readying attack melee vs melee

[Mechanize]

I don't know the RAW rules with this very well.

How would you guys handle someone who readies a melee attack vs another melee attacker?

The readier did enough damage to kill the attacker but I played it out that both got their attacks in at the same time. It feels like a semi cheesey situation where the readier can just stand around and kill anything charging at him. If he had a reach weapon I know he would get the AoO and that make sense, but 2 similar reach weapons... not sure.

I know from a fighting perspective (I teach MMA) that to stop hit someone mid attack takes a butt load of experience. You have to really be able to read your opponent, and it typically only works when you throw out a quick jab and hes throwing a big haymaker. Its not something as simple as "i'm faster, I hit you first" (initiative)

I could see readying against melee and interrupting the attack being a feat that someone needs to learn... or hell, 2 feats, because its that hard.

What are the rules, and what are your opinions?

[tyckspoon]

Rules wise? It's pretty clear- Readied actions preempt the trigger.


Then, any time before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action.

If you ready against somebody else's attack, yours happens first. If you kill him with your readied attack, you have rendered him incapable of attacking you, and so his attack does not happen. (Note that this is probably mostly a low-level situation- it gets difficult to do enough damage to drop an opponent with a single readied blow once HP totals get higher, because most of the damage increases that allow hits that big won't apply to that kind of attack.)

From an actual combat perspective.. D&D's combat system takes an event that is very fluid, changes moment to moment, and relies entirely on the interplay of actions between 2 or more individuals, and turns it into discrete actions where everybody gets their own personal slice of time to do six seconds worth of stuff without interacting with anybody or anything else (who are nonetheless somehow also *simultaneously* performing their own personal six-second blocks of action.) If you're going to start worrying about how D&D turns don't map to real fighting, you very quickly find you have to houserule in an entirely new combat engine. So either start looking for one, or learn to let it go.

[Mechanize]

Isn't it in the rules that you can ready a 5ft step coupled with your ready action? so then what stops the readier from readying a 5ft step + attack, effectively making himself unhittable by the attacker?

That is if I am correct about the rules lol. I thought that is what I remember reading.

Yeah, I just found it on SRD... "You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don’t otherwise move any distance during the round."

Sooo RAW, readier readies a backward 5ft step plus an attack on an oncomming attacker. Kill him or not, the readier hits first, and steps out of range. Attacker never gets to touch him.

[Darius Kane]

Yes, you can take a 5-ft. step as part of the readied action if you didn't move any distance in that round.

[Ardantis]

Having fenced back in college, this reminds me of a few things about fighting-

1) Turn-based combat is actually a lot like right-of-way in fencing. Someone is always "on attack" and the other is defending.

2) "Stop-hits," or striking the opponent while you are "on defense" is a legitimate tactic, and is very feasible with a sabre (or other weapon with reach). Much easier than with an unarmed strike.

3) HOWEVER, by right-of-way rules, if the person "on attack" launches an attack after the stop-hit AND STILL HITS, the person "on attack" gets the point.

I've scored several points by stop-hit, but only when the person "on attack" flubs their attack or is parried by you (which is hard).

DnD replicates this (sort of), and late game it's true, readied actions don't do very much damage, but early game it's sort of ridiculous.

That being said, a few weeks ago I was all hyped up from playing with a toy sword. A friend took a swing at me with his fist, and I caught it in mid-air. Didn't know I could do that, and totally get why it's so difficult.

[Mechanize]

Having fenced back in college, this reminds me of a few things about fighting-

1) Turn-based combat is actually a lot like right-of-way in fencing. Someone is always "on attack" and the other is defending.

2) "Stop-hits," or striking the opponent while you are "on defense" is a legitimate tactic, and is very feasible with a sabre (or other weapon with reach). Much easier than with an unarmed strike.

3) HOWEVER, by right-of-way rules, if the person "on attack" launches an attack after the stop-hit AND STILL HITS, the person "on attack" gets the point.

I've scored several points by stop-hit, but only when the person "on attack" flubs their attack or is parried by you (which is hard).

DnD replicates this (sort of), and late game it's true, readied actions don't do very much damage, but early game it's sort of ridiculous.

That being said, a few weeks ago I was all hyped up from playing with a toy sword. A friend took a swing at me with his fist, and I caught it in mid-air. Didn't know I could do that, and totally get why it's so difficult.

yeah I was going to bring up fencing, it's an amazing sword style that uses stop hitting and foot work like mentioned in my situation. BUT, this dude was swinging a great axe lol. As I mentioned, stop hitting is a technique of speed and precision, done usually with hands, very light long weapons (sabre), or even longer weapons, (spear). Pulling off this stop hitting ability with a large weapon is just rediculous... not to mention the fact that if you want to 5ft away out of reach after readied action, then the attacker never gets to hit you. That rule is broken imo...

