Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5026768" data-attributes="member: 51942">Moving as part of your attack would have the same benefit.The only normal difference between shifting and moving as part of a ranged attack power (as far as I can tell) would be that if you're doing a multi-square shift, you wouldn't provoke an OA in squares that you leave except the first square and all squares you make an attack from.In practice, this difference is irrelevant for powers which move only few squares.  Some other distinctions related to other power/effect interactions exist, but they're fairly minor.  I'm fairly sure that if indeed ranged powers with movement always provoke in the first square, then, to avoid confusion, ranged powers should never include shifting - the distinction between shifting and moving (being the provoking of OA's) is absent, so drawing attention to it is merely misleading.You could even argue that "using" is continuous and you provoke in all squares, in which case there is truly (almost) no reason ever to use the term "shift" in such powers; no copy-writer that doesn't hate his readers should ever let that pass.Assuming that the word shift was chosen to convey some useful meaning in the writing of these powers, I'd say that it's likely these ranged powers should only provoke when the actual attacks are made.Anybody ask CS about this?</blockquote>