PDA

View Full Version : [4e] Helping Someone Else Stand up



LibraryOgre
2009-12-11, 10:53 AM
Just a random question: Would you allow someone to spend an action to help someone else to their feat? What action would you require?

Yakk
2009-12-11, 10:56 AM
Standard, by default.

Helping some else do X (without them having to do anything) is harder than them doing it themselves. Standing up is a move action. So harder is a standard action.

LibraryOgre
2009-12-11, 11:05 AM
While I can see that argument, isn't picking something up a minor?

Tiki Snakes
2009-12-11, 11:18 AM
I'd let you spend a move action to allow them to take a move action to stand, as per normal, with the free shift 1 square and all.

Picking something up is indeed a minor.

rayne_dragon
2009-12-11, 11:24 AM
Well if picking something up is a minor, then you'd have to at least use another minor to set them down properly (as opposed to a free action to drop them back on their face). I'd probably say two minors or one standard.

Kurald Galain
2009-12-11, 11:33 AM
Just a random question: Would you allow someone to spend an action to help someone else to their feat? What action would you require?
Sure. I would make it a move action, because it really is a waste of a standard. Giving a move action to another player in such a circumstantial way isn't unbalanced.

(I'm assuming the ally is adjacent)

FoE
2009-12-11, 11:34 AM
It's a standard action, I say. The physical act of helping someone to their feet is only a minor action, but you have to hum a few bars from 'Lean On Me' while doing so. :smalltongue:

Yakk
2009-12-11, 11:47 AM
Yes, you can pick someone/thing up as a minor action. Check your encumbrance. You have them carried.

They can then dismount from you as a standard action. :-) (see mount rules)

Grynning
2009-12-11, 12:33 PM
Sure. I would make it a move action, because it really is a waste of a standard. Giving a move action to another player in such a circumstantial way isn't unbalanced.

(I'm assuming the ally is adjacent)

This would sort of reduce the usefulness of powers like the Warlord Utility "Knight's Move" though wouldn't it? I think it should be a standard.

Kurald Galain
2009-12-11, 12:34 PM
This would sort of reduce the usefulness of powers like the Warlord Utility "Knight's Move" though wouldn't it?
No, because Knight's Move works at a distance, and lets the target do other things besides just standing up. Also, it's not like KM is a particularly strong or desirable power.

Hzurr
2009-12-11, 01:05 PM
Well, if a standard is too much, and a move is too little, what if it costs a move and a minor? (or, like someone else suggested, two minors)

tcrudisi
2009-12-11, 01:15 PM
I would allow it as a standard action. It's a lot harder to pick someone up (especially when holding a weapon(s) or implement(s)) than it is to pick up an object from the ground. Since giving up your move action for someone else to give a move action is already the purview of the leaders (and the, uh, race that gives Telekinetic Leap), it seems unfair to them to allow it as a move action.

Besides, if you are going to argue that reaching a hand down to help someone up should not be a standard action, I would agree. In that case, they are helping you help them up (so they would probably use an action of their own to help themselves up).

Which means that the only other option is the player is trying to help them up without the fallen player helping out. I know I've picked up kids who were being stubborn, and they are hard enough. Definitely a standard, and they are kids!

Yeah, it might seem harsh, but giving up your action for someone else always comes with a penalty. Want to use someone's Second Wind for them? Use a standard action... and they don't get the defense bonus.

*edit* A side note: since there are no rules for this, my response is nothing but a house-rule (of course, it'll be that way for everyone).

