Repulsive Armor vs Warding Blades

[DarkLord Of DForce]

Correct. Now make your opportunity attack against the target that is 2 squares away. If you don't have reach, it doesn't work very well.

But you still get to make it.

Okay, maybe thats part of the problem of communication here. I've never ever once said or meant to say, or implied anything about an OA attack against an enemy 2 squares away.

Only about an enemy who enters into an adjacent square, after Warding Blade is up.

Maybe that will clear some things up...

Thanks.

 

[keterys]

I'm not sure if you're intentionally misunderstanding or not, but I'll give it one last whack, cause hey why not:

Warding Blades is used, pushing A and B

.........
.A..@..B.
.........

A's turn - starts to move closer.
First square:

.........
..A.@..B.
.........

_DECLARES_ second square, but before gets to move into that square, Warding Blades interrupts with 'Hey, I get to make a melee basic attack'
Position at time of OA:

.........
..A.@..B.
.........

If @ has a reach weapon, all is well. If not, his attack is disallowed due to the target being out of range.

A completes movement into the second square AFTER the OA interrupts:

.........
...A@..B.
.........

As an immediate reaction to the movement, repulsion armor forces him 1 square away.

.........
..A.@..B.
.........

So A goes 'Eh, I still have 2 more squares of movement' and moves 1 square closer

.........
...A@..B.
.........

And the avenger is sad, cause it was not nearly as cool as he hoped.

Now, I should note that I personally feel that it working this way is because the person designing the power _made an error_ and intended for the attack to work without a reach weapon. But you can't really prove RAI unless an author actually posts.

An immediate reaction would have worked better, as would just dealing automatic damage, or allowing the avenger to shift instead of make an attack, or any number of things. Technically a free action could also have worked, but is perhaps stronger than they intended.

But hey, you asked the rules, so there ya go.

 

[DarkLord Of DForce]

I'm not sure if you're intentionally misunderstanding or not, but I'll give it one last whack, cause hey why not:

Warding Blades is used, pushing A and B

.........
.A..@..B.
.........

A's turn - starts to move closer.
First square:

.........
..A.@..B.
.........

_DECLARES_ second square, but before gets to move into that square, Warding Blades interrupts with 'Hey, I get to make a melee basic attack'
Position at time of OA:

.........
..A.@..B.
.........

If @ has a reach weapon, all is well. If not, his attack is disallowed due to the target being out of range.

A completes movement into the second square AFTER the OA interrupts:

.........
...A@..B.
.........

As an immediate reaction to the movement, repulsion armor forces him 1 square away.

.........
..A.@..B.
.........

So A goes 'Eh, I still have 2 more squares of movement' and moves 1 square closer

.........
...A@..B.
.........

And the avenger is sad, cause it was not nearly as cool as he hoped.

Now, I should note that I personally feel that it working this way is because the person designing the power _made an error_ and intended for the attack to work without a reach weapon. But you can't really prove RAI unless an author actually posts.

An immediate reaction would have worked better, as would just dealing automatic damage, or allowing the avenger to shift instead of make an attack, or any number of things. Technically a free action could also have worked, but is perhaps stronger than they intended.

But hey, you asked the rules, so there ya go.

I'm not intentionally misunderstanding, thank you very much!

I am choosing to deliberately interpret this in a manner different than you.

The trigger from the OA from Warding Blades is not "starting to move". The trigger is when they enter, or move into the adjacent square. When the break the plane of the adjacent square, not before. Please show me the rule where it says that the OA occurs when they start to move vs when they enter the adjacent square. Thanks.

As far as Repulsive armor goes - yes it is very cool. Because its a reaction and not an interrupt, when the enemy moves into an adjacent square, it kicks in, but doesn't do anything until they *complete* their move action. THEN it kicks them back one square. Their move is completed so they can not continue the move because their move *ended*. They can spend a standard action to continue moving, but either way, thats a win-win for the Avenger.

You did note the reply from Customer service?

Thanks.

 

[keterys]

The trigger from the OA from Warding Blades is not "starting to move". The trigger is when they enter, or move into the adjacent square. When the break the plane of the adjacent square, not before. Please show me the rule where it says that the OA occurs when they start to move vs when they enter the adjacent square. Thanks.

Someone did this already earlier, but:
"Interrupts Action: An opportunity action interrupts the action that triggered it."

