AoO, ToB Maneuvers and Snap Kick, oh my!

[Dusk Eclipse]

This are just some questions that arose when I was brainstorming about a character.


1) How does wall of blades interacts with Robilar's Gambit? For example let's say a Warblade activates Robilar's Gambit and has Wall of Blades readied, enemy mook swings at the warblade, who uses wall of blades to avoid the attack, would the Warblade be rewarded with the Robilar's gambit AoO because the enemy attacked? By my reading yes; but I want to be sure.

2) How does Snap Kick interacts with Dancing/Raging Mongoose? let's say a Swordsage with one two main hand attacks one off-hand attack and snap kicks initiate dancing mongoose (giving him an extra attack per weapon held) and wielding a dagger in each hand. Then he would have his three main hand attacks (one extra due DM), then two off-hand attacks (again one extra due DM), he also adds his snap kick. Now my questions is would D/R M add another snap kick? I mean the swordsage is "wielding" his unarmed attack.

3) How would snap kick interact with Improved Trip's extra attack? Ok, let's say you get an AoO due any reason, you do a normal AoO and then use your snap kick, would you be able to use the snap kick to initiate the trip attempt?

3b) Assuming you could use snap kick to trip and you manage to trip the enemy, could you use snap kick again (due the free attack given by improved trip)?

I know these are some complex questions, and I would really appreciate if someone could help to clear these issues.

[Moriato]

This are just some questions that arose when I was brainstorming about a character.


1) How does wall of blades interacts with Robilar's Gambit? For example let's say a Warblade activates Robilar's Gambit and has Wall of Blades readied, enemy mook swings at the warblade, who uses wall of blades to avoid the attack, would the Warblade be rewarded with the Robilar's gambit AoO because the enemy attacked? By my reading yes; but I want to be sure.


Readied actions happen slightly before the thing that triggers them. You wouldn't get an AoO in this case because you'd be preventing the attack from ever happening. No attack, no AoO

[The Dark Fiddler]

Readied actions happen slightly before the thing that triggers them. You wouldn't get an AoO in this case because you'd be preventing the attack from ever happening. No attack, no AoO

Wall of Blades, if I'm remembering correctly, just changes your AC. I'm not familiar with Robilar's Gambit, but if missing normally would still allow the AoO, then I don't see why you wouldn't get it with the counter.

[Tael]

Readied actions happen slightly before the thing that triggers them. You wouldn't get an AoO in this case because you'd be preventing the attack from ever happening. No attack, no AoO

How do you figure that? Wall of Blade doesn't prevent him from attacking, it just makes him miss.

So, #1 yes, #2 DM explicitly says max 2 attacks, #3 yes.

[Moriato]

I'm not that familiar with wall of blades, I assumed that "avoid the attack" meant they were preventing the attack or moving out of the way of it somehow. If it just ups your AC that's fine. If an attack is made you get your AoO, if the attack is prevented you wouldn't.

[NNescio]

I'm not that familiar with wall of blades, I assumed that "avoid the attack" meant they were preventing the attack or moving out of the way of it somehow. If it just ups your AC that's fine. If an attack is made you get your AoO, if the attack is prevented you wouldn't.

Wall of Blades is a 'parrying' manoeuvre. As an immediate action, the initiator uses his weapon to block an incoming attack by performing an attack roll. His effective AC against that particular attack is either his attack roll or his actual AC, whichever is higher.

[Fax Celestis]

Snap Kick says "When you make a melee attack with one or more melee weapons (including a standard attack, full attack, or even a strike maneuver), you can make an additional attack at your highest attack bonus." An attack of opportunity is "a single melee attack."

Basically, Snap Kick says "any time you stab, slap, slam, shank, spear, or skewer someone, you can also kick them in the danglies." Since its an untyped penalty, multiple uses inflict multiple, stacking penalties, but you can use it as much as you like, at a maximum of once per action. However, its always an attack that deals damage. You can't use it to initiate a trip, but since tripping is an attack, you can use it as a follow up on a trip attempt.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Wow, so many replies, this is why I love the multiquote button. :smallsmile:


Readied actions happen slightly before the thing that triggers them. You wouldn't get an AoO in this case because you'd be preventing the attack from ever happening. No attack, no AoO

Well, I intended to answer this thread sooner; but anything I could reply has now been rendered obsolete due other poster's posts.


Wall of Blades, if I'm remembering correctly, just changes your AC. I'm not familiar with Robilar's Gambit, but if missing normally would still allow the AoO, then I don't see why you wouldn't get it with the counter.

That is a +1 for WoB+RG combo


How do you figure that? Wall of Blade doesn't prevent him from attacking, it just makes him miss.

So, #1 yes, #2 DM explicitly says max 2 attacks, #3 yes.

That is what happens when I don't check the exact wording of the maneuvers..


Wall of Blades is a 'parrying' manoeuvre. As an immediate action, the initiator uses his weapon to block an incoming attack by performing an attack roll. His effective AC against that particular attack is either his attack roll or his actual AC, whichever is higher.

And this is the post that rendered my original answer obsolete; but thanks.


