(PF) Escape Route: Broken as hell or no?

[Dread Angel]

So I have a player in my games who ... always... plays the same thing with the same build with the same gear with the same....you get the idea.

He recently happened upon the teamwork feat Escape Route. http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/escape-route-teamwork

And he now INSISTS to the point of getting really, really mad when I called shenanigans, that by RAW since he and his animal companion (which serves as a mount for him, he's a ranger) both have the feat, neither of them should ever draw attacks of opportunity, under any circumstances, ever.

He first insisted that he would move simultaneously with his animal companion, unmounted. When I pointed out that even if one or the other delayed initiative to match the other's, it's still two separate turns, he got mad, but insisted that if he were mounted he would never draw an AoO.

The thing is, by RAW, I think he's right. "An ally who also has this feat provokes no attacks of opportunity for moving through squares adjacent to you or within your space."

He is now Facebooking me asking me if I'm going to allow the feat to be used "as written". And I know he'll get really mad at me and claim I'm breaking the rules when I tell him no.

Opinions?

Also, this is a Mythic game. I'm considering allowing him to take it, and letting him deal with the consequences when his enemies take note that the animal companion is covering him so effectively and decide to remove it from the equation. He learned the whole "if your animal buddy is obviously aiding you in combat, he becomes a target for clever enemies" thing the hard way a while ago with this familiar-plus-wand-equals-epic-healing thing, whereupon the assassin team who was after them promptly targeted the familiar in the surprise round next ambush.

Aaaanyhoo. Opinions?

[Lanson]

Well, first off, it doesnt matter if the movement is on different turns. As long as he's adjacent with his mount, it will keep from provoking attacks, he will just be moving at a crawl as he and his mount play leap-frog across the battlefield.

As for him actually riding the creature... Heck, let him. It's not overly game breaking, and even then, most mounts won't fit into normal dungeons unless he's playing a small character.

Is he playing a druid or a ranger? If he's playing a druid, point is kinda moot since he shouldn't be provoking ever unless he's going melee in Wildshape, and rangers shouldn't stay in melee for very long with their lower HD and AC, and with a mount most things shouldn't be able to keep up with him to approach anyways. Sounds like he's probably wasted a feat

[Segev]

The RAW is quite clear: he and his mount provoke no AoOs for passing through squares the other one threatens.

This is the only trigger for which the feat protects you; provoking AoO for ANY other reason is still going to happen. It does NOT make you fail to provoke an AoO, for instance, for attacking with a ranged weapon in melee, or casting a spell in melee.

The other point he's missing is that you only threaten spaces when you're not moving. During your move, you don't threaten the spaces that you would if you were stopped in the spaces through which you move. So only if he only takes move actions that wouldn't take him outside the reach of his stationary mount, and vice versa for mount and his own reach, will he prevent AoOs on himself and his mount for movement.

While they're both moving, they provoke AoOs if they move through threatened spaces that the other one isn't threatening, and the other one threatens nothing until they are stopped. If they move together, they're safe in the first 5 ft they move, as they threaten that space and thus protect each other. Beyond that, they don't threaten anything until they stop, and so they can provoke by moving through others' spaces.

If they move separately, the FIRST to move won't provoke in the first 5 ft. or so, while in the other's threatened spaces. The second won't have his buddy there, so will provoke if he moves through spaces threatened by enemies. The first will provoke at the far end, too, but the second will be protected from provoking while moving through the first person's (newly) threatened spaces.


In all, it's not as good as he thinks it is.

[Urpriest]

Seems fine, and there are lots of other ways to be immune to attacks of opportunity anyway. Note that he can't use this to get out of attacks of opportunity from anything other than normal movement: casting, ranged attacks, etc, still provoke. Also note that since animal companions don't get all that many feats he's spending a feat on something that isn't the companion's primary combat tactic, so overall he will be a weaker combatant.

[Psyren]

As others have said this is pretty minor. Animal Companions are one of the few ways to make teamwork feats worth the paper they were printed on.

[Dread Angel]

Something that I realized - if he's mounted, isn't he using the mount's space, essentially? Which would nullify the feat anyway. As it doesn't mention the squares you threaten, it mentions the squares adjacent to your space, specifically. And since when mounted, he's using the mount's space, he'd only be immune to an attack of opportunity for the first 5 feet.

[Psyren]

I think his reasoning is that when his mount moves, the squares his mount threatens move with him. (Which I don't personally see a problem with.)