So, for example, if an enemy makes a ranged or area attack, provoking an opportunity attack - you get the opportunity attack before their attack is resolved.

Similarly, if you get an opportunity attack for someone _leaving_ a square adjacent to you, you make the attack _before_ they move, when they're still in reach. Otherwise you'd need a reach weapon to make the opportunity attack on someone leaving.

As far as Repulsive armor goes - yes it is very cool. Because its a reaction and not an interrupt, when the enemy moves into an adjacent square, it kicks in, but doesn't do anything until they *complete* their move action. THEN it kicks them back one square. Their move is completed so they can not continue the move because their move *ended*. They can spend a standard action to continue moving, but either way, thats a win-win for the Avenger.

Also wrong:
'If a creature triggers your immediate reaction while moving (by coming into range, for example), you take your action before the creature finishes moving but after it has moved at least 1 square.'

You did note the reply from Customer service?

Of course. Just as I'm sure you noted the rules that others quoted earlier.

 

[DracoSuave]

I'm not intentionally misunderstanding, thank you very much!

I am choosing to deliberately interpret this in a manner different than you.

The trigger from the OA from Warding Blades is not "starting to move". The trigger is when they enter, or move into the adjacent square. When the break the plane of the adjacent square, not before. Please show me the rule where it says that the OA occurs when they start to move vs when they enter the adjacent square. Thanks.

Right. It is triggered by entering the square. So, BEFORE ENTERING THE SQUARE, the interrupt occurs.

Now, -before- entering the square means that he's not in it yet. Interrupts happen -before- the trigger, and they can potentially negate the action. For example, if Warding Blades damage were to kill the triggering foe, then the foe is dead, and cannot take the action is was going to take. That action is then negated and we pretend it was never going to happen.

Another example: A fighter's opportunity attacks also end the movement of an enemy's current action. So if the enemy was trying to do a move away, if the fight hits with his OA, the enemy stops and his move action is negated.

Another example: An enemy has hit you with a ranged attack. Your AC is 20, and they rolled a 23. You interrupt with Shield, raising your AC to 24. Now the attack does not beat your AC, and it misses, and is negated.

Interrupts happen -before- the action. The only exception to that is movement-related interrupts, which occur before the square of movement.

Triggered by leaving a square? Happens before the square of movement. Triggered by entering a square? Happens before the square of movement.

In both these cases, the interrupt would occur at the same time, so any discussion of 'But it's not leaving a square, it's entering' is rather pointless, as it happens before the entire square of movement is resolved.

 

[eamon]

I respectfully disagree.

The key to Warding Blade is the trigger in the description. The trigger is not when an enemy moves away, moves towards, moves vertically or leaves a square, threatened or otherwise. (however, if it leaves a threatened square, adjacent, then you would of course, get a normal OA - no disagreement there).

The trigger is when an enemy moves *into* an adjacent square. Period.

The trigger for Warding Blade's OA is when an affected enemy enters a square adjacent to you. By comparison, the trigger to polearm gamble is when a non-adjacent enemy enters an adjacent square.

If the enemy is not initially adjacent, a normal OA suffices. If the enemy is initially non-adjacect, do you agree that both triggers ("enters a square adjacent to you") are identical?

And yet, if you read the FAQ I linked to, you'll see that the OA polearm gamble grants takes place when the enemy is non-adjacent!

 

[eamon]

Emphasis mine...

Interrupts happen -before- the action. The only exception to that is movement-related interrupts, which occur before the square of movement.

Triggered by leaving a square? Happens before the square of movement. Triggered by entering a square? Happens before the square of movement.

This is the critical notion. You resolve the interrupting event first. The triggering square of movement? That happens after.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Emphasis mine...

This is the critical notion. You resolve the interrupting event first. The triggering square of movement? That happens after.

Yup. Warding Blades may well have been written badly and was intended to work without a reach weapon, but by RAW it works EXACTLY the same way Polearm Gamble does. The wording is identical for all purposes under discussion here. It won't surprise me a bit if WotC issues an errata but otherwise you need reach.

The CS response really didn't address the issue. All it did was confirm that indeed you DO get an OA, which nobody disputes. The CS guy doesn't seem to have even considered the essential point about WHERE the OA happens. If he did consider that he certainly didn't convey his opinion on that point in the response.

