| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If an NPC states, "Don't move or I attack this helpless person," can you ready an action to interrupt that readied action?
For simplicity's sake, I'd argue no, due that we get into a looping scenario, and plus there is argument as to which readied action comes first. I'd rule an opposed initiative check to determine which readied action goes first, though it's also fair to say whoever readied first goes first.
However, the rules don't really expand upon this (or discourage it) in any way, so it's not like it can't be done; the issue comes with how it's resolved, and AFAIK, there is no official ruling, meaning it's up to GM discretion.
Again, I believe the fairest way to rule it is to treat it like a surprise round in terms of mechanics. The two people readied make opposed initiative rolls whoever rolls highest acts first, then the rest.
Yes, you can, there is no problem in resolving it, Readied Actions interrupt WHATEVER triggers them, just like you taking an AoO vs. whatever triggers it interrupts the triggering event.
Yes, though your better off using diplomacy in that situation.
If you've got a good CMB, a readied disarm to interrupt his attack is probably a great diplomatic opener
BBEG ready action: I ready an action to Dimension Door if anyone makes aggressive move.
Wizard ready action: If BBEG casts a spell I will cast Hold Monster on him.
Sequence:
The Wizard's buddy, Mr. Impatient Barbarian charges the BBEG.
The BBEG interrupts the Barbarian by casting Dimension Door.
The Wizard interrupts the BBEG by casting Hold Monster.
Resolution:
BBEG must make a save against Hold Monster.
If the BBEG fails then he loses the spell and gets charged by the Barbarian.
If the BBEG succeeds then he does not lose the spell and winds up relocated somewhere else.
Resulting Initatives: Wizard->BBEG->Barbarian
(Bet they wish they had a Cleric with a Silence spell, no BBEG Dimension Door spell would have worked successfully.)
To be honest, this is a pretty simple setup but more complicated readied action sequences can occur. It is all a string rather than a loop so should be easy to resolve.
- Gauss
Actually, that is exactly what it reminds me of. Not a bad way to look at it. And just as simple (which to me, is quite simple).
- Gauss
Simple yes, but can also get confusing.
I see no reason to bar it. It would be an unusual circumstance since most of the time you're not going to know that the BBEG has readied an action but in those instances, you'd resolve them exactly as has been explained above.
|
BBEG ready action: I ready an action to Dimension Door if anyone makes aggressive move.
Wizard ready action: If BBEG casts a spell I will cast Hold Monster on him.Sequence:
The Wizard's buddy, Mr. Impatient Barbarian charges the BBEG.
The BBEG interrupts the Barbarian by casting Dimension Door.
The Wizard interrupts the BBEG by casting Hold Monster.Resolution:
BBEG must make a save against Hold Monster.
If the BBEG fails then he loses the spell and gets charged by the Barbarian.
If the BBEG succeeds then he does not lose the spell and winds up relocated somewhere else.Resulting Initatives: Wizard->BBEG->Barbarian
(Bet they wish they had a Cleric with a Silence spell, no BBEG Dimension Door spell would have worked successfully.)
To be honest, this is a pretty simple setup but more complicated readied action sequences can occur. It is all a string rather than a loop so should be easy to resolve.
- Gauss
Casting Hold Monster is a hostile action, that triggers the BBEG's attempt to cast Dimension Door. The Barbarian has not yet started to charge, thus the BBEG's readied action is still unresolved and any hostile action, by any opponent, will trigger it.
On a more serious Note: there is nothing in RAW establishing the order of precedence for multiple readied actions chaining off each other. As a DM, I would resolve using initiative modifiers as all character with readied actions are acting on the same initiative step.
I'd argue that in order to consider it a hostile act, the BBEG would have to identify it. The Wizard could be casting Teleport in order to flee; casting a spell is not inherently a hostile action.
|
The other thing is that the BBEG's readied action is triggered by the barbarian, not the wizard.
But then the wizard action is another trigger that happen before the the barbarian triggering the action.
It is a infinite loop.BEEG readied action: "If they do anything beside talking I kill the hostage."
Wizard readied action: "If he try to kill the hostage I cast hold person."
Barbarian charge and trigger the BEEG action.
