Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="IndyPendant" data-source="post: 2973413" data-attributes="member: 8738">I can see how you came to your ruling, jeffman, but I agree with the consensus as well: the PC should have gotten the move action.Let me illustrate the point by this example: BBEG readies an action to attack the next person to come within 10' of him.  Wounded PC takes the Withdraw full-round action away from an opponent, and moves past the BBEG at 10'--normally beyond the BBEG's threat range.  However, the BBEG's Ready triggers, he steps 5', and attacks the PC--bringing the PC down to 0.Now, by your ruling, the PC can not complete the Withdraw action.  Worse, since Withdraw is a full-round action, he never could have taken it in the first place!  --Which means the original opponent the PC withdrew from also gets his AoO against the PC retroactively.Clearly, the only solution is to allow the PC to have taken the Withdraw action after all--a full-round action.  There *might* be precedent for forcing the PC to stop his Withdraw where he got hit due to being Staggered--but that would clearly be a house rule, not supported by any RAW quote.  Regardless, though, the point is that in order to clear up confusion, you're allowing the PC to have taken the full-round action.And if that's the only solution in the above scenario--then your PC should have been given the Move portion of her full round's actions as well in your scenario.  She should have been allowed to complete the move.</blockquote>

Verification