Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kuronue 06-14-07, 03:10 AM	From the SRD, emphasis mine: Readying an Action You can ready a standard action, a move action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, any time 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. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action. You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don’t otherwise move any distance during the round. One of the PCs readies the action "if he attacks me, I attack him, then leap back (5-foot step)". The PC's attack happens first, then the 5-ft step, leading to the NPC (who in this case does not have a reach weapon) being unable to attack him. This moves his initiative count to one before the NPC. Next round, since he goes before the NPC, he readies the same action. He gets as many free attacks as there are 5-feet-away free spaces to leap to, and if he leaps to the side when he gets to a wall.... Am I missing something that renders this impossible? Or is it broken? If it is an exploit, how would you fix it? Would putting his init right AFTER the NPC who triggered it fix it, or would that break anything else? (I'm so proud... the rash PC who never thinks before he acts is fighting intelligently... isn't character development great?)
Kouk 06-14-07, 03:46 AM	Hmm, that's good thinking. Of course, this can be overcome by enemies not continually falling for the same tactic. All the enemy has to do is not walk right into it. Take a step back, whip out a bow, and kill him that way.
Kuronue 06-14-07, 04:11 AM	assuming I gave him a bow. Where this really matters is when he's fighting one of his longtime rivals, who is a swordsman (a samurai, actually) studying iajutsu (this is a guy designed to level up in tandem with the PC to always provide a decent challenge for him). In a dual over honor with swords, pulling out a bow seems a bit... eh In any event, yes, giving him a ranged or reach weapon solves the problem, but I was wondering what I'd need to houserule to make sure the exploit doesn't work in the first place. For tonight, we ruled he can't just keep readying that particular action over and over (we told him once per combat and he readily agreed, stating jokingly that "once again, I broke DnD), but that obviously won't do for a permenant houserule
Kouk 06-14-07, 04:39 AM	The enemy could just stand there and call him a coward. Or look into the feat Lunging Strike to surprise him. There is also a feat somewhere that lets you get AoOs even on 5ft steps, but I can't recall its name.
Dherki 06-14-07, 05:02 AM	The enemy could just stand there and call him a coward. Or look into the feat Lunging Strike to surprise him. There is also a feat somewhere that lets you get AoOs even on 5ft steps, but I can't recall its name. Cannot recall any feats that do this, but there is a Stance in ToB called Thicket of Blades that does this: While you are in this stance, any opponent you threaten that takes any sort of movement, including a 5-foot step, provokes an attack of opportunity from you. Your foes provoke this attack before leaving the area you threaten. Your opponents also cannot use the withdraw action (PHB pg. 143) to treat the square they start in as no longer threatened by you. Obviously, every NPC having it would be stretching it a bit, but for a Samurai with levels of Crusader would not be a bad choice imho, especially if his archnemesis is known for mobility :) Edit: It is possible to get this using 2 feats as well: Martial Study to gain a manouver and then Martial Stance to gain this stance. You would have to be level 10 minimum for this tho.
geekling 06-14-07, 07:22 AM	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. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. I kept that quote from the SRD in, 'cause that is the base of how I judge these things. The NPC foe does not move 15ft then attacks. He moves until he gets into range of his attack and then attacks. If the PC interrupts and attacks after the NPC foe has moved 15ft then moves back 5 ft. The NPC will continue his action of moving until he gets into range - then attack. (Unless dead, or prone, or moving 5ft more means that he will have to take a double move to reach the PC, or otherwise unable to keep moving.)
Darkwolf71 06-14-07, 08:02 AM	Don't attack him. Just step up to him and ready your own action to attack if he attacks. He'll still be able to 5 foot step away, but next round do the same thing. Better, if you can manage it, (probobally not, but maybe) give your NPC levels in Dervish (CW). 5 foot step, spring attack, reach weapon... none of it matters anymore. Dude is gonna hurt.
Coldkilla 06-14-07, 10:58 AM	The NPC foe does not move 15ft then attacks. He moves until he gets into range of his attack and then attacks. If the PC interrupts and attacks after the NPC foe has moved 15ft then moves back 5 ft. The NPC will continue his action of moving until he gets into range - then attack. (Unless dead, or prone, or moving 5ft more means that he will have to take a double move to reach the PC, or otherwise unable to keep moving.) geekling, I agree with your conclusion, but I have a different spin on the reason why this should be so. The PC readies his action to trigger not on the NPC's movement, but on his attack. Unless the NPC has Spring Attack or some such, he'd have to be done moving in order to attack. Since the readied action occurs before the action that triggers it, the PC attacks and steps out of reach, then the NPC is left without a valid target for his attack (assuming a 1v1 duel situation). Here's where the RAW is probably silent and a houserule is called for to prevent this from becoming pure creamy Gouda. Since the NPC was not able to carry out his attack, rule that he still retains it as a potential action for this round. Since he has done nothing but move so far, rule that the NPC is able to continue moving up to his full move and then perform a standard attack. Alternatively, one could rule that there is no time lapse in initiating an attack and landing the first strike. So the readied action would proceed, but then the attack that triggered it would resolve anyway, regardless of the PC stepping away. This one seems like more of a stretch to me.
calvinNhobbes 06-14-07, 11:19 AM	geekling and Coldkilla, That is how I rule it as well. The opponent can continue their move (assuming they have movement left with their move action) and then attack.
Evil DM Mk3 06-14-07, 11:41 AM	I also agree, the likely description of his intended actions for that round where "I move up to the PC and attack." As such moving after the readied attack does not break that.
mvincent 06-14-07, 01:22 PM	I also agree, the likely description of his intended actions for that round where "I move up to the PC and attack." As such moving after the readied attack does not break that.Agreed. An interrupted action can be adjusted a bit after the interruption (assuming the interrupted creature has movement left).