I'm actually play testing D&D next at the moment and they got rid of the 5ft step. So happy to see that lol. The edition is looking quite promising so far.

[Fitz10019]

...You have to really be able to read your opponent...
I could see readying against melee and interrupting the attack being a feat that someone needs to learn... or hell, 2 feats, because its that hard...

Readying an action is dedicating your turn to reading your opponent for one specific action. You may not know him well, but you are not reading him generally to prepare for anything, you are prepared for one specific action. If you fail to correctly guess what his next move is, your turn is wasted.

As a rule of thumb, changing rules to simulate your real world martial experience does not improve the game, unless your whole group has the same experience and agrees with the changes.

[Mechanize]

And what about the rule that says you can ready an attack and 5ft step? Allowing the readier to attack and retreat out of range before the attacker can get his hit in? How does that rule make the game better?

[Garagos]

The person who triggered the readied action should still get to finish their turn after the readied action takes place. So if the readied person attacks once and 5 foot steps back the trigger person should get to finish his charge or whatever unless he's out of movement for his round. A readied action should completely negate the other persons original intention unless the readied action kills him or does something other than straight damage (tripped, disarmed, grappled, hold person spell, etc).

[Darius Kane]

And what about the rule that says you can ready an attack and 5ft step? Allowing the readier to attack and retreat out of range before the attacker can get his hit in? How does that rule make the game better?
You sacrifice your standard action to ready an action. And you still have to choose a condition on which the readied action is triggered, which doesn't have to necessarily be met.
How does that rule make the game better? I dunno. For one player it makes the game better, for another player it makes the game worse. For me it is meh.

[Slipperychicken]

You hit the guy before his initiative count, resolving the attack as normal. On his initiative, he may attack (and/or take other actions) as normal, provided he survived your attack.


There's a shield bash maneuver that does what you're looking for. AFAIK, it's in the Devoted Spirit discipline.

[Person_Man]

Yes, it works. And it can sometimes be a very good idea to use when you're fighting a lone "boss" enemy, especially if you have a standard action spell or maneuver or soulmeld or power or vestige.

By waiting until just before your target acts, you can sometimes "spoil" their action, if your readied action includes a Disarm, Stun, Bull Rush, or various other debuffs.

[Mechanize]

I suppose part of it is not too bad, it gives initiative a much greater weight. However I still don't think I would allow players to ready 5ft step/attack then avoid an incoming attack. If their attack didn't disrupt (kill, disarm, trip, etc) then they are still getting hit. Otherwise it feels like a cheese fest.

Part of me thinks this should be a dexterity based feat.

In D&D Next they classify some weapons as finesse weapons, you automatically get to add dex to hit with them rather than needing a feat (makes sense) and I could easily see these weapons pulling off the interrupt attack. However huge 10-15lb weapons interrupting attacks is sort of absurd.

[Axier]

The reason why I don't see a problem with adding a 5ft step to a readied action would be that A) you aren't moving that turn any more than that one 5ft step, and B) you are taking the chance that the opponent isn't going to try to hit you at close range.

Although, I have thought of a way to diminish the fact that you aren't allowed to move, and use my move action for a Cloak Dance for free concealment.

[Douglas]

The readied action attack+5' step usually doesn't work. Unless the attacker is already at his maximum movement, his reaction to the move is simply... move 5 more feet than originally planned and then complete the attack. Without a special circumstance preventing that, the readied attack isn't going to prevent the other guy's attack unless it does enough damage to drop him.

[Axier]

The readied action attack+5' step usually doesn't work. Unless the attacker is already at his maximum movement, his reaction to the move is simply... move 5 more feet than originally planned and then complete the attack. Without a special circumstance preventing that, the readied attack isn't going to prevent the other guy's attack unless it does enough damage to drop him.

Just because your target moves just before your attack doesn't mean you didn't attack. You missed your target. The readied action takes place BEFORE the trigger, but you can't just recall the action that triggered it, other wise the trigger didn't happen and then the readied action can't be triggered. It creates a paradox.

Long story short, the attack missed because there was no target in the space, but you don't just get new attacks because that one missed.

[ericgrau]

The ambiguity is whether he must continue the action he hasn't done yet but was about to do. Maybe readied actions aren't worded very well and you could rule it that way, but then 1v1 duels will consist of people staring really hard at eachother until the other acts. Or ranged weapons. Did you bring a bow Inigo Montoya?

In the case of overrun for example it lets you act like the overrun never happened if the foe lets you by, rather than saying haha you just wasted your standard on nothing.