BEEG try to kill the hostage and trigger the wizard action.
Wizard cast, triggering the BEEG action. Is action came earlier than the BEEG action.
But the wizard action come before the BEEG action and it trigger the BEEG action, so now the order is inverted.
But the BEEG action is the trigger of the wizard action that act even earlier and so the order of the actions change again.
And so on ad infinitum.
The problems are:
- a BEEG action that isn't specific enough (but then that kind of action is the staple of BEEG menaces and avoiding his action shouldn't be so simple);
- readying an action against a readied action, that isn't a good idea.
I remember a post by SKR saying that this isn't magic with interrupts. I will try to find it.
I think a related question is: Can people tell you're readying an action?
If you ready to fire a bow, do people see you nock an arrow? If you ready to swing your sword, do the enemies see your muscles tense up? If you ready to cast a spell, do the enemies see your hand hovering over that material component pouch, Wild West shootout-style? Would the act of readying an attack then be its own hostile act?
|
|
Knowing that someone has readied an action: this is a matter of play style, but if not automatic, it is a useful place to use Sense Motive.
If getting into what is perceived as an infinite loop or other situation where it is unclear, initiative order is an option, as well as forms of skill checks modified by atypical abilities. For example, a Spellcraft check modified by Dex. This sort of opposed check was explicitly called out as an optional method in the 3.5 DMG, and adds an interesting twist at times.
Artanthos, perhaps you misread my post. The Wizard did not cast Hold Person until AFTER the BBEG started the Teleport spell and thus could not be the triggering action.
Diego, you cannot have an infinite loop since the BBEG's action has already been triggered. He does not have two readied actions, only one. Once it is triggered it is triggered and cannot trigger again. Your example is flawed due to this.
- Gauss
Nocking an arrow would generally be taken as a hostile. Shifting your sword into a grip to swing, if noticed, would be hostile.
I still believe that casting a spell would not necessarily be considered a hostile act, because there are too many spells that are passive\benign. In that instance I'd probably allow a Spellcraft check as an immediate action to try and identify the spell being prepared, and if that succeeded, [b]then[/i] I'd allow the readied action to trigger.
|
|
The other thing is that the BBEG's readied action is triggered by the barbarian, not the wizard.But then the wizard action is another trigger that happen before the the barbarian triggering the action.
It is a infinite loop.
BEEG readied action: "If they do anything beside talking I kill the hostage."
Wizard readied action: "If he try to kill the hostage I cast hold person."
Barbarian charge and trigger the BEEG action.
BEEG try to kill the hostage and trigger the wizard action.
Wizard cast, triggering the BEEG action. Is action came earlier than the BEEG action.
But the wizard action come before the BEEG action and it trigger the BEEG action, so now the order is inverted.
But the BEEG action is the trigger of the wizard action that act even earlier and so the order of the actions change again.
And so on ad infinitum.The problems are:
- a BEEG action that isn't specific enough (but then that kind of action is the staple of BEEG menaces and avoiding his action shouldn't be so simple);
- readying an action against a readied action, that isn't a good idea.I remember a post by SKR saying that this isn't magic with interrupts. I will try to find it.
You're mixing scenarios. My response was to a line of discussion regarding a scenario presented by Gauss in which the BBEG readied dimension door if attacked, and the wizard readied hold monster if the BBEG casts a spell. As far as that scenario is concerned, it's pretty linear: the barbarian declares a charge on the BBEG, which triggers the BBEG's ready action to cast dimension door which triggers the wizard's ready action to cast hold monster.
I'm with Gauss on this one (hey, Gauss, say something stupid sometime, so I can disagree with you, okay?).
Readied actions interrupt the outcome or completion of the triggering action, they do not stop that action from starting.
The classic is readying an action to trip someone if they take a 5-foot step: if you succeed at the trip, they fall prone and don't take a 5-foot step, thereby not triggering the readied action...
Which is ridiculous. The readied action takes place after the action has begun, but before it completes. In the case of the 5-foot step/trip, they begin to move, which triggers the readied action, they fall prone, preventing the move from happening. No conflict. Initiative is then re-jigged to account for the order in which people act.
|
|
Artanthos, perhaps you misread my post. The Wizard did not cast Hold Person until AFTER the BBEG started the Teleport spell and thus could not be the triggering action.