Snap Kick says "When you make a melee attack with one or more melee weapons (including a standard attack, full attack, or even a strike maneuver), you can make an additional attack at your highest attack bonus." An attack of opportunity is "a single melee attack."

Basically, Snap Kick says "any time you stab, slap, slam, shank, spear, or skewer someone, you can also kick them in the danglies." Since its an untyped penalty, multiple uses inflict multiple, stacking penalties, but you can use it as much as you like, at a maximum of once per action. However, its always an attack that deals damage. You can't use it to initiate a trip, but since tripping is an attack, you can use it as a follow up on a trip attempt.

Hmm well that does put a damper on my AoO, tripping machine; but I think I can still make it work... man this thing is going to be even more feat-starved than a normal tripper build.

Thanks for all the answers guys.

[faceroll]

If you plan on using strikes and trips, try out knockdown. Anytime you do 10 or more damage, you get a free trip attack. This means you can combine a trip attempt with strikes and snap kicks. Should you succeed in tripping, you also get the follow up attack from improved trip.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Doesn't knockback need large size or bigger? Well guess I could ask to play a half-minotaur human or most probably a Goliath.

[Reynard]

Doesn't knockback need large size or bigger? Well guess I could ask to play a half-minotaur human or most probably a Goliath.

-Down, not -back.

[Veyr]

Since its an untyped penalty, multiple uses inflict multiple, stacking penalties, but you can use it as much as you like, at a maximum of once per action.
Bonuses and penalties, even untyped bonuses and penalties, don't stack if they're from the same source. This is incorrect.


However, its always an attack that deals damage.
Oh wow, I would never rule that way. Yes, Snap Kick says that the attack deals such-and-such damage (hey, you get the 1.5xStr damage on a unarmed strike, nice! never noticed that), but I'd unhesitatingly rule that to be descriptive, not proscriptive. It's still a melee attack, you can still use it like one, I think.

[Fax Celestis]

Bonuses and penalties, even untyped bonuses and penalties, don't stack if they're from the same source. This is incorrect.

The SRD disagrees with you.


Stacking

In most cases, modifiers to a given check or roll stack (combine for a cumulative effect) if they come from different sources and have different types (or no type at all), but do not stack if they have the same type or come from the same source (such as the same spell cast twice in succession). If the modifiers to a particular roll do not stack, only the best bonus and worst penalty applies. Dodge bonuses and circumstance bonuses however, do stack with one another unless otherwise specified.

And, the clearer Rules Compendium text:


STACKING
Bonuses of different types always stack. Bonuses that have identical types don’t stack, except for dodge bonuses and some circumstance bonuses. Untyped bonuses stack unless the bonuses come from the same effect.

Penalties aren’t usually typed, but identical types of penalties don’t stack. In this latter case, the worst penalty applies.

In other words, penalties always stack unless they are typed.

[Keld Denar]

Although...Ray of Enfeeblement gives an untyped penalty to Str, but explicitly doesn't stack with itself. That would be multiple untyped penalties that don't stack with each other.

Then again, that might fall under the Combining Magical Effects clause of the Magic Overview section...

[Veyr]

Your quote from Rules Compendium says that "Untyped bonuses stack unless the bonuses come from the same effect." Penalties are just negative bonuses; it's ridiculous to treat them differently. Can you name any other case where they are treated differently?

[Fax Celestis]

Although...Ray of Enfeeblement gives an untyped penalty to Str, but explicitly doesn't stack with itself. That would be multiple untyped penalties that don't stack with each other.

Then again, that might fall under the Combining Magical Effects clause of the Magic Overview section...

Ray of enfeeblement explicitly calls itself out as an exception.


Your quote from Rules Compendium says that "Untyped bonuses stack unless the bonuses come from the same effect." Penalties are just negative bonuses; it's ridiculous to treat them differently. Can you name any other case where they are treated differently?

My quote says "Penalties aren’t usually typed, but identical types of penalties don’t stack." An untyped penalty has no type and therefore does not have a 'doesn't stack' clause at all.

[Veyr]

unless the bonuses come from the same effect.
Emphasis mine. You completely ignored my post. You need to convince me that there's a good reason to treat penalties as somehow "not bonuses" for the purpose of that rule, and the only way you're going to do that is show precedent for treating the two differently.

[Fax Celestis]

Emphasis mine. You completely ignored my post. You need to convince me that there's a good reason to treat penalties as somehow "not bonuses" for the purpose of that rule, and the only way you're going to do that is show precedent for treating the two differently.

Size increase penalties to Dexterity, penalties to AC, and penalties to attack rolls. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#sizeIncreases)

[Veyr]

Those are not modifiers (bonuses or penalties), but outright changes to the monster's statistics. Not even remotely the same thing.

[Fax Celestis]

So tell me why they have to explicitly define that multiple applications of a hexblade's curse don't stack?

[Curmudgeon]

So tell me why they have to explicitly define that multiple applications of a hexblade's curse don't stack?
They didn't have to say so, but since Hexblade was the first new base class in the first 3.5 supplement, some of the authors were new to the D&D rules, too. It's just a reminder ─ as much to the authors as to the readers.