Do they stack?

[DracoSuave]

There is a specific rule on bonus damage though.

In the case of 2 effects which both say 'you push the target 3 squares' for instance you can just as easily reason that a single push of 3 squares fulfills both effects. I'm not saying I exactly advocate that interpretation, but it is one possible interpretation.

This is no more a valid interpretation than 'well he did five damage so that means your five damage effect has already happened.'

Effects are not 'fulfilled'. They are executed. You execute effect A, then execute effect B. They are distinct.

Except it isn't an 'and then', it is step 5 of the attack resolution sequence, both effects take place at the same time from the same starting condition.

One is a triggered effect, the other is not. The trigger will esecute after the actual hit that triggers it. It cannot occur before, because it's not an interrupt, and if it happens during, you still need to decide an order. And doing it before the hit effect would invalidate the attack, which it does not have the right to do, so it must occur after.

Nothing in the rules ever indicates or even hints that there is an ordering to these effects at all. Nor does anything indicate that 2 smaller effects add up to a larger one, bonus damage being a specific exception.

But you do have two separate rules telling you to do two separate things. The default state is that you execute the separate rules. In order to NOT execute either of them, you must have a rule that overrides it. For example, the rules on same-typed ongoing damage.

When a specific rule is absent, that does not mean 'invent your own specific rule now' or 'clearly, ongoing damage and pushes are the same thing!'

In fact there are other specific rules that require some effects to 'overlap' (IE stun effects for instance, where the longer lasting effect prevails).

None of which are specific to pushes. Pushes aren't stuns, or ongoing damage, or anything like that. What you need is a specific rule about pushes that apply.

Again, I'm not especially advocating against your interpretation, it is probably the most reasonable one overall.

I know, it's just a common fallacy to think that in 'exception based design' that an exception must exist to cover every situation. Sometimes... you just do what the abilities say. In such cases, no specific rule needs to exist, because you already have the rules telling you what to do.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

No, there is a specific rule for bonus damage, it is irrelevant to this discussion. The observation about 'non-ordering' most certainly IS relevant. All effects are handled together at step 5, so it is just as valid an interpretation in a purely logical sense to state that the fulfillment of an effect need not happen multiple times. You wouldn't for instance consider someone to have become bloodied twice if they were hit by an attack which dropped them below bloodied value and also triggered your flensing weapon's "the target is now bloodied" effect. This has nothing to do with exceptions, it is all about the core rules processes. Things like feat effects aren't (generally) exceptions at all, they are simply additional things that are added onto an existing situation. They still fit within and conform to the core rules. The question is thus entirely one of choosing a resolution procedure from amongst the available interpretations. No 'falacy' is involved whatsoever.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

IMO only Knockback Weapon stacks, as it mentions 1 additional square. I would choose the highest bonus, then add 1 for Knockback Weapon.

 

[keterys]

Don't see any rule (or even suggestion of intent) that would support limiting or excluding any of them from triggering. I'd say DracoSuave has the right of it from a rules perspective, but obviously DM rulings will vary

For those who really want to, it's pretty easy to trigger forced movement. That's usually a good thing, though there are a couple of builds that exploit it (Hammers for dazing in epic, Polearm shennanigans off the top of my head). Just like everything else, and not like those builds don't work just fine with at-wills (Tide of Iron, Footwork Lure)

 

[DracoSuave]

No, there is a specific rule for bonus damage, it is irrelevant to this discussion. The observation about 'non-ordering' most certainly IS relevant. All effects are handled together at step 5,

All effects of a -power- are handled at step five. External feats and features are not effects of the power and are not absolutely beholden to how to resolve a power. Because they're not powers..

so it is just as valid an interpretation in a purely logical sense to state that the fulfillment of an effect need not happen multiple times.

We're not talking about an effect. We're talking about multiple effects, and multiple effects are distinct.

You wouldn't for instance consider someone to have become bloodied twice if they were hit by an attack which dropped them below bloodied value and also triggered your flensing weapon's "the target is now bloodied" effect.

That's because bloodied is not something you can be twice. Either you are bloodied, or you are not. So, of course you can't be bloodied twice, you are either rendered bloodied, or you are not. It's an on-off switch.

However, pushes are not a binary state, or even a state at all. They are an instruction, a process. Pushing someone isn't like they are subjected to a condition; they are being moved three squares, and once that move is done, they're in a brand new state--they're somewhere else.

Someone who is bloodied can't be made more bloodied. But someone who happens to be standing in a certain spot can be pushed 3 squares... even if he got there by being pushed 3 squares. Location is not a binary state.

It's more like damage... damage is an instruction, and multiple events of damage will accumulate, because damage taken is not a binary state, even if that state may invoke other rules like 'bloodied'

This has nothing to do with exceptions, it is all about the core rules processes.

Which states, very clearly, that the specific trumps the general.

Things like feat effects aren't (generally) exceptions at all, they are simply additional things that are added onto an existing situation.[/quote[

That's actually what makes them exceptions. Normally, nothing happens. If you have a feat that says something happens, that's an -exception-. If you have a power that says something happens, that's an -exception-. And as you have two exceptions, and nothing says those exceptions cannot both work... you execute the rules, and you execute both exceptions.

They still fit within and conform to the core rules. The question is thus entirely one of choosing a resolution procedure from amongst the available interpretations. No 'falacy' is involved whatsoever.

Except the core rules do not say one single solitary syllable about NOT executing both triggered pushes. However, you DO have rules stating you DO execute each push; the rules of each push themselves. Without a rule stating that you do not execute multiple triggers, then you ONLY have the rulestate for both triggers. Thus, both triggers are executed to their fullest.

You have two different things that say 'push 3.' You push 3, then you push 3. Point out a single word in any fourth edition book that even suggests you don't do this? It's as preposterous as someone saying you can't take two shift actions in the same turn because 'you already shifted one so that satisfies your second shift action.'

Movement isn't binary, and it has no rules like ongoing damage or temporary hit points or typed bonus that cause 'overlapping' rules to kick in. They aren't ongoing damage, they aren't thp.... and if you're ruling they're bonuses, great, cause they're untyped, so why can't they stack?