Consolidated Customer Service Answers

861 posts / 0 new
Last post
A revision to my post:

Page 215, second paragraph in "Thrown Weapons":
Weapons in all four categories are further categorized as melee weapons, which you use to attack foes within reach of the weapon, or ranged weapons, which you use to fire at more distant enemies. You can’t use a ranged weapon as a melee weapon. A melee weapon with the heavy thrown or the light thrown property counts as a ranged weapon when thrown and can be used with ranged attack powers that have the weapon keyword.

(emphasis added by me)

Other evidence and points worth noting:
*The PHB's description of Light Thrown specifically mentions powers that attack multiple times, so if you're holding a shuriken +1 and use twin strike (ranged) then that would work. However, page 215 still treats heavy thrown as ranged, so I'm sure a handaxe would work too (and would rule so as a DM). I'd still be interested in a response from CS on that to make the yea or nay official.
*Ranged basic attack's description says that you use your strength instead of your dexterity when using a heavy thrown weapon. Likewise, the heavy thrown description mentions only ranged basic attack for the Dex->Str swap. Other powers do not make the swap so far as I can tell. Thus if you throw a heavy thrown weapon like a handaxe with twin strike to make two ranged attacks, you'll throw with your dexterity instead of your strength. I can't find anywhere that says otherwise. So you strong, non-dexterous characters may prefer a basic attack!
*The magic weapons section treats heavy thrown as ranged when deciding what enchantments can affect them:
"The category determines what kind of weapons can be enchanted with that particular set of qualities. 'Any ranged' includes projectile weapons and weapons with the heavy thrown or the light thrown property. 'Any' or 'Any melee' includes all applicable categories."


And so even now, while staring at the PHB before me, I'm still confused about the CS's answer. There doesn't seem to be anything that specifically says you cannot use a heavy thrown weapon as a ranged attack for powers other than ranged basic attack. This CSR response is the only thing saying so... and I'm hoping it's inaccurate.


(BTW, looks like I got ninja'd by mithmurr. Curse my slow typing. :D )
When my computer inevitably explodes and kills me, my cat inherits everything I own. He may be the only one capable of continuing my work. And Stay Down: The Polearm Momentum Handbook
No no, both of you hold your horses. I was asking specifically about ranger powers that have "Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons or a ranged weapon." in them. You can still use other ranged attack powers that have the "weapon" keyword with daggers, javelins, etc.

Though..... *sigh*, holding a dagger in each hand means that you are wielding two melee weapons, and the power never says you have to use the melee version just because you're holding melee weapons. I think CS is technically right but wrong in the sense that there's no balance reason to require literal ranged weapons over just throwing weapons. Oh well.
Read the bit again: a melee weapon with the heavy thrown or light thrown property counts as a ranged weapon when thrown.
Therefore, "requirement: ranged weapon" is fulfilled by a thrown weapon.

Twin strike counts as a melee power or a ranged power, depending on how you use it. There is nothing that contradicts what is stated by the thrown properties. The dagger (or whatever melee weapon with heavy thrown or light thrown) fulfills the wielding a ranged weapon requirement.
No no, both of you hold your horses. I was asking specifically about ranger powers that have "Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons or a ranged weapon." in them. You can still use other ranged attack powers that have the "weapon" keyword with daggers, javelins, etc.

Though..... *sigh*, holding a dagger in each hand means that you are wielding two melee weapons, and the power never says you have to use the melee version just because you're holding melee weapons. I think CS is technically right but wrong in the sense that there's no balance reason to require literal ranged weapons over just throwing weapons. Oh well.

Well, I still have qualms with the CS answer. Melee thrown weapons count as ranged when using ranged powers, and that should include the requirements. You should be able to count holding two daggers as wielding two ranged weapons for that power if you're going to use it ranged.

Or as you said, you should be able to wield two thrown melee weapons to satisfy the requirement's melee component, but use the ranged component of the attack since the thrown weapons do count as ranged. That's a bit of rules lawyering, unfortunately, but no less contrived than the CSR response IMO.

