A few rules questions

[DracoSuave]

Actually, no, you cannot. Shifting prevents opportunity attacks from moving, not only because of what's written in shifting, but because of what is written under Opportunity Attacks (p. 290). Specifically, leaving an adjacent space, so long as that movement isn't a shift, teleport, or forced.

Threatening Reach is different than Polearm Gamble and the like, as it doesn't create a new trigger for Opportunity Attacks, but extends the range of the existing basic rule of Movement Provokes. It changes the adjacency part of the rule, but not the rest of that same rule.

Polearm Gamble, on the other hand, gives a new trigger. 'Entering an adjacent space from a non-adjacent space.' This rule is different than the Movement Provokes rule, and contains no exceptions in it. Teleportation, however, does not care, as it explicitly forbids ALL opportunity attacks. Shifting, on the other hand, only forbids attacks from leaving an adjacent space.

 

[Christian]

No to thread hijack to harshly, but does this mean that if you shift from 2 squares away to 1 square away against a creature with Threatening Reach, you provoke anyway?

Nope. A character moving from 2 squares away to 1 square away provokes because he's moving out of a threatened square, specifically the one two squares away. If he shifts instead of moving, the shift doesn't provoke opportunity attacks. (It's not relevant that he's shifting into another threatened square.)

 

[Hypersmurf]

Nope. A character moving from 2 squares away to 1 square away provokes because he's moving out of a threatened square, specifically the one two squares away. If he shifts instead of moving, the shift doesn't provoke opportunity attacks. (It's not relevant that he's shifting into another threatened square.)

There are three main relevant sections.

p290 A/ Threatening Reach: Some creatures have an ability called threatening reach. This lets them make opportunity attacks against nonadjacent enemies. If an enemy leaves a square that's within the creature's reach, or if an enemy anywhere within the creature's reach makes a ranged attack or an area attack, the creature can make an opportunity attack against that enemy.

So if you are two squares away and shift adjacent to the creature with threatening reach, you have left a square that's within the creature's reach; per A/, you will provoke.

So is there anything that says otherwise?

p292 B/ No Opportunity Attacks: If you shift out of a square adjacent to an enemy, you don't provoke an opportunity attack.

Is this applicable to the given scenario? No, it is not; you are not shifting out of a square adjacent to an enemy. B/ provides no exception to the rule in A/ that your movement provokes from the creature with threatening reach.

But how about:
p290 C/ Moving Provokes: If an enemy leaves a square adjacent to you, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy. However, you can't make one if the enemy shifts or teleports or is forced to move away by a pull, a push, or a slide.

Well, this may or may not provide an exception to A/. Read in isolation, "you can't make [an OA] if the enemy shifts" is an exception to A/; you are shifting, so the enemy with threatening reach can't make an OA.

However, the sentence is not an isolated one; it is part of a paragraph that begins with "if an enemy leaves a square adjacent to you". So it depends on whether this condition limits the entire paragraph or not.

Is the sentence C1/ "However, you can't make [an OA] if the enemy shifts"? Or is it C2/ "However, you can't make [an OA against the enemy who leaves a square adjacent to you] if the enemy shifts?

Case C1/ provides an exception to A/, and no OA is provoked. But C2/ provides no exception to A/, and the OA is still provoked, because under B/ and C2/, a shift only protects you from an OA if you are leaving an adjacent square, and in our scenario, we are leaving a non-adjacent square within the reach of an enemy with threatening reach.

-Hyp.

 

[DracoSuave]

In this particular case tho, A is the exception to the general rule, which is C. C is the exact rule that gives the range of opportunity attacks triggering from movement, as well as the restriction, and A is the rule that changes the range.

 

[Bayuer]

So what if I'm adjacent to an enemy and then shift to another square adjacent to that enemy? I still provoke OA?

And second one.
In forced movement it states:
No Opportunity Attacks: Forced movement does not provoke opportunity attacks or other opportunity actions.
In teleportation:
No Opportunity Attacks: Your movement doesn’t provoke opportunity attacks.
In Spitting-Cobra Stance:
Until the stance ends, you can make a ranged basic attack as an opportunity action against any enemy within 5 squares of you that moves closer to you.