Thubby 06-14-07, 08:12 PM	since the readied attack interupts the first attack, it has yet to happen, and since he cant continue his action (attacking fighter), the action never happens, and the npc is still in his movement "phase".
Anathema 06-14-07, 08:38 PM	The first, and biggest, problem is that it's impossible to ready an action to both attack and move. He can ready an action to attack, or ready an action to move, but not to do both (because it's impossible to do both in a single standard or move action). Second; a 5' step can only be taken during his normal actions in a round. So he could ready an action and then move, or move and then ready, but once his actions are finished and he's waiting for the readied action to trigger he cannot take a 5' step. Third; even assuming the above was legal, what's to stop the person he readied against from taking a 5' step in close and hammering him with a full attack? His readied attack does not prevent his opponent from taking his full attack, unless of course he kills him with a readied action.
Roivas 06-14-07, 08:46 PM	So while in a duel of honor your player exploits rule loopholes and tried little 5-foot tricks? Simple, the enemy aftter seeing this trick even once just pulls a potion of enlarge person out and goes to town with his now bigger sword. Then watch your player try to duck and weave around a large creature, who then uses his own weak tactic against him. Enjoy.
pheron 06-14-07, 08:47 PM	Here's my call on this. Character A readies action. When attcked by Charcter B A will attack and take a 5' step back. Character B steps up and announces an attack, at which time the Readied action goes into effect. The readied action occurs before the triggering action -- the attack -- so character B has not completed his movement action. A attcks and steps back. Character B continues from from where his turns was interrupted his movement action. So B can take any remaining movement including closing on A and then attack. Now if B has moved his full movement -- he's hosed.
NoldorForce 06-14-07, 09:19 PM	@ Anathema: It's legal. Making a 5'-step (as the OP described) is a free action, and free actions can explicitly be taken while performing other actions. @ Kuronue: It's not broken. It's simply a good tactical trick for mucking up full attacks, of which there are many.
Mock26 06-14-07, 09:40 PM	I would simply rule that if he takes a second readied action he it has to wait until the following round so that he will spend one full round doing nothing. To me the ready action implies waiting and preparing. I don't think that there is enough time to prepare and wait between two initiative results such as 2 and 3 or 5 and 6.
Anathema 06-14-07, 09:45 PM	To say a 5' step is a "free action" is a bit misleading, because it isn't. Firstly, simply reading the description it clearly lists that a 5' step is to be done as part of your actions, but it can be done at any time during those actions (such as taking a full attack, attacking one opponent once, then moving 5' and attacking a different one). The most accurately it's described in the PHB is a "no action". You can't take a 5' step whenever you want, you have to take it on your turn. That being said, reading the readied action section I see where it reads that you may take your 5' step as part of that readied action. It still seems as if this isn't in the spirit of the rule, as it appears to describe taking a 5' step to allow you to take your readied action, but that much is not relevant. Even assuming the 5' step is a free action that you can take whenever you want (especially because I don't want to derail the thread), this idea still fails in two ways. The first is as described above; the opponent can continue his movement to meet the PC as his original movement never technically ended. The second is that there is nothing stopping the opponent from taking his 5' step and hammering the PC with a full attack, unless he took his full movement to get in melee range, but even then he can have his full attack the next round whereas the PC only gets a single attack.
Vrael 06-14-07, 09:52 PM	OK, here's the thing I'm not getting- why does his samurai opponent not five foot step in and complete his full attack? You can take your five foot step between any two of your attacks, so all this guy is doing is mucking up the samurai's first attack, if that- he could take the five foot step as part of his first attack, as well.
Kouk 06-14-07, 11:00 PM	OK, here's the thing I'm not getting- why does his samurai opponent not five foot step in and complete his full attack? You can take your five foot step between any two of your attacks, so all this guy is doing is mucking up the samurai's first attack, if that- he could take the five foot step as part of his first attack, as well. The idea is, that the Samurai approaches in some way and takes a swing, - the player swings and immediately steps back. It wouldn't matter how the Samurai approached, if it counted as if his movement ended because he was attacking then he could not take 2 moves in one round. I am inclined to agree with the majority of the posters now, about "If he swings and steps back before the Samurai's attack, then the Samurai has not attacked and can continue his move".
Vrael 06-14-07, 11:10 PM	The idea is, that the Samurai approaches in some way and takes a swing, - the player swings and immediately steps back. It wouldn't matter how the Samurai approached, if it counted as if his movement ended because he was attacking then he could not take 2 moves in one round. I am inclined to agree with the majority of the posters now, about "If he swings and steps back before the Samurai's attack, then the Samurai has not attacked and can continue his move". Okay, how about this: The Samurai takes a five foot step in, and does absolutely nothing. Next round, our "hero" takes a five foot step away to maintain the distance required for this tactic to work- lo, he falls prey to the "five foot step and full-attack" routine, as he has taken his five foot step for the round.
Mock26 06-15-07, 12:17 AM	Give the samurai a naginata. Then he can still attack the guy while he's 5' away.
Vrael 06-15-07, 12:26 AM	Give the samurai a naginata. Then he can still attack the guy while he's 5' away. If he has quick draw, anyway, or if he's willing to be dropping weapons left and right- just give him a spiked chain and be done with it. The problem with that is that it just kills the flavor of the Samurai.
Dherki 06-15-07, 02:51 AM	If he has quick draw, anyway, or if he's willing to be dropping weapons left and right- just give him a spiked chain and be done with it. The problem with that is that it just kills the flavor of the Samurai. Or take the naginata and Short Haft feat (PHB2).