I would love to see errata on this. I the mean time, I guess we should take the CS response as RAW and create house rules from there to allow what we think should be possible. I still don't know though since CSRs aren't always accurate.
When my computer inevitably explodes and kills me, my cat inherits everything I own. He may be the only one capable of continuing my work. And Stay Down: The Polearm Momentum Handbook
If you look into some of my earlier thread posts you will find CS responses that contradict the above ruling by specifically allowing you to use Twin Strike with Handaxes. :D

That combined with the PH text makes me think they are just wrong this time.
Useful Star Wars Saga Links
Complete Saga Index
Expanded Saga Races PDF
NPC/Encounter Requests Thread
Official Errata Thread
Official FAQ Thread

Personal Contributions: 10,000+ posts and counting!
(The current forum count is a lie!)

Check out my DeviantArt Gallery!
I'd say with that knowledge, Lokathor might want to post a followup question and cite the specific examples that contradict (both the PHB entries and previous CSR responses) so the CSR can reconsider or elevate it higher to someone who would know better.
When my computer inevitably explodes and kills me, my cat inherits everything I own. He may be the only one capable of continuing my work. And Stay Down: The Polearm Momentum Handbook
I'd say with that knowledge, Lokathor might want to post a followup question and cite the specific examples that contradict (both the PHB entries and previous CSR responses) so the CSR can reconsider or elevate it higher to someone who would know better.

I agree.
Useful Star Wars Saga Links
Complete Saga Index
Expanded Saga Races PDF
NPC/Encounter Requests Thread
Official Errata Thread
Official FAQ Thread

Personal Contributions: 10,000+ posts and counting!
(The current forum count is a lie!)

Check out my DeviantArt Gallery!
Here's another one:

Thank you for writing. Action Surge would not impart it's bonus to the attack made by your ally when using Commander's Strike, even if the ally also had Action Surge.

Please let me know if you need anymore help!

Good Gaming!

We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.

To login to your account, or update your question please click here.

Rob
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast
1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada)
425-204-8069 (From all other countries)
Monday-Friday 9am-6pm PST / 12pm-9pm EST

********************

How does Commander's Strike interact with feats and abilities such as Action Surge which provide benefits when a player spends an action point?

For example, suppose that a Human Warlord with the Action Surge feat spends an action point to use Commander's Strike to give a Fighter a melee basic attack against a monster. Would this attack gain the +3 bonus from Action Surge? How about if the Fighter had the Action Surge feat, but the Warlord didn't? How about if both of them did?

********************
Page Number: 145
Book Name: 4e Player's Handbook


------

BTW, it looks like the front section of this thread (the one with the big list) is extremely out of date. When will it be updated?
I'm not going to post a followup on the throwing weapons thing, just because it's so stupidly trivial and I can't imagine the DM that wouldn't let you just throw the stupid daggers that I'd also want to play with. You guys can send in questions and catch them in their own confusion if you want.

On other fronts, CharOp had a question in a thread they were arguing over all day. I instead posted a question to CustServ and went to sleep. I think the CharOp argument made more sense than this CustServ response:
Question: Non-Magic Shields and Magical Bracers

Customer (Daniel Gee) 08/08/2008 07:14 AM
Can a PC wear Bracers of Mighty Striking (an Arm slot item) while holding a non-magicical Heavy Shield (also an Arm slot item) and benefit from both at the same time?

********************
Page Number: 224
Book Name: Player's Handbook

Response

Response (Support Agent) 08/08/2008 12:11 PM
Greetings,

Unfortunately, you only get one arms slot. Thus, you can't wear both bracers and a shield.

We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.

To login to your account, or update your question please click here.

Tony
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast
1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada)
425-204-8069 (From all other countries)
Monday-Friday 9am-6pm PST / 12pm-9pm EST
Fair enough. I might ask them sometime today or tomorrow, assuming mithmurr doesn't ninja me on that too. ;)

On arm slots: Yea, when I found that in the PHB I found it a little odd, but I can see why they did it. I guess they decided bracers and a shield gets to be too much, so you need to decide which one you want more. Less for us power gamers to abuse.

When my computer inevitably explodes and kills me, my cat inherits everything I own. He may be the only one capable of continuing my work. And Stay Down: The Polearm Momentum Handbook
...
On other fronts, CharOp had a question in a thread they were arguing over all day. I instead posted a question to CustServ and went to sleep. I think the CharOp argument made more sense than this CustServ response:...

Unfortunately, you only get one arms slot. Thus, you can't wear both bracers and a shield.

