Shake It Off vs. Dazed

[Bigwilly]

I can understand this. But let's consider something other than dazed. How about immobilized? The Warlords turn comes up and he is immobilized. He spends his minor action and used Shake it Off and succeeds at his saving through. It seems silly that he couldn't then use his move action to actually move. Although that could certainly be correct based on RAW.

The difference with immobilized is that it does not have the specific effect: limited to only one action on your turn. As I understand 4e, specific overrules generic.

 

[keterys]

As far as I can tell, he could then take the rest of his turn. In the same sense, if you start your turn and take a move action that provokes and the OA results in you getting dazed, your turn ends after you finish the move action.

So, same theory:
Normal turn:
1) I take an action.
2) What actions do I have left?
3) Goto #1

While dazed, #2 is mostly 'none', but if your minor action in #1 removes dazed then you have a standard and move left and nothing that stops you from using them.

Now, you could try to rule that you can only take a move and minor, say, that Shake It Off effectively used your standard and that dazed reduces you to a standard action that you can turn into a move or minor... it's not RAW, but it's not a horrible interpretation thereof if you want to make the effect more painful.

I personally don't think you need to reduce the power of Shake It Off, though.

 

[Vegepygmy]

Technically RAW I would go with ween and Bigwilly.

Effects are applied at the start of your turn (see page 268).

Other Effects: Deal with any other effects that occur at the start of your turn.

Keterys has it right, I think. Looking at the rules Bagpuss cites, I realize there is a difference between what they say and what he says they say.

Other Effects: Deal with any other effects that occur at the start of your turn.

That's not a general rule that all "effects are applied at the start of your turn." It's just a reminder that some effects are applied at the start of your turn (specifically, the ones that say they are), and that you apply such effects before you take any actions.

But your turn has three parts (page 268): the start of your turn, the actions on your turn, and the end of your turn.

At the start of his turn, Warlord is dazed. That doesn't really matter, though, because he can't normally take any actions at the start of his turn anyway.

During his turn, Warlord gets three actions (page 269):

Your Actions: You get the following three actions on your turn:
Standard action
Move action
Minor action

Free Actions: You can take any number of free actions on your turn.

Any Order: You can take your actions in any order you wish, and you can skip any of them.

On his turn, Warlord is limited to taking only one minor, move, or standard action (plus any free actions) -- but only because he is dazed. After taking his minor action, he is no longer dazed. This part of his turn isn't over yet, because he could, for example, still take free actions (even if he was still dazed). And since the dazed condition no longer exists, he is no longer limited to taking only one action on his turn. The normal rule (he gets three actions on his turn) thus applies, and because he can take his actions in any order he wishes, the fact that Warlord used his minor action first doesn't matter a bit.

Yep, it seems pretty clear to me now that by RAW, Warlord gets to take all of his actions (as long as he makes the save granted by Shake It Off).

 

[weem]

Interesting Vegepygmy.

I have a question that came to me because of the way you presented this (which was a good way to present it btw)...

On his turn, Warlord is limited to taking only one minor, move, or standard action (plus any free actions) -- but only because he is dazed. After taking his minor action, he is no longer dazed. This part of his turn isn't over yet, because he could, for example, still take free actions (even if he was still dazed). And since the dazed condition no longer exists, he is no longer limited to taking only one action on his turn.

First of all, a clarification on the bolded (by me) part above - the power does not auto kill the daze, it lets you roll your save with a bonus (meaning you could still fail the save). So, in the case of the Warlord failing that save roll from the power (which happens in the middle of his turn), does he then (at the end of his turn) get his normal save roll, effectively letting him roll twice?

I'm not leading this anywhere, it's just an honest question of how you (anyone) would rule that. I don't know that you aren't allowed to roll a save twice during the same turn, maybe you are under certain circumstances or maybe not at all, I haven't looked - it was just something that occurred to me to ask and maybe the answer can help clarify this a bit? I dunno.

 

[keterys]

First of all, a clarification on the bolded (by me) part above - the power does not auto kill the daze, it lets you roll your save with a bonus (meaning you could still fail the save). So, in the case of the Warlord failing that save roll from the power (which happens in the middle of his turn), does he then (at the end of his turn) get his normal save roll, effectively letting him roll twice?

Yes. And if he has a free action daily item that gives him a save, he could make 3. If there's another inspiring warlord in the party with inspiring recovery and he spends an action point to take an extra action and get a save, he'd get 4. Etc.

There is no restriction whatsoever on the number of saves you may have, simply on the number of things that give them.

 

[weem]

There is no restriction whatsoever on the number of saves you may have, simply on the number of things that give them.

Interesting. I have yet for a situation to come up that presented a an opportunity for more than one save roll on a turn.

So back to the point, I guess that bit doesn't help clarify the question at hand unfortunately.

But, reading this all over again I still think that using the ability would be all you can do, but as others have mentioned they would allow it anyway, and I could see allowing it as well if it ever came up. It could easily be the way it was intended anyway and I simply don't see it for some reason, so it's not a game breaker by any means.

 

[Vegepygmy]

But, reading this all over again I still think that using the ability would be all you can do...

Just out of curiosity, why?

Bigwilly says it seems "cheesy" to him, but to me, saying that the Warlord shouldn't benefit from his own Shake It Off as much as someone else is basically like saying he shouldn't get the +1d6 hit points when he uses his Inspiring Word on himself. (I mean, that's a perfectly valid opinion to have, but it pretty much just screws over warlords and has no basis in the actual rules).

The RAW argument has been pretty well debunked, I think.

So (if you don't mind me asking) why do you remain unconvinced?

 

[webrunner]

Dazed says you can take only one action.

It doesn't say you have only one action to take. One could argue the actions are still 'there', just out of 'reach'. Once you are able to take the actions again, you can take them.

 

[N8Ball]

First of all, a clarification on the bolded (by me) part above - the power does not auto kill the daze, it lets you roll your save with a bonus (meaning you could still fail the save). So, in the case of the Warlord failing that save roll from the power (which happens in the middle of his turn), does he then (at the end of his turn) get his normal save roll, effectively letting him roll twice?

The Warlord definitely gets to roll twice. If you consider the turn sequence on pg 268-269, there are 3 distinct parts to your turn - "The Start of your turn", "Actions on your turn", and "The end of your turn"

Since the save was made during the "Actions" phase of the warlords turn, it does not rob him of the full sequence in the "End" phase, including saving throws.

Perhaps the discussion would be helped by a closer look at the Dazed condition. It may be subtle, but the power doesn't say that the character loses his other actions or only gets once action, it says that...

pg 277 - "You can take either a standard action, a move action, or a minor action."

So he takes his minor action and Daze restricts him from taking any other actions, but once it's gone there's nothing preventing him from taking other actions he is normally allowed.

Edit: GAH! quit reading my mind, webrunner I had a good point there.

I liked keterys's suggestion that the Warlord perhaps needed to use his Standard action to kick off the power while dazed, but after reading the description of DAZE, I don't even think that's necessary because the power specificly allows you to just use a minor action. Then IF the power works you'd still have your move and standard.

 

[weem]

So (if you don't mind me asking) why do you remain unconvinced?

I had a big response here and the forums lost it (I used to copy off my posts just incase but it's been a while since I had any incident here)... lunch is over now, so I will have to get back to you