I don't know it's just poor phrasing but look. SCS gives you opportunity action. Teleportation only prevent opportunity attack and forced movement both.

 

[DracoSuave]

So what if I'm adjacent to an enemy and then shift to another square adjacent to that enemy? I still provoke OA?

Shift from adjacent doesn't provoke. Ever.

And second one.
In forced movement it states:
No Opportunity Attacks: Forced movement does not provoke opportunity attacks or other opportunity actions.
In teleportation:
No Opportunity Attacks: Your movement doesn’t provoke opportunity attacks.
In Spitting-Cobra Stance:
Until the stance ends, you can make a ranged basic attack as an opportunity action against any enemy within 5 squares of you that moves closer to you.

I don't know it's just poor phrasing but look. SCS gives you opportunity action. Teleportation only prevent opportunity attack and forced movement both.

Nope, that's exactly how it works. (Yes I was wrong about that earlier.) So you can shoot down Eladrin with SCS, and people who shift.

And it has to be worded as an opportunity action because without a special ability or exception text, you can't make opportunity attacks with ranged weapons.

 

[Hypersmurf]

In this particular case tho, A is the exception to the general rule, which is C. C is the exact rule that gives the range of opportunity attacks triggering from movement, as well as the restriction, and A is the rule that changes the range.

A/ isn't an exception to C/.

C/ says "If an enemy leaves a square adjacent to you, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy."

A/ doesn't contradict C/, any more than "If an enemy adjacent to you uses a ranged power or an area power, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy" contradicts C/. A/ simply provides an additional condition under which an OA is provoked.

C1/, on the other hand, provides an exception to A/ - "A/ is false if the movement is a shift".

-Hyp.

 

[DracoSuave]

C is out of context. The full C is:

If an enemy leaves a square adjacent to you, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy. However, you can't make one if the enemy shifts or teleports or is forced to move away by a pull, push, or slide.

The C you provide isn't including the sentance after it. Thusly, any reference to it must be used in that context. That full phrase IS the rule that determines when attacks are provoked, which is excepted and altered by Threatening Reach, changing the 'square adjacent to you' rule to 'square within reach.' The rest of the rule remains the same, however.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The C you provide isn't including the sentance after it.

The whole distinction between C1/ and C2/ is in how that sentence is read - it's definitely included!

That full phrase IS the rule that determines when attacks are provoked, which is excepted and altered by Threatening Reach, changing the 'square adjacent to you' rule to 'square within reach.' The rest of the rule remains the same, however.

Threatening Reach states that a creature leaving a square within your reach provokes an OA. It doesn't modify the rule that a creature leaving an adjacent square provokes an OA; it provides a new condition under which an OA is provoked.

Whether or not a creature shifting out of a non-adjacent square provokes is dependent on whether, as you say, the reference to "you can't make one if the enemy shifts" is assumed to be in the context of "If an enemy leaves a square adjacent to you".

If it is, then the Threatening Reach description has no connection to the sentence "you can't make one if the enemy shifts"; the enemy is not leaving a square adjacent to you, so that entire paragraph is irrelevant.

If it isn't, and "you can't make one if the enemy shifts" is globally applicable, rather than only in the case of an enemy leaving a square adjacent to you, then it will prevent an OA from Threatening Reach when you shift, but also an OA from any other source when you shift, such as Polearm Gamble.

So that's the question.
Does "you can't make one if the enemy shifts" mean:
1. "You can't make [an OA] if the enemy shifts"?
2. "You can't make [an OA against an enemy leaving an adjacent square] if the enemy shifts"?

-Hyp.

 

[DracoSuave]

Actually, if it isn't contingent on adjecency, then the statement is still applicable to -leaving- a square within reach. Nothing there mentions it's triggered by movement, explicitly. Entering a square is not the same thing as leaving a square (altho they do go hand in hand), and Polearm Gamble would very much apply, as it does not trigger on leaving a square. Therefore the exception to leaving a square could not apply.

However, a power that, as an effect, permitted the user to shift and then use an attack, that was a ranged power would not trigger AO because shifting out of an adjacent space cancels the opportunity attack by the rule of Shift.