Can a reaction, with the trigger of "A creature targets you with an attack and you can see the attacker." that allows you to make a stride or step, nullify an enemies strike midway?
What happens to the strike?
In the case where the action is disrupted it largely does negate the action. Note that disrupting the action is possible but doesn't always happen. Outside that the game largely leaves that up to the GM to determine. AFAICT the game doesn't enforce the indivisible atomic nature of actions, that some systems do.
For example if you react to a move action. You actually react part way through that move action. So you react to them leaving a square, but they still have movement to do (they are only part way through their action). So even if you are disrupted whether you are now in your starting square, or the next square is up to the GM. If you aren't disrupted you get the rest of your move.
What happens if that was a trip (possible with a readied action)? Up to the GM, but they could reasonably have the target fall anywhere.
|
If the strike is interrupted, and then negated for lack of the target within range, would the attacker still suffer MAP?
PC1 readies to cast amped message when an enemy is about to attack an ally. Enemy targets Ally1 with a strike. PC1 casts amped message giving ally1 a reaction with which they stride out of range of the strike.
What mechanically happens in this situation?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does the reaction that you're referring to not have a clause specifying when you resolve the attack?
Example:
Trigger The giant cockroach is targeted by a melee attack; Effect The giant cockroach gains a +2 circumstance bonus to AC against the triggering attack. After the attack resolves, the cockroach Strides, Climbs, or Flies up to 10 feet.
EDIT: Oh. It's Dark Archive stuff... :(
|
|
Does the reaction that you're referring to not have a clause specifying when you resolve the attack?
Example:
Trigger The giant cockroach is targeted by a melee attack; Effect The giant cockroach gains a +2 circumstance bonus to AC against the triggering attack. After the attack resolves, the cockroach Strides, Climbs, or Flies up to 10 feet.EDIT: Oh. It's Dark Archive stuff... :(
It would be a readied action.
It would be a readied action.Does the reaction that you're referring to not have a clause specifying when you resolve the attack?
Example:
Trigger The giant cockroach is targeted by a melee attack; Effect The giant cockroach gains a +2 circumstance bonus to AC against the triggering attack. After the attack resolves, the cockroach Strides, Climbs, or Flies up to 10 feet.EDIT: Oh. It's Dark Archive stuff... :(
The old, "I ready an action to step away as soon as he starts swinging at me"?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Basically, the way I see it - unless the reaction says that it disrupts the triggering action, then it doesn't.
So if you step away from a Strike as a reaction, but don't disrupt the Strike, then the Strike is still resolved. Its requirements to take the action (specifically that you, as the target, were within reach) have already been met when the action was taken.
So yes, the Strike would still get rolled and damage would get dealt as the dice land. Then after the Strike and your reaction, you would be farther away from the enemy and they may have to either switch targets, or Stride after you in order to reach you again.
Basically, the way I see it - unless the reaction says that it disrupts the triggering action, then it doesn't.
So if you step away from a Strike as a reaction, but don't disrupt the Strike, then the Strike is still resolved. Its requirements to take the action (specifically that you, as the target, were within reach) have already been met when the action was taken.
So yes, the Strike would still get rolled and damage would get dealt as the dice land. Then after the Strike and your reaction, you would be farther away from the enemy and they may have to either switch targets, or Stride after you in order to reach you again.
So you need the reaction to specifically say Disrupt? Or you need the action taken when the trigger happens to reasonably disrupt the triggering action? So if you had someone Ready an action to close a door if someone started to Stride towards them, you would fully resolve the Stride action because Ready doesn't specify Disrupt, or do you resolve the Ready and then apply any reasonable disruption to the triggering action?
I would expect the rules to allow for a Readied action to drink a Time Shield Potion when an enemies tries to Strike at you for example, but from what I'm reading you may disagree?
So if you had someone Ready an action to close a door if someone started to Stride towards them, you would fully resolve the Stride action because Ready doesn't specify Disrupt, or do you resolve the Ready and then apply any reasonable disruption to the triggering action?
