The new stunned errata changes the way stunned works if it happens on your turn.
If you get stunned on your turn, first complete any action or activity you're in the middle of. If the stunned condition has a value, lose remaining actions to reduce your stunned value rather than waiting until your next turn.
Interestingly, the text doesn't exclude stunned with a duration. If you become stunned for 1 round during your own turn, you still complete the action even though it's no different from "you can't act for 1 round."
Anyway, this new errata got me thinking about "can't act" again. Obviously, it prevents you from using actions from that point on, but what happens to an action you already started, that you've already spent actions on?
Another case this can happen is when Casting a Spell while holding your breath. Doing so makes you lose all air, which means you're unconscious, which means you can't act. Does this mean you can't complete the spell? I think most would conclude no, because if it did, then no one would ever bother spellcasting underwater, and the mechanic would be pointless.
So what about something that deals damage as a reaction but does not disrupt, like a noncritical Reactive Strike reducing someone to 0 HP? Can the triggering action complete?
One could say "No, the action was interrupted, so it's lost." But is that an interruption? We don't have a rules definition for "interrupt", but a plain English definition would be to stop the thing from continuing. Isn't it a circular argument to say that "can't act stops the action from completing because it interrupts" when "can't act" being considered "interrupting" hinges on it preventing the action from completing?
And even if we consider noncritical Reactive Strike to be interrupting, is that a disruption? We know from the rules for activities that interrupting and disrupting both cause actions spent to be lost, but the rules never clearly equate the two. It could be that the former wastes the actions spent but not other costs like spell slots.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hmmmm. That’s a tricky problem. However, it seems the rules generally follow the status quo in that only a critical success interrupts an action when following from a Rreactive Strike. I would resolve that ruling in as many circumstances as possible. For example, the spellcaster can get his spell off before losing all breath, unless he’s struck critically, or someone reduces the PC to zero hps with a noncritical Strike but is still able to complete the action, etc.
That applies the general rule and allows for some cinematic / heroic actions when the PC is struck down in the course of doing said action. Do you have more specific examples of how this may or may not work?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The new stunned errata changes the way stunned works if it happens on your turn.
If you get stunned on your turn, first complete any action or activity you're in the middle of. If the stunned condition has a value, lose remaining actions to reduce your stunned value rather than waiting until your next turn.Interestingly, the text doesn't exclude stunned with a duration. If you become stunned for 1 round during your own turn, you still complete the action even though it's no different from "you can't act for 1 round."
Is there any possible way whatsoever to get Stunned 1 round during your own turn? I can't think of one. If it can never happen then it doesn't really matter if that case isn't covered in the rule.
I think it works the same way though: you finish what you're doing and then you're Stunned. The only difference is that you can't pay it off with actions since it lasts a round, so you're just done.
Anyway, this new errata got me thinking about "can't act" again. Obviously, it prevents you from using actions from that point on, but what happens to an action you already started, that you've already spent actions on?
You complete it as normal, getting Stunned does not disrupt. The errata covers it:
If you get stunned on your turn, first complete any action or activity you’re in the middle of. If the stunned condition has a value, lose remaining actions to reduce your stunned value rather than waiting until your next turn.”
Another case this can happen is when Casting a Spell while holding your breath. Doing so makes you lose all air, which means you're unconscious, which means you can't act. Does this mean you can't complete the spell? I think most would conclude no, because if it did, then no one would ever bother spellcasting underwater, and the mechanic would be pointless.
I'm pretty sure this works the same way: the spell happens and then you're out of air. It doesn't really function if you don't do it that way.
So what about something that deals damage as a reaction but does not disrupt, like a noncritical Reactive Strike reducing someone to 0 HP? Can the triggering action complete?
One could say "No, the action was interrupted, so it's lost." But is that an interruption? We don't have a rules definition for "interrupt", but a plain English definition would be to stop the thing from continuing. Isn't it a circular argument to say that "can't act stops the action from completing because it interrupts" when "can't act" being considered "interrupting" hinges on it preventing the action from completing?
And even if we consider noncritical Reactive Strike to be interrupting, is that a disruption? We know from the rules for activities that interrupting and disrupting both cause actions spent to be lost, but the rules never clearly equate the two. It could be that the former wastes the actions spent but not other costs like spell slots.
This one I'm not sure, but I think we've generally run it that if you get KO'd you can't complete the spell. I'd be open to changing that though. I'm not sure the rules actually cover that specific case.
It would be more consistent with the general non-disrupting case if the spell finished and then the result of the reaction kicks in (aka: you go unconscious).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there any possible way whatsoever to get Stunned 1 round during your own turn? I can't think of one. If it can never happen then it doesn't really matter if that case isn't covered in the rule.
A spellcaster can Ready Power Word Stun against you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh jeeze, this topic is always a doozy when it comes around.
The main "hard line" that's well established RaW is that Reactions occur the moment the trigger fires. If you are reacting to "makes a Strike," that is to react to the beginning of the Strike, before it is completed.
Which is why Paizo is genuinely careful about trigger wording. Most "before the Strike hits" type of Reactions only lower that roll / up one's defense, while most of the move-via-Reactions tend to trigger after the Strike hits/whiffs.
And yes, "interruptions" that cause an action-in-progress to become invalid for completion, do in fact prevent it from completing.
And because we know you commit all action points and costs up-front, those are all gone when an interruption happens.
