Rules Q&A FAQ + ask a simple question

15511 posts / 0 new
Last post

Question about the immobilized condition: Is it possible for a player, other than the immobilized one, to move his immobilized alley by granting free move/shiftactions? (for example some Warlord skills like "Knights Move" or "Wolfpack tactics")

D&D Outsider since Nov 18th 2010, if you wonder about the little red dragon, this one is dedicated to the great VT community.


Question about the immobilized condition: Is it possible for a player, other than the immobilized one, to move his immobilized alley by granting free move/shiftactions? (for example some Warlord skills like "Knights Move" or "Wolfpack tactics")



If the power says "push/pull/slide/teleport", yes.  If it says "an ally can move/shift/whatever", no.


Immobilised means you cannot voluntarily move from that square.

Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.

The Channel Divinity power Light Within creates a zone that heals each ally that ends their turn in the zone.  The power does not state the size of the zone.  If the zone is just one square then why does the imply that more then one ally can end their turn in the zone?

The Channel Divinity power Light Within creates a zone that heals each ally that ends their turn in the zone.  The power does not state the size of the zone.  If the zone is just one square then why does the imply that more then one ally can end their turn in the zone?


The power states "a zone of healing light appears in an unoccupied square within range".


The Zone is, thus, 1 square.


It implies that more than one ally may end there turn there because more than one ally *can* end their turn there.  If the first ally leaves the zone off-turn (through a push/pull/slide) or falls prone, other allies can enter that square and end their turn there.

Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.

Hi. I'm new to D and D. I'm wondering, can a PC do different actions apart from attacking. For example, if a PC had a length of rope, could he and another PC stretch it out, so that any enemies that came around the corner would trip over it?

Another question: could a PC's area attack hurt another PC?


Hi. I'm new to D and D. I'm wondering, can a PC do different actions apart from attacking. For example, if a PC had a length of rope, could he and another PC stretch it out, so that any enemies that came around the corner would trip over it?



This is something that the rules don't strictly cover, but as a Dm you'd probably want to allow it to happen as it is good storytelling, maybe have them use their skills like stealth agianst the targets passive perception to hide the rope, failure to see it results in a trip/knocked prone on the enemy or if it's a low level guy knocked unconscious from the fall if they were running etc.



Another question: could a PC's area attack hurt another PC?




Yes they can, depending on the targets affected by that are attack, If it states creatures then it targets friends and foes alike, if it targets enemies then allies are safe entirely.


Blah blah blah

Question regarding swarms. They take half damage from melee/ranged attacks, however, they are typically vulnerable to close and area attacks.


How are they affected by the zone effect of Fire Seed, or similar powers. It's automatic damage, so it is not an attack. Additionally, the power creating the zone is ranged, not area or close. In looking up the Zone keyword it says to use the rules for area powers in determining the squares it occupies, however, I was not sure that necessarily made the zone a 'close or area attack' for purposes of damaging a swarm.


Would appreciate some clarification, thanks!


Question regarding swarms. They take half damage from melee/ranged attacks, however, they are typically vulnerable to close and area attacks.


How are they affected by the zone effect of Fire Seed, or similar powers. It's automatic damage, so it is not an attack. Additionally, the power creating the zone is ranged, not area or close. In looking up the Zone keyword it says to use the rules for area powers in determining the squares it occupies, however, I was not sure that necessarily made the zone a 'close or area attack' for purposes of damaging a swarm.



Simplest answer: Autodamage from a zone is not an attack at all.  So it's neither resisted nor boosted by a Swarm.


Probably closer to RAW answer:  "damage done by the attack" is the key, and since the Ranged attack creates the Zone, the damage is being done by the Ranged attack, and halved.

Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.

Thanks. When it came up in play over the weekend I treated the damage as being neither resisted or increased by the swarm, since it was not an attack.

If an enemy charges a PC, and the PC uses a power that lets them shift one when an opponenet moves next to them (or something similar; i.e. Ranger powers) does the charge still happen and then the PC moves or does the shift interupt the charge's movement, negating the charge attack?


