PDA

View Full Version : 5 foot step and stepping 5 feet



jguy
2010-10-11, 09:40 PM
I have a DM who tends to play monsters far more intelligent than they should, specifically in taking a 5 foot step. We regularly enlarge our fighter to give him reach, but it seems to only come into effect when the enemies are charging. He says that moving 5 feet in any context constitutes a 5 foot step, even when they enemy has no concept of defensive or intelligent fighting. To date, from what I can remember, these enemies have taken a 5-foot step against us.

1.) Rats
2.) Wolfs
3.) Mindless Zombies (lots and lots of mindless zombies)
4.) Monsters specifically stated they care nothing for their own safety (I.E Ragers, insane fighters ect)
5.) Spiders

This tends to happen when a monster is one hit away from death and the AoO would have killed them if it connected. Is there any rule that states what constitutes a 5 foot step in terms of intelligence?

Keld Denar
2010-10-11, 09:56 PM
It's pretty clear cut. If you haven't moved in a round, you can take a 5' step. There is no limit on intelligence as far as what can. Lots of animals have natural cunning in combat, though. The only restrictions on taking 5' steps is when your movement is restricted due to a movement hampering effect or from difficult terrain.

ToySoldierCPlus
2010-10-11, 09:56 PM
No, there is not. There are no rules stating that certain creatures can't take five-foot steps based on their intelligence scores. The only rules for preventing 5-foot steps are A) if the terrain hampers movement in anyway, and B) if the creature's speed is only 5 feet. If neither of these conditions is met, there is no reason a creature should be unable to take a 5-foot step.

How exactly has this been used against you? And has it really impacted your enjoyment of the game this much?

ericgrau
2010-10-11, 10:09 PM
You don't provoke during a 5 foot step because you aren't occupied with another activity when going such a small distance. Anything can handle that. Heck, you'd have to almost be trying to get hurt like the subject of an irresistible dance spell for anything different to happen. I mean it's not far off from standing still without provoking.

jguy
2010-10-11, 10:18 PM
I've always interpreted a 5-foot step as a defensive step in combat to avoid being left vulnerable. It is why you don't get take an AoO when moving 5 feet but you do get an AoO when you move ten feet. Requires an awareness of the circumstances, like, "If I move to far, I might get distracted, lose concentrated ect. and be left open." A rat, a spider, and a mindless zombie have no concept of this. Hence why 5-foot step and moving 5 feet are different in my opinion. By RAW I seem to be wrong in that regard though.

Claudius Maximus
2010-10-12, 12:28 AM
Personally I'd play aggressive zombies and other mindless creatures so they wouldn't 5-step unless they need to do so to attack you. I wouldn't reckon them smart enough to slide into a flank position or do a tactical retreat with it or anything like that. In the case of zombies the most likely attack will be a partial charge, or a 5-step to close and punch if you're exactly 5 feet away. Recall that they can't just move and hit you otherwise, so taking 5-steps from them means all you have to do is 5-step back every turn and they can never attack you.

Ultimately though your DM is justified by RAW.

Hague
2010-10-12, 12:32 AM
I'm a big fan of grappling zombies. Granted, they have no aptitude for it, but it seems like something a zombie would do.

Zaq
2010-10-12, 12:36 AM
I always just thought that a the 5' step is as far as the game can expect you to go without turning your back on your opponent (and still see where you're going in a very short time frame; a move action isn't long). If you move farther than that, you at least have to look over your shoulder long enough for them to take a pot shot at you.

This of course falls apart when you're stepping away from flanking foes, stepping closer to a creature with reach, or any number of other solutions, but you'll be hard-pressed to find a mechanic that doesn't have a weak explanation if you look too hard at the abstraction.

Zaydos
2010-10-12, 12:39 AM
A five-foot step is about two steps. In combat you take 2 steps to move in and swing and move back out. 5-ft steps really are just basic combat movement.

