When exactly can you use an immediate action??

[shaga]

An immediate action can be used even when its not your turn but when exactly can you use it?
For example can you use an immediate action after someone has fired and arrow at you but before it reaches you? What about using the immediate action when the arrow is half way to you or 10 feet from you or after it pierces your cloths but before it injures you??

Another example. Can you use an immediate action after someone has casted a fireball spell? What about using the immediate action after you see the center of the fireball explosion but before the fire reaches you (Assuming you are within the fireball radius)??

My DM has ruled that you can use the immediate action any time you want but within the "action steps" of the game (that's what he called them). He explained that "action steps" are the standard and move actions. So I can use my immediate action before or after the ranger attacks me with his bow but not in-between his attack. Same for spells, before or after the enemy wizard casts the fireball but not in-between.

Is he right?

[AmberVael]

I can definitely understand where he's coming from, but I don't think he's right. Too many immediate action powers are designed to be interrupt powers, and are given no clause to interrupt beyond being an immediate action.

Take every single Counter in Tome of Battle. How can you use a counter to block an attack if the attack is already complete when you use it? How can you change how your save is rolled if the spell affecting you is concluded? The same kind of logic applies to things like Featherfall and Wings of Cover.

[Downysole]

An immediate action can be used even when its not your turn but when exactly can you use it?
For example can you use an immediate action after someone has fired and arrow at you but before it reaches you? What about using the immediate action when the arrow is half way to you or 10 feet from you or after it pierces your cloths but before it injures you??

Another example. Can you use an immediate action after someone has casted a fireball spell? What about using the immediate action after you see the center of the fireball explosion but before the fire reaches you (Assuming you are within the fireball radius)??

My DM has ruled that you can use the immediate action any time you want but within the "action steps" of the game (that's what he called them). He explained that "action steps" are the standard and move actions. So I can use my immediate action before or after the ranger attacks me with his bow but not in-between his attack. Same for spells, before or after the enemy wizard casts the fireball but not in-between.

Is he right?

I'm guessing you have Lesser Celerity and you're trying to escape the bad associated with attacks and blast radii. Makes sense to me! RAW indicates that an immediate action can be taken at any time. Your DM is saying that "time" is action-based and that an action is equivalent to a unit of time that can't be split. I would be on your side in this case, since there's nothing in the rules that goes along with his interpretation.

I would offer up the case of the readied action as an example of how to counter his argument. You can ready a standard action to be contingent on any act. One example of this is you readying a sunder attack against an opponent's weapon if he decides to attack you. That's in mid-action (since indicating your opponent and dictating how much power attack is being used, where defending bonuses are being applied, etc. is the start of the action) and you're cutting in this supposedly indivisible measure of time with your readied action.

This would prove to your DM that time is divisible into more than just actions.

From there, you have to convince the DM that you are able to sense a spell being launched, as through the Spellcraft skill, or through the spot skill to see the tiny bead of burning headed towards you. Otherwise your DM could insist that you weren't capable of knowing that it was time for you to use your immediate action until you were already being affected by it.

That's how I would argue it with my DM at any rate. Let me know how it goes!

[mattie_p]

Attacks of opportunity are "like" immediate actions in that respect as well, except they don't use up your next swift action.

An attack of opportunity takes place after the action is started (say, casting a spell or standing from prone) but before it is completed.

Immediate actions should be used the same way. Since WoTC did both 3.5 and M:tG, consider immediate actions to be "interrupts." They can and should interrupt whatever is going on.

[The Redwolf]

So, I just want to ask this in a thread that's relevant, what exactly are the limits on immediate actions, or are there any?

[Ydaer Ca Noit]

Can I ready an action,
"I move 30ft to the left, when the sorcerer has almost cast his scorching ray, just after he aims, but before the ray hits/misses"

then the sorcerer will miss no matter what.

(?)

[shaga]

I would offer up the case of the readied action as an example of how to counter his argument. You can ready a standard action to be contingent on any act.

