Rule Q: Dazed caused by immediate actions

[DracoSuave]

OK, someone is hit by an immediate effect in the middle of an action that dazes him. The target will nearly always be able to complete his current action, but will then lose the rest of his actions for that turn. A kind DM might allow an intended move-and-attack to be changed to a charge if previous movement supports it, but that's a DM call that has nothing to do with the rules.

I do not recommend this. It is not a kindness to invalidate the effect of tactics. It encourages players to not do what is to their benefit tactically, if they learn that anyone can counter their counters by a 'I changed my mind after you undid what I wanted to do.'

It also cheats them of an essential part of the challenge of the game. The DM can always counter what a player does anyways... a kind DM wouldn't 'let the player charge.'

A kind DM wouldn't use interrupts and dazes to begin with.

An Interrupt may render the current action illegal, but dazing doesn't really invalidate any current actions. Being able to charge makes the daze effect very weak when applied to most melee units (perhaps as useless as slow on a ranged unit).

If the interrupt is resolved before the action begins, then it can render taking that action illegal, and by the rules for interrupts, can and will invalidate that action.

In the case of charging, no it's not an appropriate counter*... but '+1 to hit with a melee basic attack' isn't exactly threatening when the alternative is 'move into range and then hit the entire party with a stunning breath weapon'.


Charging is overrated.


*the appropriate counter, by the way, is to move a fighter in the path of the charging monster, or otherwise use positioning to your advantage.