I'm not sure why you say the CSR isn't making sense. He's correct about there only being one arms slot for you character. (Yes, I know characters have two arms, but there is only one "arms" slot.)
I'm not sure why you say the CSR isn't making sense. He's correct about there only being one arms slot for you character. (Yes, I know characters have two arms, but there is only one "arms" slot.)

I'm not one to dispute CustServ, but the general rule on that sort of thing is you can have/wear as many of a type of thing as you want (10 rings, 5 necklaces, Mr T starter-kit, and all that), but you can only have one magical item per slot.

At least, I believe that was the case in 3.X, if they decidedly changed it, then oh well, I guess. Maybe the rule now is that you can only benefit from one item per slot, therefore you can have a shield, but it won't provide any advantages, at all.

"Not only are you wrong, but I even created an Excel spreadsheet to show you how wrong you are." --James Wyatt, May 2006

Dilige, et quod vis fac

I'm not one to dispute CustServ, but the general rule on that sort of thing is you can have/wear as many of a type of thing as you want (10 rings, 5 necklaces, Mr T starter-kit, and all that), but you can only have one magical item per slot....

P.224, "Magic Item Categories"

"You can benefit from only one magic item that you wear in your arms slot even if, practically speaking, you can wear bracers and carry a shield at the same time. You benefit from the item you put on first; any other item you put in the same item slot doesn't function for you until you take off the first item...."
P.224, "Magic Item Categories"

"You can benefit from only one magic item that you wear in your arms slot even if, practically speaking, you can wear bracers and carry a shield at the same time. You benefit from the item you put on first; any other item you put in the same item slot doesn't function for you until you take off the first item...."

So basically someone didn't RTFM, and asked CustServ, who also didn't RTFM, and we got a crappy call?

Good to see this is still around, though.

"Not only are you wrong, but I even created an Excel spreadsheet to show you how wrong you are." --James Wyatt, May 2006

Dilige, et quod vis fac

So basically someone didn't RTFM, and asked CustServ, who also didn't RTFM, and we got a crappy call?

Good to see this is still around, though.

RTFM?

"Patience is the calm acceptance that things can happen in a different order than the one you have in mind."

~ David G. Allen

 

Would you like to help build the D&D 5e forum community?
You can start by introducing yourself here.
RTFM?

Read The F***ing Manual.
pukunui: It stands for "Read The F***ing Manual". It's an especially rude way to say read the manual before asking questions. I don't like people with that attitude, however, because sometimes the manual has information buried deep within its text that is hard to look up. You may vaguely remember something about it, but cannot find it again for the exact details.

I don't think it's right to demand that people reread the manual from cover to cover every time they have a question. Spot checking doesn't always turn up an answer, and a page by page reread is inappropriate. That's why we ask questions on the forum and contact CSR. Maybe the CSR doesn't have an excuse, but the average forum poster isn't being paid to know the PHB cover to cover.

Cohen95 may or may not have meant to be rude, but that's certainly the intended effect of the term RTFM, and I'm sure he was aware of that when he wrote it.
When my computer inevitably explodes and kills me, my cat inherits everything I own. He may be the only one capable of continuing my work. And Stay Down: The Polearm Momentum Handbook
Thanks. I suspected it was something like that.

"Patience is the calm acceptance that things can happen in a different order than the one you have in mind."

~ David G. Allen

 

Would you like to help build the D&D 5e forum community?
You can start by introducing yourself here.
Cohen95 may or may not have meant to be rude, but that's certainly the intended effect of the term RTFM, and I'm sure he was aware of that when he wrote it.

I did not intend to be rude. You must understand, I learned this phrase from my mother. She's a professional computer geek, and it comes up a lot in her line of work. Further, I acknowledge that just because rudeness was not intended, does not mean rudeness was not perceived. I hope you don't take it personal, since, personally, I don't know you, and have no way of affecting your person.

That said, just because something is difficult to look up, doesn't mean you should just ask. Knowledge wants to be free, but true understanding is earned, not given. I can tell you how to build a character all day long, but until you do your own research and find your own reasons do build a character a certain way, you're never going to understand why you should do it a certain way. Further, you may come to different, yet equally valid conclusions, than I did.

I'm all for giving advice and the like, but I genuinely dislike the idea of people who spend hours on a hobby yet act as though they don't have time to really look something up. Hidden or not, it's only ~300 pages.