Actually the ready action mechanic is one of the DMs arguments. The ready action is resolved BEFORE the action that triggered your ready action and afterwards it says that if the creature that triggered your ready action is capable, it continues its turn. The DM assumes the immediate action works the same way :smallfrown:

[Greyfeld85]

Can I ready an action,
"I move 30ft to the left, when the sorcerer has almost cast his scorching ray, just after he aims, but before the ray hits/misses"

then the sorcerer will miss no matter what.

(?)

I'm not sure, because as far as I know, movement never forces an attack to miss. But even if you could, you'd still be using a full-round action every round to dodge the attack, which means you won't actually be doing anything either.

[Downysole]

Can I ready an action,
"I move 30ft to the left, when the sorcerer has almost cast his scorching ray, just after he aims, but before the ray hits/misses"

then the sorcerer will miss no matter what.

(?)

no

"Aiming" doesn't exist by RAW. As a DM, I would consider that to be part of the to-hit roll. If you're asking in terms of rules "Can I ready an action to move 30 feet between him rolling and finding out the results of the roll?" I would say yes, by RAW.

[Greyfeld85]

no

"Aiming" doesn't exist by RAW. As a DM, I would consider that to be part of the to-hit roll. If you're asking in terms of rules "Can I ready an action to move 30 feet between him rolling and finding out the results of the roll?" I would say yes, by RAW.

Now, you could ready an action to move behind cover to prevent the spell from being used against you. But one has to wonder why you didn't just do that as a move action on your own turn instead of burning a full-round action to ready it lol.

[Deophaun]

Actually the ready action mechanic is one of the DMs arguments. The ready action is resolved BEFORE the action that triggered your ready action and afterwards it says that if the creature that triggered your ready action is capable, it continues its turn. The DM assumes the immediate action works the same way :smallfrown:
But an immediate action is not like a readied action. An immediate action is like a swift action which is like a free action, and free actions can be taken at any time, even in the middle of another action (PHB 139). It has to be this way or, as others have pointed out, most immediate actions would be completely useless.

[GeekGirl]

Immediate actions should be used the same way. Since WoTC did both 3.5 and M:tG, consider immediate actions to be "interrupts." They can and should interrupt whatever is going on.

This is how my group does it, also for ready actions. All of us play a lot of M:TG so it just makes things easier. Possible for the same reason, ready actions need to worded very specifically.

[ericgrau]

Even in MtG an interrupt can't be done halfway through a spell. Only right before it is cast (or right before an action is declared).

Moving out of the way of a ray or arrow is basically dodging. That's not right for an immediate IMO. But moving to cover and/or dropping prone right before it is launched is fine IMO.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Can I ready an action,
"I move 30ft to the left, when the sorcerer has almost cast his scorching ray, just after he aims, but before the ray hits/misses"

then the sorcerer will miss no matter what.

(?)

Facing rules apply here--specifically, that there aren't any. You can safely assume that the sorcerer is targeting you as you move.

Here's one for you, though:

You're 5th-level Wizard with enough ranks in Spellcraft to identify that the spell being cast by the 8th-level Sorcerer is a Scorching Ray. You are standing 30 feet away with a readied action with a trigger condition of "the Sorcerer begins casting a spell" (presumably to dispel or counterspell). Can you, use this readied action to move 30 feet in the opposite direction (to a total of 60 feet), out of the range of the Sorcerer's spell, frustrating their actions at casting Scorching Ray at you?

[Ernir]

Actually the ready action mechanic is one of the DMs arguments. The ready action is resolved BEFORE the action that triggered your ready action and afterwards it says that if the creature that triggered your ready action is capable, it continues its turn. The DM assumes the immediate action works the same way :smallfrown:

They do. This is explained in the Miniatures Handbook.


Immediate: (Spell/Ability Keyword and Action Type) A type of swift action (see that entry, below) that a creature may trigger instantly at any time, even when it is not its turn. This action may interrupt other actions, taking effect just before they do. The last immediate action declared takes place first.