Closing a door doesn't Disrupt a Stride, it just changes where you can go.
So the case of the Strike is different. Strike states as first sentence:
"You attack with a weapon you're wielding or with an unarmed attack, targeting one creature within your reach"
So, if you Step after this sentence is applied then the Strike goes to its end as Reach is no more necessary for the rest of it.
If you Step before this sentence, you meet an issue: To what are you reacting as the enemy has actually done nothing?
I would expect the rules to allow for a Readied action to drink a Time Shield Potion when an enemies tries to Strike at you for example, but from what I'm reading you may disagree?
Time Shield Potion makes you immune to all effects, as such you don't take the effects of the Strike. So it works as a mean of defense.
A fun thought exercise for this: the target of a monk using Stand Still in response to them standing is not flat footed for the strike due to being prone even if the monk crits, causing the target to "remain" prone because their stand was disrupted
Reading Disrupting actions again, I think it's not the way it should happen.
"The GM decides what effects a disruption causes beyond simply negating the effects that would have occurred from the disrupted action. For instance, a Leap disrupted midway wouldn’t transport you back to the start of your jump, and a disrupted item hand off might cause the item to fall to the ground instead of staying in the hand of the creature who was trying to give it away."So it's perfectly acceptable to consider that having already stand up you don't get back to prone.
|
Another question related to reaction and timing.
We recently had the case of an invisible attacker reacting to spellcasting with an AoO. The spell cast was Faerie Fire. The AoO did not crit, so the spell was not disrupted. The GM ruled that, being hit, the caster could change the location he aimed for with the spell, so that it would affect the still invisible attacker.
I thought parameters of a spell were selected at the beginning of the casting while triggering AoO came later. And thus that the caster could not react to the AoO by changing his aim.
But I could not find any rule text providing a precise answer.
So, was changing the parameters of the spell after the AoO legit ?
drinking the potion would not prevent a strike from hitting you if the strike was what you reacted to, but if you drank it in reaction to an enemy striding to you the enemy would not then be able to strike you
What we're basing these statements on is in Actions with Triggers on CR 462, and then later in Disrupting Actions, same page. A reaction or action can only be used in response to the condition being satisfied - iow it has to happen to react to it.
Is there a rule that requires the trigger you set to be the completion of an action? Looking at the advice from the gamemastery guide it seems to recommend against doing things in such a gameified way, and instead base the reaction on things the PC perceives in character. From this I would assume that you could ready an action with a trigger of "someone swings a weapon at me", or more accurately "someone tries to hurt me", and if they perceive that then their reaction would be triggered. I haven't seen a rule that requires the trigger to be a fully resolved action or anything, and indeed we know from precedent that reactions triggered by a Strike HITTING can have effects that turn that hit into a miss without disrupting the action.
Another example, Nimble Dodge has the trigger of "a creature targets you with an attack and you can see the attacker." so is there any rules support to denying a similar trigger for a readied action? As far as I know the only limitation on Ready triggers beyond what a normal reaction can have is just that it needs to be something the PC can observe and explain in in character terms, which you can with being targeted by a big weapon swing for example.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there a rule that requires the trigger you set to be the completion of an action?
No, that isn't quite the point that I would make - though it does have the same result.
Looking at the advice from the gamemastery guide it seems to recommend against doing things in such a gameified way, and instead base the reaction on things the PC perceives in character. From this I would assume that you could ready an action with a trigger of "someone swings a weapon at me", or more accurately "someone tries to hurt me", and if they perceive that then their reaction would be triggered.
You do indeed have to make the trigger of Ready be something observable in-game.
But again, if the reaction doesn't disrupt the action, then the action still finishes.
And if there is any doubt to the timing of things and which event happens first, I go with the order that is balanced from a gaming perspective rather than realistic to the narrative and description. I also go with rulings that let the highest number of actions and events happen than rulings that cause things to fail or be ineffective - because in PF2 being able to prevent actions from happening is rare and usually requires critical success rolls or counteract checks. See Attack of Opportunity and Stand Still that only disrupt actions on critical hits, and Counterspell that uses a counteract check.