 

[DarkLord Of DForce]

From the Players Handbook:

"Interrupts Target’s Action: An opportunity action
takes place before the target finishes its action.
After the opportunity attack, the creature resumes
its action. If the target is reduced to 0 hit points or
fewer by the opportunity attack, it can’t finish its
action because it’s dead or dying."

I can only read this one way - that as a creature enters the adjacent square, it triggers the OA from Warding Blade, so at this point, its broken the plane/crossed the line of the adjacent square. Now before it finishes, and sets down in the adjacent square (mid-stride, halfway between squares, as it were), the OA resolves, then the creatures is sitting adjacent to the Avenger, ("the creature resumes its action")assuming the OA didn't kill it.

Well, this thread certainly has been educational for me. Its taught me just how much I don't know, and don't understand 4e and I guess, D&D in general.

I surely can't understand how a trigger happens before the event that provokes it. I can't undersand how, just by saying you're moving to and adjacent square (declared!), yet before you actually move, a trigger based on you entering an adjacent square happens, and yet, you've not even gotten to the square yet.

What if, during the game, the DM has his hand on the creature, moves it 1 square away from the adjacent square, and without removing his hand from the piece, declares he changes his mind and is stopping 2 squares away? He's not entered the adjacent square, but according to the logic here, because he said he was going to, the trigger still happens.
What if a creature gets 2 squares away and moves 1 square straight up by jumping? Silly, but there ya go.

Just another thought, if you were playing an Avenger, and you had used Warding Blade, pushed the enemies 2 squares away, and the DM put his hand on a piece and says I'm moving this one back to attack you, before he could even move the piece, would you immediately say OA! ? How silly would that look, when the DM hasn't even moved the piece yet, not even entering an adjacent square, and not setting off the trigger? How silly would that look?

Ugh. I still just don't get it. I can perfectly understand the trigger *resolving* before the action that triggered it finishes- thats what the description from the PH says, but not before the actual trigger is set off....

I've shown this thread to our DMs and they don't get it either. So I've sent an e-mail to CS and our campaign is going to go by their reply. Just for the fun of it, I'll post their reply here.

Thanks for the replies and the discussion. (and everyone's patience with me).

 

[keterys]

I can only read this one way

People often read things the way they want to... and certainly it is intuitive that the power should work without reach. Do you read the rules the same way for a normal OA, where the trigger is leaving the square? Ie, do you only make the attack after the creature has already left the square?

I surely can't understand how a trigger happens before the event that provokes it. I can't undersand how, just by saying you're moving to and adjacent square (declared!), yet before you actually move, a trigger based on you entering an adjacent square happens, and yet, you've not even gotten to the square yet.

That is the entire premise of interrupting actions, from OAs to Shield to Combat Challenge. It's a basic principle of the game.

What if, during the game, the DM has his hand on the creature, moves it 1 square away from the adjacent square, and without removing his hand from the piece, declares he changes his mind and is stopping 2 squares away?

That depends on your rules at the table. What happens in your game if you go 'Okay, I'm moving over here' and the DM says 'Okay, so I'll get an opportunity attack' and you instead go 'Oh, then I'll shift'. Same thing.

Just another thought, if you were playing an Avenger, and you had used Warding Blade, pushed the enemies 2 squares away, and the DM put his hand on a piece and says I'm moving this one back to attack you, before he could even move the piece, would you immediately say OA! ? How silly would that look, when the DM hasn't even moved the piece yet, not even entering an adjacent square, and not setting off the trigger? How silly would that look?

Not sure I see how it would look silly at all unless you try to make it so. The DM says "Okay, he moves over to you and attacks you" and you say "Cool, I get an OA when he tries to move next to me" - a mirror of the earlier conversation of "Okay, I move away from him" "Okay, he gets an OA then"

So I've sent an e-mail to CS and our campaign is going to go by their reply. Just for the fun of it, I'll post their reply here.

More curious will be what you actually asked them.

Thanks for the replies and the discussion. (and everyone's patience with me).

Good luck! You guys would do well to learn how interrupts and reactions (like the repulsion cloth, which works great on shifts since it negates them, but pretty ineffectually on normal movement unless you can push them next to a fighter or something) work, but just so it's clear... as a DM I'd house rule the power to let you hit a creature that moved adjacent. I really think the person who wrote the power just didn't realize what they were doing