You're 5th-level Wizard with enough ranks in Spellcraft to identify that the spell being cast by the 8th-level Sorcerer is a Scorching Ray. You are standing 30 feet away with a readied action with a trigger condition of "the Sorcerer begins casting a spell" (presumably to dispel or counterspell). Can you, use this readied action to move 30 feet in the opposite direction (to a total of 60 feet), out of the range of the Sorcerer's spell, frustrating their actions at casting Scorching Ray at you?
Yes, this would interrupt.

Moving 30' to some other location within spell range wouldn't interrupt.

EDIT: A problem with your description of events is that you do, of course, have to specify the action you will be taking when you ready. You can not just "ready an action".

[Lonely Tylenol]

Yes, this would interrupt.

Moving 30' to some other location within spell range wouldn't interrupt.

EDIT: A problem with your description of events is that you do, of course, have to specify the action you will be taking when you ready. You can not just "ready an action".

Of course; I worded that poorly. I was assuming that either the same "I move" action was being prepared as that which Ydaer had originally described, or that this would act as a stand-in for Lesser Celerity (granting you the move action). Just trying to help establish when, and how, you can interrupt an action (when your readied or immediate action causes the conditions of the spell to no longer be met, such as when you are within range upon being targeted, and your readied or immediate action moves you out of range).

[Baalthazaq]

Can I ready an action,
"I move 30ft to the left, when the sorcerer has almost cast his scorching ray, just after he aims, but before the ray hits/misses"

then the sorcerer will miss no matter what.

(?)

I don't see why. You're not doing a thing that genuinely helps you.

You're assuming your movement is instantaneous ("I'm 30 ft away!"), and the scorching ray isn't ("It's on its way")? "Aiming" isn't really a separate thing anyway, and technically he's targeting you, not your square.

I'd totally give you "When he starts casting, I move behind the wall". You end LoS, you interrupt the effect.

Similarly, I'd allow it to avoid a fireball. You leave the AoE. The AoE targets an area. You move out of the area.

I'd allow it in darkness, or with a blind wizard. He's aiming at your square, not you.

Especially with scorching ray, I'd rule it hits otherwise. It's a continuous beam, not an arrow. It's not aimed "at your square", it's aimed at you. You've acted in response to a threat, but that act hasn't aided you, like "I juggle in order to distract his aim".

Its... not all about mechanics. There's common sense too. You can hit a moving target. Ergo "I move" doesn't make you immune to hits unless it says it somewhere in the rules. The rules don't say it.

[Downysole]

They do. This is explained in the Miniatures Handbook.




Yes, this would interrupt.

Moving 30' to some other location within spell range wouldn't interrupt.

EDIT: A problem with your description of events is that you do, of course, have to specify the action you will be taking when you ready. You can not just "ready an action".

So, while an immediate action that went off based on the "sorcerer casting a spell" action would allow you to get out of range, would that prevent the sorcerer from redirecting said spell to hit someone else once you used your immediate action to get out of range?

Or are you capable of readying or doing an immediate action based on the "sorcerer seeming to target me with a spell" action? In this case, you would expect the sorcerer to miss with the scorching ray.

[Lonely Tylenol]

So, while an immediate action that went off based on the "sorcerer casting a spell" action would allow you to get out of range, would that prevent the sorcerer from redirecting said spell to hit someone else once you used your immediate action to get out of range?

Or are you capable of readying or doing an immediate action based on the "sorcerer seeming to target me with a spell" action? In this case, you would expect the sorcerer to miss with the scorching ray.

Yeah, this is pretty much what I was getting at. If you're a Conjurer with Abrupt Jaunt, sitting at the effective end of the Sorcerer's casting range, going "neener neener, you can't hit me", and he tries to hit you with his Scorching Ray, using Abrupt Jaunt to teleport just out of range of the spell would cause the spell to fizzle right in front of you.

Incidentally, this might make for an interesting duel with a 5th-level Conjurer who casts Bands of Steel and is Chaotic Jerkwad.

[NichG]

I'd say there should be an indivisible unit of time for actions just to help resolve weird things and corner cases. I don't agree that its necessarily a full 'chunk' action like a move or a standard. For instance, lets say someone is making a full attack. It seems mechanically reasonable to do something in reaction to his second attack specifically.