Vrael 06-15-07, 10:53 AM	Or take the naginata and Short Haft feat (PHB2). Granted. But finding a method that works without resorting to a different weapon would be best- otherwise, it would make normal weapons obsolete.
tos_shai_hulud 06-15-07, 10:00 PM	Give the samurai Combat Expertise and Improved Feint. Now, each round, the player can ready his attack/five-foot step. The samurai 5-ft. steps in, feints, and if successful, the character is deceived. The attack that he was expecting does not come. While it is not expressly stated, the definition of feint indicates that this should work. From the dictionary: feint /feɪnt/ –noun 1. a movement made in order to deceive an adversary; an attack aimed at one place or point merely as a distraction from the real place or point of attack: military feints; the feints of a skilled fencer. 2. a feigned or assumed appearance: His air of approval was a feint to conceal his real motives. –verb (used without object) 3. to make a feint. –verb (used with object) 4. to make a feint at; deceive with a feint. 5. to make a false show of; simulate. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Origin: 1275–1325; ME < OF feinte, n. use of fem. of feint pretended, ptp. of feindre to feign] Once deceived, I would rule that the character's readied action does not go off. Another tactic is to give the character spring attack. Have him start back 10'. Have his attack bring him 10' passed his opponent. If his opponent performs the 5' step, he is still within range of the spring attack.
tricky_bob 06-16-07, 05:03 AM	OK, here's the thing I'm not getting- why does his samurai opponent not five foot step in and complete his full attack? You can take your five foot step between any two of your attacks, so all this guy is doing is mucking up the samurai's first attack, if that- he could take the five foot step as part of his first attack, as well. If the Samurai moved any distance before attacking, he cannot use the 5ft. step between attacks. The 5ft. step before/between/after can only happen if you make no other move action that round (Full Round Action). So in the example given, he has moved 5ft. and then had his turn interrupted by the readied action. Now he needs to move another 5ft. to attack. I agree with the houserule that the Samurai can continue his move action and then use a standard action to attack but ONLY if the player announced he was moving and didn't say I'll 5 ft. step and and use all my attacks. which he may do the first time this trick is used against him. At the end of the day, as others have mentioned, it's just a way to prevent full attacks.
Gleepwurp 06-16-07, 09:05 AM	Maybe I'm missing something (and I haven't read all of the responses - sorry if this has been covered). If the protagonist states that his readied action every round is going to be to attack the antagonist and then take a 5 foot step back, couldn't the antagonist just take a 5 foot step forward and attack in his round? It's not as if a 'readied' action gives a PC more than one action a round... right? So the protagonist could take his readied action (attack), then step back, and the antagonist could just then step up and take his attack action... the protagonist couldn't respond with ANOTHER readied action because he has already taken his action that round.
Lootus 06-16-07, 06:52 PM	I don't really see a problem with the PC's tactics, especially because the player is making intelligent use of the rules. Using the Ready an Action rules, no less. tos_shai_hulud mentioned Spring Attack - one of the uses of Spring Attack is to avoid having to go head to head with an opponent who has a more powerful full attack than you. This is a similar way to go about that tactic. If the Samurai has iajutsu, he should have a pretty powerful standard attack; he can still attack the PC every round. If he wins the duel, he gets to make comments on the PC's cowardly combat maneuvers. Another factor is that when using this tactic, the NPC will always get the first attack.
KirkBb 06-16-07, 07:05 PM	The way I read it, it says that you may take a 5ft step as part of your readied action, but its ambiguous as to how that takes place. I think that it was put in there for people using bows and reach weapons to attack, and that the 5ft movement happens BEFORE you attack. So if he wants to stop his opponent from attacking by just taking 5ft steps, he's not getting any attacks either, unless he "cheats" and uses a bow or reach weapon, which and npc could also use. I think thats a good ruling to get yourself out of this situation.
KurenaiYami 06-16-07, 07:24 PM	Maybe I'm missing something (and I haven't read all of the responses - sorry if this has been covered). If the protagonist states that his readied action every round is going to be to attack the antagonist and then take a 5 foot step back, couldn't the antagonist just take a 5 foot step forward and attack in his round? It's not as if a 'readied' action gives a PC more than one action a round... right? So the protagonist could take his readied action (attack), then step back, and the antagonist could just then step up and take his attack action... the protagonist couldn't respond with ANOTHER readied action because he has already taken his action that round. You are indeed missing something. The readied action is to attack and move back five feet with the triggering action being that he is being attacked. So the opponent attacks, the attack is interrupted by the defender's attack, and then the defender moves five feet back. If the defender moved at all to attack, he can't five foot step forward, and can't attack without a reach or ranged weapon.
Johnny_Angel 06-16-07, 07:34 PM	Don't attack him. Just step up to him and ready your own action to attack if he attacks. He'll still be able to 5 foot step away, but next round do the same thing. Better, if you can manage it, (probobally not, but maybe) give your NPC levels in Dervish (CW). 5 foot step, spring attack, reach weapon... none of it matters anymore. Dude is gonna hurt. I think Darkwolf had the best and easiest solution. The action that the PC readied set "when he attacks" as a condition, so that means if the NPC doesn't attack then the action is never triggered. So the NPC takes a 5 ft step to get close; the npc then readies an action of his own: "when the PC attacks, I attack." Is the NPC good at tripping or sundering? A good (and somewhat devious) thing to do is to have the NPC ready an action to trip the PC or sunder the PC's weapon whenever the PC attacks.
