though, while I have the "correct quote" apparently, that talks about Jump limiting your normal maximum movement in a round, I still can't find a quote that actually defines what your "normal maximum movement" is. I am totally ready to concede this to you here, as long as you can tell me what my "maximum movement per round" is, and not just per action (and obviously where you found that). The way skirmish works is the scouts moves in such a way as to provide an opening to a vital area. If movement in general worked then he would be able to use mounted movement to qualify, but that does not work. Just reappearing in a different area does not equal movement. Movement in the case of thicket.... was intended to be physical modes of transportation. I am trying to find an example between movement and just being in a different place. Movement in D&D refers to some form of locomotion, while teleporting just says you are here now. And I ask you once again---->Are you going to argue that teleporting provokes an AoO all the time?* *refer to my last post I'm sorry, I thought we had settled/dropped the teleporting thing? Wasn't the answer that Teleporting moves you on the Astral plane, so to get an AoO, you'd need to threaten the Astral plane? I think I even agree that if you can threaten the astral plane you should always get an AoO, even without Thicket. Oh, and the Skirmish rules don't say anything at all about teleporting, they only specifically deny mounted combat. I, too, would think there was nothing wrong with, perhaps a shadow pouncer/skirmisher. I would have disagreed a few days ago, though, until I re-read about teleportion effects and how you do actually move, you just do so on the Astral Plane.
aelryinth 04-24-08, 05:03 PM	You can Always jump during a move action.... I dont know of any normal limits on movment with a swift action. You think my interpretation gives it ablites that arnt listed. I think your interpretation applies penalties that arnt apropriate. You think my interpretation makes it too powerfull. I think your interpretation makes it completly useless. I think we might have to agree to disagree here.... At very low levels, it is realy not very usefull, barring odd circumstances/optomizations. At first level, a character with 18 strenght and max ranks in jump can move... 1-5 squares, in a straight line, provoking AoO on the way, once per fight probably. Or they could take a level of barbarian instead of warblade, and get pounce. Or they could take a level of wizard, and learn mage armor, grease, or burning hands. Or they could get burning brand. Obviously, it gets better as you gain levels. Some manuevers dont. Thoes are the ones you trade out. Same thing with spells really. Some you stop using as you gain levels, others you dont (Mage Armor) Normally you can't, say, perform a move, do something, then move again. There's actually entire feats devoted to allowing you to do that (Spring attack, Shot on the run, fly by attack, etc). Sudden Leap lets you Move (jump), do something, then move again, without a feat. It's effectively a poor man's spring attack, effectiveness based off your level for distance movable. ============== Maximum move/rd is generally based off your movement rate. It is, of course, variable. A move action is generally your move. But if you run, it's twice that. Two move actions is twice your speed....if you run, 4x. So basically, Sudden Leap says nothing about adding additional movement to your potential allowed. So you're still restricted to your base move, because no exceptions have been made. The movement from Sudden Leap has to apply against something. The Swift Action just gets you an extra opportunity to apply the movement you are already entitled to, it doesn't grant you any new movement. There are feats, and I believe one manuver, out there that specifically say that any distance from a Jump check is ADDED to your movement for the round, as a bonus. Sudden Leap does no such thing. ===Aelryinth
ToastedAmphibian 04-24-08, 06:01 PM	The movement from Sudden Leap has to apply against something. Why? Or, acording to what? I guess thats the root of the disagrement. Your searching for some unstated restriction. Im just taking it for granted that, if they didnt state such a restriction, it dosnt exist. I belive there is a stance that lets you move 5ft after every hit you make. It specifically says that you cannot exceed your curent speed in one round by using that stance. Sudden leap says nothign of the sort.