To respond to a previous question, you would need the reaction you use to say that it disrupts, or in the case of Ready (which doesn't itself say that it disrupts) for the action you use to say that it disrupts. Since actions designed to be used as standard actions don't generally say that they disrupt other actions, I can't think of anything that would cause Ready to disrupt the action that you use to trigger it.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the only things that can disrupt actions are abilities that actually explicitly say they disrupt it.
Of course, a reaction might cause something to not go off as the attacker wanted without specifically disrupting it. The time shield potion makes the defender completely immune to everything by removing them from time. That means the attack won't achieve anything. But it's not disrupted because none of the abilities use that word.
The "Ready" action doesn't really specify what kind of triggers should be possible for it, so we'd have to look at how other abilities do it to see what's reasonable.
There are very few reactions/free actions that can actually foil an attack. Most abilities with a flavor of "step away" make it clear the attack still goes on, but because you're almost out of reach, you get an AC bump against it. So being able to completely foil an attack with a Ready action that you didn't even need a feat for doesn't seem reasonable. Foiling an attack is so rare, an ability would have to be really explicit about being able to do it to let that work. Or come at a significant cost (such as having a level 13 consumable in hand, that will also prevent you from helping out in the encounter for 2d4 rounds).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even for Readying an action to drink Time Shield potion, if the trigger was the Strike, then I would still have the Strike be resolved before the potion takes effect, because the Strike doesn't get disrupted. If the trigger was the enemy Stride to be within range of an attack, then the potion would take effect before the enemy's action to Strike. But that also means that the action can be used for something else instead of Strike.
|
|
NoAnother question related to reaction and timing.
We recently had the case of an invisible attacker reacting to spellcasting with an AoO. The spell cast was Faerie Fire. The AoO did not crit, so the spell was not disrupted. The GM ruled that, being hit, the caster could change the location he aimed for with the spell, so that it would affect the still invisible attacker.
I thought parameters of a spell were selected at the beginning of the casting while triggering AoO came later. And thus that the caster could not react to the AoO by changing his aim.
But I could not find any rule text providing a precise answer.
So, was changing the parameters of the spell after the AoO legit ?
Why ?
What RAW can I give to the GM to clarify this ?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
NoAnother question related to reaction and timing.
We recently had the case of an invisible attacker reacting to spellcasting with an AoO. The spell cast was Faerie Fire. The AoO did not crit, so the spell was not disrupted. The GM ruled that, being hit, the caster could change the location he aimed for with the spell, so that it would affect the still invisible attacker.
I thought parameters of a spell were selected at the beginning of the casting while triggering AoO came later. And thus that the caster could not react to the AoO by changing his aim.
But I could not find any rule text providing a precise answer.
So, was changing the parameters of the spell after the AoO legit ?
Why ?
What RAW can I give to the GM to clarify this ?
I don't see anything in Spell Targeting that allows changing targets once the cast a spell activity has started and targets were first selected.
By strict RAW, you wouldn't be able to target the invisible attacker in the first place. With more lenient RAW, you could target a location that you think the invisible enemy is in and roll the appropriate flat checks for attacking an enemy that you can't see. But if you guess the wrong space, I don't see any option for changing the target mid-cast.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, say a psychic readies message for if an ally is attacked and amps it to let them use their reaction to stride away. Do the enemy's limbs stretch out x feet to hit them anyway? Do arrows start making sharp turns in mid-air and phasing through terrain?
Is there a special clause I'm missing that makes reactions occur after the triggering action resolves as opposed to before it in these cases or that allows the triggering action to resolve successfully under impossible circumstances?
So, say a psychic readies message for if an ally is attacked and amps it to let them use their reaction to stride away. Do the enemy's limbs stretch out x feet to hit them anyway? Do arrows start making sharp turns in mid-air and phasing through terrain?
Game mechanics: yes.
If you really wanted to describe the action happening that way, you certainly could.
Or you could describe the events of the reaction happening after the attack, but before the enemy can do anything else.
