Shield Push - Shift invalidation

[Syrsuro]

So the hypothetical push would push the nonadjacent enemy, since he has not yet resolved his "move into adjacent square" action when the OA occurs.

-Hyp.

"has not yet resolved" is not synonymous with "has not yet initiated".

When trying to resolve events that are not well modeled by the system, I find it helps to think about what is really going on.

A move can be thought of as the following steps:
Character leaves his current square (as per CS this is when the typical OA occurs)
Character enters his new square (this is when Polearm Gamble is triggered).

The destination of the push depends on where the creature is when pushed.

Imagine that I am standing on your porch.

If you are set to push me back the second I move, you will probably push me right off of the porch because the starting point of the push is my original position.

If you are set to push me back if and only if I enter your house, you will probably push me back onto the porch because the starting point of the push is my destination. The push does not start until I reach the destination square and thus the push moves me one square away from the destination square.

And that is the difference, imho.

Normal OAs are triggered when the creature begins to leave his current square, and thus the origin point for the push is the start point of the move.
Polearm Gamble is triggered when the creature reaches an adjacent square and thus the origin point for the push is the destination point of the move.

It is occuring before the move is "resolved" because the creature never actually stops in the adjacent square. (Assuming a hit) it is pushed out as soon as it arrives.

Carl

The problem, of course, is that they came up with this ludicrous version of Polearm Gamble. Why couldn't they have just said: "Polearm Gamble allows the character to take Opportunity Attacks on targets that leave squares within his melee range (subject to the normal limitations on Opportunity Attacks)." This would have been more elegant and prevented the majority of these discussions.

Ok, I'm sure the reason they didn't take the easy way out is they only wanted it to work on characters who were approaching, not retreating or skirting from two squares away. But even that could have been written far more elegantly. (Take OAs on "targets that leave squares within his melee range to move adjacent to him".)

CFT

 

[Hypersmurf]

"has not yet resolved" is not synonymous with "has not yet initiated".

Sure. But if you've initiated the process of entering a square, and have not yet resolved entering the square, you're still in the square you started in. If you were not in that square any more, you'd be in the new square... which means that your action has resolved.

A move can be thought of as the following steps:
Character leaves his current square (as per CS this is when the typical OA occurs)
Character enters his new square (this is when Polearm Gamble is triggered).

That implies that there is a state between "Not in Square A" and "In Square B". But since you are always in one square or the other, those two 'steps' are the same thing! You're in Square A; [Event Occurs]; You're in Square B. That event is leaving Square A, and it is also entering Square B. You cannot have left Square A, but not yet have entered Square B, because the action of leaving Square A is the action of entering Square B.

Since your step 1 and step 2 are the same event, it's not possible for a character to have completed step 1 but not yet have completed step 2.

The destination of the push depends on where the creature is when pushed.

Imagine that I am standing on your porch.

If you are set to push me back the second I move, you will probably push me right off of the porch because the starting point of the push is my original position.

If you are set to push me back if and only if I enter your house, you will probably push me back onto the porch because the starting point of the push is my destination. The push does not start until I reach the destination square and thus the push moves me one square away from the destination square.

Not if my push occurs before your action resolves. If I'm set to push before "Move" resolves, you have not yetr moved - you are on the porch. If I'm set to push before "Enter my house" resolves, you have not yet entered my house - you are on the porch. In both cases, when I push you, you are on the porch.

Normal OAs are triggered when the creature begins to leave his current square, and thus the origin point for the push is the start point of the move.
Polearm Gamble is triggered when the creature reaches an adjacent square and thus the origin point for the push is the destination point of the move.

It is occuring before the move is "resolved" because the creature never actually stops in the adjacent square. (Assuming a hit) it is pushed out as soon as it arrives.

If the origin point for the push is the destination square, then you must be in the destination square. In which case your move has resolved.

If your move has not resolved, you are not in the destination square, and that cannot be the origin of the push.

-Hyp.

 

[eamon]

Aside about Polearm gamble triggering: Polearm gamble is an OA with some special qualities, but just like Hypersmurf points out, it's completely normal in that it resolves before the trigger - in this case before the triggering creature has entered the adjacent square, and thus while it is still in whatever square it originated in.

Now back to the interrupts:
I think my follow-up question confused the matter. We have two very different situations - but you don't need a hypothetical pushing variant to illustrate the difference.

A: A fighter with CC and shield push. This, per above discourse, does not invalidate the triggering shift (barring happenstance). The shifting creature can choose his shift target after being shield pushed.

B: A palading with polearm gamble. This will not invalidate the shift (which is why I chose a paladin), but the OA resolves before the trigger (i.e. the shift into the adjacent square). Can the shifting creature change it's mind in this situation?

Both are interrupting actions, and both trigger on movement (the distinction between shifting and normal movement isn't relevant to the comparison, I believe). The crucial difference lies in that the fighter takes his action in response to any shift (and so after the fighter's attack the creature can choose where to shift), but the paladin takes his action in response to a specific direction of movement.

Now, everyone agrees that the triggering creature doesn't need to declare where he's moving in situation A, and can choose based on the consequences of the fighter's interrupting attack. Can the creature in situation B do the same? The movement isn't invalidated, but that's not the question - can the creature change its mind based on the consequences of the paladin's interrupting attack?

I'm trying to get at the reason why movement is treated differently than attacks when interrupted. Attacks are generally "fixed" when they're interrupted, and tough luck if you want to change the target of the attack after seeing the consequences of the interruption. Movement is generally not "fixed", so you can choose to change your movement after seeing the consequences of the interruption. I'm wondering whether this difference is supposed to be inherent to attacks vs. movement, or whether this is simply because movement isn't normally declared in advance, whereas (normal) attacks are targeted. In the case of polearm gamble, however, you do declare the movement in advance, since polearm gamble doesn't just trigger on movement, it triggers on movement toward a particular set of square.

This situation isn't quite as far-fetched as may seem. Taking an OA may have consequences for the attacking creature - for instance, it might be divinely challenged by our paladin, and it might drop based on the divine challenge damage. If that occurs, the provoking creature might very well want to change his mind, and I'm curious as to when you can and when you cannot postpone determining choices until after the outcome of an interrupt has been determined.