Eled_the_Worm_Tamer 06-16-07, 07:34 PM	With one rider this should work. You can only ready an action if your before the person who would trigger it in the cue. Improved initiative + Warning (weapon property from Magic item compendium) give a +9 to inititave before dex, roll each turn. Now if your samurai is expecting this trick can he look into things that deny the pays ability to move? tripping, having a caster ally use some manner of battle field control? or the like? Failing thees the path of the samurai was classically known as 'the way of sword and bow' have him hold off with a long bow piping arrows into him till he charges, and pull the same stunt. Think tactically, your player has just given the samurai a profound gift, the knolage of what an opponent plans to do in battle.
Balseraph 06-16-07, 08:03 PM	A nifty Eberron feat would totally negate the tactic as well. Pursue allows you to spend an action point to move into the square your opponent just left if he was taking a 5ft step. Provokes no AoO itself.
Timori 06-17-07, 09:08 PM	Personally I think I'd just apply the rule "Assuming he's still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action". i.e. as long as the enemy has 5' movement left, he can attack. Anything else just seems rediculous to me. Next we'll be ruling that it's impossible to ready a missile shot against someone opening the door. After all the shot happens immediately before the action that triggers it, in which case the door will be closed. Common sense should occasionally be applied.
Kuronue 06-18-07, 08:00 PM	Alright, I'm adding a houserule that if there are no legal targets for your attack, it "fizzles" and you end up not having taken a standard action at all- putting the samurai in question still smack dab in the middle of his move action, so he can easily move anoter 5 feet and then use his now unused standard action. Thanks for the help! ETA: My player's too lazy to log in, but he wanted me to mention some things (no idea why), so here are his comments: <Dilt> and i think you should mention that this was all made in despiration ... <Dilt> and honestly <Dilt> i couldn't think of anything else to have him do, really <Dilt> he's been in a fight twice with his favorite enemy <Dilt> and no matter what he does, he's ALWAYS hit with that first strike <Dilt> i started a really bad domino effect, lmfao Now, the guy he was using this against wasn't his rival, but he was testing out the technique with the idea of using it against this guy (iaj-whatever master, the quick-draw guys from OA). He also wanted me to mention his character is a rogue who thinks he's a fighter, and he's chaotic evil-aligned (half-fiend), so it was sneaky and tricky, which was a good move for him, but not great for the campaign. He tends to do things like this.
danyc 06-19-07, 02:09 AM	Not sure what's confusing about this -at all-. The samurai moves in, would attack, triggers ready, PC attacks and steps back (all legal, the people arguing weird stuff about not being able to 5ft on a ready should read the ready text... it specifically says you can). Assuming the Samurai isn't at 30 ft (or whatever his movement rate is) already, he keeps moving, and attacks. After that, every time he attacks, the PC attacks and 5s back, the Samurai 5s forward and attacks. Much the opposite of being a 'cheese' tactic, your PC is denying himself a full round, while his opponent gets one every round. .... In a related matter, I popped into this topic because I'm having a bit of an issue with readies myself, and I'm curious what take on it people would have. The healer in my game's party has a penchant for readying healing for when someone goes to a certain range of health (we allow heal checks to roughly guage HP% as a house rule). I dont have any problem with this per-se, but I'm a little baffled by some of the weird... chronological issues that come up with the ready. Because he's waiting for -damage-, it makes less sense for the initiave to be -ahead- of the source of the damage. Normally it makes sense, because you pre-empt an attack, a move, whatever. In this case, however, he's waiting for the damage. He has to wait for the attack itself to be completely resolved. So... does his ready go off and heal BEFORE the damage, potentially wastefully? Does his healing go off after the damage and his initiative go ahead of the damage-er as normal? Does he go after the monster and effective lose a turn (relative to it). If the damaged PC goes neg from the damage before the readied heal, does he drop (I would assume so)? Just curious for feedback on this.
calvinNhobbes 06-19-07, 09:09 AM	danyc, I think the healer should be using the delay action as opposed to the ready action.
Frugal 06-19-07, 10:09 AM	So... does his ready go off and heal BEFORE the damage, potentially wastefully? Does his healing go off after the damage and his initiative go ahead of the damage-er as normal? Does he go after the monster and effective lose a turn (relative to it). If the damaged PC goes neg from the damage before the readied heal, does he drop (I would assume so)? Just curious for feedback on this. I think you need some flexibility/common sense with readied actions. A great example is if an archer character readies and action to shoot as soon as someone opens a door. By RAW, his attack action happens before the triggering action, which would mean that the door was still closed and the attack doesn't work, but clearly this is an action you should be able to ready, so you just don't worry about it and resolve it at the point in the initiative order when it makes sense.
danyc 06-19-07, 01:38 PM	I'd love it if he just delayed and then dropped in to heal as needed :) However, he's using the readies because, in theory, if they work they dont lose him anything initiative wise. And in terms of flexibility, yes I agree. Most of them involve interrupting the opponents turn, and the description of the readied action even includes that, discussing how to resolve an action in the middle of their actions. It only weirds me out in this case because rather than the usual bit where you're effectively waiting on movement (most of the common readies I see are 'attack when something gets in range/sight', thus dependant on their opponents moves), he's waiting for a trigger that requires the monster to have taken its entire turn. I suppose Im probably freaking out over it too much and there's no problem with him getting the heal at the proper time and getting the better initiative, it just seems intuitively incredibly bizarre (I never found the opening the door scenario confusing or 'weird' in the same way, for instance). I guess it will come to me making it less attractive to do things this way, perhaps having a monster with cleave so that when the person he's waiting on momentarily goes neg and then gets healed, he'll take the cleave to the face and learn to heal pre-emptively instead :)
calvinNhobbes 06-19-07, 01:46 PM	However, he's using the readies because, in theory, if they work they dont lose him anything initiative wise. What do you mean by this? Whether you use the ready or delay action, you initiative counts becomes when you took your actions. To quote the SRD: Initiative Consequences of Readying Your initiative result becomes the count on which you took the readied action. If you come to your next action and have not yet performed your readied action, you don’t get to take the readied action (though you can ready the same action again). If you take your readied action in the next round, before your regular turn comes up, your initiative count rises to that new point in the order of battle, and you do not get your regular action that round. Initiative Consequences of Delaying Your initiative result becomes the count on which you took the delayed action. If you come to your next action and have not yet performed an action, you don’t get to take a delayed action (though you can delay again). If you take a delayed action in the next round, before your regular turn comes up, your initiative count rises to that new point in the order of battle, and you do not get your regular action that round. Delaying your actions just doesn't allow you to interrupt someones turn, which he is not doing anyway, since he wants to heal after they have been hit.