I'd chunk things up the following way: An immediate and/or readied action must be taken at a point where the game state could be taken to be static without creating a new mechanical ambiguity. The key thing to imagine here is someone casting timestop as a readied action. Everyone should be in a mechanically meaningful static state when this happens.

So if you're using a grid, you shouldn't be able to do it between someone being in one grid cell and the next (creates a mechanically ambiguous situation). You shouldn't be able to do it when an arrow is in flight, since attack rolls resolve instantly (You're creating a new state which is ill-defined. There are no rules for how fast an arrow is versus a scorching ray). But you should be able to do it during someone's move action at any 5ft interval you like (but not say 'between when someone disappears and reappears while they're teleporting').

So my take on this would be, if you want to dodge an archer's shot with an immediate action you need to move such that you have cover, since there is no state between deciding to attack you and having finished attacking you. That 'time' doesn't exist in the game rules.

The in-character explanation could simply be, anything that isn't quasi-static like this happens too fast to perceive and react to without some sort of specific power or ability. A DM who's willing to figure out the ambiguous states could relax this in specific cases by requiring e.g. a Reflex save in order to react in time, but that starts getting into new territory.

[Glimbur]

So, I just want to ask this in a thread that's relevant, what exactly are the limits on immediate actions, or are there any?

You cannot take an immediate action when you are flatfooted. (Spells like Nerveskitter which you use before initiative have special exceptions.) An immediate action uses up your next turn's swift action. You may only use one immediate action per turn. Then there's what you can interrupt with an immediate, which the thread in general is discussing.

[Mushroom Ninja]

Even in MtG an interrupt can't be done halfway through a spell. Only right before it is cast (or right before an action is declared).


Well in MtG you can also use instant-speed things in response to actions, which is sort of like halfway-through since the action has already been declared. Personally, I run immediate/readied actions just like the stack for simplicity's sake.

[Xiander]

On a related note; Could I ready an action to step out of an opponents reach as soon as he attempts to attack me in melee? Would this null his attacks?

[Gotterdammerung]

An immediate action is very similar to an instant in magic the gathering. It can be used at any time, and it can be used in response to an action. If used in response to something, the immediate action resolves first.

An immediate action can even counter another immediate action, in which case you have something very similar to magic the gatherings "stack".

I personally, do not believe you can split up the action with an immediate action, unless the ability in question is specifically designed to do so. For instance, I believe you can counter once a spell or attack is announced, but I do not believe you can just wait and see if you pass your save or if the attack misses before you commit to countering the offensive action (unless the immediate action is designed to be a counter and has text detailing its new parameters).

Some abilities are designed to counter. They will usually specify the parameters of their ability, such as, "after you have been hit but before damage is rolled". I believe these specific instructions would not be there and would not be needed if all immediate actions could trigger after a successful attack roll, or after damage has been rolled, or whatever special parameters the counters might have.

So the long and the short of it. Your DM is mostly right, as far as I am concerned. You have to work within the action rules of the game when using immediate actions, unless the immediate action in question has special rules that allow it to respond at more specific times. You do not need to specify directly before the attack or directly after the attack. If you use the immediate action before the spell then you never even knew the spell was going to happen. If you use the immediate action after a spell has been declared as cast, then the immediate action cuts the spell in line and resolves first, directly before the spell was cast. If you wait til after the spell has resolved, the spell is done and your immediate action won't counter anything.


P.S. This is kinda a hot button issue. Immediate actions have very little specific rules printed about their parameters . So there is a lot of grey area. This produces several "camps" of rule interpretations, with no one camp being definitively correct.

Several very strong action economy builds heavily rely on a loose cuff interpretation of immediate action parameters. And the players that hold those builds dear, are loathe to give even a modicum of sway over public opinion to the opposition.

Interpretation- I can use them whenever and wherever I want to stop anything and everything, muhauahuahahaahahah!!!!! THE POWER!!! MUAHAHUAHAAHA!!!!!!!!