"Not only are you wrong, but I even created an Excel spreadsheet to show you how wrong you are." --James Wyatt, May 2006

Dilige, et quod vis fac

I personally believe in asking. There's no sense spending hours looking for an answer when 5 minutes (or seconds!) of asking a simple question resolves the issue and allows you to focus again on the task at hand. I love my hobbies too much to bow to show stoppers, especially just because I might offend someone who thinks I should waste my time researching the answer alone.

Any good employer will teach you that -- they can't afford to have you spinning your wheels uselessly because you're paralyzed by a compulsion to not bother others with questions. Likewise, most players do not wish to have their time for their hobby consumed by endless searching for answers. They can just ask, and then get back to whatever the question interrupted. If a search of the manual doesn't turn up an answer, that doesn't mean you cancel all appointments and read the book from introduction to index looking for the answer. It's much better to just ask.

Little scientific progress would be made if every aspiring scientist was expected to RTFM for every single question they had, no matter how big or how small, because their colleagues and superiors wouldn't give them the time of day. "Aw damn. Hey Bob, do you remember off the top of your head what to do when the liquid turns purple?" "Oh yea, no biggie, you just... Wait a second! You're trying to be efficient and save time and avoid needless mistakes by asking questions! Well no chance buddy, RTFM! It's a 300 page book and that's not listed in the index so good luck! Better hurry, that solution explodes in about 30 seconds".

Asking too many questions thoughtlessly and without effort is wrong, and I imagine such experiences are what led you to your philosophy (that's when RTFM is entirely appropriate). However, too few are worse. When given the choice between truly wasted time searching, and braving the forums and rude responses, I'll take the forums. When the forums don't work, as in this case, I ask a CSR. The search for knowledge and the pursuit of a hobby do not have to be done the hard way to be done right or well, and they should never be halted for long for something that can be easily learned by asking.

Funny, that's kind of what this thread is about. You could read the manual a thousand times and ponder endlessly on its meaning, or you could just ask. And, when you get your answer, post it here for the rest of us.
When my computer inevitably explodes and kills me, my cat inherits everything I own. He may be the only one capable of continuing my work. And Stay Down: The Polearm Momentum Handbook
The trouble is that the game says you could put on a shield over bracers (thats even the example IIRC), and you clearly don't get the magic benefit of the shield if they're magical bracers (since the bracers would have been put on first), but it never says if you still get the non-magic benefit of the shield while wearing magical bracers under said shield.
The trouble is that the game says you could put on a shield over bracers (thats even the example IIRC), and you clearly don't get the magic benefit of the shield if they're magical bracers (since the bracers would have been put on first), but it never says if you still get the non-magic benefit of the shield while wearing magical bracers under said shield.

Considering that bracers have no non-magical mechanical effect, I don't see why you wouldn't receive the non-magical effects of a shield if you were using both. It's just that you can't receive the magical effects of both at the same time.

"Patience is the calm acceptance that things can happen in a different order than the one you have in mind."

~ David G. Allen

 

Would you like to help build the D&D 5e forum community?
You can start by introducing yourself here.
Well, CS sees it differently. I won't play it that way in my own game, but it'll be a houserule if you don't. Most of these questions are only important for the RPGA anyways.
The latest round of errata has made Brew Potion a 1st level ritual, however the lowest level potion in the PHB is still 5th level, so there's nothing you can do with it at levels 1-4. I pointed this out to Customer Service and their response, as expected, was:

While there may not be any potions currently available at levels 1-4, there may be some available in the future.

I'm willing to bet there will be something in the Adventurer's Vault.

"Patience is the calm acceptance that things can happen in a different order than the one you have in mind."

~ David G. Allen

 

Would you like to help build the D&D 5e forum community?
You can start by introducing yourself here.
Questions about Wizards' Spell Books, answered by Charles.

Q. How long does it take a Wizard to prepare her spells after an extended rest?

A. There is not set amount of time to do this, so it is really up to your DM. Strictly by the rules, however, it takes no time to prepare a power you have memorized. It's just that using those powers have such a taxing toll on your endurance that you need to rest before having the energy to use them again.