Frugal 06-19-07, 02:05 PM	Delaying your actions just doesn't allow you to interrupt someones turn, which he is not doing anyway, since he wants to heal after they have been hit. Well, I think he is looking to interrupt, think of the situation of a monster doing a full attack, monster swings once and does enough damage to put the PC below the threshold that the healer readied for, he wants to be able to heal before the next hit comes in and (potentially) drops the PC.
danyc 06-19-07, 02:06 PM	Yes, but consider the two possible outcomes: Version one: Init 20 Healer delays. Init 19-15 Various actions. Init 14 Monster attacks, deals enough damage that the healer wants to heal. Init 13 Healer drops in, heals. -END ROUND- Init 20-15 Various actions. Init 14 Monster attacks Init 13 Healer is up Version Two: Init 20 Healer readies cure mod for damage. Init 19-15 Various actions Init 14 Monster deals enough damage to trigger ready *Ready Activates, Healer heals, healer's initiative becomes 15 (or perhaps 14 'high', ahead of the monster) -END ROUND- Init 20-15 Various actions Init 14+ Healer Init 14- Monster Do you see the difference? One way he loses a turn relative to the monster, the other way he stays ahead of it.
danyc 06-19-07, 02:06 PM	Well, I think he is looking to interrupt, think of the situation of a monster doing a full attack, monster swings once and does enough damage to put the PC below the threshold that the healer readied for, he wants to be able to heal before the next hit comes in and (potentially) drops the PC. Or, shorter version... yeah, what this guy said :)
Frugal 06-19-07, 02:14 PM	Or, shorter version... yeah, what this guy said :) LOL, thanks. Had another thought, you can only ready a standard action and healing spells usually have a range of touch, so for this to work he has to wade right into combat and stand right next to the PC in question, an intelligent creature will probably notice this pretty quickly (as in after the first time) and just go after the healer. If he delays, he can't interrupt the full attack situation but then he can get a full round of actions, such as move up and heal.
danyc 06-19-07, 02:18 PM	:D In my case he was adjacent to the other PC so it was legal at least. Of course you're right that the monster could target him, and it did begin to do so after the first time he pulled it off. This wasn't really a tactic that was ruining my games or anything, it just... struck me as very odd with the obvious time-warpiness of it.
mlund 06-19-07, 03:10 PM	I don't find this issue as rough because if your Readied Action happens before the Attack Action but after the Move Action, the character should be able to continue moving since he has not yet Attacked. No, the awful part is when a PC readies an action to 5' step and attack a Charging opponent with a Reach Weapon - like a Lance. Then everything falls apart. - Marty Lund
calvinNhobbes 06-19-07, 03:28 PM	Yes, but consider the two possible outcomes: Version one: Init 20 Healer delays. Init 19-15 Various actions. Init 14 Monster attacks, deals enough damage that the healer wants to heal. Init 13 Healer drops in, heals. -END ROUND- Init 20-15 Various actions. Init 14 Monster attacks Init 13 Healer is up Version Two: Init 20 Healer readies cure mod for damage. Init 19-15 Various actions Init 14 Monster deals enough damage to trigger ready *Ready Activates, Healer heals, healer's initiative becomes 15 (or perhaps 14 'high', ahead of the monster) -END ROUND- Init 20-15 Various actions Init 14+ Healer Init 14- Monster Do you see the difference? One way he loses a turn relative to the monster, the other way he stays ahead of it. In either case the healer's INIT is 13, not 15. His actions take place AFTER the monster's actions. If you want his INIT to be 15, then he would be curing before damage is done, which is pointless. You are not really interrupting anything BEFORE it happens, just delaying until AFTER is happens.
danyc 06-19-07, 11:06 PM	Calvin... you've just identified the very point I was bringing up in the first place, this is the very reason I posted this. :D RAW? Its as I write out as the examples, if he delays he ends up at Init 13 and the monster gets another action before he does. If he readies, because readies, by written text, set your init to just prior to the trigger, he ends up at 15 (or 14 high, or whatever you want to call it) -ahead- of the monster. It doesn't matter that the monster has taken the majority of its turn. See: If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action. This is WHY I brought this up as an issue :) The written rules for it cause bizarre timewarps. Ultimately its not really a big deal, but it is a little weird and definitely flies in the face of intuition. Marty: You're right thats a little wiggy, although I think it could be fairly common sense to rule it as the DM that simply both attacks would go off. Alternately, you call it a fair tactic to foil a reach character. At least there's no time warp. Btw, you the l5r Marty Lund? If so, hi :D
calvinNhobbes 06-20-07, 01:10 PM	danyc, I'd just use logic and the rules as intended and not try to rules lawyer them into some time warp (as you put it). If the player wants to interrupt and heal, fine, but the healing happens before the attacks (and therefore pointless). If his intent is to heal after the attack, then he has to delay and have his INIT after the monster.
danyc 06-20-07, 05:21 PM	Well he's the one who wants to do it, not me :D During the game I allowed it as written as not to screw him based on his (correct) reading of the rules, but I said that it felt a little 'off' to me, and I'll probably just encourage him to pick a different tactic so we don't press the issue. The time warp bit I say as a joke, I dont think anyone really thinks that's what is happening, more its an issue of how readies are supposed to be 'pre-emptive', and how because the readying character is there waiting to pounce (and was originally ahead in the initiative) he retains that edge.
calvinNhobbes 06-20-07, 07:38 PM	Which is fine, for actions that are trying to interrupt, not one's that are after the fact. The player wants to have their cake and eat it to by manipulating the reading of the rules.