Ormur
2010-10-12, 12:40 AM
I can see animals and other int-2 or less monsters instinctively shirking away from danger (in this cases tough bipeds with sharp things). Remember that things are just broken up in rounds to adjudicate actions, it's actually all happening at almost the same time.

panaikhan
2010-10-12, 07:16 AM
IMHO, most of the specific examples in the original post (rats, wolves, undead, spiders) use 'pack' tactics - surround the enemy and attack from all sides.
Wolves are intelligent enough to use sneakier tactics - they even have a manoever named after them!

As a DM, I often have to use intelligent tactics for the monsters, simply to get them past the first 2 rounds of combat. Instead of accusing the DM of being underhanded, how about stepping up your own tactics?

Godless_Paladin
2010-10-12, 07:26 AM
I'm a big fan of grappling zombies. Granted, they have no aptitude for it, but it seems like something a zombie would do.

Zombies in D&D 3.5e have very little aptitude for acting like any more popular version of zombies, sadly.

I prefer ghouls. :smallwink:

Baalthazaq
2010-10-12, 08:16 AM
Well, I'm on the fence here. Yes, there are no rules against it, however there are also no rules against the mindless zombie, breaking from combat, going up the stairs, handing out weapons to his friends, setting up a barricade, and using a spear from higher ground to gain an advantage over the players, before pushing the cauldron of hot oil on them.

Int 1.

The point is, "what is going on". Is the zombie mindlessly moving to the next square (5ft of regular movement), or is he taking a "5ft step" tactical maneuver?

I'm totally fine with a rat doing the 5 ft step, or the wolf, or even the zombie, however, if I ever see a Zombie 5ft step to provide a flanking position for another zombie, I'll complain to the DM.

Blah, I'm talking too much. The point is:
What is going on. Is he just moving, and that distance happens to be 5ft?
Then it's like any other movement.
Is he making a tactical adjustment?
That's a 5 ft step.

Person_Man
2010-10-12, 08:18 AM
Your DM is perfectly justified by RAW. Also, if your build relies heavily on attacks of opportunity, you should diversify your build. Any Tier 1-3 build should have plenty of other things to do. If you're slumming it in Tier 4-6 and it's that important to you, then take a look at the net, harpoon, lasso, Knickdown, Scorpion's Grasp, anything that creates difficult terrain (Knight, Earth Devotion, Deepstone Sentinel, plenty of spells), or Daze effects (Boomerang Daze, Ironsoul Forgemaster, Dazing Strike maneuver, etc).

jmbrown
2010-10-12, 08:34 AM
As people have pointed out numerous times, animals have a natural cunning. Don't confuse this for intelligence, but wisdom. Natural selection and all that; your species doesn't live for thousands of years by not knowing how to survive and combat is natural for all creatures. Notice how a common rat has wisdom 12 which is wiser than the average human!

As a DM, I don't allow mindless (Int 0, Wis 0) creatures to step because they have no concept of tactics or morale.

Douglas
2010-10-12, 09:07 AM
Are zombies capable of guarding themselves against attacks? Yes. If they weren't, they'd have a special handicap stating that they automatically provoke every round no matter what they do, because AoOs represent taking advantage of someone not guarding himself.

So, zombies do watch out for attacks at least enough to not constantly be provoking.

Now, what exactly is a 5' step? Is it a careful tactical adjustment, or is it simply moving slowly enough that you are not forced to drop your guard? In my opinion it is the latter. 5' steps avoid provoking because moving that short a distance over the 6 seconds of a round is so slow and easy that you can pay full attention to keeping your guard up just as easily as if you were standing still. This matches with the total lack of tactical thinking ability requirements in the rules for making a 5' step.

So, if a zombie moves at a speed of a mere 5' per 6 seconds, it is moving slowly enough to keep watching out for and guarding itself against attacks just the same as for standing still. This has nothing to do with tactics and everything to do with speed of movement.

