Shield Push Question

[Hejdun]

Under the rules for Interrupt Actions, it says that "If an interrupt invalidates a triggering action, that action is lost." I'd therefore say that since the origin square of the blast is no longer in the creature's space, there is no blast at all. I think the rules are pretty clear that the origin square doesn't "update" itself. If the action can't be carried out as it was originally attempted, then it doesn't happen at all.

 

[Paul Strack]

Under the rules for Interrupt Actions, it says that "If an interrupt invalidates a triggering action, that action is lost." I'd therefore say that since the origin square of the blast is no longer in the creature's space, there is no blast at all. I think the rules are pretty clear that the origin square doesn't "update" itself. If the action can't be carried out as it was originally attempted, then it doesn't happen at all.

I disagree. For a close attack: "A close burst uses your space as its origin square. A close blast uses a square within your space as its origin square."

This means your current location determines the origin square of the blast. If your location changes, so does the origin square, but the attack itself is still valid.

 

[Hejdun]

I disagree. For a close attack: "A close burst uses your space as its origin square. A close blast uses a square within your space as its origin square."

This means your current location determines the origin square of the blast. If your location changes, so does the origin square, but the attack itself is still valid.

As I see the rules:

1. Enemy declares a Close Blast attack and chooses where to place it, targeting your ally but not you.
2. You get to make a basic melee attack against the enemy as an immediate interrupt as part of your Combat Superiority class feature.
3. If you hit, you also get to push the target 1 square if you have the Shield Push feat.
4. The enemy finishes his attack. In this case, his placement for the close blast is no longer valid, since his square cannot be the origin square. The attack is lost, as per the text for Interrupting Actions.

I believe the example for Interrupting Actions also backs this up. In that example, it supposes that you shift away from an enemy that is attacking you in melee. Since you are no longer in melee with that creature, his action is simply lost. It says nothing about being able to re-target his attack to a different, still-adjacent target.

 

[cjais]

If we assumed that the pushed enemy was using a ranged attack instead, would that attack be lost as well? After all, a ranged attack originates from the attacker's square, just the same as close blasts and bursts.

 

[GorTeX]

I would not think it invalidates the close blast at all. you are pushed back, so the origin square is different from where you intended it to be. Nothing about the push changes the origin square of the blast, just because you moved from where you intended, the origin square is till a square in your (new) space.

 

[MarkB]

If we assumed that the pushed enemy was using a ranged attack instead, would that attack be lost as well? After all, a ranged attack originates from the attacker's square, just the same as close blasts and bursts.

If the ranged attack was against a target at the limit of the attack's range, then - just as with the close blast example - the origin square would no longer be close enough to the target for a valid attack.

If the origin square is still within attack range the target after the push, then nothing is invalidated.

 

[cjais]

If the ranged attack was against a target at the limit of the attack's range, then - just as with the close blast example - the origin square would no longer be close enough to the target for a valid attack.

If the origin square is still within attack range the target after the push, then nothing is invalidated.

I get why it would be invalidated if it was the end of the attack's range, I just didn't understand why close blasts had to abide by the "the origin square must remain the same"-rule, when ranged attacks do not abide by that.

If it was a melee attacker that got pushed out of the way, the attack would be invalidated (except if the attacker had reach). If it was a ranged attack, it woudn't (unless it no longer had adequate range to the target).
I'd probably houserule the close blast case as it not getting invalidated. At least for me, it breaks suspension of disbelief when the dragon suddenly can't breathe fire at all because it was pushed 2 inches by the fighter. I'd allow the attacker his close blast, but rule that it has to pick new target squares.

This is not the official rules, I know, but it makes more sense for me.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Well, it's a close attack, and CC is also a close thing ...
If you're marked and doing a blast, just include the fighter, suffer neither penalties to attack nor CC, and everyone is happy.

Or, if you must blast those other guys ('cos there are 3 in a clump), shift first so the fighter whacks you then. Hit or miss, or even if he decides not to take his attack, you should now be in a position to blast out of reach.

Just saying, invalidating blasts may seem wrong, but IMO in practice it's going to be so rare an occurence it won't be an issue.

 

[cjais]

Just saying, invalidating blasts may seem wrong, but IMO in practice it's going to be so rare an occurence it won't be an issue.

You could be on to something

I don't know, it just seemed wrong to me, as pushing someone shouldn't stop their flamethrower from going off, for example. Blast powers should be indiscriminate.

 

[DracoSuave]

I wouldn't invalidate the blast. Other targets already declared are still in range and are still targets. It's the one that is now out of range that does not get attacked.