Meek
2009-12-11, 01:23 PM
I'm with Kurald on this one. In 4e, helping someone up as a standard action is a waste of a standard action. It doesn't matter what the logic behind it is like – a move action is a less tactically restricting in a tactical combat situation and that's what you should be looking at in terms of designing house rules like this. If it impedes a turn's worth of contribution in a tactical combat (using your standard action basically means you're not advancing the battle that turn much at all) for something as minor as getting someone to stand up, when they can stand up far more easily on their own turn, the dude is staying floored.

tcrudisi
2009-12-11, 02:03 PM
I'm with Kurald on this one. In 4e, helping someone up as a standard action is a waste of a standard action. It doesn't matter what the logic behind it is like – a move action is a less tactically restricting in a tactical combat situation and that's what you should be looking at in terms of designing house rules like this. If it impedes a turn's worth of contribution in a tactical combat (using your standard action basically means you're not advancing the battle that turn much at all) for something as minor as getting someone to stand up, when they can stand up far more easily on their own turn, the dude is staying floored.

You are correct in that helping someone stand up is a waste of a standard action. Let's go back to high school for a few minutes. You and your best friend Bob have just gotten into a fight against Kobold and Orc. Kobold knocks Bob down to the ground. Are you going to take a couple of seconds to pick Bob up while Orc is beating on you? I'm gonna go ahead and guess "no". You might move over to him to try to protect him, but you've got someone beating on you... taking the time to pick him up would be foolish.

Now, if you were a Warlord, sure you could give up your Move action to allow Bob to stand up. But then we are talking about powers. Otherwise, forcing someone to stand up does take longer than them standing up on their own. (And yes, we are talking about forcing someone to stand up. If you just put out your hand to help them up, then they are still doing the standing mostly on their own. Err... I should not say "we", but at least it's what I'm assuming. Now, putting out your hand to help someone up would be different and I didn't cover that above.)

Meek
2009-12-11, 02:22 PM
You're saying the same thing you said before – which is your position and I respect it. The TC's question has characters who DO want to help each other stand up from prone in the midst of, I would assume, a battle. In such a situation, I have answered I would let them do so as a move action in order to prevent it from being an even larger waste of their time than it already is. Logic doesn't enter into it for me – the D&D 4e DMing golden rule is to "say yes" and making it a standard action is basically saying "No" and stifling a player action that isn't really unbalancing at all. Your approach is different. Quite fine. I don't like it though.

As for the Warlord, Kurald has already made the point that Knight's Move is a) far more useful than just helping someone adjacent stand up and b) not that powerful anyway. So I don't see this specific use of a move action to be unbalanced at all.

Inyssius Tor
2009-12-11, 02:27 PM
Standard action. It would have cost the prone character a move action; and, when it's used, that's the point. If the archer ranger (who doesn't need to move to attack) can spend a move action to lift the barbarian (who would), you've taken a condition which originally meant "target can't attack this turn" and appended "unless he wants to".

Allowing an ally to substitute their own move action would mess with the balance of a great deal of extant monsters and class powers, and would obsolete an element of the game's tactical complexity.

Meek
2009-12-11, 02:30 PM
Standard action. It would have cost the prone character a move action; and, when it's used, that's the point. If the archer ranger (who doesn't need to move to attack) can spend a move action to lift the barbarian (who would), you've taken a condition which originally meant "target can't attack this turn" and appended "unless he wants to".

The Barbarian would've been able to Charge as a standard action, therefore being able to both move and attack.

Oracle_Hunter
2009-12-11, 03:06 PM
I'm with Kurald on this one. In 4e, helping someone up as a standard action is a waste of a standard action. It doesn't matter what the logic behind it is like – a move action is a less tactically restricting in a tactical combat situation and that's what you should be looking at in terms of designing house rules like this. If it impedes a turn's worth of contribution in a tactical combat (using your standard action basically means you're not advancing the battle that turn much at all) for something as minor as getting someone to stand up, when they can stand up far more easily on their own turn, the dude is staying floored.
So, what's you opinion on spending a Standard action to give someone else a Saving Throw. Or +2 on a Check?

Helping someone out is supposed to be costly; if it were easy, then you could trade around Actions like they were Action Points.

I mean, how useful is knocking someone over if their adjacent ally can just blow a Move Action they weren't using anyways and then attack? Remember - if it is a Move Action to pick a PC up, it'll be a Move Action to pick a Monster up, too.