The choice of how fast to move and where to move to is a matter of tactics. Gaining the benefit of 5' step mechanics when only moving 5' is not.

Godless_Paladin
2010-10-12, 09:09 AM
A five foot step is not a careful tactical adjustment. It is simply movement that happens in the midst of any action. An adjustment in positioning in response to the tumultuous movement of a battlefield. In a fight, your feet don't stay planted.

true_shinken
2010-10-12, 09:20 AM
5 foot steps for zombies should be very common.
A zombie only has a standard or move action each round, so if it moves more than 5 foot, the only way it will be able to attack is with a charge.

Baalthazaq
2010-10-12, 10:47 AM
Erm...


5' steps avoid provoking because moving that short a distance over the 6 seconds of a round is so slow and easy

The choice of how fast to move and where to move to is a matter of tactics. Gaining the benefit of 5' step mechanics when only moving 5' is not.

Exactly my point, can be found in the bolded portions of your dissenting opinion.

Some additional points:
A 5ft step is *not* 6 seconds. That's a full round action.
A 5 ft step, in theory *can be* over the course of 6 seconds, but can also be a fast hop to the side taking, in D&D terms, 0 seconds.

A zombie, if it changes targets and moves 5ft, is not going to do so, still facing the enemy, watching his back, etc. He is not going to do it over the course of 6 seconds. He is likely going to move at the exact same speed, and with the exact same care as if the enemy was 30 ft away.

The same can be said of any movement modes. My character can charge 60 ft. The enemy is 15ft away. Am I charging at a slower pace than when I walk simply because he is closer?

Now, back to our Zombie example.

Lets make Bob B, the Zombie Z, and Ted T. Lets look at two possible setups.

BZ_T.
BZ_________T.

The necromancer tells the mindless undead to attack T.
Z is not going to make different choices in how to get there (because Int 0). It is going to turn, walk forward, attack.

In one case, attack of opportunity.
In the other, in my opinion, attack of opportunity.

If it were just the adjustment as part of combat, sure, it's fighting, it could represent one of a hundred things.
5ft of movement is not a 5ft foot step any more than a high BAB gives you 4 standard actions. It is an extra, specific, action type that you can take.

Sipex
2010-10-12, 10:58 AM
I don't see the problem here. Monsters are simply smarter in your campaign then you believe they should be.

Your only real option is talking to the DM. From there he makes his choice and you either deal with it or find a new game.

Keld Denar
2010-10-12, 11:00 AM
Your example falls apart if the fighter in question doesn't have reach. Moving into a threatened square, regardless of distance moved, almost never provokes an AoO unless moving into that threatened square means moving out of another threatened square (barring unusual circumstances like charging vs a character with Hold the Line).

Now, if the zombie in question were engaging Bob the fighter, and the necromancer in question directed it to attack Mark the monk who was within 5' of the zombie, then yes, the zombie could take a 5' shuffle and attack Mark without drawing an AoO. If Mark was more than 5' away from the zombie, then the zombie would have to withdraw from Bob (not provoking), or charge Mark (provoking) since zombies only have one action.

I can see what you are arguing. Creatures without any tactical sense shouldn't be able to make tactical movements like 5' steps. The rules just don't support it. If you want to house rule it, thats fine. Its a house rule. The rules as written still dictate that anything and everything can and will make 5' steps when its advantagous to do so, unless prohibited from taking them due to one of the clauses stated in my first post.

ericgrau
2010-10-12, 11:54 AM
I was thinking more along the lines that anyone moving only 5 feet will do it in a step by default. Such a creature actually has to try to leave itself open, and thus such a creature would provoke whether it moved or not. The house rule would then be zombies provoke every round regardless because they're too dumb to defend themselves. And then you have to wonder if they even have the skill to aim their weapons and can hurt others at all.

Scow2
2010-10-12, 12:03 PM
The five-foot step isn't always even technically a Step. 5' is the distance you can move in 6 seconds while performing any other action, such as swinging a sword, readying another lunge for the throat (Rats & Wolves), Piling into position or reeling from the Big Guy Coming At You (Zombies).

