Shifty v/ CC: Who Wins?

[Iron Sky]

Nowhere in combat challenge does it specify how the shift occured, so, by the rules as listed, it doesn't matter whether the kobold used a minor action, a free action, a move action, or was shifted by another player (imagine a character with a power that shifts an enemy pushing them back and forth in front of the fighter to provoke extra immediate attacks...)

I guess it says "when an adjacent enemy shifts" not "when an adjacent enemy is shifted"... Minor wording issue, but could make a huge in-game difference. An extra attack per round or two(if whatever that's used to shift the baddie misses now and then) for a whole campaign adds up to some serious damage.

 

[VBMEW-01]

I dig all of this, and actually agree until I see a reason not to (perhaps come June). It does suck however, as it makes that reallygreat kobald racial power a bit less useful.

Oh well, can't expect them to get too much love this late in the game.

 

[small pumpkin man]

Nowhere in combat challenge does it specify how the shift occured, so, by the rules as listed, it doesn't matter whether the kobold used a minor action, a free action, a move action, or was shifted by another player (imagine a character with a power that shifts an enemy pushing them back and forth in front of the fighter to provoke extra immediate attacks...)

I guess it says "when an adjacent enemy shifts" not "when an adjacent enemy is shifted"... Minor wording issue, but could make a huge in-game difference. An extra attack per round or two(if whatever that's used to shift the baddie misses now and then) for a whole campaign adds up to some serious damage.

Forced movement it pretty much always by definition a "slide" not a shift. (or a push/pull, but not a "shift"). There may well be powers that let you make extra attacks against sliding opponents, but this isn't it.

 

[FourthBear]

I think it's reasonably clear: the fighter gets the opportunity attack when the kobold shifts. The kobold doesn't *have* to shift adjacent to a fighter and after the first kobold drops due to this, I hope they wise up and don't try that stuff around fighters. Because shifting in general can take you more than a single square (although Shifty only grants one square in this specific case), the fighter ability must stop the enemy in the first adjacent square in question. Otherwise with multisquare shifts, stopping would be ambiguous. In this case, that would mean the kobold attracts an attack starting in an adjacent square and if the fighter hits the kobold doesn't move at all.

From the Scalegloom rules summary, a character only gets one immediate action per round. So our fighter could only smack one kobold per round with this, presumably choosing as kobolds moved whether or not to take the action or to save his immediate action for something else.

 

[VBMEW-01]

I think it's reasonably clear: the fighter gets the opportunity attack when the kobold shifts. The kobold doesn't *have* to shift adjacent to a fighter and after the first kobold drops due to this, I hope they wise up and don't try that stuff around fighters. Because shifting in general can take you more than a single square (although Shifty only grants one square in this specific case), the fighter ability must stop the enemy in the first adjacent square in question. Otherwise with multisquare shifts, stopping would be ambiguous. In this case, that would mean the kobold attracts an attack starting in an adjacent square and if the fighter hits the kobold doesn't move at all.

From the Scalegloom rules summary, a character only gets one immediate action per round. So our fighter could only smack one kobold per round with this, presumably choosing as kobolds moved whether or not to take the action or to save his immediate action for something else.

And therein lies another problem, or thought really. Two of the kobolds we've seen share the Mob Attack ability that requires them to get a bit closer than is normally wise. I can't help but have visions of enterprising fighters taking advantage of these three things (Shifty+MA+CC) by shifting after every cleave, or whatever attack they use to get an extra attack as the kobold's follow.

Not that this is a necessarily bad thing on itself, more hits for the PCs is always good, butit justfeels a bit fumbly to me for some reason. It almost renders those two kobolds (Skirmishers and Dragon Shields) in a much weaker light. It also makes playing as a kobold a little less likely for those of us who might've been drawn to their nice new Shifty ability. We have to assume that other creatures will get powers that mimic CC or do similar things, it is afterall a low-level ability.

 

[Oldtimer]

The two abilities in question:

SHIFTY (minor; at-will)
The kobold shifts 1 square as a minor action.

COMBAT CHALLENGE
When an adjacent enemy shifts, make an immediate melee basic attack against them.