Q. How does losing her spellbook affect the spells available to a Wizard?

A. Losing a spellbook would make it so that you cannot memorize/prepare abilities that you don't already have prepared.

Q. What options are available to a Wizard whose spellbook is destroyed or lost permanently?

A. For a wizard that loses their spellbook, they will need to purchase/find a new one, and they would need to copy their spells into their new spellbook so they can change their powers as they did prior to losing their spellbook. Any specifics (such as re-learning powers you had previously in your old spellbook) will need to be worked out by the DM.

Q. Situation: A wizard takes an extended rest. When she awakens she prepares spells. Then during an encounter she uses all of her Daily and Utility spells. During the same encounter her spellbook is destroyed. She then takes another extended rest that evening. When she awakens, she has no spellbook with which to prepare spells. So does she have access to (1) only her At-Will spells, or (2) her At-Will spells, plus the same Daily and Utility spells she had prepared the previous day?

A. #2 is correct. You do not 'forget' your powers when you use them, you're just too tired to use them again until you rest.

Q. Now, having no spellbook, she wishes to replace it. She buys a new book. What spells can she write into the new book without outside help? (1) All of the spells in her old book, or (2) only the Daily and Utility spells she last prepared from her old book.

A. #2 for sure, and anything else at your DM's discretion.

* * * * * * * *

So, what this boils down to is: "A wizard does not need access to her spellbook unless she wants to prepare different spells from the ones she prepared last time."

Hmm.
So, what this boils down to is: "A wizard does not need access to her spellbook unless she wants to prepare different spells from the ones she prepared last time."

Hmm.

chel nak (Direct Translation: Very Cool).

"Not only are you wrong, but I even created an Excel spreadsheet to show you how wrong you are." --James Wyatt, May 2006

Dilige, et quod vis fac

PH, page 287 on Charge or page 269 on Conditions to make a attack/charge

It's actually Bodyknock who should have credit for this (it was he who asked and got the answer), but as I think it's rather important I quote the answer he got below:

Question:
Charge (p.287 PHB) says "you must move directly to the nearest square from which you can attack the enemy." There's two different opinions on what that means on the forums. Either:

a) When you charge an opponent it similar to if the opponent were Pulling you toward it (p.285). That is, each square you move must bring you nearer to the creature. If this is the case, then you can zig zag around obstacles a bit while you charge, provided every square you move is one square closer to the target;

or

b) You have to trace an imaginary straight line between you and the target and follow that line as closely as possible. (Note though that the charge description does not mention requiring line of sight or line of effect. However some people are reading "directly" to mean "in a straight line".) Interpreting it this way would prohibit charging around obstacles or corners, and it also begs the question of how you properly follow a straight line on a square grid map if the line is at an odd angle.


I can't seem to find any examples or diagrams of charging in the PHB to refer to. What's the official stance on 4th edition charging? It is like a monster pulling you, or is it that you follow an imaginary line between squares?


Answer:
You do not have to charge in a straight line, but you do have to charge to the nearest square from which you can make the attack.
You do have to be able to see the target you are charging.

Joe
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast

So, what this boils down to is: "A wizard does not need access to her spellbook unless she wants to prepare different spells from the ones she prepared last time."

I'm really glad the emphasis in 4th is to not take items away from players except in extreme circumstances. Taking away the +6 magic sword a player needs to compete with the challenge rating of enemies is terrible, but it might be even worse to take away a wizard's spellbook because the DM can rule that the spell loss is permanent -- at least the fighter can re-buy/re-enchant his sword, but the wizard can't just relearn all his spells if the DM says they're gone now. He loses a lot of spells that way! At least the wizard can still function though, albeit with far less versatility.

NeoNick & Bodyknock: Interesting. That seems similar to the answer I posted before. Are there any crucial differences?
When my computer inevitably explodes and kills me, my cat inherits everything I own. He may be the only one capable of continuing my work. And Stay Down: The Polearm Momentum Handbook
PH, page 287 on Charge or page 269 on Conditions to make a attack/charge

It's actually Bodyknock who should have credit for this (it was he who asked and got the answer), but as I think it's rather important I quote the answer he got below:

I'm too lazy to re-read through this whole thread again, but I am pretty sure it was in here where it was answered that you can even make 'C' or 'U' shaped charges to avoid opportunity attacks, difficult terrain, etc. meaning you do not have to move closer on every square of movement, only END in the nearest square.
I wrote in asking exactly how immune are Goblin Warriors to OA's when they use their Mobile Ranged Attack action. There was some confusion over whether it was merely for the attack or for the entire action.

