Viper's Strike and Combat Challenge interaction question

[Nail]

The warlord's at-will "Viper's Strike" has an effect that is an immediate interrupt, so it happens before the enemy shifts. If the warlord gives the granted attack to an adjacent fighter, then as soon as the fighter attacks the opponent, it is automatically marked (Combat Challenge).

Now: the opponent is marked and has still not yet shifted. Does the fighter now get a combat challenge attack when the opponent shifts?

Put another way: Does the fighter get (essentially) 2 melee basic attacks against the enemy that shifts away?

 

[James McMurray]

I'd say yes. The flow of events required to get two attacks is within the rules. Also, it's an interesting interaction that isn't powerful, requires setup, and is unlikely to work more than once against any given group of foes.

 

[Iron Sky]

Viper's Strike doesn't give an immediate interrupt, it allows another character to make an OA if the target shifts. As such, I would think it would allow the character to make two attacks:

Monster shifts
Fighter OA from Viper's Strike, target marked
Fighter Immediate Interrupt from Combat Challenge

If Viper's Strike gave you an Interrupt, then the Fighter wouldn't get the Combat Challenge since each player only gets 1 Interrupt per turn.

 

[keterys]

Well, to add confusion to things... the fighter's OA with Combat Superiority would stop the movement (and shift) entirely.

 

[the8bitdeity]

Well, to add confusion to things... the fighter's OA with Combat Superiority would stop the movement (and shift) entirely.

If the Fighter so chooses.

Otherwise I think it's fine to allow the Fighter 2 attacks, and I think this is the intent of Viper Strike.

 

[keterys]

'An enemy struck by your opportunity attack stops moving, if a move provoked the attack.'

There's no actual choice implied there - it just happens (same as dealing extra damage from Strength, you can't just go 'wait, I want to deal less damage')... but I imagine most DMs would let you choose not to do so.

Presumably if the target is already marked, he can have his cake and eat it too, with the immediate interrupt basic attack followed by the opportunity attack that stops movement.

I don't think an argument for 'intent' that requires the timing of 'Well first my OA marks, then now that he's marked, I get my immediate attack on the action that triggered the OA even though I didn't have the ability when he declared it...' really flies - I wouldn't make bets on them thinking about it

Either way, if he OAs and misses, that definitely leaves him open to do the mark-given attack on shift. Viper Strike plus Fighter is a good thing no matter what.

 

[jasin]

The warlord's at-will "Viper's Strike" has an effect that is an immediate interrupt, so it happens before the enemy shifts. If the warlord gives the granted attack to an adjacent fighter, then as soon as the fighter attacks the opponent, it is automatically marked (Combat Challenge).

Now: the opponent is marked and has still not yet shifted. Does the fighter now get a combat challenge attack when the opponent shifts?

Isn't a combat challenge also an immediate interrupt?

In which case, the answer would be yes, but you don't have the immediate action to use for the second attack.

 

[Nail]

Huh. Good points, all. Food for thought.

Viper's Strike says:

Effect: If the target shifts before the start of your next turn,
it provokes an opportunity attack from an ally of your
choice.

..so in essense the Warlord is granting "an OA against a shift" to an ally, not an immediate action. So no worries about immediate action limitations.

After the fighter takes the warlord-granted OA against the enemy, the enemy is marked due to the fighter's Combat Challenge. Since the OA interrupted the opponent's shift, the OA happened before the opponent's shift "finishes". I can only assume that means the opponent hasn't moved the one square yet. So if the opponent completes his shift......

whenever an enemy marked by you is
adjacent to you and shifts or makes an attack that does
not include you, you can make a melee basic attack
against that enemy as an immediate interrupt.

...he's ganna get whacked a second time. EXCEPT for keterys' point: The warlord-granted OA the fighter takes actually stops movement if it's successful. So the second attack (from CC) can't take place unless the opponent uses another move action to shift.

IOW: Generally speaking, an opponent hit with Viper's Strike that's adjacent to a fighter ain't gonna wanna shift at all.

 

[DrSpunj]

IOW: Generally speaking, an opponent hit with Viper's Strike that's adjacent to a fighter ain't gonna wanna shift at all.

That's a pretty convincing argument.

 

[Nail]

...but given how long it took *me* to think through, it's pretty reasonable that many monsters would make the mistake of trying to shift....at least once.