Yet another group of players and GMs are sick of spellcasters whomping their campaigns and want to impose the strictest possible reality, regarding immediate actions.

Interpretation- You can use them once a standard, move, or full round action has been declared. They resolve before the action they interrupted.

And for another group, it is simply an unbiased look at what the designers intended. For this group, unexplained grey areas of rules must be filled in with logical balanced rules that integrate seamlessly into the existing game mechanics.

Interpretation- You can use them in the dead space in between actions (such as between turns), as well as in response to any standard action, move action, swift action, immediate action, full round action and in response to individual attacks. The immediate action resolves before the action it interrupted. You must declare your intent to interrupt the action directly after the original action is declared (unless the immediate action ability specifically declares different parameters). If you wave this opportunity to interrupt the action, you can not wait til later in the action and try to interrupt again (unless the immediate action specifically declares different parameters).

I am in this last camp, and I feel your GM probably is as well.

[ericgrau]

Well in MtG you can also use instant-speed things in response to actions, which is sort of like halfway-through since the action has already been declared. Personally, I run immediate/readied actions just like the stack for simplicity's sake.

After it's declared but before it resolves. It would be impossible to interrupt at all otherwise. You can't interrupt halfway through the resolution.

It makes sense to me not just from MtG but by common sense. You can only react so precisely without lightning quick reflexes, and that means an attack roll against your touch AC or reflex save which doesn't change anything. Basically that's what it would come down to: how fast are you wanting to respond. If you're saying the moment he pulls back the bowstring and looks like he's going to release it then fine. If you want to start and complete an entire action after the arrow leaves the bow but before it finishes its 0.2 second flight then give me a break.

[Gotterdammerung]

After it's declared but before it resolves. It would be impossible to interrupt at all otherwise. You can't interrupt halfway through the resolution.

Yep. I was just about to say that.

Also, I kinda got ninja'd on the whole MTG comparison too, lol. I was writing a long detailed post though so what can ya do.

Sincerely,
-Slow Poke-

[Asheram]

MTG Reference An immediate action is very similar to an instant in magic the gathering. It can be used at any time, and it can be used in response to an action. If used in response to something, the immediate action resolves first.

An immediate action can even counter another immediate action, in which case you have something very similar to magic the gatherings "stack".

I personally, do not believe you can split up the action with an immediate action, unless the ability in question is specifically designed to do so. For instance, I believe you can counter once a spell or attack is announced, but I do not believe you can just wait and see if you pass your save or if the attack misses before you commit to countering the offensive action (unless the immediate action is designed to be a counter and has text detailing its new parameters).

Some abilities are designed to counter. They will usually specify the parameters of their ability, such as, "after you have been hit but before damage is rolled". I believe these specific instructions would not be there and would not be needed if all immediate actions could trigger after a successful attack roll, or after damage has been rolled, or whatever special parameters the counters might have.

So the long and the short of it. Your DM is mostly right, as far as I am concerned. You have to work within the action rules of the game when using immediate actions, unless the immediate action in question has special rules that allow it to respond at more specific times. You do not need to specify directly before the attack or directly after the attack. If you use the immediate action before the spell then you never even knew the spell was going to happen. If you use the immediate action after a spell has been declared as cast, then the immediate action cuts the spell in line and resolves first, directly before the spell was cast. If you wait til after the spell has resolved, the spell is done and your immediate action won't counter anything.


P.S. This is kinda a hot button issue. Immediate actions have very little specific rules printed about their parameters . So there is a lot of grey area. This produces several "camps" of rule interpretations, with no one camp being definitively correct.

Several very strong action economy builds heavily rely on a loose cuff interpretation of immediate action parameters. And the players that hold those builds dear, are loathe to give even a modicum of sway over public opinion to the opposition.

Interpretation- I can use them whenever and wherever I want to stop anything and everything, muhauahuahahaahahah!!!!! THE POWER!!! MUAHAHUAHAAHA!!!!!!!!

Yet another group of players and GMs are sick of spellcasters whomping their campaigns and want to impose the strictest possible reality, regarding immediate actions.