Or you could come up with a different creative description of the events. The narrative is up to you as the players.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even for Readying an action to drink Time Shield potion, if the trigger was the Strike, then I would still have the Strike be resolved before the potion takes effect, because the Strike doesn't get disrupted. If the trigger was the enemy Stride to be within range of an attack, then the potion would take effect before the enemy's action to Strike. But that also means that the action can be used for something else instead of Strike.
And if the trigger wasn't a Strike, but being targeted by a Strike (as Nimble Dodge shows is very likely an allowable trigger, being something observable), what then? We know from existing reactions that you can apply an effect DURING an action that has triggered a reaction (+2 AC in Nimble Dodge's case) and that the effect of the reaction can change the course of the triggering action WITHOUT disrupting it (and with no special wording like "immediately", as Reactive Shield Block has). So why not in the case of a readied Stride? Or a Readied Trip in response to a Stride action? It seems to me that by RAW and RAI what should be done in this situation is to apply the effects of the Readied action and see how that affects the triggering action.
Note that in these cases the creature's action wasn't any more "Disrupted" than if you shield blocked all of a Strike's damage. The attack still happened, it's just that your reaction changed the effects of it.
Nimble Roll, which builds on Nimble Dodge and lets you move away, doesn't stop the attack it just lets you move after it. I don't see why you would allow a player to have a better reaction than a level 8 feat for free at level 1.
I wouldn't call a reaction that requires two actions of setup (and forewarning) better than Nimble Dodge, certainly it would be used less in actual play! Is it balanced, then, that the power of two actions + a reaction takeable by a level 1 character is more powerful than Nimble Dodge? Yes, two regular Strikes are certainly more powerful than Nimble Dodge and they don't even cost you your reaction!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't agree that comparing Ready to reactions gained from feats or class features is an apples to apples comparison.
I think the answer needs to come from the rules with Ready and the rules of the action readied, individually.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And if the trigger wasn't a Strike, but being targeted by a Strike (as Nimble Dodge shows is very likely an allowable trigger, being something observable)
The Ready action has a requirement that the trigger is something observable in-game. The built-in reactions do not.
Nimble Dodge isn't even the best example of this. Check out Clue In that has a trigger of another character making what is quite likely a purely mental action. You couldn't designate that same trigger for Ready.
So I don't think that 'I am targeted by an attack' is a valid target for Ready.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also nimble dodge is a feat to remove the 2 action cost and reduce the movement distance. But getting a +2 to AC in exchange.
That is an assumption. There's a lot to unpack in that quote, and I'm not going to.
There are many feats and class features with reactions based on meta terms/events like "about to roll initiative" or "failed a saving throw" but I don't believe you can't ready an action on those triggers any more than a player can separate targeting from the attack roll in a strike.
If a player wanted "targets me" as the trigger to Stride out of range, I might allow it, but it would not waste the enemy's action. They could have strode away on their own turn and had an action left over, but that doesn't justify giving the the ability to effectively cast Slow 1 as a reaction.
|
|
It would not make sense for a character to get the ability to phase through terrain and attack from 20+ ft away just because the creature they are targetting ran away.
It would make more sense that the attacker may attack another creature that they could target or for the attack to "hit the air". Much like swinging at empty space trying to hit an invisible creature.
Also nimble dodge is a feat to remove the 2 action cost and reduce the movement distance. But getting a +2 to AC in exchange.
The combat rules work one action at a time, but they try to simulate everyone action at the same time. So there's always going to be some friction there.
There are almost no abilities in the game that allow you to just end an attack outright. There are some reactions like hit the dirt that simulate ducking out of reach of an attack, but they don't end the attack outright, they give you an AC bonus because you're almost out of reach of the attack you're jumping away from.
The Ready rules give the GM the ultimate decision of whether a given trigger and ready action are acceptable. I'd look at existing abilities for comparison. I also think it'd make for a very annoying game if people actually started trying to bait enemies into taking a swing, taking a step back, and then insisting the enemy got MAP for that. So I wouldn't let that happen.