[Lord Vukodlak]

As others have said this is pretty minor. Animal Companions are one of the few ways to make teamwork feats worth the paper they were printed on.
When I look at Teamwork feats I see something far more valuable for NPC's then for PC's. I wouldn't take Outflank (http://paizo.com/PRD/advanced/advancedFeats.html#outflank) and Precise Strike (http://paizo.com/PRD/advanced/advancedFeats.html#precise-strike) for my own character, but they'd work very well for helping lower level mooks damage the party.

[Ravens_cry]

I'd take Outflank for a tag team pair when combined with Butterfly Sting (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/butterfly-s-sting-critical). I get a critical hit, but I don't want a critical hit, so you get a critical hit, and I get an attack of opportunity, which has a 1/4th chance of being a critical hit, but I don't want a critical hit, so you get a critical hit, which means I get an attack of opportunity.
Who doesn't want a critical hit? Often a rogue or other sneak attacker. Most of their bonus damage comes from non-crit stacking sources after all.
Who wants them? The big, beefy fighter type who has a x3 or x4 weapon.
They are the Brute Squad.

[NightbringerGGZ]

@Segev: The feat doesn't mention anything about threatened squares. The feat allows you and your teammate to not provoke AoOs from moving through squares "adjacent to you or within your space".

So pretty clearly this allows a mounted person to avoid AoOs from movement if both he and his mount take the feat. This is probably slightly more powerful than having a mount take Spring Attack, which similarly would allow you to avoid AoOs from moving. The cost of a feat slot taken from the character isn't a minor cost though, especially since many of the mounted classes will have limited feats available.

Overall, I would side with your player on this. I would agree that this interpretation probably isn't RAI, but I try to avoid RAI rulings myself as I can't really know (and don't always agree) with what the Pathfinder devs actually intended. This works RAW and isn't overpowered (particularly in a Mythic game) so I wouldn't Rule 0 this feat choice either.

[Segev]

Hm. Okay, by that wording, you're right. You and your mount are always "within your space," so you will never provoke AoOs by moving through threatened squares while mounted on your mount who shares this feat with you.

Note: he still provokes AoOs if he takes actions other than "moving through threatened squares" which would provoke. The feat ONLY removes that one trigger.

[Fouredged Sword]

Couldn't one use butterfly kiss and outflank to empty all of a pair of people's AOO's as attacks with one round.

Character A and B are flanking character C

Character A attacks character B. He threatens a critical hit, and then confirms it.

He then causes character C to be trigger an AOO from character B

Character A forgoes the critical hit effect to give character B a critical hit on his next action using butterfly Kiss.

Because character A also has Paired opportunist, he get an AOO as well.

Character B then attacks, auto threatening a crit, and triggering the whole process in reverse.

It would go until someone failed to confirm a crit.

[Squirrel_Dude]

Does the animal companion actually have an intelligence score ≥ 3? If not, it can't take the teamwork feat in the first place AFAIK.

But if they both can, then his interpretation does appear to be correct by RAW. I don't think that it was an intended use of the feat, but I'll give him credit for thinking outside the box with it.

[malmblad]

There are a couple ways you can argue this out if you want:

First, the phrase "your space" implies ownership, and since movement is obviously transient you can't "own" a space you are moving through. You have to be stationary to have "your space." Therefore one allies would have to be stationary and the other would receive the benefit while moving through the "owned" spaced.

Second, for mounted combat: You can't end your movement in a square occupied by another creature unless it's helpless. A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. Your mount is none of these things. This means a rider and mount have to be considered one "creature" for the purpose of tactical movement. If a character and their mount are considered one they cannot be considered allies at that the same time and therefore do not benefit from the feat.

This is just lawyering RAW into RAI, but they have enough shreds of logic to reinforce a DM ruling.

[Ravens_cry]

Eh, with reasoning that complicated, I'd rather just flat out say 'No, I am the DM. You may take another feat, but I am vetoing that one.' Perhaps give them a free save on one saving throw of their choice to help assuage any hard feelings.

[Akal Saris]

I'd take Outflank for a tag team pair when combined with Butterfly Sting (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/butterfly-s-sting-critical). I get a critical hit, but I don't want a critical hit, so you get a critical hit, and I get an attack of opportunity, which has a 1/4th chance of being a critical hit, but I don't want a critical hit, so you get a critical hit, which means I get an attack of opportunity.
Who doesn't want a critical hit? Often a rogue or other sneak attacker. Most of their bonus damage comes from non-crit stacking sources after all.
Who wants them? The big, beefy fighter type who has a x3 or x4 weapon.
They are the Brute Squad.