Because this means that action-nullifying interruptions are only a Ready away, a lot of folk don't like that idea, but it's how pf2 was built.
____________________________
Anyway, this new errata got me thinking about "can't act" again. Obviously, it prevents you from using actions from that point on, but what happens to an action you already started, that you've already spent actions on?
This question is spelled out directly in the Actions: Activities text.
You have to spend all the actions of an activity at once to gain its effects. In an encounter, this means you must complete it during your turn. If an activity gets interrupted or disrupted in an encounter, you lose all the actions you committed to it.
And no, that is not exclusive to "activities," that also affects actions.
In some cases, usually when spellcasting, an activity can consist of only 1 action, 1 reaction, or even 1 free action.
"Activity" is a distinction without a difference for this topic. See Reactions to Movement for more confirmation that yes, you interrupt single actions the very same as activities.
Reactions to Movement
Some reactions and free actions are triggered by a creature using an action with the move trait. The most notable example is Reactive Strike (reproduced below). Actions with the move trait can trigger reactions or free actions throughout the course of the distance traveled. Each time you exit a square 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.
This text painting a special exemption helps to understand the general case as well.
Movement triggered reactions get a special rule. Unlike normal, these Reactions pause the trigger to execute only after the triggering creature has moved 5 ft.And if the trigger had [move] but did not leave its square, then the Reaction only happens after the trigger is complete.
Reactive Strike is built with special text so that you can swing at a foe that you'd whiff due to exiting reach, btw. Ready:Strike cannot do that, it would whiff due to the (moves 5 ft before the Reaction) rule.
_________________
Some quick examples. Anyone can Ready:Shove upon a foe with the trigger of "they begin an attack" and the Shove will fire after the action(s) are spent, but before a potential attack lands.
This means a successful Shove can nullify the swing due to pushing them beyond reach of their target.
If it was a Ready: Trip, then the foe would be able to finish the swing as there's no reach issue, but that Prone penalty would affect the roll.
And Ready:Leap has no roll to make, if the Ready creature can predict their foe's incoming attack, they can spend 2A +1R to avoid it.
There is also the requirement that the trigger must be perceptible to the PC, not the player.
Is there any possible way whatsoever to get Stunned 1 round during your own turn? I can't think of one. If it can never happen then it doesn't really matter if that case isn't covered in the rule.A spellcaster can Ready Power Word Stun against you.
Good find!
|
Some quick examples. Anyone can Ready:Shove upon a foe with the trigger of "they begin an attack" and the Shove will fire after the action(s) are spent, but before a potential attack lands.
This means a successful Shove can nullify the swing due to pushing them beyond reach of their target.
If it was a Ready: Trip, then the foe would be able to finish the swing as there's no reach issue, but that Prone penalty would affect the roll.And Ready:Leap has no roll to make, if the Ready creature can predict their foe's incoming attack, they can spend 2A +1R to avoid it.
There is also the requirement that the trigger must be perceptible to the PC, not the player.
This comes up now and again, and as far as I know there's no official word on this. It's a possible interpretation that you can invalidate the conditions for the strike that way. But there's no specific clear example of doing that in the rules. Just a logical inference that you might be able to do that.
There exist several player and monster reactions to "someone tries to strike you" that give you a bonus to AC and after the strike let you step away. So the AC bonus basically represents you moving away, and it being harder to hit you because of that. But invalidating a strike entirely (instead of making it harder) is a really really precious ability.
To me that's cause to go for a different interpretation: that a ready action (which you didn't have to pay a feat for) shouldn't be more powerful than that, and probably less.
Shoving an enemy away as a ready action, or leaping away yourself, shouldn't be able to cancel an enemy strike. That's a bit too good. But a +2 circumstance bonus to AC would be okay.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
For this type of difficulty where reactions are flying around and may or may not cause other actions to be disrupted or cause targets to no longer be valid, I look at two rules. 1) The Limitation on Triggers rule. 2) The Ambiguous Rules rule.
The Limitations on Triggers rule has this in it:
If multiple actions would be occurring at the same time, and it's unclear in what order they happen, the GM determines the order based on the narrative.
That is not ambiguous. However it does lead to a case where the rules specify that there are multiple ways of interpreting or adjudicating an interaction of several abilities.
So the Ambiguous Rules rule should at the very least be used as a guideline.
Sometimes a rule could be interpreted multiple ways. If one version is too good to be true, it probably is. If a rule seems to have wording with problematic repercussions or doesn't work as intended, work with your group to find a good solution, rather than just playing with the rule as printed.
Ruling the interaction such that an action that does not Disrupt is still effectively disrupting another action (it's costs get paid, but there is no effect), then that is a problematic repercussion or too good to be true - depending on which side of the GM screen you are on.
So if you ready a Stride and trigger it with 'when an enemy uses Strike against me', then that is multiple actions occuring at the same time. I am not going to have the Stride happen after the Strike action gets paid but before it resolves. I am going to have the Stride reaction happen after the Strike action finishes. Because neither Ready or Stride say that they Disrupt actions - so result of the ruling must be that they do not Disrupt the Strike action.
If a spellcaster casts a spell and provokes Reactive Strike as a result and the Reactive Strike attack is not a critical success, then it does not Disrupt the spell even if it drops the caster to 0 HP. Casting the spell, using Reactive Strike, and the caster falling unconscious are multiple actions occurring at the same time. I am going to choose the order that they happen in so that the spell does not get effectively Disrupted by an ability that did not Disrupt it.