Ryumaru
2009-12-11, 03:32 PM
Make sure they can only do it twice; third time they fall if they havn't spent a surge, they're down for the count.

-End horrid L4D comparison-

Edea
2009-12-11, 03:41 PM
Closest thing to RAW on this is that it's merely a subset of the Aid Another action in the PHB ("You use your action to aid another character."), so yeah, it'd cost a standard.

TBH, though, either 1) Prone's not exactly a life threatening condition, so just don't worry about it and let them stand up on their own, or 2) Prone IS life threatening (such as against, say, those damned needlefang drake swarms), in which case spending the standard action to help the ally get up does more for the damage balance of the fight than attacking the enemy. Sounds good to me.

Frankly, I've -never- encountered a situation in 4e where I needed to help someone else stand up, and I've been playing constantly so the whole 'standard action is wasted' bit doesn't seem like a big deal IMO.

rayne_dragon
2009-12-11, 04:00 PM
My party usually justs picks up the person and carries them around until the person's turn. I seem to recall the DM treating it as being uneder the grappling rules.

Oracle_Hunter
2009-12-11, 04:22 PM
2) Prone IS life threatening (such as against, say, those damned needlefang drake swarms), in which case spending the standard action to help the ally get up does more for the damage balance of the fight than attacking the enemy. Sounds good to me.
FYI - they fixed Needlefangs (http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/updates)

EDIT:

My party usually justs picks up the person and carries them around until the person's turn. I seem to recall the DM treating it as being uneder the grappling rules.
Dragging someone as per Grapple requires a Standard Action, and you can only move 1/2 speed.

Kurald Galain
2009-12-11, 04:33 PM
So, what's you opinion on spending a Standard action to give someone else a Saving Throw. Or +2 on a Check?
That the former is generally a waste of time, and the latter is always a waste of time.


I mean, how useful is knocking someone over if their adjacent ally can just blow a Move Action they weren't using anyways and then attack?
(1) That it's not a given that there is an adjacent ally, (2) that it's not a given either that said ally wouldn't be using his move action, and (3) that you're still getting combat advantage in the meantime.

Prone is not a very strong debuff, nor is it intended to be a strong debuff.

Kurald Galain
2009-12-11, 04:46 PM
Frankly, I've -never- encountered a situation in 4e where I needed to help someone else stand up, and I've been playing constantly so the whole 'standard action is wasted' bit doesn't seem like a big deal IMO.
It's not a big deal on its own, but it's a good example of how a DM can discourage players from trying some special action, by needlessly giving that action a significant cost and/or a small chance of success.

Oracle_Hunter
2009-12-11, 05:10 PM
Prone is not a very strong debuff, nor is it intended to be a strong debuff.
I dunno - Granting CA, -2 to hit with melee, and requiring a Move Action to break can be pretty damaging.

Inyssius Tor
2009-12-11, 05:39 PM
The Barbarian would've been able to Charge as a standard action, therefore being able to both move and attack.

Unless he was more than six squares away from his desired target.

Unless he was less than three squares away from his desired target.

Unless terrain / other enemies would block a direct charge.

Unless he was dazed.

Unless he was slowed.

These circumstances are not uncommon.

tcrudisi
2009-12-11, 06:12 PM
Unless he was less than three squares away from his desired target.

Unless he was slowed.

I'm not disagreeing with your statement as a whole -- prone is a nasty condition. However, the two I have quoted above are incorrect. Concerning charge, PHB page 287 says: You must move at least 2 squares from your starting position... Since moving 2 squares satisfies "moving at least 2 squares", this means that you can move two squares to charge someone. However, a common tactic in my party is to knock someone prone and then move back a single step. Since the monster has to stand up (a move action) and we are out of range for its attacks, it can choose to either move closer to us (using its standard) or ready an action. It can no longer charge, as there is no one 2 squares away to charge it (or it will be punished via opportunity attacks if it charges back-line people).

