Two specific questions about Attacks of Opportunity

[supermonkeyjoe]

A situation arose in last nights game and I couldn't find any concrete answers to these questions;

1. If you provoke an AoO from moving out of a threatened square, does the attack happen in the first square or the square you move into?

2. If you provoke while moving out of a threatened square while being flanked, are you still flanked for the AoO?

3. If you move through multiple threatened squares, can the attacker chose which one they attack you in or does the only moving out of the first square provoke? Alternatively, can your opponent choose which squares they threaten with?

The situation arose when an enemy rather stupidly make a bee-line towards the squishy caster, right in between two rogues, the rogues wanted to wait until the enemy was in-between the two of them so they could get the flanking bonus and sneak attack damage, the DM ruled it was just a regular melee attack for each of them because the first threatened square the attacker moved through didn't provide them with a flanking bonus.

[Siosilvar]

1) and 2) Attacks of opportunity happen before the action that provoked them finishes (RC p19 or PHB p137) - "An attack of opportunity interrupts the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is taken, immediately resolve that attack of opportunity, then continue with whatever was happening when the attack of opportunity was provoked." So you'd still be in the first square and flanked.

3) "Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent" (RC p18 or PHB p138), so you have to take the AoO at the first opportunity or lose it.

EDIT: More applicably to your situation, you can't wait until your opponent gets flanked to take the AoO. The DM's ruling is correct.
I can't think of a way to get both rogues to get the flanking bonus, but you could get one of them if they were diagonally across from each other.

[Khedrac]

Just to confirm on 3:
Movement is a single action so moving out of multiple threatened squares of a single opponent in one action is one AoO, but since one is not required to take an AoO the one threatening can choose when to take it. Note, they don't know if you will keep moving or where to so by not taking immediately can cost the attacker their AoO. In practice when this arises one needs to move one square at a time, so the decision to AoO or not can be taken before gaining knowledge of the rest of the movement.

[Siosilvar]

Just to confirm on 3:
Movement is a single action so moving out of multiple threatened squares of a single opponent in one action is one AoO, but since one is not required to take an AoO the one threatening can choose when to take it. Note, they don't know if you will keep moving or where to so by not taking immediately can cost the attacker their AoO. In practice when this arises one needs to move one square at a time, so the decision to AoO or not can be taken before gaining knowledge of the rest of the movement.

You can choose whether or not to take it. You can't choose when - any move action provokes an AoO from another creature only once, the first time they attempt to leave a threatened square.

[Deophaun]

3) "Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent" (RC p18 or PHB p138), so you have to take the AoO at the first opportunity or lose it.
Is there another entry that's more to the point on that, as that quote by itself does not lead to that conclusion. All that quote says is that you can only get one AoO provoked by movement per round per target, not that you can only take your AoO on the first threatened square your opponent moves out of.

[Siosilvar]

Is there another entry that's more to the point on that, as that quote by itself does not lead to that conclusion. All that quote says is that you can only get one AoO provoked by movement per round per target, not that you can only take your AoO on the first threatened square your opponent moves out of.

It's still an opportunity whether you take it or not. You get one opportunity per creature per move round, and since every square moved provokes, only the first square per creature can provoke from that creature.

Move out of one square threatened by an opponent > provoke an attack from that opponent
Move out of another square threatened by the same opponent > don't provoke, since you can only provoke one attack per opponent per move round

[Deophaun]

It's still an opportunity whether you take it or not. You get one opportunity per creature per move, and since every square moved provokes, only the first square per creature can provoke from that creature.
First, what you're saying clearly isn't true by RAW. It's not based on moves. Here's an example to illustrate what RAW states:

Characters A, B, and C fight monster X.

-Monster X moves away from A to attack C, provoking an attack. A takes the attack.
-A's turn, A moves next to C and attacks X.
-B's turn, B bullrushes X to a square adjacent to A. C gets an AoO. By your reasoning, A could take an AoO, as this is a different action, even if he used an AoO on X's turn (assuming Combat Reflexes). However, by RAW, A cannot, as he already took an AoO from movement this round on X's turn.

