Questions about Knightly Intercession

4 posts / 0 new
Last post
I have two questions about this power.

1: Does the enemy attack resolve before I pull the target?
The confusion for the group came when I used Knightly Intercession to interupt an attack that allowed the Enemy to shift and pulled a grabbed ally with it. We debated whether I became grabbed and it shifted, or if it shifted the triggering ally. We ended up deciding the ally that was currently grabbed would be the character that was pulled with the enemy, and then I would pull the enemy to me.

2: If I can not pull the target adjacent to me do I still get to pull the target?
This has not come into play for us yet, but we have talked about it. I certianly understand that if it is not adjacent to me then I do not get to make the follow-up attack. We are just not sure if I still get to make the pull effect.

Thank you ahead of time for any responces.
1) The attack resolves after you pull the target because Knightly Intercession is an Immediate Interrupt.  The creature would stop grabbing any creature it was already grabbing unless after the pull it is still within range to grab the other creature, because your pull moves only the enemy, and not the creature it is grabbing.
        Was the creature you were fighting something in the compendium so that the particular attack could be referenced?

2) If you cannot pull the target adjacent to you it remains in its current space.
From the Forced Movement rules

 When a destination is specified, it is absolute; the creature or effect must either move the target to that destination or not move it at all.

  However, you would still become the target that was hit by the attack, which gets sort of weird if it was a melee attack and you could not pull the enemy adjacent to you. 
  Someone better versed on this aspect than me can confirm whether
a) the attack is then negated because you are not in range, even though your interrupt specifically states "you are hit" by the attack and not "you are targetted"
or b) you take the damage and all effects of the attack because your interrupt specifies you are hit.

The creature was an Ankheg that had used Gnaw and Scuttle.

Both answers make sense.

You bring up a great point regarding the range of the triggering attack.

Using the scenario that we faced.
1)I would be hit by the attack.
2)I would pull the Ankheg adjacent to me.
3)I would hit (assuming I hit) the target and subject them to divine sanction
4)Feat allows my to slide a divine sanction target 1 space.
5)The Ankheg is no longer in melee range, can the attack still be considered a hit?
The feat (Commanding Vow) allows you to slide the target of your divine sanction as a free action.  And from the compendium about interrupts:  If an effect has a trigger but is neither an immediate action nor an opportunity action, assume that it behaves like an immediate reaction, waiting for its trigger to completely resolve. However, ignore this guideline when the effect has to interrupt its trigger to function.

So it is pretty clear that the slide would resolve as a reaction, but then we have to get in the discussion of a nested immediate interrupt and reactions.  Is it a reaction to you sanctioning the target? Or does it use reaction timing, meaning the Ankheg would get its attack, then the reaction happens. 

A attacks B, B uses an Immediate Interrupt, C uses an Immediate Reaction on B's II.  Does C's IR resolve before A resolves its attack? 
Ours is a world where people don't know what they want, and are willing to go through hell to get it. -Don Marquis
Sign In to post comments