Attack of Opportunity "Chains", Spent Attacks or Not? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Attack of Opportunity "Chains", Spent Attacks or Not? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Rezdave
11-16-04, 09:49 AM In his "Rules of the Game" article on AoO pt2, Skip discussed "Attack of Opportunity Chains" that may occur when opponents with multiple AoO engage in actions that themselves prompt an AoO back and forth.

While he was clear about the fact that the actions and all AoO must be declared first in forward order and then resolved backwards in reverse, there was one oversight in the discussion.

Unfortunately, the article *does not* explicitly state whether an AoO is "spent" when it is *declared* or when it is *resolved*.

Basically, in Skip's example, if I am successful with AoO #5 (a disarm attempt) and AoO #1-4 are negated, have my opponent and I expended all of our AoO chances for the round, or do we each still have two "unused" AoO remaining? Now that he's disarmed, if I try to grappel him on my turn am I safe from AoO because he already spent them, or does he get them back because they were never resolved?

Thanks ... official sources are appreciated, but opinions respected. Perhaps I missed this in the PHB.
astute1
11-16-04, 10:02 AM No, I don't think there's any official ruling on this topic out there.

To make it simpler for my campaign, I've just houseruled it. My houserule is that when you are making an AoO, you can't provoke an attack of opportunity. Thus, no chains. Also, I find that it encourages players to take more daring actions, such as trip or disarm, as an AoO, which tends to spice up combat a bit.
astute1
11-16-04, 10:15 AM No, I don't think there's any official ruling on this topic out there.

To make it simpler for my campaign, I've just houseruled it. My houserule is that when you are making an AoO, you can't provoke an attack of opportunity. Thus, no chains. Also, I find that it encourages players to take more daring actions, such as trip or disarm, as an AoO, which tends to spice up combat a bit.
FriendoftheDork
11-16-04, 10:17 AM nothing official, but i say when you declare an attack of opportunity, you have spent it even if it is not immedeately resolved because it provokes another AoO.

So ... there's an end to the chain after all.
kliate
11-16-04, 10:34 AM Since you don't normally get your action back if it's negated, I rule that an AoO is spent even if negated (thus, when declared).
Jeremymc
11-16-04, 10:37 AM Well, it's pretty clear in the article that in the case of those "attack chains", the ultimate AoO interrupts the one before it, which interrupts the one before it. So if that final AoO #5 ends up disarming his opponent, that opponent hasn't actually USED all of his other attacks of opportunity, you're just running down a chain of possibilities to arrive at the end.

If four other creatures ran by him, he could still punch them with his fists.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Rezdave 11-16-04, 09:49 AM	In his "Rules of the Game" article on AoO pt2, Skip discussed "Attack of Opportunity Chains" that may occur when opponents with multiple AoO engage in actions that themselves prompt an AoO back and forth. While he was clear about the fact that the actions and all AoO must be declared first in forward order and then resolved backwards in reverse, there was one oversight in the discussion. Unfortunately, the article does not explicitly state whether an AoO is "spent" when it is declared or when it is resolved. Basically, in Skip's example, if I am successful with AoO #5 (a disarm attempt) and AoO #1-4 are negated, have my opponent and I expended all of our AoO chances for the round, or do we each still have two "unused" AoO remaining? Now that he's disarmed, if I try to grappel him on my turn am I safe from AoO because he already spent them, or does he get them back because they were never resolved? Thanks ... official sources are appreciated, but opinions respected. Perhaps I missed this in the PHB.
astute1 11-16-04, 10:02 AM	No, I don't think there's any official ruling on this topic out there. To make it simpler for my campaign, I've just houseruled it. My houserule is that when you are making an AoO, you can't provoke an attack of opportunity. Thus, no chains. Also, I find that it encourages players to take more daring actions, such as trip or disarm, as an AoO, which tends to spice up combat a bit.
astute1 11-16-04, 10:15 AM	No, I don't think there's any official ruling on this topic out there. To make it simpler for my campaign, I've just houseruled it. My houserule is that when you are making an AoO, you can't provoke an attack of opportunity. Thus, no chains. Also, I find that it encourages players to take more daring actions, such as trip or disarm, as an AoO, which tends to spice up combat a bit.
FriendoftheDork 11-16-04, 10:17 AM	nothing official, but i say when you declare an attack of opportunity, you have spent it even if it is not immedeately resolved because it provokes another AoO. So ... there's an end to the chain after all.
kliate 11-16-04, 10:34 AM	Since you don't normally get your action back if it's negated, I rule that an AoO is spent even if negated (thus, when declared).
Jeremymc 11-16-04, 10:37 AM	Well, it's pretty clear in the article that in the case of those "attack chains", the ultimate AoO interrupts the one before it, which interrupts the one before it. So if that final AoO #5 ends up disarming his opponent, that opponent hasn't actually USED all of his other attacks of opportunity, you're just running down a chain of possibilities to arrive at the end. If four other creatures ran by him, he could still punch them with his fists.