Second, opportunity is not a well defined term. Is it short for AoO, is it coupled with "provoke," or is it a new term all together? To me, it doesn't make sense to say that A doesn't get the AoO on the bullrush because the monster moved past him previously in the round, even if he didn't take it then. But, that's required if I go by the interpretation that opportunity means "whenever the target provokes."

[Brock Samson]

Sorry SioSilver, I would have to disagree. Think about it, if you're huge and a human is running directly in front of you across several threatened squares, why would you not be able to choose to strike them when they're in fact closer to you than farther away, strategically you'd be more likely to hit them (I'm talking real world here).

[The Random NPC]

First, what you're saying clearly isn't true by RAW. It's not based on moves. Here's an example to illustrate what RAW states:

Characters A, B, and C fight monster X.

-Monster X moves away from A to attack C, provoking an attack. A takes the attack.
-A's turn, A moves next to C and attacks X.
-B's turn, B bullrushes X to a square adjacent to A. C gets an AoO. By your reasoning, A could take an AoO, as this is a different action, even if he used an AoO on X's turn (assuming Combat Reflexes). However, by RAW, A cannot, as he already took an AoO from movement this round on X's turn.

Second, opportunity is not a well defined term. Is it short for AoO, is it coupled with "provoke," or is it a new term all together? To me, it doesn't make sense to say that A doesn't get the AoO on the bullrush because the monster moved past him previously in the round, even if he didn't take it then. But, that's required if I go by the interpretation that opportunity means "whenever the target provokes."

The bullrush is a separate move, 1 AoO per character per move.

[Deophaun]

The bullrush is a separate move, 1 AoO per character per move.
That would be great if that's what the RC says. It doesn't. Re-quoting:

"Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent" (RC p18 or PHB p138)
You would be correct if it said "Using a move action to move out of more than one square threatened...," and functionally correct if it just replaced the word "round" with "turn."

[The Random NPC]

My apologies, I thought you were misinterpreting what Siosilvar said.

[Siosilvar]

First, what you're saying clearly isn't true by RAW. It's not based on moves.

Second, opportunity is not a well defined term. Is it short for AoO, is it coupled with "provoke," or is it a new term all together? To me, it doesn't make sense to say that A doesn't get the AoO on the bullrush because the monster moved past him previously in the round, even if he didn't take it then. But, that's required if I go by the interpretation that opportunity means "whenever the target provokes."

I'll give you the first one. Change all my uses of "move" to "round". But that's perpendicular to the point.

It might not be well-defined within the rules, but the word itself means "chance". You get one chance to take an AoO, and you don't have to take it. Does it make sense? Not particularly. I'd probably not enforce it if it came up in-game. But if I'm giving out RAW advice, I'm required to give the RAW as I see it, not as I would like it to be.

[Deophaun]

It might not be well-defined within the rules, but the word itself means "chance". You get one chance to take an AoO, and you don't have to take it.
But here's the thing: it only counts as one opportunity. It doesn't say where that opportunity must exist.

[Siosilvar]

But here's the thing: it only counts as one opportunity. It doesn't say where that opportunity must exist.

PHB 137. "Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes an attack of opportunity from the threatening opponent."

Unless you take a 5-foot step, the Withdraw action, Tumble, can't be seen by your opponent, or a handful of other things that stop you from taking AoOs, moving out of the first square provokes. That's where the opportunity exists.

[Deophaun]

PHB 137. "Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes an attack of opportunity from the threatening opponent."

Unless you take a 5-foot step, the Withdraw action, Tumble, can't be seen by your opponent, or a handful of other things that stop you from taking AoOs, moving out of the first square provokes. That's where the opportunity exists.
Still doesn't define "opportunity" at all. You are assuming that each square of movement produces a discrete unit of opportunity that vanishes at the next square. I'm saying that all movement in a round, together, is one big opportunity. The wording in the RC seems to support this view. If you have something else, and I am including developer commentary that may not be RAW but is indicative of RAI, please provide it.

