|
3 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2010 - 1:50PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Nov 11, 2009
|
B=Battlemind
E=Enemy
XXXXXX
XXXXXX
XXBEXX
XXXXXX
XXXXXX
Enemy attempts to move to the following postion:
XXXXXX
XXXEXX
XXBXXX
XXXXXX
XXXXXX
Battlemind interrupts with Blurred Step:
XXXXXX
XXXBXX
XXXEXX
XXXXXX
XXXXXX
Enemy's move action attempts to resolve but can not. Does the enemy lose his entire move action?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2010 - 2:26PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Mar 13, 2003
|
There is much debate about that. I really don't think there is a definite answer.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2010 - 3:23PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Aug 30, 2009
|
A fighter smacks his mark with an opportunity attack and negates his movement. That creature then doesn't get to say "oh well I'll just move again since you've had your OA now".
As a defender the battlemind would be crippled if this weren't the case also.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2010 - 3:41PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Nov 11, 2009
|
A fighter smacks his mark with an opportunity attack and negates his movement. That creature then doesn't get to say "oh well I'll just move again since you've had your OA now". As a defender the battlemind would be crippled if this weren't the case also.
Blurred step only triggers off of a shift, so it would make sense the enemy loses his shift rather than just being able to choose a new direction instead. I guess the goal would be to position yourself so that shifting away from you is never beneficial.
Edit: What if the enemy is just starting a move action that allows him to shift 6 squares? Since he wasn't able to move into the square he wanted, is the rest of his movement lost?
If I try to walk into a wall, is the rest of my movement lost? Does it use up any of my movement?
What if I try to walk into an invisible enemy's square? Or any enemy's square?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 03, 2010 - 9:54PM
#5
|
|
|
Edit: What if the enemy is just starting a move action that allows him to shift 6 squares? Since he wasn't able to move into the square he wanted, is the rest of his movement lost?
That one was also mentioned in that Blurred Step debate. It seems if you try to shift 6 squares but the Battlemind blocked your initial shift, you lose 1 square movement, but can still shift the remaining 5 squares.
I could easily see attempts to walk through invisible walls or opponents causing you to lose 1 square movement, but still able to move elsewhere. Unless the DM rules something like you end up tripping or smashing your face into the invisible obstacle...
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 04, 2010 - 9:46AM
#6
|
|
|
Enemy's move action attempts to resolve but can not. Does the enemy lose his entire move action?
No. Actions are only lost if they are invalidated. The enemy's move action is Shift 1, not shift into that single specific square. Blocking that single square does not invalidate the action.
In order to resolve their action, the enemy needs to be able to move into a legal square. Unless they are completely surrounded by creatures/blocking terrain/difficult terrain, there will probably be at least one square adjacent to them that they can move into.
As mentioned above this issue is contested. We're waiting for WotC to wake up to this.
Also mentioned above was that if Blurred Step works this way, the Battlemind will not be powerful enough. That is not a legitimate argument about how the rules work, but is rather about how the rules 'should' work. I'm not saying it isn't worth discussing, just that it should be taken to the houserules forum.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 04, 2010 - 10:13AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Nov 11, 2009
|
Enemy's move action attempts to resolve but can not. Does the enemy lose his entire move action?
No. Actions are only lost if they are invalidated. The enemy's move action is Shift 1, not shift into that single specific square. Blocking that single square does not invalidate the action.
In order to resolve their action, the enemy needs to be able to move into a legal square. Unless they are completely surrounded by creatures/blocking terrain/difficult terrain, there will probably be at least one square adjacent to them that they can move into.
So for it to cause his movement to be lost, it would need to be written as follows:
Shift: Move Action
Choose a square: Choose an adjacent square to move into.
Movement: Move 1 square into the chosen square.
Multiple squares: If a game element allows you to shift more than 1 square, choose 1 adjacent square at a time and then move into it.
etc.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 04, 2010 - 10:21AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
Enemy's move action attempts to resolve but can not. Does the enemy lose his entire move action?
No. Actions are only lost if they are invalidated. The enemy's move action is Shift 1, not shift into that single specific square. Blocking that single square does not invalidate the action.
In order to resolve their action, the enemy needs to be able to move into a legal square. Unless they are completely surrounded by creatures/blocking terrain/difficult terrain, there will probably be at least one square adjacent to them that they can move into.
As mentioned above this issue is contested. We're waiting for WotC to wake up to this.
Also mentioned above was that if Blurred Step works this way, the Battlemind will not be powerful enough. That is not a legitimate argument about how the rules work, but is rather about how the rules 'should' work. I'm not saying it isn't worth discussing, just that it should be taken to the houserules forum.
This. I go with Dire-Overdrive on this one.
Yan
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 04, 2010 - 10:42AM
#9
|
|
|
I would go with one square of the shift is invalidated and lost.
The only thing I do agree with is that WoTC needs to wake up and make a ruling, that FAQ Q & A was horrible. Of course the enemy can't move into the square now occupied by the Battlemind. The question asked there wasn't the question anyone was truely confused over.
"Oh bother." sighed Pooh as he chambered another round.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 04, 2010 - 12:35PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Nov 12, 2002
|
There is no clear answer, but many views.
View 1: As the BS OA interrupts the enemy movement, the BS occurs first and the BS can move into the space into which the enemy wished to move, blocking the movement and ending the action of the enemy. This, of course, means that the BM can't follow the enemy as the BM's BS occurs while the enemy has not left its square.
View 2: The trigger for the OA occurs after the enemy has moved. Accordingly, the enemy occupies the new location when the BS OA begins (as nothing in the rules instructs you to undo things done when an II or OA occurs, but merely says that you perform the OA or II before the triggering event is resolved). Accordingly, the BM moves after the enemy shifts, but before any other parts of the enemy's action.
View 3 through 47: Similar to 2, but with variations on the reasoning why the BM shifts after the enemy's new location is occupied by the enemy.
Personally, I hope they just clarify all II and OAs so that:
* Triggering events occur when a trigger condition is met. Triggering events usually occur as part of an action. When a trigger occurs within an action, the action is known as a triggering action.
* OAs and IIs begin after a triggering event occurs.
* OAs and IIs interrupt the triggering action after the triggering event.
* If there are still steps in the triggering action, they occur after the II or OA.
* If there are no steps left in the triggering action after the triggering event, an II or OA acts very similarly to an immediate response.
As powers were previously written under differnt understandings of how IIs and OAs work, some of them will need to be rewritten regardless of how we determine IIs and OAs work. Regardless, this system seems like the easiest way to go and the least abusive. Additionally, it involves less wonkiness as you never 'go back' before an event occurs.
D&D & Boardgames
If I have everything I need to run great games for many years without repeating stuff, why do I need to buy anything right now?
|
|
|
