Delaying, and effects that end on your enemy's turn

[Sagiro]

Hey everyone,

This came up in last night's session, and I thought someone here might know the official ruling.

One of the enemies struck various PC's with a power than caused the Blind condition "until the end of the enemy's next turn." As a rogue, I have a strong preference for not spending actions while blind. I figured I would delay until after my enemy's turn came around again -- I'd be blind for the same amount of time, but wouldn't waste an attack without CA. The DM ruled this illegal, citing the PH rules about not being able to use the Delay action to avoid negative effects on your turn.

On reflection, I think I should have been allowed to Delay. The rules in the PH prevent specific kinds of abuses:

1. Avoiding negative effects on yourself that would otherwise trigger on your own turn
2. Prolonging negative effects on your enemies that would otherwise end on your turn.
3. Prolonging positive effects on yourself that would otherwise end on your turn.

But the case I'm talking about isn't any of these. What say the rules gurus of EN World?

Thanks,
Sagiro

 

[Obryn]

I would probably rule similarily to your DM, although I couldn't cite a rules reference.

The spirit of the rules, IMO, is that delaying actions should never work in your favor when it comes to conditions affecting you. This is a ruling, though, and shouldn't be confused with an actual rule; it's simply a call I'd make as a DM. Combat could get silly if everyone - including monsters - just chose to delay until their negative EONT effects ran out.

Then again, you're effectively choosing to lose your turn, and giving the enemy another chance to hit you, so it might not be so bad...

-O

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

By RAW you can delay any time your turn comes up. There are no restrictions on when or why you can do it except it has to be your whole turn you delay, and you must be neither dazed nor unable to take any actions. So a dying character for example wouldn't normally be able to delay, nor one that was stunned.

Notice that the start and end of turn procedure stuff in the delay rule is intended to take care of situations where you could gain an advantage because of delaying.

As you pointed out, in your case the effect is not tied to your turn, but to the enemy's turn. A few things are worth pointing out.

1) You are still blinded for the normal duration and there are a number of effects related to that which could still hurt you, like not being allowed to take OAs, -5 penalty to hit if you were to say use a reaction to do something, inability to see enemies can negate various other abilities too. Granted none of those may apply to you specifically, but its not as if you totally negated the effects.

2) You are losing out on total actions. Every time you shift down in the initiative order you're essentially giving every enemy you skip past an extra action compared to you. Some enemy could kill your character during that delay or maybe whatever you would have done at your normal initiative, blind or not, would have changed the outcome of the battle.

In other words, its not a freebie, and that's why it doesn't really make sense to ban it. I can understand the DM's frustration, but the monster is still benefiting. If he really feels that a "till end of my next turn" duration is not strong enough then he should modify the power to be "save ends" or "until end of target's next turn" or something like that.

 

[Ryujin]

I would permit the delay, but any and all conditions would take place normally on your regular initiative. You would not be able to delay your turn in order to escape ongoing damage, for example. Your turn would start, you would take any damage or effects that would normally occur on your turn, then you would state that you wish to delay.

 

[Saagael]

I don't have my book with me, so I can't cite a specific page, but I have to agree with what you're saying. As a DM, I've used it to my advantage to avoid losing an NPC turn. It makes sense too. A character waiting until he can see before bounding into action, or an immobilized fighter waiting until he can move before trying to charge.

 

[DracoSuave]

Go ahead and Delay. Doing so turns the monster's attack to: Hit: Player takes damage and loses a turn.

Hope that it's not on an at-will. I don't feel the need as a DM to rule against PCs who wish to take suboptimal or self-destructive tactics.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Go ahead and Delay. Doing so turns the monster's attack to: Hit: Player takes damage and loses a turn.

I concur

 

[Obryn]

Go ahead and Delay. Doing so turns the monster's attack to: Hit: Player takes damage and loses a turn.

Hope that it's not on an at-will. I don't feel the need as a DM to rule against PCs who wish to take suboptimal or self-destructive tactics.

Kind of. It depends where in the initiative you are, but using this delaying tactic once basically makes it nearly-free.

In an initiative order, we have 5 PCs (1-5) and 3 Monsters (A-C)

They act in the order...

1
2
A
3
B
4
C
5

or whatever. Let's say Monster A is the blinder. He hits PC 5, PC 1, or PC 2 with it. What do they lose from delaying past Monster A's turn? Very little - Monster A gets to go again, but even if he repeats the attack, there's a decent chance he'll miss.

It only works once, though, because if Monster A hits PC 3 (or hits PC 1, 2, or 5 after their delay), then yes, the PC effectively loses an entire turn. And it's a horrible decision. But was it a horrible decision to delay the first time for PC 1, 2, or 5? I'd argue almost certainly not - it's barely a penalty at all; just a small risk.

-O

 

[Flipguarder]

You would not be able to delay your turn in order to escape ongoing damage, for example.

I believe every instance of ongoing damage is (save ends). In fact, the condition kind of doesn't make sense otherwise.

 

[DracoSuave]

Kind of. It depends where in the initiative you are, but using this delaying tactic once basically makes it nearly-free.

In an initiative order, we have 5 PCs (1-5) and 3 Monsters (A-C)

They act in the order...

1
2
A
3
B
4
C
5

or whatever. Let's say Monster A is the blinder. He hits PC 5, PC 1, or PC 2 with it. What do they lose from delaying past Monster A's turn? Very little - Monster A gets to go again, but even if he repeats the attack, there's a decent chance he'll miss.

It only works once, though, because if Monster A hits PC 3 (or hits PC 1, 2, or 5 after their delay), then yes, the PC effectively loses an entire turn. And it's a horrible decision. But was it a horrible decision to delay the first time for PC 1, 2, or 5? I'd argue almost certainly not - it's barely a penalty at all; just a small risk.

-O

Well, if Monster A attacks, then the attacked delays until after Monster A. Then, if Monster A blinds again, the attacked delays until after Monster A's turn again. Each delay is the loss of a turn.