DracoSuave
First Post
None, reactions don't invalidate.
He's not talking about reactions tho. He's talking about interrupts.
Immediate Reactions
- Thread starter Abraxas
- Start date
None, reactions don't invalidate.
He's not talking about reactions tho. He's talking about interrupts.
Skyscraper
Adventurer
I apologize if I'm thick, but I just don't get it. Perhaps if there are other examples than the Disruptive Strike example? Disruptive Strike appears much better used during another creature's turn than it would be in the ranger's turn.
We agree that the ranger has an immediate action here, that he'll be using anyway. The question is only: when does he use it? During his turn, on during the monster's turn? Based on this, this is what I understand:
Case 1 - RAW
Ranger's turn
Ranger attacks
Monster's turn
Monster attacks
Monster triggers ranger's immediate action
Ranger possibly invalidates good attack by monster with his immediate action
Case 2 - house rule where immediate actions may be used during ranger's turn - possible abuse??
Ranger's turn
Ranger attacks
Ranger voluntarily provokes OA by monster with attack or movement
OA by monster, that triggers immediate action by ranger
Ranger possibly invalidates OA by monster with his immediate action
Monster's turn
Monster attacks
So... Where is the abuse? In case 2, the monster gets one extra attack, his OA, that is voluntarily triggered by the ranger; while in case 2 the ranger can invalidate a melee basic attack only and not a good encounter power or some such by the monster. If anything, I think the ranger is taking the wrong decision, by far, in using his Disruptive Strike during his own turn.
I don't see an added layer of complexity based on the fact that the ranger can use his immediate action anyway. Either he uses it during his turn, making his turn longer; or he uses it during the monster's turn, making the monster's turn longer. The only added layer of complexity is the additional OA by the monster, which the ranger decides to voluntarily trigger, giving the monster one extra attack during that round.
Abraxas
Explorer
OK, I see that now. How about an example of an interrupt that invalidates the OA and is an attack?
DracoSuave
First Post
1) If the problem is abuse of readied actions, then your problem is solved by not allowing abuse of readied actions.
If players are using readied actions to circumvent an immediate action, then they're doing nothing during that time. They have to select a specific action.
So let's say the meleers get into melee range, then ready actions.
What is the trigger? It must be a specific action. Generally such things are trigger chains, where one person has a trigger, then everyone triggers when they do. So, you have one person triggered by the dragon's action.
Let's say the trigger is 'uses his breath weapon.' The dragon uses Draconic Fear. The party just wasted their turn. What if the trigger was 'uses Draconic Fear'? The dragon breaths on them. The party just wasted their turn. What if the dragon's used those and the party triggers off of his bite? Dragon shifts away from the trigger man, and bites them with reach. As that is the trigger action, and they cannot perform their response, their readied actions go away. What if they make it 'The dragon moves?' The dragon bites.
This is a real easy thing to foil... take whatever they are readying their actions to do... and do not do that thing. Do something else. Let the party waste their turns. Who cares about stunning them for a round, the party doing nothing is just as bad for them!
The trick here is that readied actions must have a specific action as a trigger. As well, the dragon has many stuns that stop these actions from ever occuring. If you are stunned, your immediate reaction doesn't.
There's no need to change how immediate actions work because the system doesn't force you into these corners to begin with. The problem with abuse comes in when you let the players do really lose triggers, like 'The dragon does something' (not legal) or 'The fighter yells go.' (technically legal but incredibly abusive). Once you properly adjudicate readied actions, you don't need to fudge the rules to make things work.
If players are using readied actions to circumvent an immediate action, then they're doing nothing during that time. They have to select a specific action.
So let's say the meleers get into melee range, then ready actions.
What is the trigger? It must be a specific action. Generally such things are trigger chains, where one person has a trigger, then everyone triggers when they do. So, you have one person triggered by the dragon's action.