I'm not saying RAW isn't implying what you're saying but it isn't 100% certain and it would make a complete mess if that's true.

EDIT @ V: Likewise I would rule that he doesn't get an attack if he moved more than his movement speed on the charge. Otherwise IMO he blew his move action and he still has a standard.

Other than that there's nothing wrong with readying an action to get the first hit without receiving a full attack in reply. If you can predict that an enemy will engage you and want to use some strategy, then good for you.

[jmelesky]

If you kill him with your readied attack, you have rendered him incapable of attacking you, and so his attack does not happen. (Note that this is probably mostly a low-level situation- it gets difficult to do enough damage to drop an opponent with a single readied blow once HP totals get higher, because most of the damage increases that allow hits that big won't apply to that kind of attack.)

Killing, true. However, readying an attack in expectation of a charge, and then using the readied attack to trip the charger is an all-level example of a readied action completely short-circuiting an opponent's turn.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I suppose part of it is not too bad, it gives initiative a much greater weight. However I still don't think I would allow players to ready 5ft step/attack then avoid an incoming attack. If their attack didn't disrupt (kill, disarm, trip, etc) then they are still getting hit. Otherwise it feels like a cheese fest.

Part of me thinks this should be a dexterity based feat.

In D&D Next they classify some weapons as finesse weapons, you automatically get to add dex to hit with them rather than needing a feat (makes sense) and I could easily see these weapons pulling off the interrupt attack. However huge 10-15lb weapons interrupting attacks is sort of absurd.

It all depends on the phrasing for the trigger event and whether the DM rules that its okay or too specific/not specific enough.

You can ready an action to make a single attack then 5ft step away

A) "when that enemy attacks,"
B) "when that enemy charges,"
C) "when that enemy approaches."

A gets the intended result if the enemy charge results in a charge attack, but not if it's a charging bullrush.

C doesn't interupt the attack because the enemy can simply move that extra 5ft and finish his action

B could be ruled as not specific enough for the readied action stated.

Alternately, the DM can rule that either A or C is too specific, allowing him to decide which part of the charge you react to. All he's got to do is rule that you take your readied action on the approach and the enemy continues his charge making your 5ft step useless.

In any case, it'll only work twice. Then the enemy wises up and chucks a few 2gp daggers at your head until you get close enough to attack. Provided you can actually catch him trying to charge at you more than once.

This particular readied action is near worthless against an enemy already in melee with you, since it'll only ruin his first attack (he just takes a 5ft step to close the gap then completes his full attack), and you're not making full attacks in return.

It's a good way to disrupt charges if the DM interprets the rule favorably, but that's about it.

[Susano-wo]

You don't attack a space, you attack an opponent. if the trigger of "when he attacks" is triggered, then he must be attacking you, and if you get your readied attack, he gets his attack.

The balancing point of readied actions is just what everyone else has already said--you don't get to do anything *during* your turn, and the trigger does not always present itself.

and really, you can't make a lot of 'but in RL' timing arguments fora round based combat system. :P

[TuggyNE]

You don't attack a space, you attack an opponent. if the trigger of "when he attacks" is triggered, then he must be attacking you, and if you get your readied attack, he gets his attack.

That's not exactly true. A readied action interrupts the trigger; as such, it is possible for a readied action to cause the triggering action to fail*. Triggering on attacks are not, in principle, any exception. However, the difficulty of making this useful has already been rather thoroughly outlined.

*Otherwise, there would be no point in readying attacks to interrupt casting.

[Eldebryn]

You don't attack a space, you attack an opponent.

Isn't that exactly what you do when you attack an "empty" space while guessing the location of an invisible opponent..?

[Fitz10019]

If you need a houserule, here's a suggestion: the 5' may only occur before (to enable) the readied action, as in, "I ready to move up to 5' and then [do this] when that enemy [does that]." The 5' step should support the action (an attack), not be a separate act (retreating after attacking). [I'm fine with the rules as they are, this is just a suggestion for those who don't like the existing rule.]

In PvP sparring, I once readied an action to '5 step inside the non-threatened zone of someone with a reach weapon (a glaive, IRCC). He came up to me to attack, but I used my '5 step to move in and attacked him with a sickle before he could attack me. The DM allowed him to continue his movement so I would then be in his threatened zone, and I got an AoO as he took that added movement. I readied again and again, and therefore got two attacks for every one of my opponent's. He still pummeled me with superior strength and better damage output, but it was fun to use that strategy.

[Axier]

You don't attack a space, you attack an opponent. if the trigger of "when he attacks" is triggered, then he must be attacking you, and if you get your readied attack, he gets his attack.