JustinA 06-23-07, 01:22 AM	Because he's waiting for -damage-, it makes less sense for the initiave to be -ahead- of the source of the damage. Normally it makes sense, because you pre-empt an attack, a move, whatever. In this case, however, he's waiting for the damage. He has to wait for the attack itself to be completely resolved. What timewarp? Just because his turn NEXT round happens before the opponent he interrupted, it doesn't mean that his readied action didn't take place during the opponent's turn on THIS round. It's important to remember that the initiative system is an abstraction. Characters aren't literally finishing their action and then hitting a stop-watch to make sure they wait exactly 6 seconds before taking their next action. In this case the initiative system is modeling this guy retaining his edge in initiative because he was choosing to be reactive. There's no "timewarp". danyc, I'd just use logic and the rules as intended and not try to rules lawyer them into some time warp (as you put it). If the player wants to interrupt and heal, fine, but the healing happens before the attacks (and therefore pointless). If his intent is to heal after the attack, then he has to delay and have his INIT after the monster. Meh. This is like saying that if someone readies an action to "shoot them when they open the door" that the readied action interrupts the "open the door" action and the arrow thunks into the still-closed door. You can argue until you're blue in the face that this is technically correct -- and you might even be right -- but it's a meaningless bit of rules-lawyer bulltonkey because all it forces is ridiculous circumlocutions. Instead of readying an action to "shoot 'em as they open the door" (you arrow thunks into the door! haha!) or "heal 'em as soon as they take damage" (you heal 'em just before they take damage! haha!) you just rephrase your readied action so that it happens the way that: (a) You had intended all along; (b) Everyone else in the known universe capable of understanding basic English knew you intended all along. I just don't see what being an **** retentive asshat is supposed to accomplish here.
calvinNhobbes 06-23-07, 09:45 AM	Meh. This is like saying that if someone readies an action to "shoot them when they open the door" that the readied action interrupts the "open the door" action and the arrow thunks into the still-closed door. In that situation it is less of a readied action and more of a surprise round. Just because someone calls it a readied action doesn't mean it is. You can argue until you're blue in the face that this is technically correct -- and you might even be right -- but it's a meaningless bit of rules-lawyer bulltonkey because all it forces is ridiculous circumlocutions. Instead of readying an action to "shoot 'em as they open the door" (you arrow thunks into the door! haha!) or "heal 'em as soon as they take damage" (you heal 'em just before they take damage! haha!) you just rephrase your readied action so that it happens the way that: (a) You had intended all along; (b) Everyone else in the known universe capable of understanding basic English knew you intended all along. Why does everyone refuse to acknowledge the existence of "delay action". I have no problem with someone wanting to heal after someone gets hurt, but their INIT will be after the action, not before it. They are delaying their action not readying it.
Frugal 06-23-07, 10:31 AM	In that situation it is less of a readied action and more of a surprise round. Just because someone calls it a readied action doesn't mean it is. Not if you're already in combat, suppose you're being chased, your party runs ahead, closes the door and readies to fire when the door's opened. Or, suppose you're not in combat but both sides have made their listen checks and are aware of each other, no surprise round.
maharai23 06-23-07, 11:07 AM	1st. Sound tactic. It is possible to take a free action 5 foot step either before or after your action. It is possible to set your readied action in response to the character's attack, thus after the character has announced his movement. The player did it right. Be thankful the player hasn't discovered Improved Trip, Disarm, or Sunder. All three badly affect the ability of the enemy to mount an offense. Ideally, to defeat this, you either interfere with the player's mobility, put him in a position so that no matter where he goes, he's a legal target for an attack, or mirror the tactic on him. Alternately, I would rule that a successful Bluff check as a feint in combat would make the character flat-footed, and unprepared for the attack; enough so that the readied action wouldn't trigger until after the attack, at which point I would give the player latitude to change the action, if he chose. This could defeat the predictable readied action, while not removing the ability to pull it off once or twice. I think of the readied action like this: Vargal unsheathed his greatsword and roared, ducked around two opponents locked in a fierce grapple, and thundered across the battlefield. While not bright by conventional standards, he was gifted with great prowess on the battlefield, quickly calculating the exact moment when he would need to shift his weight to annihilate the halfling without overbalancing himself. He closed the distance, quickly, raising his massive blade, and planting his left foot to swing... Exactly as Talic predicted. His dagger darted out at the precise right moment, catching Vargal between two plates of armor and scoring a minor wound, even as he shifted his weight, dancing back just in time to avoid the massive warrior's swing. Vargal's eyes burned with rage, as his greatsword clattered to the ground and he reached for his whip... That trick would not work a second time. "Let's see how nimble you are when you're on your backside," he thought. In the example, The Barbarian moved to the halfling's location and attacked, but was interrupted by the ready halfling, who scored a minor hit after Vargal had ceased his movement to attack, and then stepped back to avoid reprisal. Vargal then changed his attack action to drawing a weapon (whip), and preparing to trip the halfling, to stop such shenanigans. If Vargal had wanted, instead, he could instead (IMO), moved to the halfling and feinted, relying on his battle prowess to catch the halfling unawares, granting him the opening he needed for a strike.