Mando Knight
2009-12-11, 06:25 PM
FYI - they fixed Needlefangs (http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/updates)

And it was about time. Those buggers had the ability to deal 2-4d10 plus modifiers in damage every turn to their primary target, and 1-2d10 plus modifiers to everyone else trying to flank it.

Yakk
2009-12-13, 10:33 AM
You're saying the same thing you said before – which is your position and I respect it. The TC's question has characters who DO want to help each other stand up from prone in the midst of, I would assume, a battle. In such a situation, I have answered I would let them do so as a move action in order to prevent it from being an even larger waste of their time than it already is.
Being able to burn your own move action, to give an ally back their move action, is not anywhere close to a waste of time.

If you can do that, then knocking prone goes from action denial and short-term debuff on a target, to short-term debuff on the target and fungable action denial, which is a far weaker ability.

My party usually justs picks up the person and carries them around until the person's turn. I seem to recall the DM treating it as being uneder the grappling rules.
Standard to grapple, standard to move at half speed while carrying a grappled target?

That the former is generally a waste of time, and the latter is always a waste of time.
Standard to grant a saving throw has been used a number of times -- when someone more effective in this context is being crippled by a (save ends) condition.

+2 on a check (aid another) can be useful when you are out of dailies/encounters and someone else wants to land a "this will end it" daily. It is far rarer that it is useful, I'll admit.

Prone is not a very strong debuff, nor is it intended to be a strong debuff.
So, making it weaker is good?

It's not a big deal on its own, but it's a good example of how a DM can discourage players from trying some special action, by needlessly giving that action a significant cost and/or a small chance of success.
If you stunt it, and use the environment, go for it!

If you want to be able to trade actions around free of charge without powers or stunts, no, you shouldn't be able to in general.

When you knock a melee character prone, then shift back one, that should be reasonably effective action denial.

Mercenary Pen
2009-12-13, 10:52 AM
I'd allow you to use a move action so that an adjacent player/NPC can stand up from prone with an immediate reaction. However, I would require that the prone individual cannot also be immobilised or grappled at the same time- because under those circumstances there is every chance either they could not support their own weight (legs damaged by enemy martial ability) or you could not physically pick them up (grappled by tentacles extruding through holes in the floor).

I personally think that getting back yup from prone has to require some effort on the part of the affected player/NPC, and in this scenario an immediate reaction to the move action you're expending suits best.

Jack_Banzai
2009-12-13, 01:03 PM
After speaking with some folk in the know, they concluded that it is usually a Standard action, as it is less Aid Another and much more Grab. Also it effectively ends a status condition, so it should be treated as more than a Move action.

Shardan
2009-12-13, 02:40 PM
The problem is it becomes a free way for player B to essentially give 2 move actions to player A. Knocking things prone is a tactical move. making players able to cancel such a tactical move for free might unbalance the fight. after all, the cleric standing behind the fighter probably doesn't need a move action, but the fighter can suddenly stand and pursue the poor critter that finally got away.

Thematically I understand it, but its like saying 'well I'm gonna spend my move action to shake him and pat him on the back so he can get a free save versus stun/daze on myturn' Creatures that knock you prone suddenly become less dangerous. Dropping as a free action for ranged defense becomes an easy strategy if you have someone in cover adjacent to you.



*looks up at what Jak posted.* err.. what he said with many more words.

Hzurr
2009-12-13, 03:21 PM
After speaking with some folk in the know, they concluded that it is usually a Standard action, as it is less Aid Another and much more Grab. Also it effectively ends a status condition, so it should be treated as more than a Move action.

Hmm..."folk in the know," and you live in Seattle. I'm inclined to agree with you.

Anonomuss
2009-12-13, 03:47 PM
This was dealt with in one of the WOTC DnD podcasts.*
Mike Mearls said that such an action would be a move action overall. Jeremy Crawford said that it would be a standard, but he seemed to retract it after Mike Mearls gave his answer.