The balancing point of readied actions is just what everyone else has already said--you don't get to do anything *during* your turn, and the trigger does not always present itself.

and really, you can't make a lot of 'but in RL' timing arguments fora round based combat system. :P

The attack triggers your response, your response is to move out of the way of the attack after scoring your hit. You move before the hit, but he attacked YOU.

Do you play Magic? If your response to someone's creature burning your creature with an activated ability, and you play an instant to return your creature to your hand (Moving it in essence), the target your opponent was trying to hit is not in the same space, but it doesn't just untap and gain another "attack", it has lost its attack by missing.

Basically, you swing, they move, you attacked, you missed.

Also, you can attack spaces. Especially with splash weapons.

[RFLS]

Hrm...this discussion has me wanting to throw a spiked chain tripper at my group, using a Swordsage with Setting Sun, Shadow Hand, and Dancing Leaf (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85614) maneuvers. I suppose I could be nice and make it Guisarme and Locked Gauntlet.

[Mechanize]

To those of you saying that the attacker can still finish, move 1 more space and continue his attack... Following that train of thought a caster after being interrupted can just retry the casting of his spell, since it "never happened."

The way the rules are set up really sounds like it stuffs the attack outright. The attacker spent his standard action and lost it. In doing so, he also broke his move up... move 5 spaces, attack, he can't move again if he already moved. When it comes to full round attack, you stopped 1 of the attacks, but if he already 5ft step to do a full round attack, and you interrupt the first and 5ft away, you again effectively broke his entire barrage. And, will continue to do so round after round. IF he keeps falling for the trap, I get it, but I feel this is broken when fighting unintelligent creatures unless the DM cheats and doesn't role play them as intended

[Fitz10019]

The rules specifically say that an attack during spellcasting can disrupt the spell, and that spell is lost. The rules do not say that an attack during an attack disrupts the attack. If the readier's attack does not kill the opponent, the opponent still makes his attack.

The other factor to consider is a readied action is only an action, not a full attack. The value of the readied action decreases compared to a full attack once the characters get multiple attacks per round (+6/+1, two-weapon fighting, etc.).

Without changing rules, you could ask the readier to be specific about what he is readying against. If he readies for a melee damage attack using the greatsword, then his readied action will not be triggered when the opponent switches to a dagger, or attempts a disarm, or a trip, or a grapple. The opponent could also feint.

If you want to change rules, you could require the same detail, and make the readier flat-footed against other attacks. In my opinion, that is better than requiring a feat to ready an attack.

[Mechanize]

The rules specifically say that an attack during spellcasting can disrupt the spell, and that spell is lost. The rules do not say that an attack during an attack disrupts the attack. If the readier's attack does not kill the opponent, the opponent still makes his attack.


Touche. :smallbiggrin:

[Curmudgeon]

The rules specifically say that an attack during spellcasting can disrupt the spell, and that spell is lost. The rules do not say that an attack during an attack disrupts the attack. If the readier's attack does not kill the opponent, the opponent still makes his attack.
That's more constraining than the actual rule. After the interruption, the opponent continues their turn and can do whatever the rules permit at that point; their intended action never happened, and they can do something else if they want. That allows them to respond to the readied action after it happens.

[Togo]

That's more constraining than the actual rule. After the interruption, the opponent continues their turn and can do whatever the rules permit at that point; their intended action never happened, and they can do something else if they want. That allows them to respond to the readied action after it happens.

Precisely. The readied action happens before the trigger, not during. If the readied action changes the situation, the other guy is free to carry on his turn taking whatever actions he desires. Spellcasting, as discussed, is a special case.

The problems with ruling otherwise are quite extensive. Negating someone's actions becomes fantasically easy, because you're allowing someone to act during someone else's action but still going before them next turn, so you can spoiler them forever.

Picture a fighter against 8 tumbling goblins. They win initiative, and move to surround him, reading an action to tumble out of the way if he attacks. He can't move, and if he attacks, they tumble out of the way and then, in their initiative, move back and ready the same action.

The key point is that readying an action takes place before the other person acts, not during. Don't blur the line between acting before someone's action and acting during it, and the problems largely disappear.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

There are no takesies-backsies, if you declare you're moving or charging and someone else used a readied action to put an obstacle in your way (Prismatic Wall, etc.) then you're committed to completing that movement and you're going to go through that obstacle. Charging works much the same way, you can ready an action to cast Grease in front of someone charging, or just use the immediate action activation of the Earth Devotion feat, and the charge is not only automatically ruined (per having a clear, unhindered path) but they're forced to make a balance check for the difficult terrain and risk falling prone.

