Melee: No way out?

[Zaruthustran]

Teleporting and forced movement explicitly state No OAs.
Shift stays No OAs for shifting away from adjacent

Polearm gamble allows you to make OAs when an enemy tries to move adjacent.

So, does shifting adjacent provoke an OA from a Polearm Gamble fighter, where teleporting or forced movement wouldn't?

Let's look at the rules:

From the Compendium, Opportunity Attack: "Moving Provokes: If an enemy leaves a square adjacent to you, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy. However, you can’t make one if the enemy shifts or teleports or is forced to move away by a pull, a push, or a slide."

From the Compendium, Shift: "No Opportunity Attacks: If you shift out of a square adjacent to an enemy, you don’t provoke an opportunity attack."

From the Compendium, Polearm Gamble: "When a nonadjacent enemy enters a square adjacent to you, you can make an opportunity attack with a polearm against that enemy"

From the Compendium, Warpriest's Challenge: "When you hit an enemy with an at-will melee attack, you can choose to mark that enemy for the rest of the encounter. The next time that enemy shifts or attacks
a creature other than you, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy."

To summarize:

1. Leaving an adjacent square provokes an OA
2. Shifting lets you leave an adjacent square without provoking an OA
3. Against someone with Polearm Gamble, entering an adjacent square provokes an OA
4. Against a Warpriest who has marked you, shifting provokes an OA

It's unclear whether shifting bypasses the OA from Polearm Gamble. Regardless, if you're a Warpriest the shift itself provokes.

 

[hamishspence]

And what about near a creature with Threatening Reach?

any movement within reach, not just away from adjacent, provokes OAs for a creature with Threatening Reach.

As for The compendium: I thought it didn't contain the rules but told you where they were. has it changed since then. Does it overrride the rulebook or the errata, or both?

(edit) P290 diagram makes no mention of shifting.

 

[Kordeth]

Obviously the intent of the rule is shifting never provokes OAs. But as written, it only gives a very specific circumstance where shifting doesn't provoke OAs.

The table gives Shift as Move 1 square without provoking OA. But text trumps table.

The text and table are not in conflict. "Leaving a square adjacent to an enemy" does not mean "ending up in a square not adjacent to the enemy." If I'm in the square due North of a goblin and I shift to the square Northeast of the goblin, I have still left a square adjacent to the enemy.

The only time shifting provokes is in specific exceptions to the general rules, like Polearm Gamble. And that, IMHO, is how it should be.

 

[Storminator]

The only time shifting doesn't provoke is in specific exceptions to the general rules, like Polearm Gamble. And that, IMHO, is how it should be.

Should that be does provoke?

PS

 

[Kordeth]

Should that be does provoke?

PS

D'oh. Yes. Yes it should.

 

[Storminator]

D'oh. Yes. Yes it should.

Nothing like an extra negation to clarify the example!

PS

 

[hamishspence]

Threatening reach

Text only gives moves out of an adjacent square. What about:

HH HH
HH HH

G G

Is not adjacent, has shifted one square. Would it provoke?

And are you saying that shifting in close would provoke for Polearm Gamble purposes?

 

[Kordeth]

Text only gives moves out of an adjacent square. What about:

HH HH
HH HH

G G

Is not adjacent, has shifted one square. Would it provoke?

I have no idea what this diagram is supposed to be showing.

And are you saying that shifting in close would provoke for Polearm Gamble purposes?

Correct. Shifting allows you to leave an adjacent square without provoking, not enter one.

 

[hamishspence]

my answer to the PG question in another thread

After careful consideration, I decided "Enters" in PG is exactly like "Leaves" in OAs: something that is being tried, but hasn't yet succeeded, until the OA and Combat superiority bit were resolved,

Since OA in response to movement take place before said movement is resolved, and Combat Superiority stops movement. So only if the OA misses does the target complete its movement.

Similarly, since shifting is only explicitly described as preventing OAs when move is out of adjacent square, it might still be dangerous within area of threatening reach. Unless there is a ruling otherwise. Is there?

 

[hamishspence]

soory, pic was a bit crude.

Was to show a Hydra (large, represnted by 4 Hs, and G was the character, Before move, and after move.


Before:
G

HH
HH

After

. G

HH
HH

Does it make more sense?