*Podcast: Episode 31; More Mailbag, @ 21min, 30sec.

jmbrown
2009-12-13, 03:58 PM
Helping someone stand as a move action is only detrimental to a small group. With a large group in a tight space or tons of minions you can effectively eliminate the usefulness of knocking someone prone. Prone affects the action economy and with helping people up minions essentially remove the penalty of wasted actions altogether.

I'd rule it as a standard action because aiding someone is always a standard.

Trobby
2009-12-13, 05:11 PM
Hmm...It's been awhile since I played 4.0, but I think a minor action would suffice here, WITH the stipulation that you're then open for an AoO. And, if you want to get technical, you should only be able to use a minor action to bring them to their feet if their total weight is less than your "Lift Over Head" weight limit. Which is to say, if you would be encumbered by carrying the person and their gear, it would take at least a standard action to help THAT person to their feet.

Similar for 3.5, if you replace "Minor" with "Move" action.

tcrudisi
2009-12-13, 05:36 PM
Hmm...It's been awhile since I played 4.0, but I think a minor action would suffice here, WITH the stipulation that you're then open for an AoO. And, if you want to get technical, you should only be able to use a minor action to bring them to their feet if their total weight is less than your "Lift Over Head" weight limit. Which is to say, if you would be encumbered by carrying the person and their gear, it would take at least a standard action to help THAT person to their feet.

Similar for 3.5, if you replace "Minor" with "Move" action.

You think that picking someone up is can be done as fast as drawing a sword? That, to me, is a good indication of minor action speed, since drawing a weapon is a minor action. Plus, once you start getting into weight limits, you really start to slow down combat.

Also, I don't like the idea of it being a move action but incurring an opportunity attack. My group's favorite tactic is to knock a monster prone and then push it one square away. It's move action is to stand up... and it's standard is to move to the party. It can't charge because we are two squares away, but it can't attack us because we are two squares away. Prone effectively takes it out of the combat for a round. Allowing it's buddy, who is behind him, to pick him up as a move so they can both charge us... well, we just lost out on some great tactics.

Effectively, what happens is that a strong status condition is being trivialized. If you make it to where prone doesn't mean much then a lot of tactics are getting thrown away. Heck, look at it this way: it takes me a move action to stand up from prone and I'm going to be able to stand up on my own much faster than if you were to pick me up. If that statement is true, then the standard to pick someone up is appropriate.

I also look at prone as being a condition. If you want to help someone shrug off a condition, it takes a standard action Heal check. They synergy is there, plus as others have said with the "Aid Another". It all fits. I can understand people wanting to make it a move action to help their allies, but then you are stepping on the toes of others who get that as a power.

Tiki Snakes
2009-12-13, 07:26 PM
My group's favorite tactic is to knock a monster prone and then push it one square away. It's move action is to stand up... and it's standard is to move to the party. It can't charge because we are two squares away, but it can't attack us because we are two squares away. Prone effectively takes it out of the combat for a round. Allowing it's buddy, who is behind him, to pick him up as a move so they can both charge us... well, we just lost out on some great tactics.


You do realise that you can freely shift 1 square as part of standing up, right?

nightwyrm
2009-12-13, 07:39 PM
You do realise that you can freely shift 1 square as part of standing up, right?

only if someone is standing on top of you.

Tiki Snakes
2009-12-13, 07:49 PM
only if someone is standing on top of you.

So it is, for some reason, back when I originally read through actions in combat, I managed to conflate the two. Huh. Well, live and learn.

...

Will have to put some more monsters in next week, that knock prone. ^_^

Kudaku
2009-12-13, 10:09 PM
Kindly take note that the following post is based mostly on common sense instead of gaming rules since I haven't had the pleasure of playing 4.0 in a depressingly long time :smallfrown:.

Skimming through the thread I have to say that I think Mercenary Pen's solution of using a move action for the helper and have the recipient use an opportunity action is the most elegant by far. Literally offering someone a hand up can be quickly done, if not quite as fast as drawing a weapon - a minor action seems too cheap. However I might also suggest that the person being helped up risks an opportunity attack from adjacent enemies since he's basically being "yanked" up on his feet again - tricky to keep your guard up while this happens. That having been said the prone character should be allowed to accept or reject the offer of help and thus save his opportunity action if he wants.