And pretty much everything instinctively will back away from something swinging at them, if only to give them room for their attacks. (Can't swing when someone's got their arm in your face)

Most of those creatures (Particularly the all-out agression fighters) wouldn't stop moving and shifting position to get a more opportune location to fight from.

But having a DM treat his monsters as Wargamer Setpieces is a different problem entirely.

Baalthazaq
2010-10-12, 03:47 PM
Your example falls apart if the fighter in question doesn't have reach. Moving into a threatened square, regardless of distance moved, almost never provokes an AoO unless moving into that threatened square means moving out of another threatened square (barring unusual circumstances like charging vs a character with Hold the Line).

Now, if the zombie in question were engaging Bob the fighter, and the necromancer in question directed it to attack Mark the monk who was within 5' of the zombie, then yes, the zombie could take a 5' shuffle and attack Mark without drawing an AoO. If Mark was more than 5' away from the zombie, then the zombie would have to withdraw from Bob (not provoking), or charge Mark (provoking) since zombies only have one action.

I can see what you are arguing. Creatures without any tactical sense shouldn't be able to make tactical movements like 5' steps. The rules just don't support it. If you want to house rule it, thats fine. Its a house rule. The rules as written still dictate that anything and everything can and will make 5' steps when its advantagous to do so, unless prohibited from taking them due to one of the clauses stated in my first post.

Close, but not quite.
I'm arguing that
1) Not all 5ft of movement is a 5ft step. It is possible to move 5ft without it being a special action known as a 5ft step.
Just like an attack CAN be a trip attempt, it doesn't have to be.

2) The DM in certain reasonable circumstances, determine that the type of movement being performed is either a 5 ft step, or just 5ft of regular movement. I'm not arguing even mindless undead can't make 5ft steps, I'm simply arguing that they will not cleverly use them under all circumstances.

Think of it another way, there are many other actions undead can do. Mindless undead. Disarm, Trip, Retreat, Ambush, barricade the players in the room until they starve to death, kill the benevolent leader of the neighbouring town thus bringing his notorious son to power initiating a power struggle that leaves the local militia too thinly spread to take on the impending attack from these zombies, and forces the adventurers to tackle them solo against less advantageous odds.

If the mindless zombies do that though, they are out of character in a massive way. Similarly in the example I first cited. I'm not arguing "the rules don't allow it".
I'm arguing "the DM should treat them as stupid", because they are, not intelligent, because they aren't.

Keld Denar
2010-10-12, 04:23 PM
FOR GREAT EMPHASIS!

I can see what you are arguing. Creatures without any tactical sense shouldn't be able to make tactical movements like 5' steps. The rules just don't support it. If you want to house rule it, thats fine. Its a house rule. The rules as written still dictate that anything and everything can and will make 5' steps when its advantagous to do so, unless prohibited from taking them due to one of the clauses stated in my first post.
So, what are you arguing, then? If you are arguing that RAW says that zombies are too dumb to take a 5' step, then my reply is [Citation Needed]. RAW doesn't cover this. Since there is no exception, then zombies have every combat ability that every other creature with a movement speed ever printed in the game has...the ability to take 5' steps tactically. Some areas of the rules are grey. This one is decisively black and white.

If you are arguing that this rule is dumb, and you'd like to institute a house rule for your game that states that creatures lacking in advanced combat tactics provoke AoOs even when making a 5' step, then I can't argue with you. As a DM, you can make whatever rules you want. If your orcs are blue, then your orcs are blue. If your zombies provoke AoOs, then your zombies provoke AoOs. So long as your players understand that what you are doing is a house rule, and you don't claim that it is RAW, you aren't misleading anyone and what you are doing is perfectly fair and supported by Rule 0. If your players disagree with your house rule, they are free to leave or DM their own game.