- Gauss
Except your readied action would precede my teleport. That is how readied actions work by RAW.
Your readied action is thus occurring before the barabian's charge and would trigger my readied action.
If you try to change the order of resolution, trip locking becomes possible.
|
|
Artanthos, perhaps you misread my post. The Wizard did not cast Hold Person until AFTER the BBEG started the Teleport spell and thus could not be the triggering action.
Diego, you cannot have an infinite loop since the BBEG's action has already been triggered. He does not have two readied actions, only one. Once it is triggered it is triggered and cannot trigger again. Your example is flawed due to this.
- Gauss
but the wizard action come before the triggering action, so the action hasn't already been triggered.
That is why it become a recursive loop: my readied action come before the other guy action, but then, as the other guy action is a readied action too and hasn't jet been triggered as I act before him, get triggered. and the mine and his and mine and his ....The action occurs just before the action that triggers it.
Not "is resolved" but "occurs".
Artanthos and Diego, the actions that are triggering the readied action have *started*. Thus, they cannot be undone and cannot be changed. This appears to be the flaw in both of your arguments.
Yes, the readied action occurs just before the action that triggers it but THEN the action that triggered it must still occur. If it cannot occur then it is wasted.
Thus, no recursive loop since the triggered action is already triggered.
- Gauss
In this case, I'd argue occurs = is resolved. Otherwise, you'd have people arguing that a readied action against them that did enough damage to kill them wouldn't stop them from casting their spell.
I don't see a loop here.
Initiative order: BBEG, Wizard, Barbarian
BBEG: "Don't you threaten me! My magical aptitude will keep you from even laying a hand on me!" (Readies action to cast Dimension Door versus hostility from attackers)
Wizard: (Readies action to cast Hold Person if the BBEG begins to cast)
Barbarian: "I'll show you 'threaten'! RAAAAAWR!" (Barbarian begins to charge at BBEG)
BBEG: (Hostile action perceived, charge interrupted by starting to cast Dimension Door)
Wizard: (Casting action perceived, Dimension door interrupted by casting of Hold Person)
If BBEG's saving throw versus Hold Person is successful, Dimension Door successfully triggers, BBEG teleports away, and Barbarian is left charging empty air.
If BBEG's saving throw versus Hold Person fails, Dimension Door's casting is interrupted, the BBEG stays in place, and the Barbarian charges him.
I'd argue that in order to consider it a hostile act, the BBEG would have to identify it. The Wizard could be casting Teleport in order to flee; casting a spell is not inherently a hostile action.
I argue that ALL spellcasting is always considered hostile by everyone unless they have a VERY good reason to assume it is not. In a "Don't move or I kill this person" situation, nobody is going to wait and find out if that wizard is casting Teleport or Power Word Kill - they're just going to assume it's hostile. Always.
Now, maybe if a NPC brings an injured/dying friend to your character and asks you to heal him, he won't whack you when you start casting a spell; he has a very good reason to assume you are not casting something hostile.
But in any tense situation, or even just two strangers passing each other on the road, if one side starts casting, the other side has really no option but to assume hostility - they could very well be dead before they find out if the spell was hostile or not, and they all know it.
Another way to look at it: If you, in the real world, are walking down the street and you see someone, a total stranger, walking toward you. Suddenly he pulls a gun out of his pocket (or wherever). What do you do? Assume he just wants to clean it? Or do you assume he MIGHT start firing so maybe it's best to find cover right away? Do you wait until you have a bullet in your head to figure out if he was hostile or not? 1,000x more true if you're, say, an invading "peace keeper" soldier in a foreign country (a very tense situation indeed), right?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really really really hate the shenanigans of readied actions...
I see your point. Originally I was thinking of this from a mechanics standpoint - i.e., where spells state they break on a hostile action, and casting a spell isn't necessarily considered a hostile act. But in this case, we're talking about the perception of the NPC.
I think the overall chain of events is still valid - just means the BBEG doesn't have to identify the spell being cast before considering it hostile.
I really really really love the shenanigans of readied actions...