I say the charge is interupted, as per this:


PH 268:
Reaction: An immediate reaction lets you act in
response to a trigger. The triggering action, event, or
condition occurs and is completely resolved before
you take your reaction, except that you can interrupt
a creature’s movement. If a creature triggers your
immediate reaction while moving (by coming into
range, for example), you take your action before the
creature finishes moving but after it has moved at
least 1 square.


Now our DM has been told this and shown this MANY times but still rules that the charge happens before we can react since the "charge" is one action...or some other logic.


 


 


 

Depends on the final position of your shift.  If you shift "back" and they still have movement then they can continue moving and complete the charge.


If you shift towards them (at an angle) and are still adjacent it's debatable if they can attack or not.


If you shift out of their movement and reach they can't attack.


If an enemy charges a PC, and the PC uses a power that lets them shift one when an opponenet moves next to them (or something similar; i.e. Ranger powers) does the charge still happen and then the PC moves or does the shift interupt the charge's movement, negating the charge attack?



If the attacker can still reach you with his attack, he can still Charge you.  And just because you moved doesn't mean *he* has to stop, if he's got movement left - you might React to his entering the adjacent square, shift away 2, and then discover that *he just follows you* because he's got two more movement.


So:  Your GM is wrong, because you are Reacting to *the last step of his movement*.  You are *partially* wrong - the Charge is NOT automatically cancelled, because you didn't *interrupt* his attack, you *reacted* to his last move before the attack - so he can keep moving after your Reaction completes, just as if he'd taken an Opportunity Attack or someone had Readied an attack on him.

Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.

Simplest answer: Autodamage from a zone is not an attack at all.  So it's neither resisted nor boosted by a Swarm.

fwiw: WotC custserv has corroborated this notion a few times.

Hi All,


The following shift/movement question got a hearty debate at our Saturday night gaming session:


The Scene: A party member (Red Dawn) was put down by a critical hit from Krand (-45 HP). He was given a Healing Word by the Cleric but still prone and adjacent to the enemy on his next turn.


The Rule in Question: Red Dawn wanted to shift back one square but I ruled he could not do so while prone. As I understand it, a shift is defined as one square of movement and one square only. If prone and trying to shift, you would essentially have to be crawling which is one half your movement. Thus, that is .5 of movement (since shift is only 1) and when rounding down, that is not possible.


The Question: So can you shift one square while prone? Even better can you shift one square while prone and adjacent to an emeny without suffering an attack of opportunity?


I think the move Red Dawn had to do to avoid an attack of opportunity was to stand up (move action) and then shift back one square (double move)...but then no standard action left to attack.

In the PHB, I'm reading pages 288 and 292. I'm starting to wonder if Red Dawn, who has a move of 6, could have crawled three away (half movement) but still provoked an attack of opportunity. He just couldn't have shifted while prone to avoid that attack of opportunity. Man, this is a tricky one!


Thanks in advance for your wisdom (+4),


Ben
Chandler, AZ


"Say hey" on Twitter
Check out our blog: Ben's RPG Pile
Download our weekly video podcast  


 


Hi All,


The following shift/movement question got a hearty debate at our Saturday night gaming session:


The Scene: A party member (Red Dawn) was put down by a critical hit from Krand (-45 HP). He was given a Healing Word by the Cleric but still prone and adjacent to the enemy on his next turn.


The Rule in Question: Red Dawn wanted to shift back one square but I ruled he could not do so while prone. As I understand it, a shift is defined as one square of movement and one square only. If prone and trying to shift, you would essentially have to be crawling which is one half your movement. Thus, that is .5 of movement (since shift is only 1) and when rounding down, that is not possible.


The Question: So can you shift one square while prone? Even better can you shift one square while prone and adjacent to an emeny without suffering an attack of opportunity?


I think the move Red Dawn had to do to avoid an attack of opportunity was to stand up (move action) and then shift back one square (double move)...but then no standard action left to attack.

