Quote from: Bill;577547Honestly I think aoo add nothing to the game.

A person can run through a pitched melee unscathed without AoOs or the AD&D rule cited as similar. Because they begin and end their movement out of melee range. It's an artifact of a turn based system that favors range (almost to the point of making melee useless in some cases) and for some, yes, needs fixing.

A better alternative based on their actual purpose is to have people block the space they occupy somehow. If you really really hate AoOs, that's probably the best alternative.

Quote from: beejazz;577554A person can run through a pitched melee unscathed without AoOs or the AD&D rule cited as similar. Because they begin and end their movement out of melee range. It's an artifact of a turn based system that favors range (almost to the point of making melee useless in some cases) and for some, yes, needs fixing.

A better alternative based on their actual purpose is to have people block the space they occupy somehow. If you really really hate AoOs, that's probably the best alternative.

Just have high tumbling skill and you can matrix your way through anyhting!

The aoo rules in 3X just irritate me.

I allow a lot of 'blocking' as when I run a game.

Quote from: Bill;577555Just have high tumbling skill and you can matrix your way through anyhting!

The aoo rules in 3X just irritate me.

I allow a lot of 'blocking' as when I run a game.

Not gonna argue the exceptions to the rule are annoying as hell. Charge is the only exception I can kind of see a purpose for.

Quote from: beejazz;577554A person can run through a pitched melee unscathed without AoOs or the AD&D rule cited as similar. Because they begin and end their movement out of melee range.

Can you cite the rule on that?  You provoke an attack of opportunity whenever you leave a threatened square.  It doesn't matter where you end your turn because attacks of opportunity are immediate actions and happen out of sequence.

Quote from: Wolf, Richard;577560Can you cite the rule on that?  You provoke an attack of opportunity whenever you leave a threatened square.  It doesn't matter where you end your turn because attacks of opportunity are immediate actions and happen out of sequence.

I'm saying that if there were no AoOs, you could evade the melee entirely by moving through it. Which is part of why there are AoOs. I know that under AoOs as written, they'd all get an attack.

Thisa becomes the conversation I hate where people look at the AoO rule as the RULE and then see how it can be manipulated.

The tail wags the dog.

Stormbringers point on abstract versus real simulation is valid. 1e had 1 minute combat rounds in that system an AoO kind of makes sense because although you are engaged in combat in a 60 second period is someone moves past you its trivial to try and land a blow.

However with 6 second rounds if i have already done a spinning kick and smacked a bloke with my Axe how can I notice or attack a bloke that runs past me....

Now I hate 1 minute combat rounds because they are simply silly. So if I wrote an AoO rule it would run ...

If another combatant moves through an adjacent 'hex/square/area' or attempts to retreat from combat and the character has yet to complete all their attacks this round they make take an Attack of Oportunity at the opposing combatant with a bonus of +2 to hit. This action does count towards their number of attacks for the round but can occur outside of general initiative sequence.

Quote from: jibbajibba;577569Thisa becomes the conversation I hate where people look at the AoO rule as the RULE and then see how it can be manipulated.

The tail wags the dog.

Stormbringers point on abstract versus real simulation is valid. 1e had 1 minute combat rounds in that system an AoO kind of makes sense because although you are engaged in combat in a 60 second period is someone moves past you its trivial to try and land a blow.

However with 6 second rounds if i have already done a spinning kick and smacked a bloke with my Axe how can I notice or attack a bloke that runs past me....

Now I hate 1 minute combat rounds because they are simply silly. So if I wrote an AoO rule it would run ...

If another combatant moves through an adjacent 'hex/square/area' or attempts to retreat from combat and the character has yet to complete all their attacks this round they make take an Attack of Oportunity at the opposing combatant with a bonus of +2 to hit. This action does count towards their number of attacks for the round but can occur outside of general initiative sequence.

That would work well for me in regards to violating someones area. I would also allow a half move to retreat from melee that is all you can do that round, without an aoo being possible. Call it careful retreat.

Quote from: Bill;577590That would work well for me in regards to violating someones area. I would also allow a half move to retreat from melee that is all you can do that round, without an aoo being possible. Call it careful retreat.