For what it is worth to the community (apologies if you think I worded the question poorly):

SpaceShot to CustServ
"The goblin warrior can move up to half its speed; at any point during that movement, it makes one ranged attack without provoking an opportunity attack."

Presumably this means the goblin warrior can, as a standard action, move up to three squares and attack all as part of a standard action.

"...at any point during that movement..."
The easy part of this is that the goblin could make the ranged attack in any one of those three squares of movement all as part of the standard action. So presumably the attack could come from one place and the goblin warrior could end in another place (like say, behind cover)

"...without provoking an opportunity attack."
Here is where I get confused, so let me walk you through the different interpretations I have come up with. Does this mean that:

(Limited view)
When the goblin decides to make the attack, if he is in a square where he would normally provoke an OA by making a ranged attack, he doesn't?

(More expansive view)
Or does it mean he could make the three squares of movement and the ranged attack at any point, and not provoke OA's due to movement AND not provoke OA's due to ranged attacks because he is using this ability.

In other words, does the "without provoking an opportunity attack" operate just on the "makes one ranged attack" clause or on the whole movement?

The limited view doesn't ruin the ability, but I would argue that the whole idea of avoiding an OA is not that useful. You wouldn't want to end next to your target and the whole point is not to get close anyways. It would only be useful if you wanted to attack a different target and you were in a threatened square.

I guess all it really means is you would get to keep firing away when when you are closed on by melee attackers. But then again, maybe not.

But some DM might rule that the goblin warrior didn't make any actual movement and that the ability requires that to trigger the "without provoking an opportunity attack" clause. So would the goblin warrior actually have to move?

It's still useful as a "shot on the run" kind of ability where a goblin could get a better look and the target and then end behind cover again.

The expansive view makes it pretty powerful (maybe too much so?), as the goblin is basically shifting up to three squares and firing whenever he wants, I think.

Thank you for your time.


CustServ
A Goblin using the Mobile Ranged Attack ability will not provoke opportunity attacks. This is a part of the Goblin's standard action. If the goblin moves normally (a move action) he will still be subject to the rules for opportunity attacks. During the Mobile Ranged Attack ability, the goblin does not provoke an opportunity attack for moving or making a ranged attack.

Please let me know if you have any more questions!

Charles
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast
..."The goblin warrior can move up to half its speed; at any point during that movement, it makes one ranged attack without provoking an opportunity attack."

...A Goblin using the Mobile Ranged Attack ability will not provoke opportunity attacks. This is a part of the Goblin's standard action. If the goblin moves normally (a move action) he will still be subject to the rules for opportunity attacks. During the Mobile Ranged Attack ability, the goblin does not provoke an opportunity attack for moving or making a ranged attack.

Charles
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast

This is one of the rare times I think the CSR got it wrong. The power doesn't say "The goblin warrior can move up to half its speed without provoking an opportunity attack." It says "The goblin warrior makes one ranged attack without provoking an opportunity attack."

So personally I think CSR Charles simply misread the power and if it was escalated to a dev the answer would probably be reversed. Just my opinion.

P.S. Given the confusion, though, it might be worth WotC clarifying the language of the power in errata. Especially if the intent of the power is that it is a combination of a "tumble" and ranged shot. If that's the case, then CSR Charles is correct but the wording of the power should be changed to make that clearer.
Some things to note:

1) The power says the goblin warrior moves half its speed, not shifts. Player powers are very careful to distinguish between moving and shifting. I assume this means the movement in this power provokes opportunity attacks.

2) The power only mentions that the attack does not provoke opportunity attacks. This statement is separate from the movement description. It seems very explicit. If they intended for the "no opportunity attacks" to apply to movement as well, they did a bad job conveying this in the text.

IMO, this movement will incur opportunity attacks if movement as part of a standard action functions the same way as movement as part of a move action -- you have to shift to avoid OAs. The attack will not incur opportunity attacks, however. I assume an errata could change the description to say "shift" instead of move, or otherwise explain the intent better, but beyond that I'm agreeing with BodyKnock. The CSR's response surprises me and I assume it's a simple mistake on his part.