If you are a player and think its unfair that zombies are using intelligent tactics against you, politely confront the DM about it, preferably not during the game session. If your DM agrees, see paragraph 2 above. If your DM disagrees, technically he's right according to RAW, and RAW is king in the absense of a house rule. If you don't like this, find another DM or be the DM yourself.

Curmudgeon
2010-10-12, 04:48 PM
I think you're setting the bar for combat tactics way too low, jguy. A 5' step isn't particularly crafty; it's just a minor position shift which doesn't happen to expose you to attack. Any creature capable of attacking is capable of this sort of action. Smarter combat movement would involve things like the Spring Attack feat, or using Tumble to pass through an enemy's position and then adding the Acrobatic Backstab skill trick.

randomhero00
2010-10-12, 05:00 PM
Personally I see a 5ft step as a tactical decision and it annoys me when DMs use it on unintelligent creatures.

Zaydos
2010-10-12, 05:33 PM
Scorpions.

In real life they use minor shifts in position during hunting or when fighting their own predators.

Scorpions are mindless creatures according to D&D's definition of mindless and we know they are smart enough to take the real life equivalent of 5-ft steps.

awa
2010-10-12, 09:01 PM
if zombies cant take 5 foot steps that means all you need to do is take a 5ft step back after attacking and a zombie cant attack you back your to close to charge and if he moves he cant attack.

I also agree that a 5ft step is not a tactical decision it only seems that way do to the abstract round based nature of rpg combat

Zeofar
2010-10-12, 09:55 PM
There is a limit. Zombies will take a five foot step to get around to whatever side of you is available for attacking, but not explicitly to get a flanking bonus. Wolves will do this to get a flanking bonus, because they understand that they'll have an easier time fighting someone from behind. If they're stepping away, simply imagine a wolf shoving its head as close to the ground as possible and moving back slowly; if you've ever seen a mammalian predator backing away from a fight, you've probably seen this.

There are some creatures where their size simply wouldn't allow for a five-foot step without an AoO, like a rat. However, the rules don't support this, so there you go. That is a flaw in the rule system, not necessarily the DM's monster playstyle. Also, it seems unlikely that zombies would take a mere 5-foot-step to get just out of range on their own, but if they are being commanded, it would make decent sense. It also seems more likely (and probably more useful) that a monster would withdraw rather than take a five-foot step if it was nearly dead, but that's just giving you an advantage.

However, your issue really seems to be the idea of a five-foot step to get INTO range. I can't really see anything wrong with this, beside the "too small to step easily" problem I personally have. A five-foot step isn't necessarily defensive or planned; it is the distance that can be moved without rushing or making an opening for an attack. The time it takes for somebody to move five feet with any intent to attack you or get closer to you and is aware that you are there simply doesn't make an opening. If somebody is five feet away from you, it doesn't make sense that they'd try to run (Remember, in D&D, "moving" is pretty much running and "running" is sprinting) at you in a manner that would create an opening unless they were trying an overrun or bullrush (there are rules regarding this, if they do) even if they are a zombie. Also, as said above, it isn't so much a tactical decision as simply the space can be moved while launching an attack on you.

Now, the best case that could be made is walking through someone's 20 foot reach with nothing but 5 foot-steps. Wolves could do this. Rats could too, in my mind, actually. They are aware that you have weapons which can hurt them and are wary enough to tread slowly. A zombie wouldn't because that involves greater thought than which they are capable on their part unless actively being commanded. A batpoo insane guy intent on rushing and killing you could, but it doesn't make sense in terms of intent. But, you also have to realize that you're probably running your characters in a manner that doesn't always reflect their emotions, and more often reflects the best meta-game tactics of which you can think . There is a little give and take here - if your DM can rely on your Barbarian to occasionally rush between a rank of enemies and take a huge amount of attacks just to score a single hit on the enemy wizard, he'll probably be kind enough to let you have the same opportunity.