Yeah I wrote retreat in italics because I assumed that it would be a formal 'option' meaning move more than 50% of your movement and 'withdraw' would be move back 50% or less

Quote from: beejazz;577561I'm saying that if there were no AoOs, you could evade the melee entirely by moving through it. Which is part of why there are AoOs. I know that under AoOs as written, they'd all get an attack.

How so? By skirting around the melee if there is enough room might work.

In AD&D once you are in melee distance with an enemy then you are considered to be in melee and fleeing from melee has the attendent drawbacks.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;577602How so? By skirting around the melee if there is enough room might work.

Didn't say around. Said through.

QuoteIn AD&D once you are in melee distance with an enemy then you are considered to be in melee and fleeing from melee has the attendent drawbacks.

I know, which is why I included that rule as similar in purpose. It helps remove that weird turn-based artifact (in the absence of AoOs or this similar rule) which makes it so you can run through a melee unhindered and unscathed so long as you begin and end your turn out of melee range.

Is there a 3.x player who can help me translate this? I feel like I'm not getting through somehow. Is it how I'm wording this?

Quote from: beejazz;577604Didn't say around. Said through.



I know, which is why I included that rule as similar in purpose. It helps remove that weird turn-based artifact (in the absence of AoOs or this similar rule) which makes it so you can run through a melee unhindered and unscathed so long as you begin and end your turn out of melee range.

Is there a 3.x player who can help me translate this? I feel like I'm not getting through somehow. Is it how I'm wording this?

So your saying that in old editions if you entered combat and then left combat in the same round you would be retreating and your oponent would get a free attack. Whereas 3e if you passed through an adjacent space as you leave it your oponent would get a free attack.....

No they are in no way similar

Quote from: jibbajibba;577633So your saying that in old editions if you entered combat and then left combat in the same round you would be retreating and your oponent would get a free attack. Whereas 3e if you passed through an adjacent space as you leave it your oponent would get a free attack.....

No they are in no way similar

And they would both work quite well if this were added:

..as you leave your opponent would get a free attack unless he/she would otherwise still be in melee.

So if you were still engaged with another opponent no opportunity attack applies.

It is a house rule that I have used in B/X and AD&D because it allows allies to cover the retreat of a wounded comrade. Its hard to justify granting a free strike (at a bonus no less) against a fleeing target when there is still an active foe in your face.

Because D&D uses an initiative sequence, even though everyone is acting 'simultaneously', allowing the Attack only as part of someone's attack routine would simply encourage people who intend to do something silly (like run past 40 armed guards) to simply wait until the guards have taken their single attack for the turn.  

A single attack roll doesn't always have to result in a single swing, either.  If you make a full attack and hit 3 out of 5 times, rather than 3 big hits, that can be described as a single BIG hit.  Because combat is mostly abstract, the number of attacks that are possible with AoO doesn't really bother me.  I will point out that the limit of one AoO (normally) for a character tends to mean it's not really any stranger than a high level fighter having 4 attacks in a round - if the number of attacks is bothersome, simply eliminate Combat Reflexes (though personally, I think that would be a mistake).

Quote from: deadDMwalking;577661Because D&D uses an initiative sequence, even though everyone is acting 'simultaneously', allowing the Attack only as part of someone's attack routine would simply encourage people who intend to do something silly (like run past 40 armed guards) to simply wait until the guards have taken their single attack for the turn.  

I prefer side based initiative. On a d6 roll without modifiers ties happen quite often and there actually is simultaneous action.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;577661Because D&D uses an initiative sequence, even though everyone is acting 'simultaneously', allowing the Attack only as part of someone's attack routine would simply encourage people who intend to do something silly (like run past 40 armed guards) to simply wait until the guards have taken their single attack for the turn.  

A single attack roll doesn't always have to result in a single swing, either.  If you make a full attack and hit 3 out of 5 times, rather than 3 big hits, that can be described as a single BIG hit.  Because combat is mostly abstract, the number of attacks that are possible with AoO doesn't really bother me.  I will point out that the limit of one AoO (normally) for a character tends to mean it's not really any stranger than a high level fighter having 4 attacks in a round - if the number of attacks is bothersome, simply eliminate Combat Reflexes (though personally, I think that would be a mistake).

Why not just make it one big attack in the first place?
My main complaint about aoo and secondary attacks is that they slow down the game for no real gain.