Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 4449131" data-attributes="member: 51942">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.</blockquote>

Verification