EDIT:
Let's put this a different way and apply this to a monster.

Choose anything you want from the MMs, and we're going to make one change to it. The "Space/Reach" entry is listed as special. In the description, we give it an ex ability "Discorporate:" X exists as 2d4 seperate entities, each taking up 1 5ft square. However even though it has multiple entities it does not count as being more than one creature."

Would you interpret this to mean that only the first entity put down is the "real" creature, and none of the other entities can move, attack, or take damage? Or would you interpret this to mean that an attack can come from any one, and players can target whichever they want and do damage to the whole?

[Siosilvar]

Still doesn't define "opportunity" at all. You are assuming that each square of movement produces a discrete unit of opportunity that vanishes at the next square. I'm saying that all movement in a round, together, is one big opportunity. The wording in the RC seems to support this view. If you have something else, and I am including developer commentary that may not be RAW but is indicative of RAI, please provide it.

Yes, I am assuming that each square of movement produces a discrete opportunity. The wording in RC is the same as the PHB for the sections we're talking about, and the action that provokes an attack of opportunity is specifically "moving out of a threatened square". It has the additional restriction that "moving out of more than one square ... doesn't count as more than one opportunity ...," which would seem (to me, at least) to reinforce the idea that each square is a separate opportunity (or would be if that second rule wasn't there).

[Tar Palantir]

Note that you can choose not to take an AoO at one provoking opportunity in order to take one at another (such as if you know both A and B will leave your threatened area in the same round, you can let A leave unmolested to save your AoO for B). However, a given movement only provokes once from any single creature. I'm not certain as to the answer of the actual case under discussion. Sorry that I'm not more helpful.

[Deophaun]

Yes, I am assuming that each square of movement produces a discrete opportunity. The wording in RC is the same as the PHB for the sections we're talking about, and the action that provokes an attack of opportunity is specifically "moving out of a threatened square". It has the additional restriction that "moving out of more than one square ... doesn't count as more than one opportunity ...," which would seem (to me, at least) to reinforce the idea that each square is a separate opportunity (or would be if that second rule wasn't there).
But there's nothing that links the term "provoke" to "opportunity" on a one-to-one basis. And "moving out of more than one square... doesn't count as more than one opportunity" groups the ENTIRE sequence of movement into a single entity for the purposes of counting as an opportunity.

Just as I can move anywhere I want into a room, and still be within that one room, I can take my AoO anywhere within that opportunity, and still be within that one opportunity.

That said, though, I think we're just going to go round and round. So how 'bout we agree to disagree, and leave this with a "check with your DM" due to RAW ambiguity?

[Siosilvar]

EDIT:
Let's put this a different way and apply this to a monster.

Choose anything you want from the MMs, and we're going to make one change to it. The "Space/Reach" entry is listed as special. In the description, we give it an ex ability "Discorporate:" X exists as 2d4 seperate entities, each taking up 1 5ft square. However even though it has multiple entities it does not count as being more than one creature."

Would you interpret this to mean that only the first entity put down is the "real" creature, and none of the other entities can move, attack, or take damage? Or would you interpret this to mean that an attack can come from any one, and players can target whichever they want and do damage to the whole?

For starters, I'd call it a poorly-written monster for not specifying. But in the lack of anything specifying, it's one monster that exists in 2d4 different squares, so I'd use your second option there.

I don't see how that has any bearing on what we're discussing here.

However, looking at the Multiple Attacks of Opportunity section (in the RC), "opportunity" is used again. I think I see where your argument comes from, and it does seem to work nicely. Each square provokes, but since all the movement that round only counts as one opportunity, you can't take more than one AoO.

