Attacks of Opportunity

#1

Just wondering if/how some of you handle this at the table.

#2

I don’t have Attacks of Opportunity, seems like a hiccup during gameplay. It doesn’t seem to affect gameplay by not having it. Remember the PCs only have 10 (20)HP to begin with…if they wanna run, I say-- let 'em.

#3

What @waddinghambrett says.

#4

What other’s said. Only exception is if I want a specific enemy that is hard to escape from. Then create a mechanic for that foe. “Sticky legs: Roll STR/DEX when trying to move away” “Sentinel’s Hook: Roll Dex when you run, or take weapon damage”
To be fair, I’ve only done this once though.

#5

I do not use Attacks of Opportunity for ICRPG or 5e. Never have. never will… slows the game down too much and I agree with @waddinghambrett wholeheartedly.

#6

Attacks of opportunity discourage players from moving around the encounter. This can end up with the fight becoming a slugfest back and forth until one side wins. Allowing free movement encourages players to come up with more creative solutions, and that makes the game more fun.

#7

Not using it anymore. For reasons others have stated.

#8

What @waddinghambrett says. x2

#9

I’m just chiming in to say, these guys nailed it. Slows the game down. Discourages movement. I took AoO out of game a long time ago and never looked back. I agree a boss might have a special riposte or attack ability that pegs fleeing characters, but that’s a super rare thing for me. And honestly, after a few years of no AoO, I don’t miss it one tiny bit.

#10

I"m a dissenter! I use attacks of opportunity. There are times in combat that a combatant gets an “extra” opportunity to deal damage. Remember the To Hit roll is the FINAL RESULT of many, many attacks on your turn. You do not just swing once in 6 seconds and call it a day.

So, there are times when you might get another opportunity to inflict injury, or have injury inflicted upon you. I use these pretty often, on nat1s, movement (sometimes, but not always; backing away with a shield in front of you for example does not trigger AOO), etc.

Players like it, and they understand when the enemies get to do it.

#11

this is interesting! I haven’t thought about it but you made me realise I do AoO when attack/spellcast fumbles happen. An orc attacks and fumbles, then the player can retaliate freely (or viceversa)! Sometimes it ended in pretty awesome moments where both attack and counter attack fumble and both figthers end up with their weapons flying away, escalating into a fist fight. It also allows me to get rid of the “you hit yourself” result of the fumble for a more interesting “you opponent uses your error to strike hard!”.

That said, I do have special mechanics for some monsters and even for players that imitate AoO but I would never allow movement to allow free attacks, it just sounds silly to me.

My fictional reasoning is that combatants are always actively attacking and defending and rolls only determine outcomes of fully commited actions that overcome enemy’s defence.

#12

I dont even use turns lol. I do it like dungeon world and move the spotlight evenly among players keeping a good balance and flow. Giving everyone turns but without a rigid structure and I still use timers. I approach games like we’re making a movie.

#13

This is key to understanding combat IMO

#14

Yes, but from a narrativist point of view, perhaps. A gamist is fine with the idea that when simulating reality, each player taking a turn that showcases his or her moment in the fiction is totally cool. A simulationist might disagree entirely with both: there’s no realistic way you can swing that many times in six seconds.

So, I don’t think there are absolutes here. Only preferences.

#15

No AoOs for me, but I generally subscribe to the idea that it’s an action for an action. Meaning, if the PCs want to stop someone from passing them, they have to spend an action (and roleplay it really well, of course), and if they succeed the Roll, then the enemy has to spend an action and succeed a Roll to break through the PCs’ shield wall.

#16

I’m glad I got the brain-juices flowing! Most people really do associated the gaming term “Attack of Opportunity” with movement. In actuality, there are plenty of times it may be appropriate to award a character an attack of opportunity. Here are the times I do it, non-inclusively:

  • Disengaging from an opponent in melee without doing something to protect yourself (parrying, shield up, dirt in the eyes, etc.). Of course, your characters aren’t stupid. They don’t just turn their back on the enemy and walk away! In effect, I only ever give characters and AOO if the retreating character openly states they are forgoing safety for SPEED, or the retreating character couldn’t see (and therefore couldn’t defend against) the creature who would attack. Or, I suppose, if the retreating character was injured in some way that prevented defending themselves.

  • A Natural 1 in close quarters. Fumbling your arrow shot from FAR doesn’t open you to an AOO from the guy FAR away. But, a natural 1 on the dagger attack “in the fray” certainly might. Likewise, casting a spell “in the fray” and critically failing might invoke an AOO. Additionally, some spells in my games are NOT instant cast. They take more than one turn, maybe even more than one full round, to finish. During this time, casters are quite vulnerable (unless they want to fizzle the spell to defend themselves), but this isn’t really an “Attack of Opportunity”, just a note of interest.