Certainly, it is possible for just about any type of enemy or monster to take a five-foot step, but it has less to do with intelligence than to do with mindset. A raging berserker could take a five-foot step to move through a AoO minefield, but usually, it doesn't make sense character-wise. This guy is a raging maniac - he will take some hits to reach his goal. On the other hand, I could just as easily see him taking is slow, too. It isn't like he is just standing there during your turn; he's hacking away your weapon every time you try to swing it, probably shouting at the top of his lungs while he does so. As far as he's concerned, he is engaged with you and battling, just not close enough to hit your body. If this is what you're describing, I'll agree with you on zombies, because they simply cannot think well enough to avoid an attack that isn't coming straight at them. If you're just talking about a single square, though? That is just being oversensitive.

P.S. I'd keep in mind that none of these characters or creatures are "taking a five-foot step to avoid an AoO" when they move closer to you. You have a weapon, are actively threatening them with it, and they are smart enough to try to avoid it. Keep this in mind if you get the feeling that "unintelligent animals" can't avoid attacks of opportunity.

RebelRogue
2010-10-12, 10:11 PM
As a DM, I don't allow mindless (Int 0, Wis 0) creatures to step because they have no concept of tactics or morale.
Nitpick: Every creature has a Wisdom score.

awa
2010-10-12, 10:31 PM
and a charisma score

jguy
2010-10-12, 11:16 PM
This got a bigger reaction than I thought it would. From reading all of this it just comes down to my own perspective versus my DM's and RAW. My personal opinion is a 5ft step is a tactical decision and I houserule it as such. By RAW, and 5 foot movement that is simply 5 feet does not constitute a AoO if the opponent has reach.

Scow2
2010-10-12, 11:48 PM
I am offended by your ruling. A 5' step isn't a tactical decision that requires INT... that would fall under the domain of a Feat or Skill.

Also, basic tactics such as 5' steps and "Swing arm at Target" are keyed to WIS, not INT.

A creature with INT 0 isn't going to be taking 5' steps, because INT 0 means you have no nervous control over your body. INT "-" =/= INT "0".

Mindless undead have full access to the tactical tables, because they have a WIS score, and thus situational awareness. They just lack memory and planning. Taking a 5' step is just reflex/instinct.

For the most part, 5' steps are taken during the Physical attack (ever seen anyone swing a sword while slowly moving to maintain balance?).

5' is ambiant movement you're allowed in the span of 6 seconds. Not a feat of intellect to use. It lets combat be somewhat mobile.

Zombies still get DEX to AC, implying they have at least minimal defensive awareness. Hence, they can take 5' steps defensively.

Zaydos
2010-10-12, 11:52 PM
Scorpions, spiders, insects; these creatures termed "vermin" in D&D all make small tactical movements constantly.

Cerlis
2010-10-13, 05:50 AM
A five foot step represents movement done during battle. you see two people attacking and parrying, whilst slowly moving in a directing, they are 5 foot stepping. Edging away while summoning something or the like. You devote yourself to one action but in the midst of dodging and weaving you happen to place your feet in sequence to move you some way. That is why it does not provoke AoO, because its part of your natural defense.moving 5 feet does provoke an attack of opportunity because that is essentially you turning away and leaving, that is "hightale it and run", the form of movement represented by people looking for an opportunity and then avoiding an enemies blow while backing out of combat and then fleeing...is a Withdraw action. Charging does not provoke an attack because you are attacking the enemy and they have to defend themselves.

In between all the true attacks, are dodge, weaves, feignts and movement. Just got to know which is which.

Zeofar
2010-10-13, 11:37 AM
This got a bigger reaction than I thought it would. From reading all of this it just comes down to my own perspective versus my DM's and RAW. My personal opinion is a 5ft step is a tactical decision and I houserule it as such. By RAW, and 5 foot movement that is simply 5 feet does not constitute a AoO if the opponent has reach.