Using a readied action to strike a charging opponent and then 5-foot step out of their current reach and slightly to the side will also ruin the charge. If you're no longer standing directly in line with the path of their charge, then they haven't fulfilled the criteria to allow them to complete it, barring some special ability which allows them to change direction when charging (Twisted Charge skill trick, Psionic Charge feat). They can't change their mind, they've already spent a full-round action performing the charge, and if their circumstances no longer fall within the limitations of being able to charge, including moving directly toward their intended target, they can't complete it and don't have any more actions that round.

[Kelb_Panthera]

There are no takesies-backsies, if you declare you're moving or charging and someone else used a readied action to put an obstacle in your way (Prismatic Wall, etc.) then you're committed to completing that movement and you're going to go through that obstacle. Charging works much the same way, you can ready an action to cast Grease in front of someone charging, or just use the immediate action activation of the Earth Devotion feat, and the charge is not only automatically ruined (per having a clear, unhindered path) but they're forced to make a balance check for the difficult terrain and risk falling prone.

Using a readied action to strike a charging opponent and then 5-foot step out of their current reach and slightly to the side will also ruin the charge. If you're no longer standing directly in line with the path of their charge, then they haven't fulfilled the criteria to allow them to complete it, barring some special ability which allows them to change direction when charging (Twisted Charge skill trick, Psionic Charge feat). They can't change their mind, they've already spent a full-round action performing the charge, and if their circumstances no longer fall within the limitations of being able to charge, including moving directly toward their intended target, they can't complete it and don't have any more actions that round.

I'd rule that a 5ft step can't really get you out of the reach of a charge anyway, providing your phrasing allows the attacker to continue his charge. If I was feeling generous I might nix the charge bonus, but the attack is still coming, since you can't actually get out of reach unless you're using a reach weapon and he's not.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

I'd rule that a 5ft step can't really get you out of the reach of a charge anyway, providing your phrasing allows the attacker to continue his charge. If I was feeling generous I might nix the charge bonus, but the attack is still coming, since you can't actually get out of reach unless you're using a reach weapon and he's not.

"You must move at least 10 feet .... directly toward the designated opponent." If he's no longer moving directly toward the opponent, it's no longer a charge. If it's no longer a charge, then the attacker has no more actions remaining to do a regular attack instead, as he's already spent a full-round action to attempt the charge.

[Invader]

The problem with the 5ft step after your readied attack is that you're not really able to complete your attack and move before your opponents attack finishes.

Your readied attack doesn't trigger until the prerequisite is met, in this case your readied attack goes off when your opponent starts a melee attack. I'd say in this case your attack goes off first and strikes first but it's not realistic that you'd also be able to move a whole 5 feet in the fraction of a second that it takes your opponent to finish swinging his weapon.

[Susano-wo]

The attack triggers your response, your response is to move out of the way of the attack after scoring your hit. You move before the hit, but he attacked YOU.

Do you play Magic? If your response to someone's creature burning your creature with an activated ability, and you play an instant to return your creature to your hand (Moving it in essence), the target your opponent was trying to hit is not in the same space, but it doesn't just untap and gain another "attack", it has lost its attack by missing.

Basically, you swing, they move, you attacked, you missed.

Also, you can attack spaces. Especially with splash weapons.

OBJECTION! yes, I play Magic (when I can find an opponent :P), but that situation only applies to Magic timing rules. it doesn't have any bearing on Dnd.

But Curmudgeon and Togo have put it well. the interruption happens before the attack, not during. Now, in the case of charging you are still committed to your charge [since you began that before the readied action], but you can still move any additional spaces [provided you have movement] because your charge hasn't finished.

RE: 'you are no longer moving toward your opponent'..you still would be. there are only three spaces that would move you out of the chargers reach[ ok five on a diagonal]..and all of them can be reached by the same straight line you have already been traveling in.

[Curmudgeon]

There are no takesies-backsies, if you declare you're moving or charging and someone else used a readied action to put an obstacle in your way (Prismatic Wall, etc.) then you're committed to completing that movement and you're going to go through that obstacle.
There are very few cases in the D&D rules which use declared actions. The Stunning Fist and Power Attack feats are examples where declarations are required. Most everything else definitely does allow "takesies-backsies". Requiring you to map out everything you're going to do for the next 6 seconds, regardless of what happens in that time, is definitely a house rule; it's not D&D RAW.

[Fitz10019]

... if you declare you're moving or charging

Charging is a full-round action, so it shouldn't be lumped in with a move + standard action.

I would think starting anything that's a full-round action is kind of the no-backsies situation that Biffoniacus_Furiou is referring to, and that Curmudgeon is implies is not common. By starting, I mean moving for your charge, or taking the first shot of your Rapid Shot.

