PDA

View Full Version : Close Quarter's Defense question (dragon mag 309)



Raishoiken
2020-07-30, 04:05 AM
So i had a question regarding the close quarter's defense feat found in dragon 309 that seems fairly obvious by rai but i wanted some input on raw just in case i'm missing anything

(as a sidenote i'm aware of the close quarters fighting feat that has a similar effect, not relevant to this thread)


You gain a +2 bonus on your attack roll for any attack of opportunity that an opponent has provoked by moving into your space. The benefit also applies for attacks of opportunity provoked by the opponent making an unarmed attack, attempting to start a grapple, bull rushing you, sundering your weapon or shield, or trying to sever your silver cord with a silver sword.
If the opponent has a feat that would normally prevent you from making an attack of opportunity in the given circumstance, you can still attempt one by virtue of this feat. However, instead of gaining a +2 bonus on the attack roll, you take a -10 penalty

emphasis mine

The question i have is on the bolded line. I'm fairly certain that this was intended to apply to the grapple, sunder, unarmed strike, etc., but would it apply to whatever an opponent had a feat to normally prevent AoO's with based on how it's worded specifically by raw?

Heavenblade
2020-07-30, 04:34 AM
Im inclined to disagree with that interprrtation kf RAW -

because the words "in the given circumstances". The given circumstances, in the beginning of the feat, are


moving into your space.
.the opponent making an unarmed attack, attempting to start a grapple, bull rushing you, sundering your weapon or shield, or trying to sever your silver cord with a silver sword.
.

If he has a feat that means that when he is doing X he doesnt provoke, he provokes nonetheless. X is defined by the given circumstances above.

Raishoiken
2020-07-30, 05:47 AM
Im inclined to disagree with that interprrtation kf RAW -

because the words "in the given circumstances". The given circumstances, in the beginning of the feat, are
.

If he has a feat that means that when he is doing X he doesnt provoke, he provokes nonetheless. X is defined by the given circumstances above.

this is what i've been assuming too, just seeing if anyone else is inclined to believe otherwise though