Level Up (A5E) does warning strike ignore disengage?

[Mark Essel]

The first paragraph suggests it requires provoking, the second does not. Just asking for clarity, thanks.

 

[Phil Best]

The first paragraph suggests it requires provoking, the second does not. Just asking for clarity, thanks.

The first paragraph doesn't contain any mechanical information. It's all fluff, and we can ignore that. The mechanics of the maneuver are in the second paragraph.

When an opponent opens themselves up to a reflexive strike you can deliver a blow that shakes them to their core and forces them to hesitate.

When a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach, you can use your reaction to make a melee weapon attack and on a hit its Speed is reduced to 0 until the start of its next turn.

As we can see above, the only condition for Warning Strike is that a creature that you can see leaves your reach. The attack is not an opportunity attack, so it doesn't interact with the Disengage action. See below:

When you take the Disengage action, you take a defensive, guarded retreat and your movement does not provoke opportunity attacks during that turn.

As such, you're able to attack with Warning Strike even if a creature chooses to disengage first. Warning Strike is supposed to broadly emulate much of the Sentinel feat in 5e, so this interaction isn't surprising.
Due to differences in wording, however, Warning Strike also triggers in situations where opportunity attacks would not usually be possible at all. For example, in cases of forced movement. Once again, the condition is only that a creature leaves your reach, there is no stipulation as to how that happens.

 

[Stalker0]

Due to differences in wording, however, Warning Strike also triggers in situations where opportunity attacks would not usually be possible at all. For example, in cases of forced movement. Once again, the condition is only that a creature leaves your reach, there is no stipulation as to how that happens.

Oh damn, that is actually really powerful then if you have the right combos.

 

[Phil Best]

Oh damn, that is actually really powerful then if you have the right combos.

Yeah, absolutely. One very basic combo that you can use is to combine this maneuver with a simple Shove.

You can use the Shove maneuver to push a creature away. If you are able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this maneuver replaces one of them.

The target must be within your reach and be no more than one size category larger than you. The target makes a Strength saving throw against your maneuver DC. On a failure, you deal basic melee damage and push the target a number of feet away from you equal to 5 + 5 for every 5 points it failed its saving throw by. You can move the creature in any direction away from you (to the side, forward, or diagonally away).

A creature that is shoved off of a precipice is propelled off of whatever it is standing on—it does not receive any saving throw or ability check to grab onto something to avoid falling down below.

If your target fails their save by any amount, they're out of normal weapon range, so dropping them to 0 movement speed can be very potent. It also lets you recover the attack lost in the shove itself at the cost of your reaction.

There are plenty if neat combos surrounding this kind of interaction that could make for a very satisfying fighting style, I feel.

There is, however, some room for argument about whether this is legal. Some people may contest the word "move" in Warning Strike:

When a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach, you can use your reaction to make a melee weapon attack and on a hit its Speed is reduced to 0 until the start of its next turn.

There is a reading here which takes "move" as meaning specifically that the targets moves of its own accord. When a creature moves vs when a creature is moved is a distinction that could reasonably be made, I feel. Worth checking that with your GM before making it a centrepiece of a build.

The stuff regarding disengage, however, is totally unambiguous. Disengage doesn't nullify Warning Strike in any way, because Warning Strike doesn't involve opportunity attacks.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

There is, however, some room for argument about whether this is legal. Some people may contest the word "move" in Warning Strike:

There is a reading here which takes "move" as meaning specifically that the targets moves of its own accord. When a creature moves vs when a creature is moved is a distinction that could reasonably be made, I feel. Worth checking that with your GM before making it a centrepiece of a build.

personally, i'd point them to the opportunity attacks section on page 446:

The Disengage action can be used to avoid provoking opportunity attacks. Movement through teleportation does not provoke opportunity attacks, and unless noted otherwise neither does forced movement (such as if you are pushed away by a creature or effect, or if you move past a creature while falling).

this section implies that there is no meaningful distinction between a character moving and a character being moved from a terminology perspective, because the opportunity attack section feels the need to specify that movement via being moved does not provoke opportunity attacks (and we already know warning strikes ignores that), whereas if there was a meaningful difference from a terminology perspective then this section would be unnecessary.

also, it does raise another interesting question - does warning strike ignore teleportation? it doesn't use the creature's movement so i'd assume they'd still be able to get the teleport off and just wouldn't be able to use their movement afterwards, but opportunity attacks do specify that teleportation doesn't provoke them. since warning strike is not an opportunity attack, would this mean you could warning strike a creature teleporting out of your reach?

 

[Phil Best]

it does raise another interesting question - does warning strike ignore teleportation?

I had considered this, but I think teleportation is out for another reason. When teleporting, a creature is only going to leave your reach when it arrives at its destination point. The movement is instantaneous, and by time you're able to use Warning Strike, the creature isn't typically going to be in range to target. This is different from cases where a creature moves away by normal means, where you can strike them as they attempt to cross the boundary defined by your reach.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

When teleporting, a creature is only going to leave your reach when it arrives at its destination point. The movement is instantaneous, and by time you're able to use Warning Strike, the creature isn't typically going to be in range to target. This is different from cases where a creature moves away by normal means, where you can strike them as they attempt to cross the boundary defined by your reach.

i suppose that's one way to look at it, but teleportation is typically accomplished either via casting a spell or using an item, and i find it hard to imagine that you wouldn't be able to tell if either is happening, so i don't think that's a totally solid argument.

 

[Phil Best]

i suppose that's one way to look at it, but teleportation is typically accomplished either via casting a spell or using an item, and i find it hard to imagine that you wouldn't be able to tell if either is happening, so i don't think that's a totally solid argument.

It's not that you wouldn't know that it's happening, but teleportation presents a different kind of opening to somebody moving away, and this maneuver simply may not capture that expertise. There are other maneuvers which trigger when an enemy attempts to cast a spell.