Clerics are some of the best anti-spellcasters out there due to silence and readied actions. :)
- Gauss
I really really really love the shenanigans of readied actions...
Clerics are some of the best anti-spellcasters out there due to silence and readied actions. :)
- Gauss
I'm wondering--what special ability do your clerics have to cast silence in less than a full round casting time, or do you mean Quickened?
I mean quickened, sorry. Many of my battle cleric builds get a lesser wand of quicken in order to pop buffs quickly. I will alternately use the lesser wand of quicken for silencing enemy spellcasters.
- Gauss
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd argue that in order to consider it a hostile act, the BBEG would have to identify it. The Wizard could be casting Teleport in order to flee; casting a spell is not inherently a hostile action.I disagree 1000%
that's like saying a gun pointed at you isn't hostile unless you know its loaded.
If you read my latter response to DM_Blake, I already admitted that I was viewing this in the wrong perspective, and indicated that I was wrong in my original thoughts.
|
|
I'd argue that in order to consider it a hostile act, the BBEG would have to identify it. The Wizard could be casting Teleport in order to flee; casting a spell is not inherently a hostile action.I disagree 1000%
that's like saying a gun pointed at you isn't hostile unless you know its loaded.
Yeah, that's why you want to be careful how you word your ready action when you have a devious GM like myself:
Player: I ready a spell in the event the BBEG casts a hostile spell.
GM: Oooooooooooooook...
BBEG: I begin to cast a spell...
GM: Player, make a Spellcraft check.
Player rolls incredibly low.
GM: The BBEG is casting a spell to spread good will to all mankind. Player, make a Fortitude save.
Player fails the save
GM: you have been turned into a chicken.
|
|
I'd argue that in order to consider it a hostile act, the BBEG would have to identify it. The Wizard could be casting Teleport in order to flee; casting a spell is not inherently a hostile action.
By your reasoning, a person without spellcraft will assume all spells cast by enemy wizards in a combat situation are non-hostile until they are resolved.
Not very intelligent reasoning.
Smart reasoning would be to assume all spells are hostile unless identified.
Should a character without Spellcraft know that a spell is being cast, unless the character is of a caster class himself?
A sword - or a gun - is pretty easily identifiable; a spell, at that point, is muttered words, hand motions, and perhaps some mundane (and in itself, harmless) material component.
That said, I'll say again: I already admitted that my POV was wrong.
I see your point. Originally I was thinking of this from a mechanics standpoint - i.e., where spells state they break on a hostile action, and casting a spell isn't necessarily considered a hostile act. But in this case, we're talking about the perception of the NPC.
I think the overall chain of events is still valid - just means the BBEG doesn't have to identify the spell being cast before considering it hostile.
Not so simple now...
And why do you think that the trigger has to happen after the readied action? Maybe it does, but there was a thread last week and for as long as I followed it, it was still undecided as to the ruling on that.
Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action.
Some people read this as you must continue the same actions while others feel it just means you still have your actions left.
I prefer the latter. Otherwise, it is stupid. Say I declare to move and attack someone. Unbeknownst to me, an archer has readied an action to shoot me with an arrow when I try to take a step. Now I have 1 HP left. I am not going to continue my movement and attack, I am going to stop and cast cure light wounds because I am not a stupid cleric. I am also going to hope no one has a readied action set for me casting spells!
@Komoda:
Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character.
Xaratherus:
Huh? What does that have to do with how you act after the readied action is resolved?
"you interrupt the other character" means it happens before they get to act. I agree with that. I haven't claimed otherwise. My point is that it is unclear if you have to continue the same exact action after the readied action goes off. Some people think you do.
Another example:
I declare that I am moving 30' to reach you. My first 10' of movement triggers your spell casting. Your spell casting places a wall of fire 5' in front of me. I would rule that I don't have to continue my next 20' of movement to walk through the fire, even though I was planning on moving through those squares before the fire was there.
Some people rule that you have to take the SAME EXACT actions that you were taking before the readied action goes off. I find this to be unlikely.
If a character can change their action between each attack, surely they can change their action (assuming they still have the ability to) once a readied action goes off. Really, a TWF character could choose to attack a different target after each swing and after they get to see the result of their attack. A wall of fire should surely allow a character to change direction.
