Can a Slowed Creature Shift?

[eamon]

Interrupts on the other hand DO have this explicit rule that says that they can invalidate actions and if so, those actions are lost. So if you passing attack, and have already moved before hand, if my interrupt dazes you, then it -can- very well invalidate the entire thing. Attacks -can- be undone and actions lost. The rules are very explicit on that.

You may think of it as "undone". But at the time the interrupt occurs - which is before the trigger action, the trigger action hasn't occured yet. As long as your mental model involves creature X starting an action, creature Y's interrupt being declared and resolved, and only then creature X's action is resolved, it's fine. Having X's action occur and then undone by Y's action and then if-possible redone with the same dice-rolls is equivalent to having X attempt his action but Y jumping in before X can finish - if still possible. Since time-travel is generally confusing, I prefer to avoid the "undone" notion. It's not a difference in rules - it's a difference in perspective and terminology.

 

[pemerton]

For the matter of dazing during an action... the action is already spent when you start the action. Dazing does not affect a current action because it can't go 'Alright, you have to unspend this current action.'

<snip>

You -can- complete an action you've already spent. Dazed doesn't reverse time to the point where you spend the action. You need an interrupt to do that.

A reaction that triggers off of an attack or movement in passing attack might make other parts impossible to resolve, but it does not cancel the action; if the rest of the power is still able to be done you still do it. So, if the reaction moves all legal targets away, well... passing attack can't do anything more at that point. But dazed will not prevent the rest of the action from resolving. Reactions cannot invalidate actions.

PC X moves, and then commences a second action - let's say Passing Attack, or a charge. As a reaction in response to the first of the attacks in Passing Attack, or as a reaction to moving during the charge (let's say there's an enemy archer who declared a readied action with a dazing power) X gets dazed.

I take it that you are saying that X can make the second attack in a Passing Attack, or complete his/her movement and attack with a charge. Your reasoning is that "reactions cannot invalidate actions" or that daze cannot make you "unspend" an action.

I'm curious what others think. My feeling is that once you're dazed, you're limited thenceforth to one action on your turn. If you've already taken more than one action, so be it - the enemy who dazed you struck too late! But if you're part way through resolving an action with complex sub-parts ("events" in Eamon's terminology) than I don't see why the dazed condition doesn't apply and limit you to one action - obviously nothing you've already done (like making the first of your Passing Attack attacks, or moving as the start of your charge) is lost, but I don't see that you get to keep going, and complete your second action, even though you're dazed.

In short, I don't see the difference between being dazed, and having all legal targets moved away. Neither is more nor less a way of "invalidating" or "unspending" an action. (And the Immediate Reaction rules expressly say that a reaction may "interrupt other
actions a combatant takes after" the reaction is triggered.)