Side question: at what point of a charge does your -2 AC attach? at what point do you become a tad reckless?

[Novawurmson]

For PF, just realized that Vital Strike is a standard action, and thus is viable for a readied action. Vital Strike (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/vital-strike-combat---final)+brace (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons#wpn-quality-brace) weapon could be a pretty brutal strategy in the right hands...

[Darius Kane]

For PF, just realized that Vital Strike is a standard action, and thus is viable for a readied action. Vital Strike (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/vital-strike-combat---final)+brace (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons#wpn-quality-brace) weapon could be a pretty brutal strategy in the right hands...
I don't think you can combine them.
You have to specifically ready an action to brace your weapon against the enemy.
And you have to specifically ready a Vital Strike attack.
You can't ready two actions. If you ready the Vital Strike attack you don't ready the brace and vice versa.

[GeriSch]

I don't think you can combine them.
You have to specifically ready an action to brace your weapon against the enemy.
And you have to specifically ready a Vital Strike attack.
You can't ready two actions. If you ready the Vital Strike attack you don't ready the brace and vice versa.

Looks perfectly viable - you ready an attack action against a charging opponent, which fulfills the criteria for the brace bonus and when making your attack action, you declare to use vital strike. (The only thing that keeps me thinking is how the damage will be calculated because of the wording of vital strike)

gr,
Geri

[Darius Kane]

Looks perfectly viable - you ready an attack action against a charging opponent, which fulfills the criteria for the brace bonus and when making your attack action, you declare to use vital strike. (The only thing that keeps me thinking is how the damage will be calculated because of the wording of vital strike)

gr,
Geri
But it takes a standard action, which you didn't ready because you had to ready the brace.

[Axier]

Still... Vital Strike would be useful for doing damage.

Also, Factotum 8, get an extra standard, brace, hold your next action for Vital Strike?

Could you use extra Factotum standard actions for readied actions?

Also, I think there is a psionic ability that lets you get an extra readied action.

[Slipperychicken]

Could you use extra Factotum standard actions for readied actions?


Absolutely, although Readying still modifies your Initiative as normal.

[GeriSch]

But it takes a standard action, which you didn't ready because you had to ready the brace.

Surely it takes a standard action, thats what you are readying - you ready an attack which is a standard action, and vital strike can be used with an attack action which is what you have readied.

gr,
Geri

[Darius Kane]

Surely it takes a standard action, thats what you are readying - you ready an attack which is a standard action, and vital strike can be used with an attack action which is what you have readied.

gr,
Geri
Yes. I didn't say it can't. I simply don't think you can ready two actions - bracing the weapon and using Vital Strike.

[Flickerdart]

Vital Strike just multiplies your weapon damage, making it supremely worthless unless you're abusing size increases (in which case you probably have enough reach to just full attack).

[Axier]

Vital Strike just multiplies your weapon damage, making it supremely worthless unless you're abusing size increases (in which case you probably have enough reach to just full attack).

Yes, but you get some extra additave multipliers. You combine size increase and weapon damage with as many modifiers as possible. You brace against a charge, along with a vital strike.

I wonder how a Vital Strike charger would do if pounce was more difficult to obtain?

[Novawurmson]

I wonder how a Vital Strike charger would do if pounce was more difficult to obtain?

Charge can't be combined with Vital Strike, that much I'm sure of. Let me find the relevant text for brace.

Edit:

Brace (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons#wpn-quality-brace):


If you use a readied action to set a brace weapon against a charge, you deal double damage on a successful hit against a charging creature (see Combat).

Readying an Action (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat):


You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition.

It seems unclear whether brace is a special kind of readying an action, or a result of readying an attack vs. a charging a opponent.

Either way, readying a Vital Strike is better than just readying a regular hit to the face, it's just a matter if you can multiply the whole shebang by two with the brace feature vs. a charge.

[Squirrel_Dude]

I don't know the RAW rules with this very well.

How would you guys handle someone who readies a melee attack vs another melee attacker?

The readier did enough damage to kill the attacker but I played it out that both got their attacks in at the same time. It feels like a semi cheesey situation where the readier can just stand around and kill anything charging at him. If he had a reach weapon I know he would get the AoO and that make sense, but 2 similar reach weapons... not sure.

I know from a fighting perspective (I teach MMA) that to stop hit someone mid attack takes a butt load of experience. You have to really be able to read your opponent, and it typically only works when you throw out a quick jab and hes throwing a big haymaker. Its not something as simple as "i'm faster, I hit you first" (initiative)

I could see readying against melee and interrupting the attack being a feat that someone needs to learn... or hell, 2 feats, because its that hard.