Sadly, it isn't true a a five-foot movement that is only five feet doesn't prevent AoO. If you move out of an opponent's threatened square and it isn't a withdraw or a 5-foot step, they get an attack under the usual circumstances. I've never seen such a rule that negates this if an opponent has reach.

But anyways, the thing is that a 5-foot step can be a "tactical" decision but is often not. Understanding this is key to even understanding what someone is doing when they take a 5-foot step. In a very broad sense, "attacking your enemy" and "running away" are tactical decisions. Not running into a spike in the wall is as much of a tactical decision as not running straight into the spear that a guy is brandishing. There is a difference between "animal stupidity" or a lesser amount of care for one's well being and suicide. Trust me, if you have a "reach weapon" and you're trying to fend off a pack of wolves, they'll start moving more slowly when they get close to you.

Your take doesn't seem so much like a house rule on what a five-foot step actually is as much as what the intellectual ability of creatures are. This can be okay, like with a zombie. On the other hand, if an animal sees a large (or larger) guy with a big stick, they'll be smart enough to take small movements and defend themselves before they get closer. Not doing so is a calculated risk, which animals are capable of making if they don't consider you a significant threat. If A and Zero just saw you bisect Pachi when he ran at you, they may just keep running in an attempt to overwhelm you, but they just as likely may recognize that you're bigger game than they expected and decide to encircle you instead. Both of these make perfect sense. If you say, tripped a creature 10' out, it makes sense that it would get up and move closer if it doesn't move away, and it doesn't need to leave itself open to attacks while doing so.

In D&D 4e, the equivalent of a five-foot step is "shifting." Would you be more comfortable with the terminology if it sounded simpler? An animal shifts around in the battlefield to advantageous position, i.e., one where it can attack you. Same for an average human, a zombie, or a berserker. This is the same as a 5-foot step. Also, keep in mind that when they do so they aren't actually making a "tactical decision." They don't see the option of "move action or 5-foot step" and choose the better one; they're just moving in closer to attack you, but under D&D rules doing so doesn't give you the opportunity to attack (Hence, they are passively denying you an Attack of Opportunity - see how this works out?). It can only be a tactical choice if it somehow plays into a plan, which it doesn't. They're just moving in for an attack.

Snake-Aes
2010-10-13, 11:55 AM
As far as tactical choices go, adjusting to attack or waiting until prey is close are two very common things hunting animals do everywhere. They are represented by readying actions and 5' steps.

Also, whoever said that mindless creatures wouldn't get flanking due to flanking positions... they would. Flanking is a condition imposed by having to divert attacks from opposite directions. A creature that is too dumb to know that won't actively do that, but when it happens the benefit will be there.

Baalthazaq
2010-10-13, 05:47 PM
Keld Danar:
Are you talking to me?

If so:

If you are arguing that RAW says that zombies are too dumb to take a 5' step

No. I'm not. I put up, and bullet pointed my arguments.

Quick rundown of things I've already said about 5ft stepping Zombies:
1) ... there are no rules against it ...
2) I'm totally fine with a rat doing the 5 ft step, or the wolf, or even the zombie
3) If it were just the adjustment as part of combat, sure, it's fighting
4) I'm not arguing even mindless undead can't make 5ft steps, I'm simply arguing that they will not cleverly use them under all circumstances.
5) I'm not arguing "the rules don't allow it".

I'm not just going to repeat myself over and over again, bolding specific 5 word portions. I've stated 5 times that the argument you're fighting against, is not mine.
I've stated, clearly, and now lined up above lines from every post I've made that demonstrate I think the opposite of what you suggested. That should be enough. However, once and only once more, my argument is, in full:

1) A 5 ft step is not the same as 5 ft of regular movement. A 5ft step is a specific action, that must be stated is being used.
Movement when threatened isn't automatically a "Withdraw".
Moving towards an enemy isn't automatically a "Charge".
Attacking isn't automatically a "Disarm" or "Trip" or "Grapple".
Moving 5 ft isn't automatically a "5 foot step".