Ace_of_time 04-24-08, 06:53 PM	movement modes Creatures may have modes of movement other than walking and running. These are natural, not magical, unless specifically noted in a monster description. Burrow: A creature with a burrow speed can tunnel through dirt, but not through rock unless the descriptive text says otherwise. Creatures cannot charge or run while burrowing. Most burrowing creatures do not leave behind tunnels other creatures can use (either because the material they tunnel through fills in behind them or because they do not actually dislocate any material when burrowing); see the individual creature descriptions for details. Climb: A creature with a climb speed has a +8 racial bonus on all Climb checks. The creature must make a Climb check to climb any wall or slope with a DC of more than 0, but it always can choose to take 10 (see Checks without Rolls, page 65 of the Player's Handbook), even if rushed or threatened while climbing. The creature climbs at the given speed while climbing. If it chooses an accelerated climb (see the Climb skill, page 69 of the Player's Handbook), it moves at double the given climb speed (or its base land speed, whichever is lower) and makes a single Climb check at a -5 penalty. Creatures cannot run while climbing. A creature retains its Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) while climbing, and opponents get no special bonus on their attacks against a climbing creature. Fly: A creature with a fly speed can move through the air at the indicated speed if carrying no more than a light load; see Carrying Capacity, page 161 of the Player's Handbook. (Note that medium armor does not necessarily constitute a medium load.) All fly speeds include a parenthetical note indicating maneuverability, as follows: Perfect: The creature can perform almost any aerial maneuver it wishes. It moves through the air as well as a human moves over smooth ground. Good: The creature is very agile in the air (like a housefly or a hummingbird), but cannot change direction as readily as those with perfect maneuverability. Average: The creature can fly as adroitly as a small bird. Poor: The creature flies as well as a very large bird. Clumsy: The creature can barely maneuver at all. A creature that flies can make dive attacks. A dive attack works just like a charge, but the diving creature must move a minimum of 30 feet and descend at least 10 feet. It can make only claw or talon attacks, but these deal double damage. A creature can use the run action while flying, provided it flies in a straight line. For more information, see Tactical Aerial Movement, page 20 of the Dungeon Master's Guide. Swim: A creature with a swim speed can move through water at its swim speed without making Swim checks. It has a +8 racial bonus on any Swim check to perform some special action or avoid a hazard. The creature always can choose to take 10 on a Swim check, even if distracted or endangered. The creature can use the run action while swimming, provided it swims in a straight line.I said if it counts as movement for the round. Teleportation might move you but doesn't count as movement for the round. And I believe the entry, if not the whole, makes it very unclear on what any of the abilities do. I could see how a DM might see it that way. The way it is worded would run on what the DM considered movement. I think it would be easier just to take the whole book, reedit it.
Metafictional 04-24-08, 07:05 PM	Remember, unless an exception is stated, rules apply normally. Jump checks are modified by your speed (ie, 40' speed grants +4 to a jump check), and it specifically states in the Jump check description that "Distance moved by jumping is counted against your normal maximum movement in a round. For example, Krusk has a speed of 40 feet. If he moves 30 feet, then jumps across a 10 wide chasm, he has moved 40 feet total, so that's his move action." Jump further goes on to say the following: Action: None. A Jump check is included in your movement, so it is part of a move action. If you run out of movement mid-jump, your next action (either on this turn, or, if necessary, on your next turn) must be a move action to complete your jump. Ok, so normally Jump is part of a move action. Check. And should you attempt to Jump farther than your speed, then you must use a move action to complete your Jump before you make any other action. Check. All Sudden Leap says is that you can make a Jump check as a Swift action! It then states you move the distance indicated by your Jump check. Nothing in this description says it violates any other part of the PHB rules for the Jump skill, including: "All Jump DC's given here assume you get a running start, which requires you to move at least 20 feet in a straight line before attempting the jump. If you do not get a running start, the DC for the Jump check is doubled." That's RAW. You cannot assume that Sudden Leap gives you free movement, nor that it allows you to Jump as if you had a running start, because it never tells you that it does so. This doesn't, mind you, make Sudden Leap useless as written. Since you make your Jump check as a Swift instead of Move action, you do not need to move in order to Jump (unless you intend to Jump further than your speed). Even if you do Jump beyond your speed (and note, I see no reason to force someone to Jump beyond their speed unless they choose to do so), you still potentially have a move action to use to finish your movement. The uses for this are considerable. You could make a Full Attack and attempt to leap away, move, take a standard action, and then Sudden Leap, take a standard action, then move/Sudden Leap, move/Sudden Leap, then make a standard action, or Sudden Leap up to your speed and then make a Full Attack. This can be, as stated above, a "poor man's Spring Attack", or a "poor man's Pounce", or just simply a way to get more mileage out of your movement in a turn. And note, if you take a move action, then