Interpretation- You can use them once a standard, move, or full round action has been declared. They resolve before the action they interrupted.

And for another group, it is simply an unbiased look at what the designers intended. For this group, unexplained grey areas of rules must be filled in with logical balanced rules that integrate seamlessly into the existing game mechanics.

Interpretation- You can use them in the dead space in between actions (such as between turns), as well as in response to any standard action, move action, swift action, immediate action, full round action and in response to individual attacks. The immediate action resolves before the action it interrupted. You must declare your intent to interrupt the action directly after the original action is declared (unless the immediate action ability specifically declares different parameters). If you wave this opportunity to interrupt the action, you can not wait til later in the action and try to interrupt again (unless the immediate action specifically declares different parameters.

I am in this last camp, and I feel your GM probably is as well.

Surprisingly enough this is just about what I was going to reference when I saw this.

But in practice, I'd say that every opportunity in which you could use some form of dexterity based action (initiative, reflex save) or as response to a visible action before the result of that action is known, you should be able to use an immediate action.

(For use in practice, I'd suggest that you discuss this with the GM so that he doesn't get ahead of himself. This might slow down play though.)

Edit.
Damn lot of ninjas in here :smallbiggrin:

[Baalthazaq]

So I can use my immediate action before or after the ranger attacks me with his bow but not in-between his attack. Same for spells, before or after the enemy wizard casts the fireball but not in-between.

Is he right?

You haven't given enough information. Define "before". Before it's declared? Then no.

Can you interrupt the spell?
No? That's not how immediate actions work. He's wrong. There's no debate.
Yes? Then yeah, he's essentially right.

[Gotterdammerung]

Surprisingly enough this is just about what I was going to reference when I saw this.

But in practice, I'd say that every opportunity in which you could use some form of dexterity based action (initiative, reflex save) or as response to a visible action before the result of that action is known, you should be able to use an immediate action.

(For use in practice, I'd suggest that you discuss this with the GM so that he doesn't get ahead of himself. This might slow down play though.)

Edit.
Damn lot of ninjas in here :smallbiggrin:

Yeh, but that just means a lot of people are agreeing, so it isn't a bad thing.


But in practice, I'd say that every opportunity in which you could use some form of dexterity based action (initiative, reflex save) or as response to a visible action before the result of that action is known, you should be able to use an immediate action.

While this makes for an interesting house rule, I think, even with the small amount of printed rules, we can rule it out as "the way it works by RAW".


Edit: Also, I predict this is going to be one of those threads that is effectively answered on page 1, but continues on to around page 30 anyway :smallamused:.

[Asheram]

While this makes for an interesting house rule, I think, even with the small amount of printed rules, we can rule it out as "the way it works by RAW".


:smallbiggrin: Yeah, I suppose. Still believe that it ought to work like that though. :smallwink:

[Ziegander]

No one here is addressing the OP's question in any rules-relevant way. Let's define some action types, as per the Rules Compendium, to clear this up:

Free Action
Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. Their impact is so minor that they’re considered free. You can perform one or more free actions during your turn. However, the DM can put reasonable limits on what you can really do for free.

Swift Action
A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but it represents a larger expenditure of effort than a free action. You can take a swift action any time during your turn, but you can perform only one swift action per turn.

Immediate Action
An immediate action consumes a tiny amount of time. However, unlike a swift action, an immediate action can be performed at any time during a round, even when it isn’t your turn. Using an immediate action on your turn counts as your swift action for that turn. If you use an immediate action
when it isn’t your turn, you can’t use another immediate action or a swift action until after your next turn. You can’t use an immediate action when you’re fl at-footed.

So there you go. There are the differences between Free Actions, Swift Actions, and Immediate Actions. Swift and Immediate Actions are not called out by the rules as being "like Free Actions, but [...]," and as a matter of fact, Free Actions, unlike Immediate Actions, can only be used during one's own turn. For example, a Warblade with the Moment of Perfect Clarify maneuver and the Quick Draw feat can, on another creature's turn, correct a Reflex save as an immediate action, using the result of a Concentration check instead, but he cannot draw a weapon.