Also IMO, the power ought to read more as the tumble and shoot way (just because that makes the enemy more potent). I would probably run it that way as a DM, though I'd do so knowing that it's not what the book says.
When my computer inevitably explodes and kills me, my cat inherits everything I own. He may be the only one capable of continuing my work. And Stay Down: The Polearm Momentum Handbook
So, according to CustServ, I can use Deft Strike to back out of melee without getting OAs, and then make a ranged attack and still use my move action to get further away?
So, according to CustServ, I can use Deft Strike to back out of melee without getting OAs, and then make a ranged attack and still use my move action to get further away?

Maybe if you're a goblin warrior ...

"Patience is the calm acceptance that things can happen in a different order than the one you have in mind."

~ David G. Allen

 

Would you like to help build the D&D 5e forum community?
You can start by introducing yourself here.
...1) The power says the goblin warrior moves half its speed, not shifts.

That's an excellent point, and yet another reason to think the CSR simply misread the power. If part of the intent of the power was for the goblin to avoid provoking attacks while moving, they almost certainly would have used the word "shift" instead of "move" in the power description.
Maybe if you're a goblin warrior ...

Oh, yeah. :embarrass
No worries. When you're the DM, you get to play as anything. :D

Well, as long as your players don't mind too much. If you're really dead-set on playing Orcus, it's a good idea to get your players into epic levels first. ;)
When my computer inevitably explodes and kills me, my cat inherits everything I own. He may be the only one capable of continuing my work. And Stay Down: The Polearm Momentum Handbook
No worries. When you're the DM, you get to play as anything. :D

Well, as long as your players don't mind too much. If you're really dead-set on playing Orcus, it's a good idea to get your players into epic levels first. ;)

I'm deadset on playing Orcus one day ... I'm really hoping that E3 will involve fighting him.

"Patience is the calm acceptance that things can happen in a different order than the one you have in mind."

~ David G. Allen

 

Would you like to help build the D&D 5e forum community?
You can start by introducing yourself here.
Here are 35 questions I sent to customer service. Most regard the rogue and there are a few general questions that follow. Many of the questions are basically duplicates. This was done for consistancy and ease of reference.
The customer service representative answering these questions was Chuck.
Thanks to Chuck for his assistance.

CSR Responses

1. Deft Strike, 118 - Do you have to be able to see the target before you use Deft Strike?
Nope

2. Riposte Strike, 118 - If you hit the target with Riposte Strike, does the target know you will make a riposte as an immediate interrupt?
Generally yes but this is up to your Dungeon Master

3. Positioning Strike, 118 - Can an artful dodger with a 10 Charisma opt to slide the target one square, as if he were not an artful dodger?
Yes, that is still an option

4. Fleeting Ghost, 119 - Does this exploit allow you to become hidden without Superior Cover or Total Concealment?
Unfortunately, there isn’t an official answer for the situation you describe. I’ve passed along this conversation to the game’s developers. Hopefully, we’ll see an update or FAQ entry covering it soon, but until then it’s up to the campaign’s Dungeon Master to decide. The DM is always the final arbiter on how they want their campaign to run.

5. Great Leap, 119 - Does this exploit allow you to avoid opportunity attacks?
No, it only gives you what it says in the power.

6. Bait and Switch, 119 - Can an artful dodger with a 10 Charisma opt to slide the target one square, as if he were not an artful dodger?
Yes, he can choose not to use the "bonus".

7. Clever Riposte, 120 - If the target dies from the damage dealt when it attacks you, are you still able to be hit by the target's attack?
You still take the damage as the attack is successful before you trigger the attack.

8. Walking Wounded, 120 - If you hit the target with this exploit, does the target know it will fall prone if it moves more than half its speed?
Generally yes but this is up to your Dungeon Master

9. Imperiling Strike, 121 - Can a brutal scoundrel with a 10 Strength opt to give the target a -1 to AC, as if he were not a brutal scoundrel?
Yes, he can choose not to use the "bonus".

10. Close Quarters, 122 - Does the opportunity attack for moving into the space of the adjacent creature take a -4 penalty?
Yes.

11. Tornado Strike, 123 - Can an artful dodger with a 10 Charisma opt to slide the target two squares, as if he were not an artful dodger?
Yes, he can choose not to use the "bonus".

