Grapple and AoO vs creature with no reach.

[RCgothic]

In a recent game, my lvl 1 fighter came across an unawares imp, and attempted to grapple it. I took damage from an AoO and the attempt failed.

So firstly, as it was unawares should it even have got an AoO, and secondly as it wasn't threatening the square i was in, should it have been denied AoO on that basis as well?

[tyckspoon]

If you were initiating a combat on it and it had not yet acted (as in you were trying to grapple it in a surprise round or won initiative on it, which sounds roughly like what happened) then it would be Flat-Footed, which does indeed prevent making Attacks of Opportunity as well as Immediate actions.

Grapples, reach, and the AoO related to them are.. a bit weird. Strictly by RAW, not having enough reach to hit your grappler's square would prevent that defensive AoO; you can only AoO into squares you threaten, and with reach 0 you only threaten your own square. However, grappling explicitly requires you to reach into and, should you be successful, move into your opponents square with your own limbs. So it's fairly likely and defensible for a DM to look at the RAW regarding those AoO and disregard them, on a rational along the lines of "you're shoving your hand into its face to try and grab hold of it, of course it can reach you to make an attack."

[RCgothic]

Moving into the target's space is on the subsequent round and specifically doesn't provoke. Am so going to take improved grapple at some point!

[TheLooker]

You should totally have gotten away with it. As he was unaware, he gets no AoO, thus allowing you your grapple.

[Greenish]

If you were initiating a combat on it and it had not yet acted (as in you were trying to grapple it in a surprise round or won initiative on it, which sounds roughly like what happened) then it would be Flat-Footed, which does indeed prevent making Attacks of Opportunity as well as Immediate actions.Unless it had Combat Reflexes, but that's not a default feat for imps.