|
2 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2011 - 12:38AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2007
|
At our LFR table yesterday, a player presented us with this bizarre conundrum.
He's playing a Drow, and he took both the Instinctive Darkness and Shadowslip Feats. This resulted in the following exchange:
1) his character is targeted by a Melee 4 attack. He's currently three squares away.
2) Instinctive Darkness has his cloud of darkness racial power trigger as an immediate reaction to being targeted by the melee attack.
3) Shadowslip allows him to shift 2 squares as a free action whenever he uses cloud of darkness. The player presents the argument that this is a triggered free action. As a result, it functions similarly to an immediate reaction to the use of cloud of darkness. He then shifts out of reach of the attack.
A lot of this is contingent on the fact that "being targeted by an attack" occurs before the attack roll is made- as best as we understand, this allows a Paladin's Divine Challenge/Divine Sanction to trigger before the attack roll is made (thus if the damage somehow kills the enemy, the attack itself is negated). Thus, the intent of Instinctive Darkness is clear- you target the Drow, he obscures the spaces around him before the attack roll is made, thus reducing the chance of the attack to hit.
(Which is why I believe it's a reaction to the targeting of an attack; a standard interrupt to "you are hit by an attack" to increase your defenses allows you to change your defenses, but does not penalize the attack roll- by the time the attack roll result is known, it's too late to give that an attack a penalty. If this is not the case, then the Feat is needlessly confusing for no good reason!).
Since the power must be resolved before the attack roll, and Shadowslip resolves immediately after Cloud of Darkness, it appears that the shift then also occurs before the attack roll is made.
The counter-argument, however, states that a reaction ability to being targeted by an attack cannot result in a scenario where the attack is no longer legal (ie, the shift moving the player out of range of the melee attack).
A second counter-argument is that Shadowslip isn't actually a triggered free action- normally, one uses Cloud of Darkness on their own turn, and the Feat simply allows you to use a free action to shift 2 squares after you use Cloud of Darkness (which normally requires a minor action). In this scenario, the shift can still be used when it's not your turn, but it cannot occur during another action. Thus the proper sequence of events would be that the player is targeted, he places himself in a heavily obscured space, and after the attack is resolved, he can then shift.
I appreciate any assistance in sorting out this mess, as even if it does work as the player described it, the abilities need some clarification. Thank you in advance.
"You can always judge a man by the quality of his enemies." -The Doctor, Remembrance of the Daleks
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2011 - 12:57AM
#2
|
|
|
Yes, the combo works. It renders the attack illegal and therefore it does nothing.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2011 - 5:04AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
Immediate Reactions react to the whole action - the whole thing takes place after the attack's resolved.
It would have to be an immediate interrupt to function the way it's described here, and even then the shift would happen as a reaction, because it's a triggered free action which doesn't need to be an interrupt (and it's still a triggered free action, even if you use it on your turn - if it were not, you would be able to do it any time, not just when you use CoD).
This doesn't work.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2011 - 7:08AM
#4
|
|
|
1) his character is targeted by a Melee 4 attack. He's currently three squares away.
2) Instinctive Darkness has his cloud of darkness racial power trigger as an immediate reaction to being targeted by the melee attack.
Resolves after the triggering event, meaning he's already been attacked, and taken damage, when he uses the power.
If it was meant to give penalties to the attack, it would be an interrupt. It's not an interrupt, so it doesn't interrupt. Reactions are not interrupts.
3) Shadowslip allows him to shift 2 squares as a free action whenever he uses cloud of darkness. The player presents the argument that this is a triggered free action. As a result, it functions similarly to an immediate reaction to the use of cloud of darkness. He then shifts out of reach of the attack.
He's correct, it functions as a Reaction, which means it happens after Cloud Of Darkness resolves. Cloud Of Darkness resolves after the attack resolves, because it is also a REACTION.
Reactions react. They do not interrupt.
There is no problem here.
A lot of this is contingent on the fact that "being targeted by an attack" occurs before the attack roll is made
You cannot "react" to targeting and thus "interrupt" the attack. That allows reactions to be interrupts. This is not allowed.
as best as we understand, this allows a Paladin's Divine Challenge/Divine Sanction to trigger before the attack roll is made (thus if the damage somehow kills the enemy, the attack itself is negated).
Not a similar situation. Divine Challenge is not any kind of action, not even a triggered free action.
Thus, the intent of Instinctive Darkness is clear- you target the Drow, he obscures the spaces around him before the attack roll is made, thus reducing the chance of the attack to hit.
No, if that was the intent it would be an Interrupt. It is not an interrupt, it is a reaction. The intent is clear: You *react* to being attacked and possibly hit and possibly not by spewing your ink like a frightened squidmonster.
(Which is why I believe it's a reaction to the targeting of an attack; a standard interrupt to "you are hit by an attack" to increase your defenses allows you to change your defenses, but does not penalize the attack roll- by the time the attack roll result is known, it's too late to give that an attack a penalty. If this is not the case, then the Feat is needlessly confusing for no good reason!).
No, you're wrong. Interrupts can invalidate their own trigger, and an interrupt to being hit can make the hit miss for any number of reasons.
It's a Reaction because it's supposed to happen after, not before. It's to being "targeted" because you're supposed to be able to use it on any attack - one that hits, one that misses, one that just does autodamage as an effect, whatever.
