Hi everyone,
The more I read Stand Still and the less I'm sure about which case(s) generates a disruption:
"Stand Still
Feat 4
Monk
Source Core Rulebook pg. 160 4.0
Trigger A creature within your reach uses a move action or leaves a square during a move action it’s using.
You strike out when your foe tries to flee. Make a melee Strike against the triggering creature. If the attack is a critical hit and the trigger was a move action, you disrupt that action."
Because it is triggered by move actions in both cases. Does "the trigger was a move action" separates both triggers or is it a useless reminder? I'm puzzled.
Whatever the reason for the wording, the current wording is clear - and also redundant. If the trigger was a move action (which is the only possibility) then a critical hit will disrupt the action.
|
It might be redundant but it's not wrong in any way. The trigger only includes move actions. If the trigger was a move action (which is 100% of the time), then a crit disrupts it.
It's like code that says something like:
X=5
If X=5 do thing
(Also side note, any move action where you don't leave your square, like Standing, only trigger reactions after the action completes, meaning you can't disrupt things when they Stand.)
|
For reference:
Move actions that trigger reactions[/url]"]Some reactions and free actions are triggered by a creature using an action with the move trait. The most notable example is Attack of Opportunity. Actions with the move trait can trigger reactions or free actions throughout the course of the distance traveled. Each time you exit a square (or move 5 feet if not using a grid) within a creature’s reach, your movement triggers those reactions and free actions (although no more than once per move action for a given reacting creature). If you use a move action but don’t move out of a square, the trigger instead happens at the end of that action or ability.
Some actions, such as Step, specifically state they don’t trigger reactions or free actions based on movement.
Stand Still can't prevent you from standing up from prone, because by the time the trigger is executed, it's too late to disrupt the action, you're already standing. Just... still.
And I think that was intentional; they were trying to remove stun-locking and trip-locking.
Sadly, this rule combined with flail and hammer crits still results in trip locking. But that's a problem with those crit specializations being too good.
Anyway, with that in mind, I think yeah, Stand Still's text about disrupting move actions is partially redundant because it can only disrupt move actions that move you to a different square.
Stand Still can't prevent you from standing up from prone, because by the time the trigger is executed, it's too late to disrupt the action, you're already standing. Just... still.
Do you have anything besides YouTube errata to cite for that?
Because while I can agree that this causes a bit of a balance problem and being stun-locked is no fun, I don't see how the rules actually allow running it any other way.
Disrupting an action means that the action doesn't take effect. So if you disrupt a Stand action, then the Stand action doesn't take effect and the target is still prone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean Ascalaphus just quoted the relevant ruling. The trigger happens at the end of the action. You are already standing when the AOO activates, so there is nothing to disrupt.
I mean Ascalaphus just quoted the relevant ruling. The trigger happens at the end of the action. You are already standing when the AOO activates, so there is nothing to disrupt.
No, this is how you quote a relevant rule.
Various abilities and conditions, such as an Attack of Opportunity, can disrupt an action. When an action is disrupted, you still use the actions or reactions you committed and you still expend any costs, but the action’s effects don’t occur.
So if you disrupt a Stand action, then the Stand action doesn't occur and the target is still prone.
If you have something that overrides that specifically for a Stand action, I would be interested in seeing it. As long as that reference doesn't involve a URL from YouTube - I'm aware of that one, but don't consider it to be official.
Like seriously, do you argue the same logic for Attack of Opportunity disrupting a Fireball spell?
Oh, well since Attack of Opportunity happens after the Fireball is cast, then the spell still deals damage even though it is disrupted.
|
|
You can't disrupt an action that has already completed.
Your AoO example is not relevant, as that triggers at the start of the Cast a Spell activity, not after the spell has been cast. Ascalaphus even cited the exact rule that I was referencing, which is an exception to the normal triggers for actions.
Like seriously, do you even read the rules we cite?
exception to the normal triggers Hmm... am I missing something...
The rule about move actions that you don't leave your square for seems a bit odd to me since all reactions happen after their triggering action.
But if you are considering that to be a specific override of a general rule, I can see where you are coming from.
That does leave me with the question of what the general rule is for when reactions happen. What general rule is being overridden by that move action rule?
|
|
The rule about move actions that you don't leave your square for seems a bit odd to me since all reactions happen after their triggering action.
This is not true at all. Reactions occur as soon as the trigger is met, which in the case of AoO and Stand Still, the trigger is met as soon as the action starts.
So if someone starts an action to Drawn an Item, the AoO happens immediately, and if it crits, the action is disrupted. If not, the action completes. Same with Cast a Spell. If you Cast a Spell with a somatic component, the entire activity gains the Manipulate trait, and the AoO occurs immediately. If disrupted, you lose all actions you had dedicated to casting a spell, spend all resources used to try the activity (like spells slots), and no effects of the spell occur.
If the reaction happens after the spell finishes, spells like Blue, Invisibility, and Mirror Image would be so much better to use in melee combat.
This is not true at all. Reactions occur as soon as the trigger is met, which in the case of AoO and Stand Still, the trigger is met as soon as the action starts.
I'm not seeing that as the general rule.
Not in the Reaction rules.
Not in the Reaction action definition.
All I see is that the trigger is generally another action.
Often, the trigger is another creature’s action.
It doesn't specify whether it is the start or the completion of the action, but it sounds to me like it is the completion of the action.