Sudden Leap, you could get the "running start". All of this is pretty useful for a boost, provided you have a decent Jump check (like that's hard to get). Now, having said that, the Rules as Intended on Sudden Leap are a different matter entirely. I personally believe that they probably did intend the maneuver to grant "free" movement. But because they forgot to clarify that Sudden Leap had any exceptions to the PHB rules for Jump, you must adhere to those rules. And sorry, saying that you "move a distance indicated by your Jump check" is not an exception, since Sudden Leap says nothing about WHAT DC you should use. Since you have to look at the Jump skill to determine the DC for distance jumped, and the DC's explicitly state that they are set assuming a "running start", which Sudden Leap never states you get, the rules are clear: this is resolved as a Jump check with the sole exception that it does not require an actual move action unless you Jump beyond your speed. Now, back on track, about Thicket of Blades. Thicket of Blades is a very difficult Stance to work with, because it states an absolute fact. Any movement in a threatened area provokes, even Withdraw and 5-foot step. I've previously argued in other threads that Tumble and Spring Attack (as well as Charging Minotaur and others) explicitly deny an AoO. Unfortunately, what I finally had to admit was that Tumble and Spring Attack are written with the existing rules of AoO provoked by movement in mind. Hold the Line grants a special AoO against a charging opponent. This is not normal. Charging Minotaur grants you immunity to AoO's due to movement (as well as AoO's due to Bull Rushing). And it works just like that. Since Hold the Line is an exception to the normal rules, it would grant an AoO vs. Charging Minotaur, which makes no exception for Hold the Line. Thusly, Thicket of Blades really does grant an AoO for any sort of movement in a threatened space. This unfortunately includes movement that is not made under your own power, as Bull Rush, which is part of the core rules, already makes a precedent for this. So, as odd as this sounds, if I had Thicket of Blades and sufficient reach and AoO's available, if you are Bull Rushed into a pit and fall into it, and I threaten all the spaces you are moved through (and out of) I get an AoO for each space you move out of, even for falling. This is because Thicket of Blades is given a universal exception when it calls out "any sort of movement". It doesn't just mean move actions, it means any time you move in a threatened square. Further, note that, as a consequence of how Thicket of Blades is written, it does not replace the normal rules for provoking AoO's! You get a special AoO for your opponent opting to move (which is resolved before they actually move). This does not replace the AoO you get for an opponent leaving a threatened space normally! I say this because Thicket never states "leaving a threatened space" as it's requirement. It says "any sort of movement". That's RAW. Now as for Rules as Intended, well, no, I don't think Thicket was intended to be quite this skippy. It grants a special exception that is loosely defined, and never says that it replaces the normal rules. However, I'm not the designer, I can't say that it isn't meant to do this. I can only assume. However, as with any rule, the DM is of course free to make house rules regarding this stance, and they probably should. I'm not in my game, because it's yet to be an issue, it immensely helps the party's Crusader tank do his job, and I see no reason to nerf that benefit, even when it's silly. Martial Adepts generally do their dirty work with actions made during their turn, not with AoO's. As a final explanation of my logic: Core rules function in all cases unless a specific exception is put into place. Any effect that grants a specific exception is assumed to be an exception to the core rules, unless it specifically includes text that states it's exception applies to rules outside of core.
Ace_of_time 04-24-08, 07:06 PM	1. AoOs happen before the action so if it was counted as a move the attack would come before the teleport. 2. Sudden leap just lets you make a jump check as a swift action. Other then that it would work the same as a jump check does. Distance moved by jumping is counted against your normal maximum movement in a round.
ToastedAmphibian 04-24-08, 07:48 PM	Ace of time, as a side note, your interpretation makes Knocback super friendly with thicket of blades. Not saying yoru wrong, just saying that if your right, that makes an excellent combo. Especially if you have reach.... Anyways, jumping is counted aginst your Move action because it is PART of the move action. If i use any other tiger claw manuvers that requier jump checks, do thoes also count aginst my move action?
mplindustries 04-24-08, 08:35 PM	I'm sorry, but I still am just not seeing what your maximum movement is for a round. Again, there is one per action. Thats clear. With a single move action, you cannot move more than your speed. With a Charge, you move double your speed. When you run, you move 4x your speed. Nowhere does it mention what distance you are limited to when using a swift action to use a skill you can normally only use as part of a move action. Let me pose this question: If I sudden leap, and then make a full attack, since I have taken no movement actions to "set my movement limit," does that mean I can't jump any distance? If I really am limited by the amount of movement my other non-swift actions allow, what is the purpose of sudden leap? Seriously, there is no stated limit to your movement per round. There is only a limit per action (Unless of course you found something I didn't). I totally understand everyone's arguments on this topic given the poor wording of various D&D products, but if you don't have any kind of reference to show this artificial "per round movement limit," then I just don't believe you can be right on this.