Since the power must be resolved before the attack roll,
That's an Interrupt. Reactions specifically CANNOT do this, because they are reactions.
The counter-argument, however, states that a reaction ability to being targeted by an attack cannot result in a scenario where the attack is no longer legal (ie, the shift moving the player out of range of the melee attack).
Yes, because a reaction to part of an attack happens after the attack resolves.
A second counter-argument is that Shadowslip isn't actually a triggered free action- normally, one uses Cloud of Darkness on their own turn, and the Feat simply allows you to use a free action to shift 2 squares after you use Cloud of Darkness (which normally requires a minor action).
No, that's wrong - it's a Free Action, triggered by using Cloud Of Darkness. That's pretty much the definition of a Triggered Free Action.
I appreciate any assistance in sorting out this mess, as even if it does work as the player described it, the abilities need some clarification. Thank you in advance.
The player is wrong because he is trying to turn a Reaction into an Interrupt.
Remember, Interrupts happen before the triggering event resolves, and can invalidate their own trigger. Reactions happen AFTER the triggereing event resolves, and CANNOT invalidate their own trigger. That's the difference. Any time you think you see a Reaction invalidating it's own trigger, you're doing something wrong.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2011 - 7:10AM
#5
|
|
|
Immediate Reactions react to the whole action - the whole thing takes place after the attack's resolved.
Almost correct: They react to the entire action, with two exceptions: A reaction to a single step of movement interrupts all further parts of the action, and a reaction to a single attack interrupts all further parts of the action.
So you're right, the reaction happens AFTER the attack, but it might happen BEFORE the rest of the action if the action was "attack, move, attack" or something like that.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2011 - 9:32AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
Two things.
An Immediate Reaction waits for its Trigger to Finish, not necessarly for the action that contains the Trigger to finish. The Trigger here would be to be targeted not attacked or hit. Just like how Divine Challenge interrupt before the attack takes place, so should Instinctive Darkness.
RC 197 Immediate Reactions: An immediate Reaction lets a creature act in response to a trigger. The
triggering action or event occurs and is completely resolved before the Reaction takes place.An Immediate Reaction waits for its Trigger to Finish, not necessarly for the action that contains the Trigger to finish.
I don't know if Shadowslip can be considered a Triggerred Free action. It lacks any formal Trigger entry. But at the same time it has an event defining when to you Shift.
RC 195 Triggerred Actions: A Trigger is an action, an event or an effect that allows the use of a Triggerred Actions. Two actions types - Immediate actions and Opportunity actions - always have Triggers. Free actions sometimes have Triggers as well, as do some Powers and effects that require no actions at all.
Yan
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2011 - 10:12AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jan 30, 2007
|
Instinctive Darkness is an immediate reaction, which means that the close or melee attack (trigger) would resolve before ID happens, and therefore before Shadowslip does.
Salla, on minions: I typically use them as encounter filler. 'I didn't quite fill out the XP budget, not enough room left for a decent near-level monster ... sprinkle in a few minions'. Kind of like monster styrofoam packing peanuts.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2011 - 10:18AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
Two things.
An Immediate Reaction waits for its Trigger to Finish, not necessarly for the action that contains the Trigger to finish. The Trigger here would be to be targeted not attacked or hit. Just like how Divine Challenge interrupt before the attack takes place, so should Instinctive Darkness.
RC 197 Immediate Reactions: An immediate Reaction lets a creature act in response to a trigger. The
triggering action or event occurs and is completely resolved before the Reaction takes place.An Immediate Reaction waits for its Trigger to Finish, not necessarly for the action that contains the Trigger to finish.
This is a very badly written rule. What they mean to say here, I think, is that you can react to individual squares of movement. What's been done by several people here is to expand this into the Making an Attack sequence which lets reactions interrupt attacks. I think that's an overly generous reading of this rule. The movement reaction-interrupt is explicitly called out. No such wording exists for a reaction interrupting an attack.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2011 - 10:35AM
#9
|
|
|
Two things.
An Immediate Reaction waits for its Trigger to Finish, not necessarly for the action that contains the Trigger to finish. The Trigger here would be to be targeted not attacked or hit. Just like how Divine Challenge interrupt before the attack takes place, so should Instinctive Darkness.
RC 197 Immediate Reactions: An immediate Reaction lets a creature act in response to a trigger. The
triggering action or event occurs and is completely resolved before the Reaction takes place.An Immediate Reaction waits for its Trigger to Finish, not necessarly for the action that contains the Trigger to finish.
This is a very badly written rule. What they mean to say here, I think, is that you can react to individual squares of movement. What's been done by several people here is to expand this into the Making an Attack sequence which lets reactions interrupt attacks. I think that's an overly generous reading of this rule. The movement reaction-interrupt is explicitly called out. No such wording exists for a reaction interrupting an attack.
The school of thought is that a "triggering action or event" includes any step of the attack process as an atomic "event". (I don't agree at all, but that is the argument as I understand it.)
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Oct 03, 2011 - 11:01AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
And again I would state that reading the Making an Attack sequence in such a way that makes reactions interrupt attacks is overly generous. The Making an Attack sequence indicates nothing that allows for "space" for the time for reactions, just the fact that it's arrangedin a list of steps. Movement, on the other hand, has an exception for reaction timing written into it. Attacking doesn't.
Reactions don't interrupt attacks. It's why they're reactions.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
