1
\$\begingroup\$

As we understand Levitation, even involuntary movement by an opponent can trigger an Opportunity Attack.

Does that mean that even the wizard who cast the spell get an Opportunity Attack against an opponent they Levitate away from themselves?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ If you are having trouble developing the narrative with opportunity attacks in 5e, my groups often say that moving away is equivalent to dropping your defenses (which gives the enemy a chance to strike). That's why the disengage action is a thing: you can keep your defenses up if you spend a bit more time moving. If you are force moved, you are still keeping your defenses up. \$\endgroup\$ – David Coffron Apr 20 '18 at 14:25
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Just to make sure, this is about whether the movement should provoke attacks from the wizard when they use their action to move an opponent in a game which has already houseruled said movement provokes attacks from everybody else, right? \$\endgroup\$ – Please stop being evil Apr 20 '18 at 19:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ to rephrase the question, do you have a houserule at your table that says that "involuntary movement by an opponent can trigger an Opportunity Attack" or is that how you understand the rules to be written? \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Apr 20 '18 at 19:43
14
\$\begingroup\$

No

From the PHB rules on opportunity attacks:

You can avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the Disengage action. You also don’t provoke an opportunity attack when you Teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your Movement, action, or reaction. For example, you don’t provoke an opportunity attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe’s reach or if gravity causes you to fall past an enemy.

So if something else moves an opponent (e.g. a Levitation spell), they do not trigger any Opportunity attacks during that movement.

You appear to have taken "even involuntary movement by an opponent can trigger an Opportunity Attack" as a given - this is not the case.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ That sounds like that suggests we could Levitate characters in trouble up and out of combat and they wouldn’t provoke opportunity attacks? \$\endgroup\$ – Praxiteles Apr 20 '18 at 14:37
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Praxiteles That's right! But note that it's not the case if you are the caster of Levitate trying to get yourself out of trouble - in that case you would be using your action or movement to move, which would provoke opportunity attacks. \$\endgroup\$ – Vigil Apr 20 '18 at 14:39
9
\$\begingroup\$

No.

Forced movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks unless it uses the creature's movement, action, or reaction.

You can avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the Disengage action. You also don’t provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction. For example, you don’t provoke an opportunity attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe’s reach or if gravity causes you to fall past an enemy.

\$\endgroup\$
-7
\$\begingroup\$

Yes

If you have house-ruled that the lack of stability caused by being levitated causes even involuntary movement to provoke opportunity attacks, the source of that movement should get the opportunity to make an attack (provided the movement, in fact, would provoke from them).

There's no restriction against making reactions during your turn and letting someone else's opportunity-attack-provoking knockback effect deal a single extra attack at the cost of their reaction isn't a balance problem for a potential use of a 2nd level spell.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I think you may have misunderstood the OP. They say "As we understand Levitation..." They say nothing about a house rule. Moreover, allowing involuntary moment to provoke OA's would be a major houserule that would change the balance of many spells and combat abilities such as shove and grapple. \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Apr 20 '18 at 13:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Rubiksmoose They say they have Levitation cause enemies to provoke attacks of opportunity from involuntary movement. That's not how the rules work, so it's a house rule. In the context of that house rule the extra attack by the source of the involuntary movement is not a big deal, which is the context of the question. Obviously the extra attacks in general are a big deal, but they've already decided to play that way and ignoring the question to complain about it is just rude. \$\endgroup\$ – Please stop being evil Apr 20 '18 at 19:23
  • \$\begingroup\$ To me it reads as a simple misunderstanding of the rules, not a house rule. It seems like this comment seems to suport my reading. I see you have commented to ask so we'll see how that turns out. I'm also not sure where I've complained about anything and certainly I don't see where I have been rude. \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Apr 20 '18 at 19:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Rubiksmoose You haven't been, I was referring to the other answers that seem to be taking the question in bad faith. That comment does seem to indicate the querent is just misunderstanding the rules. \$\endgroup\$ – Please stop being evil Apr 20 '18 at 21:26

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.