Warden L6 Utility "Bears Endurance"

[Vyvyan Basterd]

The difference is that dazed and stunned are automatically imposed by a Hit or an Effect.

Falling Unconscious and Dying are not automatically imposed by a Hit or an Effect (barring specific powers to the contrary). They are a condition that befalls you if your hit points drop to zero or less. That condition is what is being interrupted. You are interrupting the point where you are Unconscious and Dying and no longer able to use actions.

You are the one unable to divorce the condition from the action and insisting that an Interrupt must reel all the way back to the beginning of an action when you have no rules support that states so. The rules state that an Immediate Interrupt resolves before a triggering condition. If that triggering condition is an action, like the attack that triggers Shield, then the interrupt can negate the attack.

The intent of the power seems pretty clear to me and I believe you are merely overthinking it. Could it use clearer wording? Absolutely. But the rules wording, the different trigger wording than other powers, and now CustServ place some pretty strong evidence against your interpretation, IMO.

Start from the successful resolution of the hit:

Hit line resolves:
Damage effect of 1d6+29 damage... modifiers thrown in, let's say it comes out 34 damage.
34 damage is applied to the target, hit points are subtracted
Target is now below zero.
Target has dropped below zero, so now has the dying condition
Target has the dying condition so now has the unconscious condition
Target is unconscious, so now has the helpless and prone conditions
Hit line has fully resolved
Effect line resolves:
Target is now dazed.
Effect line has fully resolved.
Attack has fully resolved.

I disagree completely:

Start from the successful resolution of the hit:

Hit line resolves:
Damage effect of 1d6+29 damage... modifiers thrown in, let's say it comes out 34 damage.
34 damage is applied to the target.
Hit line has fully resolved
Effect line resolves:
Target is now dazed.
Effect line has fully resolved.
Attack has fully resolved.

Target has dropped below zero, so now has the dying condition
Target has the dying condition so now has the unconscious condition
Target is unconscious, so now has the helpless and prone conditions

Your state of being is not part of the attack resolution. The power itself does not impose the dying condition upon you, your current hit point total does. Take out the dazed condition from your example and the Bear's Endurance triggeres and resolves before the dying condition is applied, but after damage.

 

[DracoSuave]

Your state of being is not part of the attack resolution. The power itself does not impose the dying condition upon you, your current hit point total does. Take out the dazed condition from your example and the Bear's Endurance triggeres and resolves before the dying condition is applied, but after damage.

You've missed the point: Dropping below zero, and its intendant consequences, are resolved during the attack, not after. You can't have finished resolving any attack without having resolved 'dropped below zero' because damage does not wait for the attack to be done with.

Which doesn't jive with how abilities that react to bringing someone to bloodied work.

If you have an attack: 'Hit: 2d6+8 damage, and daze the opponent if they become bloodied' then, by your insistance, becoming bloodied would occur after the attack resolved.

Thusly, that attack could never bloody them, and thus, could never daze them.

Lastly, this is not in concordance with the rules on how attacks are resolved anyways.

"5. Deal damage and apply other effects (page 276)."

and:

"DAMAGE
When you hit with an attack, you normally deal
damage to your target, reducing the target’s hit points."

Which means that the hit points are reduced during the resolution of the attack. Dropping to zero hit points occurs at this time--meaning that if your trigger is 'dropped below zero hit points' then it must be resolved before the resolution of step 5 of resolving an attack.

More over, your argument fails at this line:

"Target has dropped below zero, so now has the dying condition"

Notice the past tense: You've admitted that the target has already dropped below zero which means that dropped below zero has already resolved. Interrupts occur BEFORE trigger has resolved. If you say 'You have dropped below zero hit points' then you're too late... you're now AFTER you've dropped below zero hit points.

How is this difficult to reconcile?

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I'll concede on that point then. But you are still missing the fact that Immediate Interrupt doesn't necessarily interrupt an entire action. Using your example I will insert the point of interrupt:

Hit line resolves:
Damage effect of 1d6+29 damage... modifiers thrown in, let's say it comes out 34 damage.
34 damage is applied to the target, hit points are subtracted.
Target is now below zero. (This seems really redundant with your next step.)

***Bear's Endurance***

Target has dropped below zero, so now has the dying condition
Target has the dying condition so now has the unconscious condition
Target is unconscious, so now has the helpless and prone conditions
Hit line has fully resolved
Effect line resolves:
Target is now dazed.
Effect line has fully resolved.
Attack has fully resolved.

The trigger is "you drop below zero hit points", not "you take damage." The trigger interrupted the step in your own example where you fall below zero. Other II powers indicate "damage" or "hit" and would interrupt at different points in the sequence.

The existence of different wordings on different powers that would become equivalent under your interpretation tell me that the designers intended for the power to act differently.

 

[Gryph]

I have a follow up adjudication question.

A PC has a Cape of the Mountebank with the following Daily Power

Immediate Interrupt:
Use this power when you are hit by an attack. Teleport 5 squares and gain combat advantage against the attacker until the end of your next turn.


Battle scenario:

xGxxx1xxxx2xx

A goblin(G) with speed 6 charges the PC at position 1 moves to the square immediately to the left of the PC and makes a succesful attack roll. The player invokes the cape's power and teleports to postion 2. What is the state of the Goblin? please explain your answer.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

The goblin has just made an unsuccessful charge attack. His turn is over.

 

[Gryph]

The goblin has just made an unsuccessful charge attack. His turn is over.

And where are the Goblin and PC in relation to each other and to their starting positions?

 

[DracoSuave]

And where are the Goblin and PC in relation to each other and to their starting positions?

xxxGxxxxx2xx

Movement is an explicit exception to interrupts and reactions vs entire actions.

The existence of different wordings on different powers that would become equivalent under your interpretation tell me that the designers intended for the power to act differently.

Interrupts have an inherent rule that allows them to invalidate actions. Which means that, without a specific rule stating otherwise, there's no reason for one to state this cannot invalidate actions just like every other II.

Bear's Endurance can't possibly mention an attack, because its trigger is agnostic to attacks; you can be dropped below zero by other means besides an attack. Case in point: Auras. Another case in point: Being slid into damaging or precipitous terrain. Bear's Endurance needs to work in these instances, which if it mentions 'hit or damage' it simply cannot.

Of course the designers intended something different; that difference has nothing to do with how interrupts proceed.

 

[Gryph]

xxxGxxxxx2xx

Movement is an explicit exception to interrupts and reactions vs entire actions.

The only reference I could find to an exception for Immediate actions and movement was on page 196 of the RC:

"Likewise, an immediate reaction can interrupt movement. Here's how: If a creature triggers am immediate reaction while moving (by coming into range, for instance), the reaction can take place before the creature finishes moving, but after it has moved at least 1 square. In other words, an immediate reaction can be in response to a square of movement, rather than to an entire move action."

I couldn't find a specific rule that allows an interrupt to act differently to movement than the general rule for interrupts and actions. Can you point that out for me?

 

[DracoSuave]

I couldn't find a specific rule that allows an interrupt to act differently to movement than the general rule for interrupts and actions. Can you point that out for me?

I'll be glad to, but it's literally been years since the questions come up last. Skyrim's coming out. So don't expect a hasty reply on this one.

Actually never mind, I can answer it right now.

The Charge action involves movement, followed by making an attack as a free action. The hit part of the free action is what is interrupted.

 

[Gryph]

I'll be glad to, but it's literally been years since the questions come up last. Skyrim's coming out. So don't expect a hasty reply on this one.

Understood, I'm queueing up my download while I type this.

Enjoy!