Resolving Two Triggers at the Same Time

[Fkewl]

It doesn't _really_ solve the question conclusively, though. The No Action Unseen Hand still clearly happens after the damage - after all, otherwise sliding the target away would prevent the damage

I must disagree here.

The trigger is on the Hit, before Damage. It is also a No Action, not an Immediate Reaction to damaging a foe. And yes, if you Slide the creature away of your range by doing so, it would prevent damage.. so just don't slide him away but in a better position for you and your allies.

There are some situation where i can see a viable "slide the foe away from damage" would be wanted : very nasty foes with deadly auras, so even if you do slide him away from you without doing damage, it can prevent the PC or his allies from dying OR sliding the foes into a 100' foot deep pit, filled with magma and deadly fire-shark elemental

Not every power is about damage.. for me, tactical positioning trumps damage.

 

[Nichwee]

Why would the slide negate the damage?
You hit the target - it was in range when you did so.
Was the hit negated by Unseen Hand?
No; as it can work without being an interrupt it is assumed not to be, and only interrupts negate previous triggers!

So you have a power that hit (the range to target is an issue for whether you can target the creature and thus if you hit or not) so you apply the effect of hitting = damage regardless of range now.
The attack resolution only cares about range upto the point you decide if you hit or not - after this point the creature hit can end up any range away and the issue is still "Did the power hit? If so apply damage + effects."

 

[Radiating Gnome]

I'm with Fkewl. Mostly. Actually, I dunno.

Think about the trigger on a shield spell. The trigger is "you are hit by an attack". The power interrupts the attack boosts the AC and Reflect defense, and then (unless you're using it stupidly) the attack now misses.

So, Unseen Hand is a free action. It's a free action for a couple of reasons -- for one thing, it's can't be an immediate action because:
*immediate actions can only be taken when it's not your turn
*you only get one immediate action per round, so having to use an immediate action on your attack would be a pretty steep price to pay for these little power bumps

An important question is whether a free action actually interrupts the action that triggers it. So, in the case of the shield spell, the hit is interrupted, the shield spell changes game reality, and then the hit is re-resolved. If it were a immediate reaction, though, the attack would still hit, and do it's damage, even though the attack might have missed against the new, higher AC.

So....I think this is a pretty grey area. I can see reading it a lot of different ways.

On the one hand, the Unseen hand, even if it were a reaction, because it's triggered by the MBA hitting, could conceivably still move the target out of reach and it might not take the damage.

On the other hand, I think it's easy to say that the hit would still be resolved, and only interrupts can actually effectively roll back time and change the reality (the reality being, in this case, that the target was withing melee range).

Bottom line, for my own game, I think it's more "fun" for the player if his attack does damage and then the slide takes effect, so that's the way I'd rule. But I can't say I think that's the only way to interpret the RAW.

 

[Ryujin]

I'm with Fkewl. Mostly. Actually, I dunno.

Think about the trigger on a shield spell. The trigger is "you are hit by an attack". The power interrupts the attack boosts the AC and Reflect defense, and then (unless you're using it stupidly) the attack now misses.

So, Unseen Hand is a free action. It's a free action for a couple of reasons -- for one thing, it's can't be an immediate action because:
*immediate actions can only be taken when it's not your turn
*you only get one immediate action per round, so having to use an immediate action on your attack would be a pretty steep price to pay for these little power bumps

An important question is whether a free action actually interrupts the action that triggers it. So, in the case of the shield spell, the hit is interrupted, the shield spell changes game reality, and then the hit is re-resolved. If it were a immediate reaction, though, the attack would still hit, and do it's damage, even though the attack might have missed against the new, higher AC.

So....I think this is a pretty grey area. I can see reading it a lot of different ways.

On the one hand, the Unseen hand, even if it were a reaction, because it's triggered by the MBA hitting, could conceivably still move the target out of reach and it might not take the damage.

On the other hand, I think it's easy to say that the hit would still be resolved, and only interrupts can actually effectively roll back time and change the reality (the reality being, in this case, that the target was withing melee range).

Bottom line, for my own game, I think it's more "fun" for the player if his attack does damage and then the slide takes effect, so that's the way I'd rule. But I can't say I think that's the only way to interpret the RAW.

Unless otherwise specified, free actions are always reactions. But as I stated, where Unseen Hand is concerned, it's a *no action*.

 

[Radiating Gnome]

Cool, but, then can we assume that "no actions" are also always reactions?

 

[Ryujin]

Cool, but, then can we assume that "no actions" are also always reactions?

Why would you? They aren't actions, they're 'no actions.' They aren't even 'free actions.'

Though admittedly they generally seem to have a triggering condition.

 

[Radiating Gnome]

No action or not, it needs to fit into the flow of time in the game, doesn't it? The no action (rather than free action) primarily excuses these powers from the limitation on free action attacks to one per turn.

 

[keterys]

No Actions are not interrupts (like the mentioned Shield spell), so do not interrupt an action - unless, of course, they need to do so to function.

So, yeah, it doesn't actually _change_ anything about the discussion, but it's a really good reason to rule in the Bladesinger's favor and move on. Right up until you hit the _next_ thorny question of ghoul death bursts (or Orc Savage Demise) and need to figure out which No Action happens first

My gut feeling is just let the Bladesinger stuff trigger first. It's their shtick, move on with life. But the overall rule question is much thornier.

 

[Fkewl]

So, yeah, it doesn't actually _change_ anything about the discussion, but it's a really good reason to rule in the Bladesinger's favor and move on. Right up until you hit the _next_ thorny question of ghoul death bursts (or Orc Savage Demise) and need to figure out which No Action happens first

Hum.. nice one

Now, if the Dmg+Slide from Unseen Hand is enough to bring Ghoul to 0, does the Slide happen first, then Dmg or Dmg then Slide.. or both at the same time? hummm..

This is where, as DM, I would go "player friendly version" of

-MBA the Ghoul
-Hit, use Unseen Hand (no Dmg from MBA, out of range)
-Slide, then Dmg from Unseen Hand
-Unseen Hand Dmg bring Ghoul to 0hp
-Death Burst happens , Bladesinger is not in range, no Dmg.<

(unless Bladesinger is a prick and slides Ghoul into allies! muhaha)

 

[Vadriar]

My gut feeling is just let the Bladesinger stuff trigger first. It's their shtick, move on with life. But the overall rule question is much thornier.

Yeah, I'd rule of cool this too. The bladesinger pushes people around as part of their attacks. Let him enjoy that aspect of his character, the rest of it isn't too good to begin with.