Shifting when not adjacent?

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

I'm thinking that Shifting simply does not provoke opportunity attacks, period. The description of shifting not provoking on moving out of adjacent is a description (not a rule, itself) of how it would work under the general rules. Threatening reach and others would be a specific that breaks how to provoke opportunity, but not how to avoid it.

Of course, that's a only justification for the interpretation I think is most fair.

This is the right way to rule this in my opinion.

No, Polearm Gamble means you can make an OA when a non-adjacent enemy enters a square adjacent to you - if they are just shifting or moving to another non-adjacent square, you're out of luck.

Exactly.

 

[Branduil]

No, Polearm Gamble means you can make an OA when a non-adjacent enemy enters a square adjacent to you - if they are just shifting or moving to another non-adjacent square, you're out of luck.

Yes. So an enemy attempts to enter a square adjacent to you. As an immediate interrupt, you make an Opportunity Attack, at which point the enemy is not yet in the square adjacent to you. After you make your OA, if the enemy still can, he enters the square adjacent to you.

 

[Dragonstriker]

Yes. So an enemy attempts to enter a square adjacent to you. As an immediate interrupt, you make an Opportunity Attack, at which point the enemy is not yet in the square adjacent to you. After you make your OA, if the enemy still can, he enters the square adjacent to you.

Ok, but that isn't making an OA against an arbitrary non-adjacent enemy - it's making an OA against an enemy moving to become adjacent and who will become an adjacent enemy with CA vs you (or a dead non-adjacent enemy). Anyway, this is a corner case for whether shifting provokes in general as the shift could only possibly provoke if it ended adjacent to you. Personally I'm not sure which way I'd go on that one - probably that the shift away didn't provoke, but the shift to adjacent did trigger Polearm Gambit.

 

[Branduil]

Ok, but that isn't making an OA against an arbitrary non-adjacent enemy - it's making an OA against an enemy moving to become adjacent and who will become an adjacent enemy with CA vs you (or a dead non-adjacent enemy). Anyway, this is a corner case for whether shifting provokes in general as the shift could only possibly provoke if it ended adjacent to you. Personally I'm not sure which way I'd go on that one - probably that the shift away didn't provoke, but the shift to adjacent did trigger Polearm Gambit.

Well, it's also important because it means that you can't use Polearm Gamble against an enemy that teleports next to you from a square outside of your reach.

 

[dcyale]

I'm a little confused (as is often the case). Polearm Gamble doesn't say it's an interupt. It occures when a non-adjacent enemy enters an adjacent square. It's not a regular OA, which triggers when an enemy leaves an adjacent square, and it looks like an immeadeate reaction to me. It seems tha attack actually happens in the square adjacent to you and here is why I think so-

An enemy teleports into an adjacent square from 4 squares away. Polearm gambit triggers. The condition, "When a nonadjacent enemy enters a square adjacent to you..." is met. The attack cannot logically be taking place 4 squares away so it must take place in the adjacent square. I also don't see it interuptng a teleport that is being initiated 4 squares away.

Otherwise it should be worded that it allows an OA when a target moves or shifts from a non-adjacent square to a square adjacent to you, or give it a range 2, or some other wording, but since it spcifically includes a trigger different from a "normal" OA I have to give weight to the difference.

Now what about forced movement? General rule, no OA. But Polearm Gamble is specific to this one feat. Does that make it a specific exception to the general rule covering OAs? If so, forced movement should likewise be a trigger.

 

[Dausuul]

Well, the RAW is fairly clear - you're only protected from adjacent foes, not foes with Threatening Reach - but I agree with the other posters that RAI is for shifting not to provoke OAs, period.

 

[Mort_Q]

• The wording of the feat says you get an OA when a nonadjacent foe enters an adjacent square
  • OAs interrupt
  • Teleporting in adjacent is entering an adjacent square.
    • Polearm gamble allows you to interrupt the teleport.

Doesn't make and literal sense.

The feat wasn't written with teleport in mind (the cinematics of it anyway).

RAW is grants an OA, which you can't take at range with a basic melee attack.

Weirdness

 

[Master Witch]

First lets look at what shift is. It has taking the place of the 5 foot step in 3.x. The idea is that you are still in the mind set that things are trying to kill you and you’re keeping an eye out for them. You’re moving slowly trying to not get hit.

Now for the mechanics of shift, it says “no opportunity attacks”. (Read page 292 in the PH.) Now for teleportation (read page 286 in the PH) “no opportunity attacks”. So once again this feat (page 204 PH) does not work here ether.

Now here is the nail in the coffin. See page 290 on opportunity attack under moving provokes: ...

Moving Provokes:If an enemy leaves a square adjacent to you, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy. However, you can’t make one if the enemy shifts or teleports or is forced to move away by a pull, a push, or a slide.

The advantage of Polearm Gamble is that you get to hit them coming and going. As they move into your area of threat you smack them a basic attack and as they move out you get to do the same.

 

[bardolph]

Question has come up in our group regarding shifting. Basically, we need to know which part of the rule description is the actual rule. You see, shifting says, in part:
No Opportunity Attacks: If you shift out of a square adjacent to an enemy, you don’t provoke an opportunity attack.

I would invoke "specific beats general" and say that Polearm Gamble gets the OA even on a shift.

 

[Stalker0]

I would invoke "specific beats general" and say that Polearm Gamble gets the OA even on a shift.

Agreed. Polearm Gamble says you get an OA when a "nonadjacent enemy enters a square adjacent to you".

That's pretty explicit. The power doesn't care how you got there, as long you were not adjacent and now you are. Shifting, teleporting, even forced movement would provoke.

Btw, I've never really looked at that feat before, but omg is that powerful in a fighter's hands! Its like the old large and in charge all over again.