In the PHB, I'm reading pages 288 and 292. I'm starting to wonder if Red Dawn, who has a move of 6, could have crawled three away (half movement) but still provoked an attack of opportunity. He just couldn't have shifted while prone to avoid that attack of opportunity. Man, this is a tricky one!


Thanks in advance for your wisdom (+4),


Ben
Chandler, AZ


"Say hey" on Twitter
Check out our blog: Ben's RPG Pile
Download our weekly video podcast  


 




Can't shift while prone, we actually just had this discussion in another thread, the title wouldn't lead you to it though, the PHB errata contains an addendum to the prone condition. It's in the compendium if you look up prone as well.



Prone

• You grant combat advantage to enemies making melee attacks against you.
• You can’t move from your space, although you can teleport, crawl, or be forced to move by a pull, a push, or a slide.
• You get a +2 bonus to all defenses against ranged attacks from nonadjacent enemies.
• You’re lying on the ground. (If you’re flying, you safely descend a distance equal to your fly speed. If you don’t reach the ground, you fall.)
• You take a -2 penalty to attack rolls.
• You can drop prone as a minor action.



Shift is a specific move action, so is crawl, they can't be combined into a shiftcrawl, just like you can't shiftrun.  I highlighted the important addendum above

Blah blah blah

Thank you. I really appreciate the prone clarification. Makes total sense.


Ben
Chandler, AZ


"Say hey" on Twitter
Check out our blog: Ben's RPG Pile
Download our weekly video podcast



If an enemy charges a PC, and the PC uses a power that lets them shift one when an opponenet moves next to them (or something similar; i.e. Ranger powers) does the charge still happen and then the PC moves or does the shift interupt the charge's movement, negating the charge attack?



If the attacker can still reach you with his attack, he can still Charge you.  And just because you moved doesn't mean *he* has to stop, if he's got movement left - you might React to his entering the adjacent square, shift away 2, and then discover that *he just follows you* because he's got two more movement.


So:  Your GM is wrong, because you are Reacting to *the last step of his movement*.  You are *partially* wrong - the Charge is NOT automatically cancelled, because you didn't *interrupt* his attack, you *reacted* to his last move before the attack - so he can keep moving after your Reaction completes, just as if he'd taken an Opportunity Attack or someone had Readied an attack on him.




Similar question...


Say a monster has an immediate reaction triggered from being hit by an attack. A rogue has a power that allows him to shift x squares, attack, and then shift y squares away.


Would the monster be able to use the immediate reaction before the rogue shifts away?

Say a monster has an immediate reaction triggered from being hit by an attack. A rogue has a power that allows him to shift x squares, attack, and then shift y squares away.

Would the monster be able to use the immediate reaction before the rogue shifts away?



Yes, because he's reacting to *being hit*.  Since it's a reaction, you resolve the rest of *the hit* first, and then he gets his reaction to being hit, and then anything else that happens *after* the hit (like, completing the Rogue's action and Shifting away) triggers.

Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.


 


Similar question...


Say a monster has an immediate reaction triggered from being hit by an attack. A rogue has a power that allows him to shift x squares, attack, and then shift y squares away.


Would the monster be able to use the immediate reaction before the rogue shifts away?




Nope.  The rogue gets to move first.


"Reaction: An immediate reaction lets you act in response to a trigger. The triggering action, event, or condition occurs and is completely resolved before you take your reaction, except that you can interrupt a creature’s movement. If a creature triggers your immediate reaction while moving (by coming into range, for example), you take your action before the creature finishes moving but after it has moved at least 1 square."


The enemy isn't reacting to the movement, so the rogue's action completely resolves before the reaction takes place.  Interrupting the movement only occurs if the movement itself is the trigger.


"Reaction: An immediate reaction lets you act in response to a trigger. The triggering action, event, or condition occurs and is completely resolved before you take your reaction, except that you can interrupt a creature’s movement. If a creature triggers your immediate reaction while moving (by coming into range, for example), you take your action before the creature finishes moving but after it has moved at least 1 square."


