Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Karmic_vegeance" data-source="post: 5199940" data-attributes="member: 90657">Normally I'd agree wholeheartedly with this, but Combat Agility specifically states that it doesn't resolve until "After the enemy has completed the action [that triggered Combat Agility.]" I suppose it is still triggered first, so perhaps might resolve first. But the nature of the immediate reaction would then allow this:The opponent moves 1 square away from me as part of a walking move action (any number of squares works, so long as I interrupt the movement). I use the immediate reaction from Harrier's Ploy to shift a number of squares in order to catch up/limit movement (as reactions may interrupt movement if movement triggers them). Then, when they complete the move action that triggers Combat Agility, I could use the opportunity action to shift again and attempt to catch the target and attack them.Either that, or I could interpret the action that triggered Combat Agility as the single square of movement that triggered the opportunity action in the first place, causing Combat Agility to become a pseudo-immediate reaction, resolving immediately after the enemy takes one step out of reach. If the attack hit (knocking the enemy prone), they would stop moving, obviously. If the attack missed, I could then use the Harrier's Ploy immediate reaction later in the enemy's movement to keep up with them.The first way is just a more mechanically complex way of combining the two actions. The second arguably makes Combat Agility just as powerful, if not more so, as Combat Superiority (and also makes the scaling shift on the power useless, so this probably isn't the intended interpretation).As for the second question, I'm glad I wasn't going crazy. Just wanted to see whether a brawling fighter had more flexibility than I thought.</blockquote>

Verification