12. Hide in Plain Sight, 123 - Do you remain hidden if the cover or concealment is removed? For example, you run behind a 10' wall (superior cover) in an open field and succesfully perform a stealth check against several enemies. The enemies then walk around the wall.
Unfortunately, there isn’t an official answer for the situation you describe. I’ve passed along this conversation to the game’s developers. Hopefully, we’ll see an update or FAQ entry covering it soon, but until then it’s up to the campaign’s Dungeon Master to decide. The DM is always the final arbiter on how they want their campaign to run.

13. Leaping Dodge, 124 - Is this power used before or after the enemy rolls to attack?
before the attack roll

14. Dragon Tail Strike, 124 - On a hit, is the target aware you will get to attack it again as an immediate interrupt? Do you need to attack again with the same weapon?
Generally yes but this is up to your Dungeon Master

15. Hounding Strike, 124 - Can an artful dodger with a 10 Charisma opt to get a +1 bonus to defenses, as if he were not an artful dodger?
Yes, he can choose not to use the "bonus".

16. Snake's Retreat, 124 - How long does the effect remain? If I am adjacent to an enemy under the effect of Snake's Retreat, can I attack the enemy with a ranged attack, shift away from the opportunity attack and then resume my ranged attack? What if the enemy is not under the effect of Snake's Retreat, and the ranged attack I am performing is Snake's Retreat?
You can not use immediate action on your turn so that is not possible normally but if you were able to take a ranged attack when it was not your turn you could shift away because of the opportunity action.


17. Cloud Jump, 125 - Are you subject to opportunity attacks when using Cloud Jump?
Yes

18. Dazzling Acrobatics, 125 - What could attack you while you shift?
I can’t make an exhaustive list for you, but a readied action could cause this.

19. Ghost on the Wind, 125 - Do you become invisible only to the target?
No, you are invisible to everyone

20. Moving Target, 126 - Does the "Requirement" indicate that you must be in active combat? My understanding "wielding" is not just holding.
Welding means that you are using the weapon for that power

21. Killer's Eye, 128 - Does a target who has delayed his action count as having acted in the encounter?
No

22. Bad Idea, Friend, 128 - Would the melee attack hit you before you use this power?
No, it is an immediate interrupt and so it resolves before the trigger

23. Shadow Assassin's Riposte, 128 - Does this work against minions?
Yes

24. Are magic shuriken purchased in lots of five?
no

25. If five magic shuriken can be purchased as one lot, can the shuriken be distributed among five party members so they all have a magic throwing weapon?
no

26. Can you hold five shuriken in your off hand?
no

27. Can you draw five shuriken as a minor action?
no

28. Can you use a close attack from a daily exploit against multiple opponents if you have no weapons in hand, but five non-magic shuriken in your belt or wherever you may be keeping them?
yes

29. Do you have to be able to see an enemy before you initiate a charge?
There are no sight requirements on a charge

30. Elven Accuracy, 40 - Do you know if you hit before you choose to use Elven Accuracy?
Yes, but you are more likely to use it if you’ve miss.

31. Divine Miracle, 175 - If Elven Accuracy is your last remaining encounter power, can you keep using it to reroll an attack until you get a natural 20?
No, you have to accept the second roll.

32. Lasting Frost, 203 - If you have the Lasting Frost feat, when do you apply the vulnerable 5 effect? ie. After the hit, before the damage.
After you have completed the hit.

33. Warrior of the Wild, 209 - Does this feat permit you to take the four existing ranger paragon paths from the Player's Handbook?
No, each of the ranger paragons have other prerequisites

34. Holy Avenger, 234 - Can a Holy Avenger be used as an implement for a cleric?
Yes

35. Terrifying Insight, 73 - How does this interact with attacks that target multiple defenses like Prismatic Spray, 168?
Unfortunately, there isn’t an official answer for the situation you describe. I’ve passed along this conversation to the game’s developers. Hopefully, we’ll see an update or FAQ entry covering it soon, but until then it’s up to the campaign’s Dungeon Master to decide. The DM is always the final arbiter on how they want their campaign to run.
This is one of the rare times I think the CSR got it wrong.

Like I said, I only offer the Q&A for the benefit that the community knows the question was asked. I can't say you should run it any particular way in your game.