Metafictional 04-24-08, 09:26 PM	No, there isn't a stated limit per round. There doesn't really need to be because there is a limit per action. You cannot use Jump without some kind of action, right? If a way existed to take a move action as a swift action (which I know of one in the MIC), and you used that move action to Jump, then you'd follow the rules for the Jump skill, wouldn't you? I don't see this as being any different, you get a Swift action that counts as a move action, but all you can do is Jump. IE, it takes the requirement of needing a move action (or actions) to Jump and says no, you can do this as a Swift action. Isn't that really an easier way of reading it than saying that because you Jump as a Swift action, there is no penalty to how far you can move, because it's a Jump not made during a Move or Standard action made to move? The PHB says: "Action: None. A Jump check is included in your movement, so it is part of a move action. If you run out of movement mid-jump, your next action (either on this turn, or, if necessary, on your next turn) must be a move action to complete your jump." To say that, because the Jump is now a Swift action, there is no limit on how far you can Jump...well.... "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity". or, paraphrased: "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best."
Ace_of_time 04-25-08, 12:25 AM	Does anyone read the skill before posting, not being smart just wondering. Action: None. A Jump check is included in your movement, so it is part of a move action. If you run out of movement mid-jump, your next action (either on this turn or, if necessary, on your next turn) must be a move action to complete the jump. Special: Effects that increase your movement also increase your jumping distance, since your check is modified by your speed. If you have the Run feat, you get a +4 bonus on Jump checks for any jumps made after a running start. A halfling has a +2 racial bonus on Jump checks because halflings are agile and athletic. If you have the Acrobatic feat, you get a +2 bonus on Jump checks. If you jump more then you can move in one round, AKA your speed, then you must make the rest of the jump next turn first before standard or maybe as a full round action going two moves. So the limit would be double your speed. Anything that ups your speed ups the max. Also this is alittle off topic? How does how far you can jump matter for the AoO part of the argument? For me you have two options 1. house rule it so you and your group knows for sure how it works in your game. 2. Wait till WotC fixes the problems with the book for lack of clarification. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: It could happen.
mplindustries 04-25-08, 03:10 AM	No, there isn't a stated limit per round. There doesn't really need to be because there is a limit per action. You cannot use Jump without some kind of action, right? If a way existed to take a move action as a swift action (which I know of one in the MIC), and you used that move action to Jump, then you'd follow the rules for the Jump skill, wouldn't you? I don't see this as being any different, you get a Swift action that counts as a move action, but all you can do is Jump. IE, it takes the requirement of needing a move action (or actions) to Jump and says no, you can do this as a Swift action. Isn't that really an easier way of reading it than saying that because you Jump as a Swift action, there is no penalty to how far you can move, because it's a Jump not made during a Move or Standard action made to move? The PHB says: "Action: None. A Jump check is included in your movement, so it is part of a move action. If you run out of movement mid-jump, your next action (either on this turn, or, if necessary, on your next turn) must be a move action to complete your jump." To say that, because the Jump is now a Swift action, there is no limit on how far you can Jump...well.... "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity". or, paraphrased: "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best." I would happily accept (though still respectfully disagree with) a ruling in which you could jump no further than your speed with the maneuver. I think my major contention is with the idea that the Sudden Leap should count against your movement in other parts of your turn (some seem to think if you Sudden Leap 20' and tried to charge afterwards with a 30' speed, you could only charge 40' total, because 20' would be deducted). Does anyone read the skill before posting, not being smart just wondering. I actually quoted the skill, as did others, so, yes, obviously we do. If you jump more then you can move in one round, AKA your speed, then you must make the rest of the jump next turn first before standard or maybe as a full round action going two moves. So the limit would be double your speed. Anything that ups your speed ups the max.(Emphasis mine)Seriously? I have asked nicely 3 or 4 times now for someone to give me a reference to where they are getting this from. There is no limit per turn. There is only a limit per action. There is no listed limit on how far you can move with a swift action. I think it would be reasonable, as Metafictional proposed, to set your speed as a limit, though I would still contend that its not RAW (and for once, I actually agree with RAW and would run it that way). Anyway, this is my last civil request. If you claim there is a limit per turn on your movement, please, prove it. Also this is alittle off topic? How does how far you can jump matter for the AoO part of the argument? Sort of, but the actual Thicket of Blades issue was solved a while ago, so we've moved on to something else.