Attack of Opportunity's Trigger line is also using past tense: uses, makes, and leaves.
A creature within your reach uses a manipulate action or a move action, makes a ranged attack, or leaves a square during a move action it’s using.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
exception to the normal triggers Hmm... am I missing something...
The rule about move actions that you don't leave your square for seems a bit odd to me since all reactions happen after their triggering action.
But if you are considering that to be a specific override of a general rule, I can see where you are coming from.
That does leave me with the question of what the general rule is for when reactions happen. What general rule is being overridden by that move action rule?
This one:
You can use only one single action, activity, or free action that doesn’t have a trigger at a time. You must complete one before beginning another. For example, the Sudden Charge activity states you must Stride twice and then Strike, so you couldn’t use an Interact action to open a door in the middle of the movement, nor could you perform part of the move, make your attack, and then finish the move.
Free actions with triggers and reactions work differently. You can use these whenever the trigger occurs, even if the trigger occurs in the middle of another action.
Normally reactions happen immediately when triggered. So when someone walks past you, you can use Stand Still and hope that you disrupt that action, stopping their movement there.
But that doesn't work with move actions that don't leave the square because the trigger is delayed until after the action finishes.
And consider also the second part of how Disrupting Actions works:
Various abilities and conditions, such as an Attack of Opportunity, can disrupt an action. When an action is disrupted, you still use the actions or reactions you committed and you still expend any costs, but the action’s effects don’t occur. In the case of an activity, you usually lose all actions spent for the activity up through the end of that turn. For instance, if you began a Cast a Spell activity requiring 3 actions and the first action was disrupted, you lose all 3 actions that you committed to that activity.
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.
If someone starts outside your reach, and tries to Stride past you, you can use Stand Still to try to make them stand still. But that wouldn't teleport them back to their starting square.
So if the rules for move actions make this specific exception for moves that don't leave the square, that's supposed to do something. The action is already complete. You're not supposed to time travel to undo it.
If someone starts outside your reach, and tries to Stride past you, you can use Stand Still to try to make them stand still. But that wouldn't teleport them back to their starting square.
That also wouldn't happen if all reactions happen after their triggering action because of the Move action and Reactions rules.
Each time you exit a square (or move 5 feet if not using a grid) within a creature’s reach, your movement triggers those reactions and free actions
So if the Move action is disrupted they would fail to leave the 5 foot distance that they were trying to move at that moment, not go back to their position at the beginning of their Stride action.
-----
Having all reactions happen before their triggering action doesn't make sense for a lot of things such as a Readied action to shoot through a doorway triggered by someone opening the door.
I think there are some spells that have reactions that wouldn't work so well if they happen before the action that triggers them.
Edit: Or the notorious "I Ready a Stride action with a trigger of 'an enemy attacks me'".
|
|
If someone starts outside your reach, and tries to Stride past you, you can use Stand Still to try to make them stand still. But that wouldn't teleport them back to their starting square.That also wouldn't happen if all reactions happen after their triggering action because of the Move action and Reactions rules.
Each time you exit a square (or move 5 feet if not using a grid) within a creature’s reach, your movement triggers those reactions and free actionsSo if the Move action is disrupted they would fail to leave the 5 foot distance that they were trying to move at that moment, not go back to their position at the beginning of their Stride action.
Again you only quote half the rule.
Some reactions and free actions are triggered by a creature using an action with the move trait. The most notable example is Attack of Opportunity. Actions with the move trait can trigger reactions or free actions throughout the course of the distance traveled. Each time you exit a square (or move 5 feet if not using a grid) within a creature’s reach, your movement triggers those reactions and free actions (although no more than once per move action for a given reacting creature). If you use a move action but don’t move out of a square, the trigger instead happens at the end of that action or ability.
Some actions, such as Step, specifically state they don’t trigger reactions or free actions based on movement.
There would be no point to making that different, if you weren't supposed to handle it differently.
Having all reactions happen before their triggering action doesn't make sense for a lot of things such as a Readied action to shoot through a doorway triggered by someone opening the door.I think there are some spells that have reactions that wouldn't work so well if they happen before the action that triggers them.
Edit: Or the notorious "I Ready a Stride action with a trigger of 'an enemy attacks me'".
The Simultaneous Actions sidebar talks about "in the middle of another action", not before the triggering action. I think that works well for most cases.
I agree with you about ready actions, but those are a bit of a special case, because they're so open-ended what kind of triggers the GM might consider reasonable.
I think for ready actions it often makes sense to look at other abilities that already exist to see what's fair. There are some "step away while attacked" feats and none of them entirely cancel the attack, but they might give you a circumstance bonus to AC against it. Then I wouldn't let a ready action be better than an ability you had to spend a feat for. Those feats tend to flavor it as you being halfway away when the blow hits, so a bit harder to hit properly. Again going with a "in the middle of" kind of style, not wholly before or after.
If you use a move action but don’t move out of a square, the trigger instead happens at the end of that action or ability.There would be no point to making that different, if you weren't supposed to handle it differently.
Yeah, I'll concede the point on disrupting Stand or other Move actions that don't cause change of location. Because of the specific override.
I don't think that it is a general rule that reactions happen at the start of or before the action that triggers them. They happen after the action or one of the subordinate actions of an activity. Then if they disrupt the action, they rewind and undo the action that gets disrupted.
I think the difference between the two is usually rather trivial. But in some cases - such as Ready - it can be quite important.