[PF] Attacks of Opportunity: Which Resolves First?

[Mr. Zolrane]

Okay, here's the scenario:

Say my monk, who has Improved Disarm, but not Improved Trip, makes a 2-hit Flurry of Blows (he's only 3rd level) and the first attack is a successful disarm that deprives the enemy of his sword. The second is a trip attempt, successful or not, it provokes an attack of opportunity because I don't have Improved Trip. Thing is, he has no weapon, so he's making an unarmed strike (and assuming some random elven mook that's part of an enemy strike team doesn't have Improved Unarmed Strike, which, I think you'll agree, is a safe assumption) which ALSO provokes an attack of opportunity, at which point I choose to strike at him with my seven-branched sword:

My question, boiled down, is this:

When an action taken as an attack of opportunity provokes an AoO itself, which one resolves first? Does his unarmed strike resolve first, or my sword strike?

[AspectOfNihil]

Just on a tangent, he wouldn't be able to make the attack of opportunity if he was unarmed w/o imp unarmed strike. I believe the wording in the core rulebook is he doesn't threaten any squares when unarmed.

But on the order of AoOs, if he COULD get an AoO, your AoO would go before his, and his AoO would go after that, but before your trip attempt.

Hope this helps.

[Mr. Zolrane]

Just on a tangent, he wouldn't be able to make the attack of opportunity if he was unarmed w/o imp unarmed strike. I believe the wording in the core rulebook is he doesn't threaten any squares when unarmed.

But on the order of AoOs, if he COULD get an AoO, your AoO would go before his, and his AoO would go after that, but before your trip attempt.

Hope this helps.

You may be right about the threatening no squares without IUS; I never really cared to read the unarmed rules until I decided to play a monk.

But yeah, thanks. I thought it might be something like that; just thought I'd get some opinions.

[Koury]

AoOs resolve just before the events that trigger them. Action A occurs, followed by action B. Action B triggers an AoO, and an action taken in the AoO provokes another (AoO2). I believe it would look like this.

A
AoO2
AoO1
B

[panaikhan]

AoOs resolve just before the events that trigger them.

This is the one bit that slightly annoys me with AoO and trips.
By RAW, you get an AoO if someone tries to stand up (from a previous trip).
By RAW, this AoO can be a trip attack.
By RAW, this trip attack DOES NOTHING (because the target is already prone), and the opponent then simply stands up.

[Ossian]

This is the one bit that slightly annoys me with AoO and trips.
By RAW, you get an AoO if someone tries to stand up (from a previous trip).
By RAW, this AoO can be a trip attack.
By RAW, this trip attack DOES NOTHING (because the target is already prone), and the opponent then simply stands up.

You could houserul that the 2nd AoO if a trip simply hits the target a split second after he/she stands but before he/she gets a good footing. So there is the 2nd trip attack. That should make the subject fall back to the ground AND inflict unarmed damage. A-la-aikido or ju-jitsu. Maybe a daze, a stun, or a disarm effect if 2 trips are successful consecutively.

Used to be a pretty nifty combo in the original Mortal Kombat videogame if I recall well.

O.

[Jack Zander]

This is the one bit that slightly annoys me with AoO and trips.
By RAW, you get an AoO if someone tries to stand up (from a previous trip).
By RAW, this AoO can be a trip attack.
By RAW, this trip attack DOES NOTHING (because the target is already prone), and the opponent then simply stands up.

Then anyone half decent at tripping can completely lock out 1 (or more with combat reflexes) opponents with relative ease. Every melee character and their mom would use this trick, which is generally a sign that something is too powerful.

[Ravens_cry]

The way I understand most DM read it, RAW or no, the standing up AoO resolves before they actually stand up, so you can't trip them for trying to stand up as they are already on their ass.
It's still a pretty good lock down though.

[Medic!]

I believe it looks something like this:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/01/09/article-2084173-0F62BF8300000578-621_634x632.jpg

Side note, first pic I could find on the internet to fit the concept in a short time frame, I do not condone kicking girls in bikinis.

[Jeraa]

This is the one bit that slightly annoys me with AoO and trips.
By RAW, you get an AoO if someone tries to stand up (from a previous trip).
By RAW, this AoO can be a trip attack.
By RAW, this trip attack DOES NOTHING (because the target is already prone), and the opponent then simply stands up.

It prevents someone with a spiked chain and Combat Reflexes from keeping an entire party prone on the ground for an entire fight.

If an AoO occured after the action that caused it, then you could never disrupt spells. The casting would end (and the spell take effect) before you could strike. Nor could you disrupt anything at all, as the action would be completed before you got your attack.

[Mystify]

The attack occurs while they are prone specifically to counter infinite trip lockdowns. Its already quite an inconvenience to be tripped, you don't need to make it so they can never stand up again.