Ace_of_time 04-25-08, 10:23 AM	I posted that before reading yours. sorry. Action: None. A Jump check is included in your movement, so it is part of a move action. If you run out of movement mid-jump, your next action (either on this turn or, if necessary, on your next turn) must be a move action to complete the jump. Special: Effects that increase your movement also increase your jumping distance, since your check is modified by your speed. If you have the Run feat, you get a +4 bonus on Jump checks for any jumps made after a running start. A halfling has a +2 racial bonus on Jump checks because halflings are agile and athletic. If you have the Acrobatic feat, you get a +2 bonus on Jump checks. Then I would ask you why you would run out of movement for your turn if there was no limit per turn. Plus there is no way for you to jump farther then your max jump check result +5. If the DC is more then that then there is no way you could jump that far. Now the DC for 30' is DC 30. If you did try a jump with a run action, don't know if that is possible but lets assume. Anyone know what the DC would be for jump 120', assuming you have the room to jump 120' in a stright line. Since it is part of your move the same things that limit you move would limit how far you could jump. other wise you wouldn't have to use a move the next round to finished.
mplindustries 04-25-08, 02:18 PM	Then I would ask you why you would run out of movement for your turn if there was no limit per turn. Because its not a limit per turn, its a limit per action. If you take a move action (the normal place for a Jump check to be made), you can only move your speed as part of the move action. With a charge, you can jump twice your speed if you can make a check that high. During a run, assuming you can make the DC, you can jump 4x your speed. There is no limit per turn, there is a limit per action. Someone: Oh, but you can only take so many actions in a turn. Me: No, there are plenty of ways to get extra actions. Anyway, once you take the jump check out of the context of a move action (or other action that includes movement), you take it out of the context of limits. What is the movement limit for a swift action jump? There isn't one. There is no limit for it to count against. Period.
aelryinth 04-26-08, 12:54 PM	Because its not a limit per turn, its a limit per action. If you take a move action (the normal place for a Jump check to be made), you can only move your speed as part of the move action. With a charge, you can jump twice your speed if you can make a check that high. During a run, assuming you can make the DC, you can jump 4x your speed. There is no limit per turn, there is a limit per action. Someone: Oh, but you can only take so many actions in a turn. Me: No, there are plenty of ways to get extra actions. Anyway, once you take the jump check out of the context of a move action (or other action that includes movement), you take it out of the context of limits. What is the movement limit for a swift action jump? There isn't one. There is no limit for it to count against. Period. You are being willfully obtuse. The limit on movement is Move Actions, as a part of something else (A standard action, a charge) or standing alone. A swift action does not include a Move action...thus, it adds nothing to your movement potential. Charges and partial charges are inherently limited by your movement rate. If you want them to extend further, you must generate additional move or standard actions. Run actions are based on your movement rate, and posit doing nothing but moving in a straight line. Swift actions have NONE of this. They don't 'make' movement out of thin air, like additional move or standard actions do. Do you have difficulty seeing the difference between them? I think the rest of us simply consider it so obvious we are lost as to where your argument is coming from. ===Aelryinth
mplindustries 04-26-08, 01:57 PM	You are being willfully obtuse. The limit on movement is Move Actions, as a part of something else (A standard action, a charge) or standing alone. A swift action does not include a Move action...thus, it adds nothing to your movement potential. Charges and partial charges are inherently limited by your movement rate. If you want them to extend further, you must generate additional move or standard actions. Run actions are based on your movement rate, and posit doing nothing but moving in a straight line. Swift actions have NONE of this. They don't 'make' movement out of thin air, like additional move or standard actions do. Do you have difficulty seeing the difference between them? I think the rest of us simply consider it so obvious we are lost as to where your argument is coming from. ===Aelryinth (Emphasis Mine) Well, I actually thought it was because I was so obviously right, nobody could counter it ;P Anyway, I in no way agree with the following. I am extrapolating others' statements to their logical end. If a swift action has no movement tied to it, and you feel the Sudden Leap movement has to be limited by something, then you must follow the normal rules for jumping (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/jump.htm). "If you run out of movement mid-jump, your next action (either on this turn or, if necessary, on your next turn) must be a move action to complete the jump." In other words, since the distance has to be deducted somehow, and as you've said, a swift action has 0 movement tied to it, then your maximum sudden leap distance is 0 feet. So, you use the swift action maneuver, make your jump check, lets say you jump 20', and then you hang there, inches off the ground because you have no movement to complete the jump. Your next action must be a move action to complete the jump. Thus, by using the maneuver, you've accomplished two things: 1) You've taken a swift action to sort of hover a little. 2) You've limited your future options by having to take a move action as your next action. Essentially, there is either no limit on the distance you can Sudden Leap, or the limit is 0 feet. Anything else would have to be a houserule, which as always, is fine, but we're discussing RAW (and sometimes RAI). Just because you view something as too powerful does not mean that isn't how it was meant to be. Personally, I think Sudden Leap is nigh useless to just about anyone except Charge Builds, and they have to sacrifice other, better class levels, or feats to get it...