My dilemma is this; since both abilities exist to give their larger source greater meaning, which one wins when Shifty is employed? Does the fighter get his attack even though it was only a minor action? Does the kobold race have an ability that is a great bit less useful in a real fight?

I don't want to take anything away from either of them. To me, there are no more pathetic monsters out there now, and their racial powers seem to scale for higher levels, to make them worthwhile. At the same time however, fighters have always been meat and potatoes, the greatest of D&D stand-bys, and you really don't want to limit their function.

I opted to let my player's fighter win here, for the purpose of quicker and less rules-obsessive play-testing, but I wonder who is meant to win?

What do ya'll think?

I really don't understand the problem here. The kobold shifts, the fighter wacks him with an immediate attack, and - if he's not dead - the kobold has now shifted 1 square. Where lies the confusion? What kind of action the kobold uses to shift has nothing to do with it.

Remember, though, that you only get one immediate action per round. Each kobold around you can shift twice (one minor, one move) per turn and still attack. A single fighter is not going to stop too many of the shifty little things.

 

[FourthBear]

Overall, I have no problem with the idea that mob attacks and kobold tactics are quite a bit weaker in the threatening range of a fighter. I prefer this kind of ability to control the battlefield to the old Cleave and Great Cleave feats, for example. I'd imagine that smart kobold will be doing their best to avoid the fighter and the fighter will be doing his best to get in range of the kobolds and bog them down, which is pretty much how it should be, IMO.

 

[FourthBear]

I really don't understand the problem here. The kobold shifts, the fighter wacks him with an immediate attack, and - if he's not dead - the kobold has now shifted 1 square.

I think one point in contention is when the Combat Challenge says the attacked creature stops, where does it stop? Does it stop in the first square that it was in when it attempted the shift, the next or the intended final square for its movement? It clearly can't be the last, since that wouldn't be stopping at all. Since shifting can be more than one square, you could have characters entering a fighter's adjacent square during a shift and attempting to leave it. In that case, I think it would make sense for the stopping to occur at first adjacent square and the enemy be stopped at that point, not the next. So I suspect that if hit, the kobold is stopped in the square it started in, not the one it was going to. We'll see.

 

[VBMEW-01]

I think one point in contention is when the Combat Challenge says the attacked creature stops, where does it stop? Does it stop in the first square that it was in when it attempted the shift, the next or the intended final square for its movement? It clearly can't be the last, since that wouldn't be stopping at all. Since shifting can be more than one square, you could have characters entering a fighter's adjacent square during a shift and attempting to leave it. In that case, I think it would make sense for the stopping to occur at first adjacent square and the enemy be stopped at that point, not the next. So I suspect that if hit, the kobold is stopped in the square it started in, not the one it was going to. We'll see.

Fine point to this and the other. My whole defense of the kobold is in the vein of using them as player characters, and not a monster concept at all. I do agree that the fighter deserves the advantage here, after some thought, but just dislike Shifty and other effects that grant a free shift a bit less now, in light of things.

I think it is important to analyze these finer points now, for better play later. Of course we could all be proven wrong, come June :\

 

[zoroaster100]

I don't see any contradiction or confusion between these two abilities. Shifty merely grants the Kobold the opportunity to use its minor action for the round to do a shift. That means it can use its move action to move, use its standard action to attack, and also get an extra square of movement in, before or after its attack. That is pretty useful. Combat Challenge allows the fighter to attack someone who tries to shift away. It makes no distinction as to whether the shift was done with a standard action, a move action or a minor action.

There is nothing about a minor action that makes it "faster" than a move action. A minor action is simply more limited than a move action. You can always use a standard action or move action to do what you could do with a minor action. For most creatures, shifting requires a standard or move action. But for kobolds, they can get that extra bit of movement in using their minor action.

I do think we might be missing some important text about Combat Challenge though. Someone that played at D&D Experience or who was a play tester posted shortly after D&D Experience a comment that I understood to mean that Combat Challenge per the PHB means you can get your attack against someone who shifts away from you IF you marked them. But I'm not sure if that is true, since it was just my speculation based on someone's comment, not on based on looking at the actual rule first hand.