I need to go back to bed, I'm not reading things properly. I misread "And why do you think that the trigger has to happen after the readied action?" as "...happen before the readied action".
My apologies. I'm going to plod my way through the rest of my day at work and go home to go to bed. :P
For what it's worth, I do not believe that a character interrupted by a readied action must continue the interrupted action, nor does he lose his action.
As it stands today, it's probably not worth much. I need sleep!
Komoda, if you perform an action that triggers a readied action it doesn't make sense that the triggering action is then not performed.
If the triggering action is not performed what triggered the readied action?
While the language can be clearer to me the intent is clearly that you must perform the action you started before you were interrupted via the readied action. If you cannot perform that action then it is your loss.
With that said, your example involved still performing the same action but with redirected results. A concept I think is fine.
Example:
The wizard declares a readied action that if he is attacked he will teleport away.
A fighter with 3 attacks attacks him. The wizard teleports away before the first attack is fully executed. That attack is wasted. The remaining two attacks can now be directed at other targets normally. But the Fighter is still stuck with the first attack being wasted. Alternately, the fighter can stop attacking and use a move action instead (as per the rules on single vs full attacks).
What the fighter is NOT stuck doing is attacking empty air for 3 attacks. Only the first attack is wasted.
- Gauss
See Gauss, I disagree. While there is an explicit rule that states casters lose spells when interrupted, there is no such rule for attacks.
I see the logic in your argument and I can't say that you are wrong. But if you give the character with the readied action the ability to stop the action, not just get in front of it, it will always make sense for two fighters to ready rather than attack first.
I would rule that unless the action is already truly in motion (moving 10' of 30' movement for example) the character that triggers the readied action can change his action based on any change in the battlefield that he perceives. And even if he did move that distance, I would allow him to change direction or stop.
Would you make him run through the wall of fire because he can?
Would you make the cleric continue his attack rather than heal himself?
This gives way to much power to the character reading an action. Rather than just control his initiative and disrupt spellcasters, it then becomes a catch all, outrageously powerful tactic, such as dodging charges and the like.
In your example, if the fighter 5' steps and attacks, the wizard's readied action takes all of the fighters moves for the round. That is more powerful than a 1 round stun spell because it is automatic, no save, no chance of failure. And all the wizard had to do was declare, "I 5' step when attacked." Because the fighter 5' stepped, he can't attack. Because he started an attack, he can't change his standard action. Does it really make sense that he can do that?
Oh, and would you give that fighter an AoO in your example as he is now threatening the wizard as he is casting? What if he kills the wizard? Does he still lose all his actions even though the wizard is now dead and therefore he never needed to start his first attack?
And finally, the rule that rules them all for me, using it your way, you have a huge list of when someone can continue, when they can't continue, what actions they lose, what actions they keep and how they are allowed to move. Every situation would be different. You don't have one rule to apply to them all.
Yeah, still not so simple...
|
|
Should a character without Spellcraft know that a spell is being cast, unless the character is of a caster class himself
Spellcraft is not required to notice an arcane chant spoken in a firm voice while wiggling fingers and manipulating odd items.
Spellcraft simply allows the identification of the spell prior to spell resolution.
|
|
Back to the OP's original question
If an NPC states, "Don't move or I attack this helpless person," can you ready an action to interrupt that readied action?
When I GM'd the scenario, I had the other npcs stand between the PC's and the hostage. The hostage himself was held between the npc and the players. The poor man failed his fort save after the barbarian initiated hostilities.
In the above case: coup-de-grace is a full round action. Only standard actions can be readied.
|
If an NPC states, "Don't move or I attack this helpless person," can you ready an action to interrupt that readied action?
That's absolutely legit. However, if I were the DM, I would say No to that just to avoid confusion. Most games already take a while to progress through with all of the RP and whatnot.
It's trickier if you have declared, say, a charge. In those cases I suppose you could abort the charge but I wouldnt let you switch to a different action.
Even if the trigger was, "If he moves I run away", so after I move 5' of a 60' charge you would take away all the rest of my actions even though you are now 180' away and I have no way to reach you?