Metafictional 04-26-08, 03:50 PM	Alternately, as I stated, because the maneuver lets you make a Jump check and move distance, you could think of it as a special Move action that you make as a Swift action. There's precedence for this sort of thing, the MIC has an item with a Swift activation that can net you an extra Move action. Because, as you said, making a Jump check as a Swift action is almost useless, since you can Jump as part of movement. So if Jump is a non-action during movement, and the Boost says you Jump as a swift, I have to interpret it as Boost: you gain a move action as a Swift action, but all you may do during this special move action is make a Jump check and move the distance indicated; standard Jump rules limiting distance per action apply. If you want to say that's a house rule, um, fine, but it's really about the only interpretation that makes sense compared to the core rules for Jump in the PHB. As I said before, however, I do feel the designers probably intended for this Boost to generate extra movement out of thin air, and simply didn't take into account the full rules for Jump. I can safely say this because a ruling that allows the Boost to simply let you move the distance indicated by the Jump check, with no maximum limit, and as if you had a 20' head start (even if you didn't) WOULD BREAK NOTHING. Oh no, a possible few times per encounter, some guy could Jump for extra speed. I'm far from terrified as a DM. : ) So there you have it, two possible alternatives, one as in-line with the existing rules as possible (Occam's Razor ftw!), and another as in-line with the probable intent of the maneuver as possible (since, at it's most powerful, this still ain't broken). I realize Char Optimizers must adhere to the rules as written as close as they can; individual gaming groups make their own rules. This is intended. A rulebook cannot substitute for a brain; if something is illogical and makes no sense to a play group, it will never fly, no matter what the rules say. It's fine to respond to a rules query with the RAW. It's also fine to give examples for how it could be easily fixed, if the RAW is confusing or illogical. It is NOT fine, however, to continue to insist on a RAW interpretation that makes no sense. MPL, you fully acknowledge that the strictly-RAW interpretation is bizarre as written, as it flies in the face of the written rules without giving any clear indication of what is going on here. When I made my first post on this subject, I thought you didn't get it, but now I know you do. So why not drop it? Do you need someone to say, "you are correct Sir, you win the internets!"? Don't take that the wrong way, I'm teasing, not trying to be a jerk. But if it helps... You are correct, Sir, you wins the internets! ^-^
mplindustries 04-26-08, 06:59 PM	You are correct, Sir, you wins the internets! The boss was hard. I don't really mind people coming up with houserules. I play with more houserules than RAW rules. I don't really have a problem with anything you said at all. I think limiting it to your speed is perfectly reasonable. I find this kind of discussion fun. I like debating whats RAW and what isn't. So, in truth, this is still important to me because I like watching people back themselves into a corner and collapse under their own arguments. I think the intent of the maneuver is very clear. It gives you free bonus movement. Its not even powerful compared to other level 1 manuevers. However, it was argued that becuase it didn't say the movement was free, the movement was thus counted against your other actions in the turn. This is what I had a problem with, and I don't want anyone to walk away from the thread with this very wrong idea (not that it would be wrong to houserule it that way, I just want to make sure people know it is a houserule). Remember, Aelryinth is not simply arguing that you can't Sudden Leap more than your speed. He is also arguing that if you Sudden Leap your speed, and then charge, you can't charge twice your speed anymore, since half your "movement for the round" was used up Sudden Leaping. Furthermore, he is arguing that this is how the rules intend it to be. So, I built my point using the same lines of logic, and I think its pretty clear that Sudden Leap does not limit your other move actions during the round, because if it did, it would do absolutely nothing. I don't need anyone to tell me I'm right. I know I'm right. I do like seeing how long it takes for people to admit they are wrong, though (if they ever do at all). I have a lot of respect for that kind of thing.
Ace_of_time 04-26-08, 07:24 PM	Because its not a limit per turn, its a limit per action. If you take a move action (the normal place for a Jump check to be made), you can only move your speed as part of the move action. With a charge, you can jump twice your speed if you can make a check that high. During a run, assuming you can make the DC, you can jump 4x your speed. There is no limit per turn, there is a limit per action. Someone: Oh, but you can only take so many actions in a turn. Me: No, there are plenty of ways to get extra actions. Anyway, once you take the jump check out of the context of a move action (or other action that includes movement), you take it out of the context of limits. What is the movement limit for a swift action jump? There isn't one. There is no limit for it to count against. Period.Since the entry says swift action instead of move action I would assume that would be your speed. If you look back at some of my past post you will see that jump skill is part of your move action. As such is limit to your speed each round. Note: the book assume 20' head start on long jump. So anything over 10' would need to be carried over to the next action/round.