And for the record the idea that picking up an item takes the same action no matter what size it is, be it the yo-yo you dropped on the floor or an unconcious party member in a fireman lift, is hillarious. :smallbiggrin:

tcrudisi
2009-12-14, 01:12 AM
Skimming through the thread I have to say that I think Mercenary Pen's solution of using a move action for the helper and have the recipient use an opportunity action is the most elegant by far. Literally offering someone a hand up can be quickly done, if not quite as fast as drawing a weapon - a minor action seems too cheap. However I might also suggest that the person being helped up risks an opportunity attack from adjacent enemies since he's basically being "yanked" up on his feet again - tricky to keep your guard up while this happens. That having been said the prone character should be allowed to accept or reject the offer of help and thus save his opportunity action if he wants.

People are allowed to take one opportunity action per characters turn in 4e. So, basically, by making it an opportunity action cost, you are charging that player nothing, as the player is highly unlikely to make an opportunity attack action on an allies turn anyway (though not impossible... just very highly improbable).

Thajocoth
2009-12-14, 01:17 AM
People are allowed to take one opportunity action per characters turn in 4e. So, basically, by making it an opportunity action cost, you are charging that player nothing, as the player is highly unlikely to make an opportunity attack action on an allies turn anyway (though not impossible... just very highly improbable).

Per ENEMY'S turn.

tcrudisi
2009-12-14, 02:16 AM
Per ENEMY'S turn.

Incorrect. Per the PHB on page 290:
One Per Combatant's Turn: You can take only one opportunity action during another combatant's turn, but you can take any number during a round.

For clarification, when I was saying character in my post above, I was meaning both allies and enemies/monsters.

Thajocoth
2009-12-14, 02:21 AM
Incorrect. Per the PHB on page 290:
One Per Combatant's Turn: You can take only one opportunity action during another combatant's turn, but you can take any number during a round.

For clarification, when I was saying character in my post above, I was meaning both allies and enemies/monsters.

That's what I originally thought, but somebody pointed to something somewhere in one of the 4e books showing I was wrong. I forget which book they pointed to, but I remember this event clearly. It never made sense to me either... Not that there are any opportunity actions one might want to make on an ally's turn (barring domination, and then, are they an ally?)

tcrudisi
2009-12-14, 02:28 AM
That's what I originally thought, but somebody pointed to something somewhere in one of the 4e books showing I was wrong. I forget which book they pointed to, but I remember this event clearly.

If you can find the book, please post it as I like to keep up-to-date on all the rules. I just double-checked the compendium for DDI subscribers and it confirmed what the PHB said, both with Opportunity Actions and Opportunity Attacks.

*edit* Yeah, there used to be ways to do opportunity attacks on allies turns, although there were not many. Most have been errata'ed down to immediate actions. Although, off the top of my head, an example would be the Rogue daily power Compel the Craven (from Martial Power) which causes the enemy to move away from you (literally move away from you, not push, pull, or slide), which will provoke opportunity attacks.

Asbestos
2009-12-14, 02:28 AM
So it is, for some reason, back when I originally read through actions in combat, I managed to conflate the two. Huh. Well, live and learn.

...

Will have to put some more monsters in next week, that knock prone. ^_^

Wolves man... wolves. Those things are the bane of lower-level existence when used sadistically properly.

Also, Dire Wolves and Bugbear Warriors happen to be the same level... together they form 'Team Beat-the-tar-out-of-the-PCs!'

nightwyrm
2009-12-14, 10:38 AM
Wolves man... wolves. Those things are the bane of lower-level existence when used sadistically properly.

Also, Dire Wolves and Bugbear Warriors happen to be the same level... together they form 'Team Beat-the-tar-out-of-the-PCs!'

Various types of undead canines are also good for keeping PCs on the ground.