I think breithauptclan had a good point: when the attack was declared, the reach requirement was checked. If your reaction is against "he starts to attack me" then you can step back, but the requirement was already met. And this is where the "combat as everything at once" and "combat as turn based" come back into the story. It's not "he starts to attack, but then I trigger my reaction, he comes to a complete halt while I walk 20ft and then he attacks the air". Everything is happening at once: you're backing away so his strike is a bit harder, but he could still hit you. I might allow the +2 circumstance bonus to AC like in Hit the Dirt though.
My main reason stays however: it's up to the GM to decide, and MAP-baiting is not the game I want to run, so I wouldn't allow this shenanigan.
Also, there is a less gimmicky way for the player to do this: you could set "an enemy ends their move close enough to me to attack me". That would still let you back away from them but doesn't involve MAP baiting.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It would not make sense for a character to get the ability to phase through terrain and attack from 20+ ft away just because the creature they are targetting ran away.
Actions with a trigger don't happen until the trigger is satisfied.
So if your Ready action's trigger is the enemy attacking you, you don't "run away but then the sword phases through the air to hit you anyways"
You get hit with a sword, then run away. No discrepancy or issue.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am solidly in the camp that this is NOT intended to be possible, otherwise it would just straight up be the #1 "tank" option 9 times out of 10, just think about it.
Tank moves up in front of the group within move+strike/attack range and spends two actions just about guaranteeing that you're going to have the enemy in one of, say, 5 spaces around your PC, attempts to attack and instantly fails plus your own character then finished a full land speed move of their choice to reposition into an even more advantageous position while the opponent has at BEST one action left to use which is almost always going to be spent moving and not actually dealing any damage.
The tank then goes before the opponent, has a spare Action to do whatever they like, then they Ready the same shenanigans while the rest of the party bursts the first opponent to the ground, this is even more powerful if the tank has any form or Reach Weapon and/or Attack of Opportunity.
All of this without having invest in a single feat, you never take any damage, you tax your opponents Actions, and the rest is just cheese. Maybe I'm missing something about this but that's my take and opinion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You are all now saying that
No one has said anything even remotely close to that. Try again.
I agree with Squiggit. This isn't even close to what people are actually proposing.
Take two characters C1 and C2. C1 spends 1 actions running away, 1 action idling, and 1 action raising their shield. Then C2 strikes at the spot where C1, moves to the spot where C1 is now in, and then strikes again. The way it normally works is that C2 would fail on their first strike then succeed on the second because C1 "was not in that spot", aka the actions did not happen at the same time. You are all now saying that C2 would actually have hit C1 because at the start of the round C2 could had hit, regardless of what position C1 actually is when the strike finishes.
In this scenario, reactions aren't even involved. So if C1 does ◆Stride, ◆Something, ◆Shield; and then C2 decides to attack the space that C1 started their turn in, that would be silly and of course the attack would miss.
If C1 runs away and C2 has AoO then C2 can trip C1 before they can move from their space, not after C1 has finished moving. If C1 readies to use cure light wounds when C2 is about to take damage, you cannot say that C2 had 0 HP despite having been healed to be above that after damage is taken. Etc. Reactions always happen as specified by the trigger (before or after X).
First, Attack of Opportunity calls specifically for a Strike action, so the Subordinate Actions rule doesn't allow you to do a Trip instead.
And while it is not specified very clearly, most of us will allow triggering reactions based on movement for every 5-foot-square moved. So a Readied Trip reaction with the trigger 'The target moves away from me' that succeeds would trip the opponent and land them either in the square that they started their movement in, or in the square 5 feet along their intended path. Not all the way at the end of their movement distance.
"About to take damage" isn't something that happens in-game that you can Ready an action for. For Ready, the event has to actually happen in order for you to observe it. "Takes damage" is a valid trigger, but that means that the reaction happens after the damage is dealt.
P.S. This is functionally equivalent to Champion's Glimpse of Redemption and Liberating Step. Both of which require no actions on the part of the person benefiting from it cause "champion". Everyone else has to spend 2 actions, get the right trigger, and provoke AoO.