Johannixx 04-27-08, 11:45 AM	Sudden Leap, as written, allows a Jump check as a Swift action. I see no reason why it would have any limitations on distance other than what the character can roll. You could make a reasonable argument to limit it to the character's normal movement distance, and you could make a reasonable argumente not to do so. Until we get a real FAQ/Errata on ToB, it's all up to the DM anyway.
Lyndis 04-27-08, 01:07 PM	How about a compromise to not make Tumble useless? To Tumble thru a threatened area of Thicket of Blades, the Tumble DC goes up by 5 + the dex or str modifier of the person using the stance + the level of the person using the stance. So if a level 14 character with 20 dex is threatening you with his Thicket of Blades stance, your tumble DC is now 39. A level 14 Rogue will have 17 ranks and a + 6 dex modifier. So a simple Boots of +5 Tumbling will make this about a 50-50 chance of tumbling working for the classes with tumble as a class skill. And the wizard who cross-classes Tumble can still have it work against other classes, but will probably not succeed against Thicket of Blades.
Metafictional 04-27-08, 03:59 PM	Well, a DM can certainly make rulings to allow skills like Tumble or other abilities that let you ignore AoO's due to movement interact more with Thicket of Blades. Upping Tumble DC's, for example, doesn't seem bad. I think the DC should be lower than what you propose however, you shouldn't have to be able to make Epic Tumble checks to bypass a much lower level stance. But there's no reason to make Thicket of Blades as potent as it seems to be written in your games unless you're fine with it being that way. Myself, I don't have a problem with it as-is in my game, because the character with it is a Crusader who doesn't even have Combat Reflexes. Unlike a tactical Fighter, who does most of his work with AoO's, Crusaders do most of their work with standard actions taken during their turn. Thicket is a deterrent, but without building your character to monopolize on it's advantage, it's a neat trick, nothing more. And really, even if someone did slap Thicket of Blades into a chain-tripper build, in the long run, there's no real problem; used properly, you want that kind of build to succeed most of the time (by keeping pressure off of ranged characters and casters, the tactical fighter keeps the party alive), and if you don't want it to succeed, there are tons of ways to challenge or even negate the advantage.
aelryinth 04-27-08, 06:57 PM	How about a compromise to not make Tumble useless? To Tumble thru a threatened area of Thicket of Blades, the Tumble DC goes up by 5 + the dex or str modifier of the person using the stance + the level of the person using the stance. So if a level 14 character with 20 dex is threatening you with his Thicket of Blades stance, your tumble DC is now 39. A level 14 Rogue will have 17 ranks and a + 6 dex modifier. So a simple Boots of +5 Tumbling will make this about a 50-50 chance of tumbling working for the classes with tumble as a class skill. And the wizard who cross-classes Tumble can still have it work against other classes, but will probably not succeed against Thicket of Blades. 1) Only PC's will regularly have Thicket. 2) Tumble is usually a maxed-out skill. It's also boosted by competence items. While you raise the DC significantly with your switch, a single +20 comptence item and you can stroll by Mr. Thicket, who can't do anything to stop you. 3) Thicket was made to stop tumble, among other things, and actually allow a fighter to hold a position. most classes will never take thicket...tumble works fine against them. But now Tumblers have a reason to fear warrior-types who actually control the space around them...that's much more important then giving more love to Tumble, which is still one of the most useful skills in the game. ===Aelryinth
Lyndis 04-27-08, 11:36 PM	Hehe, when I DM, some of the enemies have Thicket as well. My players cringe when they see an enemy with a spiked chain. Yes, I throw Lockdown McTrippy at the PCs to protect Caster McBBEGs or even Caster McMid-Boss. But yes, +20 items will indeed by pass Thicket. Why, as a DM, are you allowing +20 items into the game so easily? You are the DM, you can control what the players have and what they can craft. Remember, to craft a +20 item, the crafter has to have 20 ranks in the skill. How many +20 items do you think there will be in the world? And besides, there's nothing from preventing the existence of competence items that can boost the DC of Thicket.