Then it goes on to say that "each provoking act represents a different opportunity", which would contradict that moving out of each square provokes an attack, and indicate that, as you say, all movement is one continuous opportunity.

I think "counts as one opportunity" is more specific, but I'm not sure which of use that would support.


But there's nothing that links the term "provoke" to "opportunity" on a one-to-one basis. And "moving out of more than one square... doesn't count as more than one opportunity" groups the ENTIRE sequence of movement into a single entity for the purposes of counting as an opportunity.

Just as I can move anywhere I want into a room, and still be within that one room, I can take my AoO anywhere within that opportunity, and still be within that one opportunity.

That said, though, I think we're just going to go round and round. So how 'bout we agree to disagree, and leave this with a "check with your DM" due to RAW ambiguity?

I made most of those observations while preparing this post [except that there is a "provoke" to "opportunity" one-to-one; see above]. Stop ninja'ing me. :smalltongue:

[whibla]

Raw is quite clear on the first two questions, and the third too if I'm honest though, in that case, it doesn't really make a huge amount of sense.

1. The attack happens immediately, before the move. (Otherwise we'd have to ask how a character with a 5' reach could attack an opponent who moved out the character's threatened square and is now 10' away).

2. Yes, if he was flanked when he started to move he'd be flanked for the AoO, since it happens 'before' the move.

As for the 3rd question, as I say, by RAW the DM was correct:

"If an AoO provoked, immediately resolve the AoO..."

"Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent."

3. If you do not take the AoO as the opponent tries to move out of the first threatened square you will not get another simply because he moves further through your threatened areas. Use it, or lose the opportunity.

While I agree that this is a harsh, and somewhat illogical, situation, that is what RAW says.


Yes, I am assuming that each square of movement produces a discrete opportunity.

This unfortunately, by RAW, is not the case.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

3. When you move through multiple threatened squares, you only provoke an AoO from a given opponent the first time you exit one of their threatened squares. It's not opponent-only-gets-one-AoO, it's you-only-provoke-once. Opponents cannot choose to not threaten a square.

[Siosilvar]

This unfortunately, by RAW, is not the case.

Well no, of course not, since you only provoke once per creature. Please read the context. I used that wording to represent the exact argument you're making. It's not 100% accurate, but it illustrates the point.

[Khedrac]

So to summarise all the above:

The point at which you can or cannot take an attack of opportunity if multiple threatened squares are left is a DM's call.

People may say "RAW clearly states X" - however since people are reading it two different ways (none of the above convinces me that you cannot hold off then change you mind as the movement progresses) then the one thing RAW here is not is "clear".

Now to make another point that my above makes irrelevant (oh well):
Consider charging a dragon when you don't have a reach weapon. The Bite attack (head ) has more reach than the other attacks. By the arguments for "first square only" the AoO would have to be taken with the bite as it is the ONLY attack that threatens the first square - this means that the dragon cannot contemptuously flick aside the charging opponent with it's tail or wings. It gets worse - if the dragon is currently grappling somone with it's bite attack then it can use any other attack!
Replace the dragon with a creature with a longer ranged attack that does less damage than its main attack - it now cannot take AoOs with the main attack...

One last comment - the Living Greyhawk campaign was full of "Rules Lawyers" as it was a RAW campaign (shared campaigns do that) though there were some adjustments (e.g. no nightsticks). Although I did not play it for that long I never heard of someone even suggesting that one could not hold off on the initial AoO for a movement but then decide to take it later in the move. People may have said this (they probably did) but it was not widely accepted enough to be known by anyone I played with where such situations came up.

[supermonkeyjoe]

So it seems that the initial ruling was right, I thought it might be, it just seems very strange that it's only the first threatened square that provokes.

This could lead to some strange loopholes, such as with the dragon's bite, or someone with a low damage reach attack and a high damage attack without reach could only make the AoO with their inferior attack and not wait until they could hit with the better one.

I don't suppose the rules support choosing not to threaten with a particular weapon anywhere?