The enemy isn't reacting to the movement, so the rogue's action completely resolves before the reaction takes place.  Interrupting the movement only occurs if the movement itself is the trigger.




I appear to be wrong!  I thought the atomic nature of resolutions was universal, not just for movement!

Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.

Yep, Warden's Grasp is even more useless than we thought.


 

Just to play devil's advocate here regarding semantics... The monster's power says that the trigger is that he is hit by an attack; to what degree of granularity is it [the "triggering action, event, or condition"] meant to be broken down?


Is it the attack roll that hits the monster that is what is to get resolved completely, or is it the attack action (thus, the power) that is to be resolved completely in order for the reaction to occur?


I guess I'm not seeing why the rogue wouldn't have to shift away after the reaction, when it seems the attack hitting is resolved before the shift.


(thanks for your help!)

Just to play devil's advocate here regarding semantics... The monster's power says that the trigger is that he is hit by an attack; to what degree of granularity is it [the "triggering action, event, or condition"] meant to be broken down?

Is it the attack roll that hits the monster that is what is to get resolved completely, or is it the attack action (thus, the power) that is to be resolved completely in order for the reaction to occur?


I guess I'm not seeing why the rogue wouldn't have to shift away after the reaction, when it seems the attack hitting is resolved before the shift.



The attack hitting is resolved, but it's an *action*, and so the *action* is fully resolved before the Reaction happens.


The only exception to being able to react mid-action is if you're reacting to the *move*.

Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.


It all really depends on what events are and whether an attack is considered an event or part of action.  The only guidance that I can find is from PHB 278 under Conditional Durations.  


It lists 4 events: start of someone's turn, end of someone's turn, end of the encounter, and someone making a saving throw.

Hi ibixat,


For the shift prone notes...


Could you note the specific link and page number to the PHB Errata - I swore I looked in there and didn't find it. Same for the Compendium reference.

I really appreciate your reply on my question.

Thanks,


Ben


Nope.  The rogue gets to move first.


"Reaction: An immediate reaction lets you act in response to a trigger. The triggering action, event, or condition occurs and is completely resolved before you take your reaction, except that you can interrupt a creature’s movement. If a creature triggers your immediate reaction while moving (by coming into range, for example), you take your action before the creature finishes moving but after it has moved at least 1 square."


The enemy isn't reacting to the movement, so the rogue's action completely resolves before the reaction takes place.  Interrupting the movement only occurs if the movement itself is the trigger.




You missed some.


"An immediate reaction might interrupt other
actions a combatant takes after its triggering action.
For example, if a power lets you attack as an immediate
reaction when an attack hits you, your action
happens before the monster that hit you can take
any other action. If a monster has a power that lets
it make two attack rolls against you as a standard
action, and the first one hits, you can use an immediate
reaction before the next attack roll."


You missed some.


"An immediate reaction might interrupt other
actions a combatant takes after its triggering action.
For example, if a power lets you attack as an immediate
reaction when an attack hits you, your action
happens before the monster that hit you can take
any other action. If a monster has a power that lets
it make two attack rolls against you as a standard
action, and the first one hits, you can use an immediate
reaction before the next attack roll."




The Rogue moving is *not* a different Action.  It is the completion of the *same* Action.

Of course, so is a second attack with a Standard: Make Two Attacks action.

Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.


The Rogue moving is *not* a different Action.  It is the completion of the *same* Action.

Of course, so is a second attack with a Standard: Make Two Attacks action.




Indeed, but it seems funny that a monster can jump in the middle of a Ranger's Twin Strike, but it cannot jump in after taking damage but before an "Effect" line of a power.


I play Immediate Reactions as happening directly after the trigger resolves. If the Trigger is "hit," then the reaction happens after you are "hit" but before any effects of that hit are placed.


This turns "Unbreakable" (and similar powers) into something that is actually useful. If you play IRs as happening after the entire action is resolved, then you cannot reduce the damage (as it has already been dealt).