What are the rules, and what are your opinions?It shouldn't be too much of a problem. If a character readies and action, they are sacrificing their standard/move action to do so, and have to ready the action for a very specific situation. Basically, your player would be giving up multiple attacks for a single attack to do damage against a target. Also keep in mind that an AOO doesn't stop the action that provokes and AOO from taking place.

It's a suboptimal choice, and although it doesn't make much sense conceptually, as you pointed out, it's a bad choice.

[Flickerdart]

Yes, but you get some extra additave multipliers. You combine size increase and weapon damage with as many modifiers as possible. You brace against a charge, along with a vital strike.

I wonder how a Vital Strike charger would do if pounce was more difficult to obtain?
That's not how multiplication works, unless Pathfinder changed it.

[Novawurmson]

I think we should probably take the Vital Strike conversation into another thread, as it's not really what the OP was asking about. I'll make.

[Knaight]

I suppose part of it is not too bad, it gives initiative a much greater weight. However I still don't think I would allow players to ready 5ft step/attack then avoid an incoming attack. If their attack didn't disrupt (kill, disarm, trip, etc) then they are still getting hit. Otherwise it feels like a cheese fest.
It's an effective tactic at low levels, sure, but there are a lot of flaws with it. Lets start with the obvious - one could always respond to it by just lobbing a weapon their way instead of charging into a readied trap. One could also move in but not attack, then ready an action to strike if the opponent tries to move out of the area, which prevents them from using the AoO circumventing movements without getting attacked. So on and so forth.

At high levels, you're giving up any chance for a full attack, which makes this tactic basically useless for most characters.

[Darius Kane]

It's an effective tactic at low levels, sure, but there are a lot of flaws with it. Lets start with the obvious - one could always respond to it by just lobbing a weapon their way instead of charging into a readied trap. One could also move in but not attack, then ready an action to strike if the opponent tries to move out of the area, which prevents them from using the AoO circumventing movements without getting attacked. So on and so forth.
First you would have to know what the opponent is actually doing.

[jmelesky]

At high levels, you're giving up any chance for a full attack, which makes this tactic basically useless for most characters.

Again I'll bring up the "ready an attack" followed by a debilitating maneuver of some sort (trip, dirty trick, disarm), which is far more likely to be worth it (where "worth it" == disrupting the current action and putting your opponent at a disadvantage during your turn). And you would want to trigger on "enemy enters my threatened area" rather than "enemy attacks me", for what that's worth.

[Squirrel_Dude]

First you would have to know what the opponent is actually doing.To be fair, it's pretty obvious when someone is readying against a charge. Other actions, not so much.


Again I'll bring up the "ready an attack" followed by a debilitating maneuver of some sort (trip, dirty trick, disarm), which is far more likely to be worth it (where "worth it" == disrupting the current action and putting your opponent at a disadvantage during your turn). And you would want to trigger on "enemy enters my threatened area" rather than "enemy attacks me", for what that's worth.If you're doing a trip maneuver, you're probably using a reach weapon anyway, to gain more attempts, so you're already provoking an AOO as the move through. I see your point with the disarm, though.

[Curmudgeon]

I would think starting anything that's a full-round action is kind of the no-backsies situation that Biffoniacus_Furiou is referring to, and that Curmudgeon is implies is not common. By starting, I mean moving for your charge, or taking the first shot of your Rapid Shot.
Just because a character intended to use the Charge special full-round action doesn't mean they succeeded. If they try to cross some terrain which slows their movement, then their charge will be impossible (illegal under the rules). But when they've already moved with the intention of charging before they notice the problem, it's both impossible for them to be taking a Charge action, and an accomplished fact that they have indeed moved. This isn't that difficult to resolve in the game: you just ignore intentions, and ascribe the movement to some D&D actions which are actually legal ─ like a single or double move. After that the character continues their turn as usual.

The game already has this flexibility to resolve character behavior into specific D&D actions after they've started; it's just not stated explicitly in too many places. But here's one example:

Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack

After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.

Side question: at what point of a charge does your -2 AC attach? at what point do you become a tad reckless? That's after moving, as per the RAW:
Attacking on a Charge

After moving, you may make a single melee attack. You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll and take a -2 penalty to your AC until the start of your next turn.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

The game already has this flexibility to resolve character behavior into specific D&D actions after they've started; it's just not stated explicitly in too many places. But here's one example:

That's the exception, not the general rule; there is no such exception made for charging. If you were going to charge, you've spent a full round action to make the attempt, even if it fails before completion.