  • When I offer the player to reroll at a COST. Often times, I offer players the chance to reroll at a cost. In melee, this is almost always an attack of opportunity. “You can try again, but you’ll be fully committed to your attack if you do. Whether you hit or not, the opponent will try to take advantage of your commitment by attacking, unless you kill them.” This doesn’t count against their Actions in their turn, so this is essentially an AOO. I allow the players this chance also, of course. If I want to allow a foe to reroll at a cost, melee characters get to perform their AOO as well.

There are some other hedge cases, but these are the three primary times I award attacks of opportunity to PCs/baddies. :slight_smile:

#17

I actually practice HEMA (specifically german long-sword) and I’m also a Runequest fan, and even though I don’t consider myself a simulationist gamer, I have to say that 6 seconds is A LOT of time during a melee combat and a realistic unarmored fight with longsowrds will not last more than 10-20 seconds before some hands/legs/necks are chopped/staved and one (or both) combatants are out of the fight. Including multiple attacks and backs&forths.

#18

Done away worth AofO too. I’ve found if you really want to hit a creature as it moves passed you can always use the hold action idea.

#20

Wow. Great extension to this discussion.
Short Version what @waddinghambrett said X25 :stuck_out_tongue:

My long post of feelings based on what many people have already articulated wonderfully.

Is there a place for AoO?
Yes. (Somatic spell casting comes to mind)
Should it be used as D&D 3,4 and 5 have it?
Nope, based on my add feel vs speed of game flow.

How do you as a player limit movement?
Shield walls, guard the passage type thing if it applies. (stopping tiny things or things larger than you does not work think a human trying to stop flies with a shield and sword or a knight in shining armor trying to stop a locomotive)

It can be addressed at the table as needed.
creatures must roll Vs the player/players to pass, or automatically take weapon damage…or they take the damage no matter what (suppressive fire like) and must roll vs Players Character AC to get past…if 2 players characters are guarding the space… each rolls damage and the opponent must surpass the Player Characters AC each time.

Reverse that to GM side defending.
players moving through this area with 2 defenders controlling that space, take automatic Dx damage and must roll hard TN dex or str to pass.

or any way you want to deal with it at your table, but those defending space are sacrificing their action, for their reaction…but their reaction might apply more than once. if thought of in D&D terms.

I feel the need of auto hit is there since otherwise any High TN monster or AC PC will ignore it, and damage dice are random enough, but players should know the mechanic going in. It’s actually a trap, step here and you take damage and save or it ends your movement.

As to using it on critical failures
I am soooo stealing this. So much better than you drop your sword.

What are reasons for AoO
It makes tabletop and computer based turn games more engaging. I truly believe it was added with Baldurs Gate in mind. That computer games where the future of Tabletop Role Playing games. It did not have theater of the mind style play as a consideration. It was promoting video games, miniatures and many many other accessories.

Does it add a tactical element?
Yes, but not a great one. However it does let the certain classes and builds do things that others are at risk to do. So in reality it is a tactical element that has strategic consequences. I personally think it is mainly to set up positioning. Qualifiers for backstab or advantage in the 5E Parlance. From my understanding of it, PF2 has mostly removed it.

To the Original Post
However you and your players want to handle this is how to handle this, your table your rules. There are great ideas that I will steal here.
But it slows down play, and makes theater of the mind play a bit more of a hassle.

If your players or a player wants it…a piece of loot that grants it and does weapon damage. e.g.
boot spur
once per round wielder can attack an enemy moving out of close range on the ground.
or
ring of reaction
once per round wielder can attack an enemy moving out of close range with a melee attack.

But I would not add it to the normal element of combat for the monsters.

On simulist play,
Simplest way to think of weapon fighting is Boxing with more range and consequence. combatants are going for position, leverage, force and speed usually in that order…for medieval/military weapons…that’s why the rapier was so dramatically prefered later in dueling…that’s another topic…

Most attacks are combination attacks with each intending to hit, but if defended against, it typically places the defender at an increasing disadvantage, it’s not the Movies or old school SCA/ren faire fights of trading blows as both are totally encased in armor, and they are fighting with tools that don’t do a good job of countering their armor. Youtube and the study of HEMA have totally changed understanding of this in the last 15 years, and I think it will/is improving past documented maneuvers with increased understanding of biometrics, but perhaps it is just filling in gaps…:herocoin:and :beers: to all who spend the money and time to learn the ancient art of bashing each other with archaic weapons!!!

I also played some of chaosium games titles…Pendragon hurt the most. I played Harnmaster a bit…also hurt. I like my characters getting back in the fight after a bit of rest.

#21

Great explanation! I’ve noticed that when every character can do AOO all the time, things slow way down. That is where things break. Great job!