Everything in "quotes" is a specific, named, type of action you can choose to take. Hell, maybe you have Karmic strike and you WANT to provoke an AoO. Maybe you're fighting a troll and your only source of fire is your fire shield. You can move 5ft. No problem.

Therefore, it is possible, to move 5 ft and not take a "5 ft step" and therefore provoke attacks of opportunity.

This is RAW. Moving 5 ft can provoke attacks of opportunity, provided it is not a specific action titled as a 5ft step.

2) The DM chooses if the action being performed is a "5 ft step" (Shifting, movement during combat, etc), or 5ft of movement (Someone has used control undead and told him to walk 5ft that way, his master has given him a non-combat command which requires the movement, etc).

Zombies can make this 5ft step, but it should be a DM decision to use that ability or not, and that decision should be based on whether the zombies would, in that circumstance, do that thing.

Just like Disarm. Just like Withdraw. Just like Charge. Just like every other action. You pick which one is most appropriate for the character. A Barbarian might charge, a Bard might negotiate.

Sometimes that decision is a poor one like getting an armed, unhindered, massively intelligent unbuffed halfling wizard, with many applicable spells, to attempt a grapple on a Colossal Dragon. If I watch the halfling splatter, I'm going to say "That was stupid", and I'll be right. You might give me a lecture on how "The action was perfectly permissible by RAW", but saying as that isn't my point, intent, argument, suggestion, or inclination, I don't care.

It just makes no sense.

Keld Denar
2010-10-13, 05:55 PM
I was responding to you, because it seemed like you were refuting my post. In reality, you are agreeing, just in what I interpreted as an argumentative tone. My appologies.

It is exactly as you have stated, exactly as I have stated. RAW, a zombie can make a 5' step with all of the mechanical implications that go with it. Anything else is a house rule, which is perfectly valid, so long as you know it is a house rule and not RAW. A DM has the liberty to play with whatever rules he wants while house ruling any rules he doesn't want.

So, you agree that it is in the rules that a zombie can take a 5' step, but feel like a DM should step in and make a house rule that they can't or at least shouldn't. I feel the same way. *waves hand* this isn't the arguement you were looking for. :smallcool:

Baalthazaq
2010-10-13, 06:17 PM
I was responding to you, because it seemed like you were refuting my post. In reality, you are agreeing, just in what I interpreted as an argumentative tone. My appologies.

It is exactly as you have stated, exactly as I have stated. RAW, a zombie can make a 5' step with all of the mechanical implications that go with it. Anything else is a house rule, which is perfectly valid, so long as you know it is a house rule and not RAW. A DM has the liberty to play with whatever rules he wants while house ruling any rules he doesn't want.

So, you agree that it is in the rules that a zombie can take a 5' step, but feel like a DM should step in and make a house rule that they can't or at least shouldn't. I feel the same way. *waves hand* this isn't the arguement you were looking for. :smallcool:

*Grumble Grumble* I just put on my anti-flame armor and you have to go and be nice. Fine. Be that way. :P

(Although, trivially, I don't think it's a house rule as much as a DM style. If all my halflings stupidly charge colossal dragons, I've not created a rule, I just play them that way. Similarly with the Zombies acting intelligently vs like zombies vs like 28 days later zombies vs I am legend zombies, vs dawn of the dead zombies).

Zeofar
2010-10-13, 06:39 PM
(Although, trivially, I don't think it's a house rule as much as a DM style. If all my halflings stupidly charge colossal dragons, I've not created a rule, I just play them that way. Similarly with the Zombies acting intelligently vs like zombies vs like 28 days later zombies vs I am legend zombies, vs dawn of the dead zombies).

Yeah, I'd say this plays the most important role in determining if a 5-foot step is reasonable if you accept that it isn't by itself "tactical" or the mark of a highly intelligent being. Then it just comes down to the matter of whether or not the monster can use a 5-foot step tactically (or has any desire to do so).