If your action goes before my turn, it is now my turn. Why would I lose anything? I get to go on my turn and therefore get to make decisions of how to act, on my turn.
As to move actions, how does that work? Does your character move at 5' increments up to its movement rate, or only start and finish up to its movement rate? The former would indicate I can change direction and destination in the middle of my move. That latter would indicate that I must declare where I am going to move to and I am unable to compensate for anything that changes during that time.
If the triggering action is not performed what triggered the readied action?
I would have to say it is the intent that sets everything into motion. What I mean, is the opening or telegraphing of the action, rather than the completed action. Based on your logic, you could also have problems explaining readied actions and AoOs.
For instance:
Fighter A turn 1: readies an action to trip (no feat) the next person that attacks him.
Fighter B turn 1: attacks fighter A
Fighter A turn 1 readied action: trips fighter B, provokes AoO
Fighter B turn 1 AoO: kills fighter A with a crit.
Now what? Fighter A never made the trip. Fighter B never made the attack, just the AoO. I would rule Fighter B gets to go do what ever he wants as it is now his turn to act.
While the actions happen in this order at the table, RAW states that the first thing that actually happened in the game was that Fighter B killed Fighter A with an Attack of Opportunity. Based on RAW, nothing else happened. Based on RAW, Fighter B did not go in this round. Why would Fighter B then lose his attack/standard action?
To justify any of it "in game" I would say they both were working through openings in battle and fighter A left himself open and got killed.
But we can both justify it in game. So to me, it comes down to the mechanic. Should readying and action be powerful enough to act as a one round, unstoppable hold person? And of course, I don't think it should.
I repeat I hate the shenanigans of readied actions.
For instance: Lets say a wizard is standing next to the corner of a wall and is fighting a fighter. The wizard makes a readied action to move behind the wall if the fighter moves toward him. The fighter then decides to charge the wizard, but the wizard gets his readied action before the fighter gets to actually move at all. So the wizard moves behind the wall, blocking the charge lane. Now, the fighter cannot actually legally make a charge at all. What happens? Does the fighter loose his entire turn? NO! Thats complete baulderdash. The fighter prepares to charge, and as he does so the wizard moves. The fighter, seeing this knows he can no longer charge (by the rules) and decides to do something else because he still has a move and standard action to use as he wants because he didn't actually do anything.
EASY SOLUTION! For GM's anyways, readied actions don't interrupt!
We all need to keep in mind that a move action is about two seconds (is there an official ruling stating otherwise? two seconds has always been my estimate), so in the case of finding yourself with 1 HP after a held action puts an arrow in you when you begin your move action, you need to think of it this way:
The move action you were originally going to make was 30' forward. In two seconds. That's a lot of momentum to kill at the drop of a hat. So then an arrow hit you. In the thrill of combat, it would probably take a full second, anyway, to realize just how much that arrow hurt. But for simplicity's sake, let's pretend you are fully aware of how close to death you are the instant you are hit. The call I would make as a GM would be: You've already begun your momentum. You have to move at least 5'. Or you may complete the full 30'. Either way, you have consciously begun your move action and must use it to move.
With a charge interrupted by a readied action, I would make the same call, still using just a move action to move as the action that must be used regardless of the new conditions. Assuming the player stops his movement after 30' at the most (assuming a 30' move speed) of the intended charge, he would still have a standard action to use before his turn is over. Yes, his charge got ruined, but the target of the charge wasted his entire turn readying a 5' step - potentially saving his life, but also not casting spells, drawing weapons, shooting a bow, etc. It's give and take.
This gives way to much power to the character reading an action. Rather than just control his initiative and disrupt spellcasters, it then becomes a catch all, outrageously powerful tactic, such as dodging charges and the like.
This is true, so long as the creature readying an action always guesses right. If the action they prepare to interrupt never happens, they effectively lose their turn, standing there like an a-hole. That is the balance, and will eventually tip the scale making holding actions every round unreliable. Here's why:
If some jerk keeps predicting my straightforward actions and cutting me off at every turn, it's going to motivate me to start acting unpredictably. My improvised actions may not be as effective over time as the actions I originally wanted to make, but if it means that as a result, this jerk keeps losing turns until he starts acting on his own freaking turn, it'll be worth it.