While these are reactions, they are not Readied actions. So their triggers don't have to have the same requirement as Ready does.
Glimpse of Redemption does have some aspects of rewinding the game mechanics. That doesn't have to come through in the narrative description though. Narratively you could say that the Champion did their ability before the enemy started their attack. Even though mechanically the reaction happens after the attack has been made and even rolled.
Liberating Step doesn't have the mechanics rewinding, but it is able to take effect in between multiple-hit abilities like Double Slice and Flurry of Blows - which can cause the second Strike of those abilities to no longer be within reach. But in this case, like in the Ready an action to move when attacked, the reaction doesn't prevent the triggering attack from being rolled and resolved even though the reaction moves the ally out of reach of the attack. The attack still happens and damage gets dealt for the triggering attack - then the ally moves.
Take two characters C1 and C2. C1 spends 1 actions running away, 1 action idling, and 1 action raising their shield. Then C2 strikes at the spot where C1, moves to the spot where C1 is now in, and then strikes again. The way it normally works is that C2 would fail on their first strike then succeed on the second because C1 "was not in that spot", aka the actions did not happen at the same time. You are all now saying that C2 would actually have hit C1 because at the start of the round C2 could had hit, regardless of what position C1 actually is when the strike finishes.
Translating this into something that does actually use Ready and reactions:
C1 ◆Raises Shield (not sure why since their reaction will be to move), then ◆◆Readies an action to Stride, triggered by "C2 attacks me".
C2 ◆Strike
C1 ↺ Stride 25 feet away.
The Strike is still resolved with C1 in that initial square. Attack is rolled and damage is dealt. Then C1 can move to the new location.
C2 ◆Stride to follow C1, ◆Strike again.
--------
What many of us are proposing is that you can't set up a trigger of "The enemy targets me with a melee attack", or "The enemy starts an attack, but hasn't rolled yet".
The Strike either happens or it doesn't.
If you set up a trigger to Stride away before the attack happens, then the enemy hasn't made the attack. They haven't spent any actions, they haven't progressed their MAP.
If you set up a trigger to Stride away after the enemy has spent actions and progressed their MAP, then the attack is resolved fully, no matter what your ending location after your Stride.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The result is that things would become closer to IRL sparing matches where you move back and forth waiting for someone to make a mistake.
That is what AC and randomized attack rolls represent: a culmination of combat events where one is trying to hit a target and the target is moving around trying to not be hit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The scenario is about readying before, while, or after being attacked.
The trigger you seem to be looking for is along the lines of "The NPC looks at me."
If we're to follow you into the "IRL" and "start of the attack" premise, I'm curious how long--even if we accept 1 swing of a weapon per Strike action--you think it takes to make a sword strike compared to how long it takes to move even 5 ft.
Yeah, when you start bringing "well, that's how it happens IRL" is when I start thinking 'munchkin'. We know that the game rules are a very crude approximation of real combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, when you start bringing "well, that's how it happens IRL" is when I start thinking 'munchkin'. We know that the game rules are a very crude approximation of real combat....blame the reaction rules requiring "what you would see" as a trigger. That by default requires IRL comparisons, GMs are even told to, "Notably, the trigger must be something that happens in the game world and is observable by the character rather than a rules concept that doesn’t exist in world."
I really don't see how "The trigger must be something that happens in the game world and is observable by the character" leads to the idea that a Readied action to Stride away means that either the triggering attack misses completely with no roll allowed, or the attack has to somehow teleport the 25 feet away to the character's new location. The game rules don't say that.
Well, in the interests of conversation: How do you run this scenario?
When C1 Readies an action to Stride with a trigger of "C2 attacks me" (or 'targets me', or 'begins an attack against me', or whatever else). Then C2 makes a Strike against C1 and C1 uses their reaction to Stride 25 feet away and around a corner of a wall.
What do you have happen as the GM of this particular game? What gets rolled, and what doesn't?