maharai23 06-23-07, 11:37 AM	What timewarp? Just because his turn NEXT round happens before the opponent he interrupted, it doesn't mean that his readied action didn't take place during the opponent's turn on THIS round. It's important to remember that the initiative system is an abstraction. Characters aren't literally finishing their action and then hitting a stop-watch to make sure they wait exactly 6 seconds before taking their next action. In this case the initiative system is modeling this guy retaining his edge in initiative because he was choosing to be reactive. There's no "timewarp". Meh. This is like saying that if someone readies an action to "shoot them when they open the door" that the readied action interrupts the "open the door" action and the arrow thunks into the still-closed door. You can argue until you're blue in the face that this is technically correct -- and you might even be right -- but it's a meaningless bit of rules-lawyer bulltonkey because all it forces is ridiculous circumlocutions. Instead of readying an action to "shoot 'em as they open the door" (you arrow thunks into the door! haha!) or "heal 'em as soon as they take damage" (you heal 'em just before they take damage! haha!) you just rephrase your readied action so that it happens the way that: (a) You had intended all along; (b) Everyone else in the known universe capable of understanding basic English knew you intended all along. I just don't see what being an **** retentive asshat is supposed to accomplish here. The readied action can be for: As soon as I see someone at the door or Well, with healing, it's likely better to delay. If you had to ready, such as if you thought someone would need healing in the middle of the full attack action, then: I'm paying attention to this guy, and readying an action to heal him if he looks severely wounded to me (more than 25% damage). By rephrasing it based on your perception of the change, it forces it to after the trigger you're looking at, and not before.
calvinNhobbes 06-23-07, 01:55 PM	Not if you're already in combat, suppose you're being chased, your party runs ahead, closes the door and readies to fire when the door's opened. Or, suppose you're not in combat but both sides have made their listen checks and are aware of each other, no surprise round. In that case I wouldn't ready an action to fire when the door opens. I'd ready an action to fire at the first enemy I see. Just cause the door opens doesn't mean there is a target. Intelligent opponents will take advantage of jumpy characters.
Frugal 06-23-07, 02:04 PM	In that case I wouldn't ready an action to fire when the door opens. I'd ready an action to fire at the first enemy I see. Just cause the door opens doesn't mean there is a target. Intelligent opponents will take advantage of jumpy characters. Still breaks by RAW though. Ready an action to fire at the first enemy you see, great takes place before you see him, still doesn't work. That's why you have to add some flexibility into the readying to be that it's triggered when it makes sense. Same goes for the earlier example of healing when damaged, by RAW it takes place before the trigger which makes no sense for damage, but I'd argue should work.
calvinNhobbes 06-23-07, 02:22 PM	Still breaks by RAW though. Ready an action to fire at the first enemy you see, great takes place before you see him, still doesn't work. That's why you have to add some flexibility into the readying to be that it's triggered when it makes sense. Now that's a really twisted interpretation :rolleyes: Same goes for the earlier example of healing when damaged, by RAW it takes place before the trigger which makes no sense for damage, but I'd argue should work. Fine ready an action to heal someone. I still wouldn't put the healer's INIT order before the attackers. Makes no sense, rules wise or realistically. I will follow the players intent of course, but I won't then give them a benefit for sloppy play.
Frugal 06-23-07, 04:59 PM	Now that's a really twisted interpretation :rolleyes: Not by RAW. The RAW states that your readied action happens before what triggered it. Which means it doesn't matter if it's a door opening or seeing an enemy or what, your action goes off before that, which makes no sense for a large number of things you might want to ready against. Fine ready an action to heal someone. I still wouldn't put the healer's INIT order before the attackers. Makes no sense, rules wise or realistically. I will follow the players intent of course, but I won't then give them a benefit for sloppy play. Well again, rules-wise it's right in there that your initiative order changes to be before the person who triggered it. Now for balance issues, I can see why you wouldn't allow this I'm just pointing out it is RAW. But given how nonsensical the RAW for readied actions are, I'm deeply in favor of applying large quantities of common sense when using them.
danyc 06-23-07, 06:34 PM	Yikes, more stuff got added to the thread. Too tricky to quote it all but I'll try to address the points JustinA: Obviously there's no literal timewarp, it was just a bit of hyperbole :) You're entirely right, I know how the RAW works and the guy DID get his heal. I'm never going to penalize someone for written rules unless there's a -really- obvious mistake, and even then I'll at least inform them of the change and put it in afteward. I was mostly trying to demonstrate how sometimes the readies are a WHOLE lot more counterintuitive, while sometimes they work just fine. calvin gives a very good counterarguement, though, that in the system of abstraction, the delay abstraction might make more 'sense' for those obvious happen-after actions, than those happen-in-the-middle actions. Rules wise, its clearly done so people aren't losing turns, where delay is mostly for intentionally moving yourself in the initiative order. maharai: Oh, believe me, they know all the tricks. When we played in college we were a very 'optimizy' playgroup. A lot of us hadn't played for a long time after graduating, though, and now that we got this online reunion game going sometimes we have to check RAW to refresh our memories. I don't really have any problems thinking up counters to most strategies, and I've never really seen readying as abusive (just because it cuts down on what you can do). This situation only came up as a snag because it was a really counter intuitive example. As an anecdote: Amusingly enough, in last night's session of the same game, I ended up doing the EXACT same funky initiative thing to them, unintentionally. The situation had one party member seperated from the party and asleep, with 2 archers near her. One was tying her up, the other had a readied action to shoot if he got a target (the rest of the party was across a river and mostly out of line of sight behind various obstacles). However, the party wizard was coming across invisibly. He broke invis using a cone to hit the archer and the sleeping party member (to do some damage and wake her up), and then of course the archer's ready went off, after everything was resolved, when the wiz because visible. When the archer got another shot before the wizard did... he started up a storm on ventrilo, when I pointed out it was the exact same situation as with the cleric. Of course, he answered with 'Stupid Cleric' :)
calvinNhobbes 06-23-07, 07:14 PM	Not by RAW. The RAW states that your readied action happens before what triggered it. Which means it doesn't matter if it's a door opening or seeing an enemy or what, your action goes off before that, which makes no sense for a large number of things you might want to ready against. Then you are not readying, you are delaying. Just because someone "says" they are readying an action, does not mean they really are by RAW. If the intent of their action is not to interrupt but respond after the fact, then their initiative order should be after the triggering event, not before. Just because someone wants to twist the RAW does not mean you should allow it as a DM. Well again, rules-wise it's right in there that your initiative order changes to be before the person who triggered it. Now for balance issues, I can see why you wouldn't allow this I'm just pointing out it is RAW. But given how nonsensical the RAW for readied actions are, I'm deeply in favor of applying large quantities of common sense when using them. Yes, you have to apply common sense to realize when someone is trying to disguise a delayed action with a readied action and gain an advantage they don't deserve. In general, I'm not going to penalize a player for mixing them up, but I'm also not going to give them the advantage of a higher initiative count either if what they really described was a delayed action not a readied action.