Lotus Crane 04-27-08, 11:55 PM	And besides, there's nothing from preventing the existence of competence items that can boost the DC of Thicket. Except the lack of a precedent? How would you determine a pricing formula for a non-skill DC bonus? If you made an item to boost the DC of Thicket, would that set a precedent for making items to boost the DC of spells, other than the normal, expensive, ability score boosting method? Even though we're at a loggerheads in this thread (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1023333), I'm going to agree with aelryinth here that Thicket of Blades should just automatically stop Tumble cold. It's so easy to make Tumble automatically succeed, and crusaders represent only 2-3% of PC-class characters in the world, a group which represent probably less than 1% of the inhabitants of a world. Think about all the mindless creatures in the world immune to enchantments, all the creatures without normal anatomies that are immune to sneak attack, and the spells mind blank and true seeing, and how they shut down entire characters, let alone single abilities. Compared to that, I don't think you can really say it's unfair for crusaders to be able to use Thicket of Blades to counter Tumble automatically. And remember, using Thicket is causing an opportunity cost for him too, because that means he can't be using Martial Spirit or some other stance of his choice instead.
ToastedAmphibian 04-29-08, 06:38 PM	Wow... this thread isnt dead yet? I had no idea sudden leap would strike up so much side-debate :} Yes, i agree that Thicket of Blades should simply stop tumble. NOTHING else stops or coutners tumble. Everything should have a descent counter, and finally tumble has one. To take tumble and allow it to overcome Thicket of Blades is to completly screwover the stance.
TheCobra 04-29-08, 10:23 PM	I hadn't thought of Thicket of Blades as creating a separate AoO trigger. That's interesting. I might run it that way, though I can't see myself allowing an AoO for each square moved. That's nuts.
Metafictional 04-30-08, 02:35 AM	It is a little crazy, but it's far from an unbeatable tactic. Especially once you consider the Feat requirements to really get mileage out of things like Thicket or Defensive Rebuke. And all it takes is one wise guy with Douse the Flames to trash all your hard work.
TheCobra 04-30-08, 10:22 AM	Well, if they get close enough to attack. Imagine this 00b3r interpretation of Thicket of Blades on something with four squares of reach. Such a creature would get four AoOs if an opponent tried to close.
Metafictional 04-30-08, 03:07 PM	No doubt, it's nasty, but you'd need at that point a very high Dex, in addition to Combat Reflexes, or some other way to get bonus AoO's to really make that work. That having been said, all it takes is ranged attacks, something with equivalent reach, or your standard array of Save or Lose, Save or Suck, or battlefield control spells to counter even such a powerful melee build, so it's no more "broken" than anything else in the game : )
TheCobra 04-30-08, 04:36 PM	I have a boneclaw crusader with ToB in store for my players. If I used this interpretation of the stance, I think they might throw d30s at me.
Metafictional 04-30-08, 10:38 PM	I don't blame you for houseruling it one bit, especially if your players have access to d30's! But you could at least throw it past them first, they may be perfectly fine with it this way (and plot ways to use it themselves).
TheCobra 05-01-08, 11:09 AM	I'd call it an interpretation, not a house rule. If the stance were clear, I wouldn't necessarily mind AoOs for every square moved. The text ain't clear. I hadn't heard of that interpretation until this thread. I hadn't even seen anyone consider Thicket of Blades as granting a distinct AoO trigger. On the other hand, there are powerful tricks I avoid just because they're too silly. White Raven Tactics would be the best example. I want to use it to optimum effect, but I can't figure out how to describe the action without laughing. The mook shouts an order at the BBEG, who gets another action? No way. And the ideal swarm of 5th-level warblades would be goofy beyond words.
TheCobra 05-02-08, 11:05 AM	I think one could reasonably argue that giving multiple AoOs for movement that leaves a threatened square wouldn't work because the rules only allow one AoO per opportunity. Yes, you could say there are two different triggers. It reminds me of debate over Karmic Strike and Robilar's Gambit. CustServ ruled that each swing provokes one and only one AoO. Of course, ToB might still grant an AoO for every square moved. That's another argument. Normally, leaving multiple threatened squares doesn't provoke more than one AoO. This could be evidence for either side.
aelryinth 05-02-08, 08:33 PM	Since ToB specifically says it does grant exactly that, it's obviously changing the default rule, just like many feats do. The fact that it's expanding threats instead of shrinking them down doesn't make it imbalanced...we're too used to feats that stop people from making AoO's, and not to ones that actually can grant a sizable number of them without negative consequences. ===Aelryinth
TheCobra 05-02-08, 10:26 PM	Since ToB specifically says it does grant exactly that, Nope, it does not. The actual text is wonderfully vague: Any sort of movement provokes.