I play Immediate Reactions as happening directly after the trigger resolves. If the Trigger is "hit," then the reaction happens after you are "hit" but before any effects of that hit are placed.


This turns "Unbreakable" (and similar powers) into something that is actually useful. If you play IRs as happening after the entire action is resolved, then you cannot reduce the damage (as it has already been dealt).



Your way is, as usual, quite sensible, and it's how I play it myself (as my first answer shows!).  I just have become convinced that, while sensible and preferable, it's a *house rule* from here on in, because the official rules have a dumb spot.

Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.


You missed some.


"An immediate reaction might interrupt other
actions a combatant takes after its triggering action.

For example, if a power lets you attack as an immediate
reaction when an attack hits you, your action
happens before the monster that hit you can take
any other action.
If a monster has a power that lets
it make two attack rolls against you as a standard
action, and the first one hits, you can use an immediate
reaction before the next attack roll."




And there's the problem with 4E.  What is an attack? What is an action? 

This part shouldn't work, because if the monster can make two attacks as part of one action, then the action should completely resolve.  


But rules here say that multiple attacks as part of one action are two actions.  So then a move that is part of an attack should also be considered a separate action that is part of the same action.


The result is that you should rule how you want until they fix this, i.e. never.


As for Unbreakable, do we have any rules that say that damage can't be reduced after it's been dealt?  It's chronologically wonky, but nothing says it can't happen.  


Unbreakable being an immediate reaction just means that it can't be used if the damage would knock you below 0 hp.


Unbreakable being an immediate reaction just means that it can't be used if the damage would knock you below 0 hp.




Or of the amount of damage triggers some other effect - something that lasts "until you are bloodied", or if you're a Demigod and the no-action-required "first time you hit 0" power triggers...
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.

I am at work so I can't get the link for the errata or the compendium but all I did was go to the compendium, search for prone and narrow it down to glossary results and the prone glossary result was exactly what I posted.

Blah blah blah

Is there a difference between death saving throws and a common saving throws? 

Is there a difference between death saving throws and a common saving throws?

Well, a 20 on a death saving throw does something unique. However, a death saving throw is a subset of regular saving throws... things that affect normal saving throws affect death saving throws.

Hopefully this is easy: Warlord power: "Lead the attack", if the warlord goes unconscious, does the bonus to attacks linger? (based on wizard and other powers, I think no, but want to confirm)

Through the ages, many would wonder "Does art imitate life or does life imitate art?" I wonder "Does the art of discourse on the internet imitate the art of discourse in life or does the art of discourse in life imitate the art of discourse on the internet?"


Hopefully this is easy: Warlord power: "Lead the attack", if the warlord goes unconscious, does the bonus to attacks linger? (based on wizard and other powers, I think no, but want to confirm)





  Yes, you still get the bonus.  No reason for it to go away, it's not a zone or conjuration.  So, the effect persists even if the warlord is dead.

thanks - what about the +1 from Lend Might(feat)?

Through the ages, many would wonder "Does art imitate life or does life imitate art?" I wonder "Does the art of discourse on the internet imitate the art of discourse in life or does the art of discourse in life imitate the art of discourse on the internet?"

thanks - what about the +1 from Lend Might(feat)?

I see no reason why that should be cancelled if the warlord becomes dead or unconscious before the granted attack takes place.

May I ask: Does the damage from divine challenge trigger only once, or only once per turn? That is, if the damage is triggered, does the paladin have to "re-challenge" in order to set up the damage on a subsequent turn, or does the paladin just have to remain "engaged" with the target?

If I have to ask the GM for it, then I don't want it.

May I ask: Does the damage from divine challenge trigger only once, or only once per turn? That is, if the damage is triggered, does the paladin have to "re-challenge" in order to set up the damage on a subsequent turn, or does the paladin just have to remain "engaged" with the target?


Once per turn and the paladin has to "remain engaged" to deal the damage.