Oh, wow! That would be a great combo! A rogue with a 15-20 crit range coupled with a fighter type with a x4 weapon.

[Icewraith]

There are a couple ways you can argue this out if you want:

First, the phrase "your space" implies ownership, and since movement is obviously transient you can't "own" a space you are moving through. You have to be stationary to have "your space." Therefore one allies would have to be stationary and the other would receive the benefit while moving through the "owned" spaced.

Second, for mounted combat: You can't end your movement in a square occupied by another creature unless it's helpless. A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. Your mount is none of these things. This means a rider and mount have to be considered one "creature" for the purpose of tactical movement. If a character and their mount are considered one they cannot be considered allies at that the same time and therefore do not benefit from the feat.

This is just lawyering RAW into RAI, but they have enough shreds of logic to reinforce a DM ruling.

Actually, for a certain class of beneficial effects, you count as your own ally. If you care about lockdown builds, you can bring in the stance from Tome of Battle that specifically lets you take AoOs when some other ability would stop you from doing so.

[Ravens_cry]

Oh, wow! That would be a great combo! A rogue with a 15-20 crit range coupled with a fighter type with a x4 weapon.
Ninja would also be good for the SA side as they are proficient with a light weapon capable of getting to that 15-20 crit range from the start.

[Crustypeanut]

Meh let him have it, then laugh as his mount gets eaten by some mythic baddy.

;)

[Baroncognito]

I'd take Outflank for a tag team pair when combined with Butterfly Sting (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/butterfly-s-sting-critical). I get a critical hit, but I don't want a critical hit, so you get a critical hit, and I get an attack of opportunity, which has a 1/4th chance of being a critical hit, but I don't want a critical hit, so you get a critical hit, which means I get an attack of opportunity.
Who doesn't want a critical hit? Often a rogue or other sneak attacker. Most of their bonus damage comes from non-crit stacking sources after all.
Who wants them? The big, beefy fighter type who has a x3 or x4 weapon.
They are the Brute Squad.

I like the idea of having the crit fisher be a paladin. Because Bless Weaponhttp://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/b/bless-weapon says it doesn't stack with Keen or Vorpal weapons, but apparently stacks just fine with Improved Critical.

[Ravens_cry]

I like the idea of having the crit fisher be a paladin. Because Bless Weaponhttp://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/b/bless-weapon says it doesn't stack with Keen or Vorpal weapons, but apparently stacks just fine with Improved Critical.
There is that. However, Paladins love criticals as their smite multiplies. They would make better crit catchers in my opinion. That is, gaining the critical from the Butterfly stinger.

[deuxhero]

Could be worse: He is his own ally, has Escape Route and is in the same square as himself. Strict RAW, he could pull this off without an AC.

Actually... it's even not that horrible even then, PF broke tumble to the point you can't use it consistently and lots of classes were dependent on that.

[malmblad]

Actually, for a certain class of beneficial effects, you count as your own ally. If you care about lockdown builds, you can bring in the stance from Tome of Battle that specifically lets you take AoOs when some other ability would stop you from doing so.

Just curious, what class of effects is that? If I've come across that before, I must have switched it in my head to "you and your allies"

[Psyren]

You count as your own ally in PF (unless doing so would make no sense or be impossible.)

Source (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9nda)

[Lord_Gareth]

You count as your own ally in PF (unless doing so would make no sense or be impossible.)

Source (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9nda)

This statement, it causes arguments. Lots and lots of arguments.

[Psyren]

This statement, it causes arguments. Lots and lots of arguments.

Not including it would cause just as many. See also - every thread about 3.5 Bluff since the dawn of time.

[Lord_Gareth]

Not including it would cause just as many. See also - every thread about 3.5 Bluff since the dawn of time.

Legend does just fine with, "You are always your own ally." No arguments there.

[Psyren]

Legend does just fine with, "You are always your own ally." No arguments there.

Not enough players to have arguments :smalltongue:

Less facetiously, the ruling was left open-ended in case they came up with an effect that relies on allies that wouldn't feasibly or thematically be usable on one's self. I happen to like "but mind Rule Zero" clauses - you don't. It's just a preference difference.

[Da'Shain]

You count as your own ally in PF (unless doing so would make no sense or be impossible.)

Source (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9nda)While "sense" is certainly relative, for the purposes of a teamwork feat, treating a character as their own ally would almost certainly fit the "make no sense" exception for most people.

Especially when a specific class feature (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/inquisitor#TOC-Solo-Tactics-Ex-) is normally needed to bypass the requirement of having another character present with the same feat.