1: How far can you bull rush a willing target?
RAW, as far as you could bull rush an unwilling target. I would probably house rule the 'target' could forgo his BAB, STR, and DEX modifiers; so it would be bull rush vs. 10 + special size modifier, but this would also depend on how it was used. Bull rush friend out of a wall fire--fine; bull rush the barbarian forward into battle so he doesn't need a move action and could full attack, I would say you have to beat his normal CMD.
2: Can I knock a target prone via bull rushing?
Not without any extra feats, or special abilities.
Me, I'm not really a fan of rules that work differently for no good reason. Bullrushing someone out of a fire is no different than bullrushing someone into a fire, or into a group of enemies. Sure, one seems like a good deed, saving a friend from doom, while the other seems like a rules exploit to let a friend get extra attacks.
Still, a bullrush is a bullrush.
Further, there is a reason why bullrush doesn't knock you flat and let the bullrusher trample on your prone self and dance a jig on your bones. Mainly, becaues you resist it. You do everything in your power to NOT be plastered to the ground and end up with boot prints on your forehead.
Yeah, that's not ezplicitly RAW, but if you think about what a bullrush is, and you think about meeting it head on, braced and defensive, and it still pushes you back - then think about what it would do if you just stood there and let it happen without making any effort to keep yourself safe.
In short, I don't think it makes much sense to even be a "willing target". You have to expend enough energy to stay on your feet and not become a bloody throw rug that you automatically resist it.
At least, that's my take.
There isn't any RAW for most of that. I believe that what Tim said is true, by RAW, bullrushing a willing target is exactly the same as bullrushing an unwilling target, but it's very likely that the willing target won't take an AoO against the bullrusher - and I don't believe RAW supports giving up any CMD modifiers, though one could certainly houserule it that way if so desired.
|
I would give a bonus to the bullrusher (forgoing modifiers to CMD etc.) IF the bullrusher is actually carrying the bullrushee with a free hand (for small creatures) or two (for medium or larger). If the bull-rusher has no free hands to carry a willing target, then no bonuses can apply (other than the fact that they don't take an AoO against you!) because it's basically the same.
Knocking someone prone would be a trip attack, under most circumstances. It's just like a bull rush, only it's called by a different name and requires a different feat to do well. And apparently requires more intelligence.
I don't believe RAW supports giving up any CMD modifiers, though one could certainly houserule it that way if so desired.
Well, they hint at it. Consider when you cast a cure spell on a friendly target. You don't need to make an attack roll to touch the creature. Yet, you need to touch the target.
Page 91 of the core rulebook even explicitly says you can voluntarily forego your dexterity bonus to AC (when someone tries to catch you while falling). We also know you can voluntarily give up a saving throw. While maybe not explicity RAW in this case, I will allow a character to voluntariy give up bonuses.
As I said before, intent also plays into the ruling. If you try to exploit the rules for an unfair advantage the answer is no. I have a simple axiom: If bending a rule makes for a more heroic, enjoyable game, you bend the rule.
That is one of the real advantages of a human DM, they can adjust the rules to aid the game. It is something I miss sometimes about 1st edition games. There were fewer rules and more on-the-fly rulings. While sometimes inconsistant, I think the game flowed better because there was less trying to get the action to fit the rules and more adjust the rules to fit the action.