Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mudlock" data-source="post: 5663807" data-attributes="member: 95211">First, thank you very much for the example.Now I'm going to nit-pick it <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Most significantly, not one bit of this example deals with opportunity actions or opportunity attacks, so really it's got nothing to do what the stated intent of this thread. But let's put that aside and assume, for now, that "OA" means "every kind of out-of-turn action".Moving on: powers resolve in the order they are written. The Cleric's attack is the first thing that happens; he can't wait for the rogue to move to flank. (Unless Inspire Fervor is written so the effect is first? Point is, it's in a specific order.)Then, the effect of the power happens; it effects multiple targets, and so each target is resolved one at a time, in the order chosen by the power's user. If the Cleric says "rogue, go" first, then the rogue goes first.When the fighter asks if he could have gone before the rogue, after he sees what happened, well... "rewinding" stuff like that is hard, and perhaps unfair as it reveals information (i.e., results of die rolls, the fact that an enemy becomes bloodied) that the player/character couldn't have possibly had. Again, it's the Cleric who gets to decide, but even if he *did* want to change his mind in this case, I would encourage the DM to say "sorry, no; you said 'rogue, go' and we've already rolled, so we're sticking with that."You were unspecific about what power the monsters were using, so it's a bit harder to get the details. But if the two monster's powers you describe are both  immediate interrupts or free actions, then the DM, controlling both monsters, can decide in what order they resolve. The only time there would be any conflict is if a monster and a PC are both trying to trigger off the exact same result... but the rules have an answer for this too! It's resolved in initiative order; whichever creature is nearer-to-next to go, gets to go first.Finally, there is no need for the rogue to be so specific about his future plans: the attacks against him are happening in a specific order, and he will have to choose, while they are happening, how he will respond, and before they are resolved.One way to approach thinking about all this is as a stack; an action goes on top of the stack when it is announced, and sub-parts of it piling on in order as they occur, and any interrupts of the action (or sub-actions) piling on top of it as well. Importantly, only the top-most piece of the pile is ever something that anyone can respond to, and there is a specific, defined order for who gets a chance to respond when. When no-one wants to (or can) respond, only then is the top-most piece resolved.For your example, the stack at its most-complicated would look something like this:Rogue uses Second ChanceMonster hits rogue with ???Monster targets first enemy (rogue) with ???Monster uses ??? to attack two enemies in melee 1Monster becomes bloodiedRogue attacks monster through Inspire Fervor effectCleric targets first ally (rogue) with Inspire Fervor effectCleric's Inspire Fervor effect-line happensCleric uses Inspire FervorWhich is pretty deep... but when approached logically, not all that complicated.The rules are quite clear though. Most of the time, the specifics of those clear rules don't matter and are glossed over; a bad habit to get into because then you run into an actually complex situation, and if you've never actually learned the rules, you WILL get confused.... as you do no less than five times just in your example.So I'm going to stand by last comment and say that the people who are getting confused have certain fundamental aspects of the rules which they have not learned properly. (And if this example is any indication, it's not even the OA rules that are causing the problem.)</blockquote>

Verification