"Evade the Blow" do you avoid the attacker's hit?

[phloog]

No, you just need to read the rules for immediate interrupts.

I guess, then, that I would see this as UNCLEAR...but we can agree to disagree...the point made by an earlier poster was that it would be unclear to new gamers...arguing that it's clear as day so long as you have a complete understanding of the rules for interrupts doesn't make it seem all that clear to Los N00bz.

They hit me so I get to move, but then that means I've moved before they hit me. Crystal.

So now in D&D we're going to have to keep track of interrupts, and likely chains of interrupts

"Your move from Evade the Blow put you in range of Alvin's Steadying Doomaflotchy power, which means he interrupts your move and you stay put and get hit...but wait! Alvin's Doomaflotchy happened in the range of Kurt's Flippant Intercession, so now YOU move 1 square, Alvin, and Tim's Evade the Blow still works, so he doesn't get hit, but it's all meaningless now because I use Urza's Mine to gather uncolored mana"

 

[The Little Raven]

They hit me so I get to move, but then that means I've moved before they hit me. Crystal.

Good, it seems you've got it. It really is that easy when you RTFM.

 

[phloog]

Good, it seems you've got it. It really is that easy when you RTFM.

Which of course is my problem with the text as written for the ability. I realize you can't reproduce all rules for each power, but this is a case where I believe they should have been more clear - you disagree. It seems like it would not take a huge amount of ink to make this clear to someone who is not 100% secure in their knowledge of the interrupt rules.

I also continue to have grave concerns about an interrupt system, so maybe you can RYFM and answer this:

Is it possible in 4th edition to have a 'chain' of interrupts, where an interrupt ability/power results in the activation of another interrupt power, etc? - - So that you get into this situation where multiple actions are declared and taken, then sequentially NOT taken?

That's my biggest concern from this thread, not so much the clarity of the text (where we disagree), but my extreme dislike of the way MTG gets into these interrupt waterfalls, and my desire to keep them out of D&D.

 

[Eldorian]

Also if an opponent has a power like "If an adjacent enemy shifts you may shift one square" as an immediate interrupt it can be used to counteract Evade the Blow.

Can't take immediate actions during your turn.

 

[NMcCoy]

Is it possible in 4th edition to have a 'chain' of interrupts, where an interrupt ability/power results in the activation of another interrupt power, etc?

Basically, no. According to TFM the PHB, you can't take immediate actions on your own turn, and you only get one per round. So you won't ever get two combatants interrupting each other repeatedly.

Also, the specific example they use for illustrating interrupt actions is, in fact: "For example, an enemy makes a melee attack against you, but you use a power that lets you shift away as an immediate interrupt. If your enemy can no longer reach you, the enemy’s attack action is lost." This might be why some people are grumbling about other people not reading the rules.

 

[MarkB]

Is it possible in 4th edition to have a 'chain' of interrupts, where an interrupt ability/power results in the activation of another interrupt power, etc? - - So that you get into this situation where multiple actions are declared and taken, then sequentially NOT taken?

That's my biggest concern from this thread, not so much the clarity of the text (where we disagree), but my extreme dislike of the way MTG gets into these interrupt waterfalls, and my desire to keep them out of D&D.

You're years too late for that. Interrupts of interrupts have been possible ever since 3rd Edition introduced Attacks of Opportunity. Add readied actions, and - as of 3.5e - immediate actions, and you'll find this has been a feature of the game for quite some time.

The irony is that, as pointed out, 4e's rules actually diminish the potential for such scenarios compared to 3e.

 

[phloog]

You're years too late for that. Interrupts of interrupts have been possible ever since 3rd Edition introduced Attacks of Opportunity. Add readied actions, and - as of 3.5e - immediate actions, and you'll find this has been a feature of the game for quite some time.

The irony is that, as pointed out, 4e's rules actually diminish the potential for such scenarios compared to 3e.

I don't agree with that statement. I don't recall a situation where taking your attack of opportunity caused an attack of opportunity...I can understand where you're coming from in terms of interrupted movement, but maybe I missed a 3.x rule somewhere. We never used immediate actions, but maybe that's as you say. Readied actions really aren't the same, since they are set up via a single very specific condition. Even though I'll grant that they INTERRUPT, I recall no situations where a chain was created...but the other poster answered my question I think.

 

[phloog]

Basically, no. According to TFM the PHB, you can't take immediate actions on your own turn, and you only get one per round. So you won't ever get two combatants interrupting each other repeatedly.

Also, the specific example they use for illustrating interrupt actions is, in fact: "For example, an enemy makes a melee attack against you, but you use a power that lets you shift away as an immediate interrupt. If your enemy can no longer reach you, the enemy’s attack action is lost." This might be why some people are grumbling about other people not reading the rules.

Thanks for the actual answer, and the full text. If the chains don't exist that's actually awesome.

I understand the part that was struck out about R'ing the F'ing M...my issue is that I have these questions and don't have the FM to R at this point.

If it turns out that some of these things are as silly as they sound (and it looks like some aren't I'll grant), then I don't see the need to P the FM, as that would be a W of my F$.

 

[small pumpkin man]

I don't agree with that statement. I don't recall a situation where taking your attack of opportunity caused an attack of opportunity...I can understand where you're coming from in terms of interrupted movement, but maybe I missed a 3.x rule somewhere. We never used immediate actions, but maybe that's as you say. Readied actions really aren't the same, since they are set up via a single very specific condition. Even though I'll grant that they INTERRUPT, I recall no situations where a chain was created...but the other poster answered my question I think.

You besides making your attack of opportunity a disarm?

Okay, yes, that's not going to come up that much, but it was certainly possible.

 

[phloog]

You besides making your attack of opportunity a disarm?

Okay, yes, that's not going to come up that much, but it was certainly possible.

I guess it seems that THIS kind of interrupt sequence would be more common, but maybe I'm wrong.

Also, I accept that your example is possible by the rules of 3.x, but we've honestly never had anyone try it, because we've understood that the spirit was 'taking a quick poke when they open themselves up', and I guess disarm, sunder, etc...seem like they take more focus and 'umph' than would be allowed in a quick poke...but absolutely legal I guess.

Am I wrong in thinking that there are far more interrupt-style powers in 4E?