Timori 06-23-07, 08:24 PM	Then you are not readying, you are delaying. Despite that being the exact example given under readying in the PHB? :P I think everyone is clear on the intent of readying, it's just so badly worded in the RAW. Obviously your action is triggered slightly after the enemy action, not before. I can't think of a single instance where the RAW would make sense. You get your action after the trigger but gain the upper hand in initiative. Here's how I see it: Ready: If he does x, I'll do y Delay: I'll wait to see what he does, then I'll decide what to do.
danyc 06-23-07, 09:13 PM	Ready: If he does x, I'll do y Delay: I'll wait to see what he does, then I'll decide what to do. Or even Delay: 'I don't have an obvious action to take right now, so I'll wait around for an opportunity.' In games I play, most delays are either when someone specifically wants to switch initiative order with an ally (letting them open up a charge line or such), or because they simply have no action worth taking and want to wait around for an obvious opportunity to make themselves useful.
Frugal 06-23-07, 11:02 PM	The thing is readying allows you to interrupt another person's action but you only get a partial action (standard or move), whereas with delaying you're just putting off your entire round of actions. So as I see it, "I want to stand next to a party member and heal him in the middle of another creatures' attacks" = readying "I want to stand back at a safe distance but be able to move in to heal as needed" = delaying
maharai23 06-24-07, 12:01 AM	Keep in mind, readied actions trigger on your character's perception. For example, if the character readies an action to shoot the first character who passes through a doorway, he won't shoot at the first invisible creature passing through. Why? He can't see it. If he fires at the first person he sees, he can't do it before he sees them. The action can't take place before the trigger if you can't perceive something before the trigger. I.E. If you ready an action to shoot the first person passing through a doorway, I see it as: person walks in doorway, intent to run outside *STOP* Shot is fired. resolve at current bonuses. Next round, set initiative order to just before the current character. *continue* character completes move as desired, possibly changing move. You have now interrupted the character's action, per the Readied action, played at first legal trigger. I have an additional penalty for readying an action to fire at a character as soon as they come into view. I call it an itchy trigger finger. Regardless of friend or enemy, the first creature generally close to what they want to hit (example: trogdar, the heavy fighter, runs into the building after the monk. The player states he's attacking the enemy when he comes out. I rule too specific, based on long distance perception, and split second decision required. He states the first unarmored person. I rule that broad enough, with a general description of something highly visible to look for. If Trogdar gets his armor Shattered (groan), and runs out first, he will be the target.
JustinA 06-24-07, 03:50 AM	In that situation it is less of a readied action and more of a surprise round. Just because someone calls it a readied action doesn't mean it is. This assumes that the opening of the door begins combat. More importantly, it ignores the fundamental question under discussion. Why does everyone refuse to acknowledge the existence of "delay action". I have no problem with someone wanting to heal after someone gets hurt, but their INIT will be after the action, not before it. They are delaying their action not readying it. Since virtually any action that can be readied can also be taken on a delayed turn, this argument doesn't hold any water with me at all. Sure, you can delay your turn and then heal. That doesn't mean you can't ready an action to do the exact same thing. And there are many scenarios (most of them dealing with interrupting an opponent's full attack sequence) where it would be BETTER to ready the action than to delay your turn.
calvinNhobbes 06-24-07, 11:38 AM	Despite that being the exact example given under readying in the PHB? The fluff in the PHB does not always give the best examples. Hence the need for these forums and the FAQ! ;) Ready: If he does x, I'll do y Delay: I'll wait to see what he does, then I'll decide what to do. I agree. The trick is that you can pretty much word your intentions to fall under either category, and readying gives you the advantage of ending up with higher initiative count, so everyone always tries to make it a readied action. I just try to use the common sense approach to figure out where their INIT ends up. Since virtually any action that can be readied can also be taken on a delayed turn, this argument doesn't hold any water with me at all. Exactly! Which I think is part of the problem. I think you really have to be interrupting their action to qualify for being ahead of them in the intiative order. Sure, you can delay your turn and then heal. That doesn't mean you can't ready an action to do the exact same thing. We'll just have to agree to disagree then. For me, if the readied action isn't really trying to interrupt anything then it's just a delay. And there are many scenarios (most of them dealing with interrupting an opponent's full attack sequence) where it would be BETTER to ready the action than to delay your turn. In general, it is always better mechanically to ready an action over delaying. The problem is that in many situations it doesn't make sense for it to be so.