[olentu]

Just because a character intended to use the Charge special full-round action doesn't mean they succeeded. If they try to cross some terrain which slows their movement, then their charge will be impossible (illegal under the rules). But when they've already moved with the intention of charging before they notice the problem, it's both impossible for them to be taking a Charge action, and an accomplished fact that they have indeed moved. This isn't that difficult to resolve in the game: you just ignore intentions, and ascribe the movement to some D&D actions which are actually legal ─ like a single or double move. After that the character continues their turn as usual.

The game already has this flexibility to resolve character behavior into specific D&D actions after they've started; it's just not stated explicitly in too many places. But here's one example:

That's after moving, as per the RAW:

The problem, of course, being that there are some things that activate on a charge, such readying a weapon against a charge, that would make treating a failed charge as something else also nonsense. Well that, or the fact that you are extrapolating from the specific to the general in that example, but whatever.

[Togo]

That's the exception, not the general rule; there is no such exception made for charging. If you were going to charge, you've spent a full round action to make the attempt, even if it fails before completion.

Can you give me a reference to this general rule? I can't find it.

[Axier]

OBJECTION! yes, I play Magic (when I can find an opponent :P), but that situation only applies to Magic timing rules. it doesn't have any bearing on Dnd.

But Curmudgeon and Togo have put it well. the interruption happens before the attack, not during. Now, in the case of charging you are still committed to your charge [since you began that before the readied action], but you can still move any additional spaces [provided you have movement] because your charge hasn't finished.

RE: 'you are no longer moving toward your opponent'..you still would be. there are only three spaces that would move you out of the chargers reach[ ok five on a diagonal]..and all of them can be reached by the same straight line you have already been traveling in.

But your charge does finish, because you have attacked, which caused the reaction. If you attack at the end of a charge, your charge ends when you attack from it. They attacked, they missed, the charge is over.

Let me try to illustrate it without the magic rules (which you are right about not being the best analogy :smalltongue:) The opponent charges at an enemy, its not a bull rush, so you aren't entering the space, your stopping to drive the force of your charge into the target through your weapon. You stop your legs, drive the force through your body, into your weapon, and attack. The attack essentially misses, because the readied action queues off of the attack, not the charge, and the charge's momentum has ended. Your opponent has moved away from your swing, therefore not hit by it. As I mentioned, acting like the attack that made the readied action didn't happen would cause a paradox.

Your train of thought basically equates to, [A] caused [B], therefore [A] never happened, leads to [B] also never happening. If [B] never happened then [A] has to be successful, but if [A] is successful, then [B] should happen.

[Togo]

But your charge does finish, because you have attacked, which caused the reaction. If you attack at the end of a charge, your charge ends when you attack from it. They attacked, they missed, the charge is over.

Let me try to illustrate it without the magic rules (which you are right about not being the best analogy :smalltongue:) The opponent charges at an enemy, its not a bull rush, so you aren't entering the space, your stopping to drive the force of your charge into the target through your weapon. You stop your legs, drive the force through your body, into your weapon, and attack.

You're treating a charge as if you stop moving, and then attack, which would make it pointless. It's a combined move and attack, hence being a combined action, and hence the bonus to hit from momentum.

And remember an attack in D&D is not, and never has been, a single swing like you're describing. It's several seconds worth of swordplay and interaction with your opponent. This doesn't occur, not even a little bit, if he isn't there.

The point is that the readied action goes off before the attack. You see the intention to act, or the preparation to act, and act in first in anticipation. You're trying to work it so that the attack starts, and then you interrupt the action as it takes place. By RAW, that isn't how it works. Your action goes before, not during, the trigger.


The attack essentially misses, because the readied action queues off of the attack, not the charge, and the charge's momentum has ended.

If the charge's momentum ended before the attack, it wouldn't effect it. It does.


As I mentioned, acting like the attack that made the readied action didn't happen would cause a paradox.

B doesn't cause A to happen, unless you believe in causation flowing backwards through time, because A happens before B. It is B being about to happen that triggers A. You are anticipating a move of your opponent, and acting before him. He's not then compelled to perform B for exactly the same reason that he may not be able to - your action has changed the situation. He is no more forced to carry out an attack after you've moved than he is able to hit you after you've moved.

[Susano-wo]

Thinking on this and coming back to it, I think the thing to remember is this: they really didn't explain exactly what happens. the rules for charge, etc, basically assume that your actions are happening, then someone elses. And for some reason, the publishers of Magic: the Gathering forgot to include what happens if it is interrupted and the 'target' is now 'illegal' (like how I brought it back to M:tG?:smalltongue:). :smallsigh:

So we have to figure it out. I would take the option that is A: the most straightforward(which I think 'if he has move left on charge he completes it' is) and B: makes a player feel less like his character was denied reasonable reactions to other people's actions (which, again, I think my favored interpretation does)