Let's say the trigger is 'uses his breath weapon.' The dragon uses Draconic Fear. The party just wasted their turn. What if the trigger was 'uses Draconic Fear'? The dragon breaths on them. The party just wasted their turn. What if the dragon's used those and the party triggers off of his bite? Dragon shifts away from the trigger man, and bites them with reach. As that is the trigger action, and they cannot perform their response, their readied actions go away. What if they make it 'The dragon moves?' The dragon bites.
This is a real easy thing to foil... take whatever they are readying their actions to do... and do not do that thing. Do something else. Let the party waste their turns. Who cares about stunning them for a round, the party doing nothing is just as bad for them!
The trick here is that readied actions must have a specific action as a trigger. As well, the dragon has many stuns that stop these actions from ever occuring. If you are stunned, your immediate reaction doesn't.
There's no need to change how immediate actions work because the system doesn't force you into these corners to begin with. The problem with abuse comes in when you let the players do really lose triggers, like 'The dragon does something' (not legal) or 'The fighter yells go.' (technically legal but incredibly abusive). Once you properly adjudicate readied actions, you don't need to fudge the rules to make things work.
DracoSuave
First Post
A readied sleep spell.
Abraxas
Explorer
How does that invalidate the OA?
Redbadge
Explorer
I recognize that there are many ways to circumvent readied actions. Readied actions were not my only concern with the rule.
However, based on the readied action rules:
When you ready an action, you prepare to react to a creature’s action or an event. Readying an action is a way of saying, “As soon as x happens, I’ll do y.” For instance, you could say, “As soon as the troll walks out from behind the corner, I’ll use my pinning strike and interrupt its movement” or something like, “If the goblin attacks, I’ll react with a crushing blow.”
I think that the party was justified in saying, "If the dracolich attacks, I will use Reaping Strike with my glaive." I say fine, the dracolich shift and uses bites. The fighter forgoes his Combat Challenge attack in order to use Reaping Strike. Either way, he's avoiding the dracolich's interrupt.
More likely though, the triggered action will be something like, "If the dracolich takes damage from the wizard's zone (a specific event), we will attack him."
However, based on the readied action rules:
When you ready an action, you prepare to react to a creature’s action or an event. Readying an action is a way of saying, “As soon as x happens, I’ll do y.” For instance, you could say, “As soon as the troll walks out from behind the corner, I’ll use my pinning strike and interrupt its movement” or something like, “If the goblin attacks, I’ll react with a crushing blow.”
I think that the party was justified in saying, "If the dracolich attacks, I will use Reaping Strike with my glaive." I say fine, the dracolich shift and uses bites. The fighter forgoes his Combat Challenge attack in order to use Reaping Strike. Either way, he's avoiding the dracolich's interrupt.
More likely though, the triggered action will be something like, "If the dracolich takes damage from the wizard's zone (a specific event), we will attack him."
not only does disruptive strike have a large chance to invalidate a far more dangerous attack than an OA (and, across an encounter, nearly no chance of not being triggered), but baiting it and houseruling it to work on your own turn deals LESS damage, because hunter's quarry is once/turn.
Ryujin
Legend
I hit a target with Wakeman's Invocation. Next round I walk right up to him and hit him with Force of Nature; a ranged attack. He takes his opportunity attack and hits, at which point I immediately teleport him 2 squares away, invalidating his attack, then follow up with the original Force of Nature which pushes him an additional INT mod away, with 6d10 damage. With my Warlock that would be 2+7 squares at level 22.
Not the best, but just off the top of my head. There are likely other classes that have damaging/condition style interrupts, that would be more effective.
Matt James
Game Developer
I'm not going to list every immediate interrupt. The Compendium is easy enough to browse through.
As I said a couple of times. If your group has no problems with it, then it isn't really a problem. Keep on truckin'. My group(s), however, would demolish the physics of time and space in its abuse
As I said a couple of times. If your group has no problems with it, then it isn't really a problem. Keep on truckin'. My group(s), however, would demolish the physics of time and space in its abuse