Swift and Immediate Actions are not called out by the rules as being "like Readied Actions" either. Instead, they are given the rules definitions of being available at any time, either "during your turn," for swift actions, or, "during a round, even if it isn't your turn."

Now, the Rules Compendium states that Swift and Immediate Actions can be taken at any time during their respective "time" intervals. Interestingly, it doesn't specify whether Free Actions can be taken "at any time" or whether there is a time and a place for Free Actions to be taken. Luckily, most free actions specify when they might be used, or if they are used as a part of another action. Any time seems, to me anyway, to mean: Any. Time.

But, I will concede that the rules are a bit unclear as regards the ultimate definition of these actions. Let's look at some Tome of Battle maneuvers to see if we can clear the cobwebs, shall we?

In Devoted Spirit, the Shield Block maneuver, is a counter, which is initiated using an Immediate Action. In the text it states, and I quote, "You can initiate this maneuver after an opponent makes his attack roll, but you must do so before you know whether the attack was a success or failure."

But, not precisely the same, the higher level Shield Counter maneuver, a counter, and therefore Immediate Action, states, "You can use this maneuver immediately after an opponent declares an attack, but you must do so before the attack's result has been determined."

By RAW, you may use Shield Block after you have seen the d20 roll of the enemy, but your usage of Shield Counter is more or less limited, only based on the DM's interpretation. Certainly, after seeing the d20 roll, but before knowing, precisely, whether the attack has hit equates to "before the attack's result has been determined," but perhaps the DM doesn't see it that way. What is the "attack's result," for example? Maybe you can use Shield Counter after knowing that attack has hit but before damage has been rolled? That's up to the DM to determine.

For another example, the Iron Heart maneuver, Manticore Parry, another counter, another Immediate Action, states, "You must decide whether to initiate this maneuver after the enemy attacks, but before you know whether or not the attack you are attempting to deflect actually hits. If the attack misses, you can still attempt to deflect it."

So, we have three different examples of powers/effects that require an Immediate Action to use, and in each of these examples, the power/effect has its own rules, specific to that individual power/effect, defining exactly when and how it may be used. In the absence of such precise measurements, you must default to the Rules Compendium definition of the Immediate Actions, which states that they may be taken at any time during a round. Any time means any time. Any time.

[Ziegander]

If you want to start and complete an entire action after the arrow leaves the bow but before it finishes its 0.2 second flight then give me a break.

Also, guess what, some immediate actions, check the ones I quoted, are specifically designed to be used in exactly that point between the arrow leaving the bow and before it finishes its flight. Humans can and do react in time intervals faster than 0.2 seconds.

[ericgrau]

Some, but not most. It would certainly be impossible to act so fast on a readied action, such as a readied move action. With a wide variety of immediate action spells if you tried to add the bonus after your roll rather than before it you'd rightly be accused of cheating unless the spell says specifically that you may do so.

Even abilities that do go against the general convention and allow something after a roll tend to be a bit meta and hard to explain in real world terms. Take the fluff on Pathfinder's gallant inspiration (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/g/gallant-inspiration). The inspiring word you utter insures success... except you utter it after a failure and it applies retroactivally. Huh?? At least put some time travel in the fluff.

ToB is much, much nicer because you don't know if it's a success or failure yet. It's effectively the same as declaring it before the attack roll yet without the disruption in gameplay that would require. That stops players from needing to say "Hey, don't roll that yet!" You do get to know the target before the action, but success of the maneuver isn't 100% certain as you'd expect against a foe who isn't helpless. Unlike other potential (ab)uses for immediates brought up in this thread where the player is trying to automatically counter some action without any kind of roll. Even though really the attacker should be able to still do something just like he could against anyone trying to dodge him by mundane means.

[Baalthazaq]

at any time during a round. Any time means any time. Any time.

Fair point, well argued but missing a key detail: So what?

I roll to hit. I hit.
You use your immediate action to move 5ft.

What rule where says I now miss?
It's not even incongruous. In real life you anticipate movement in both shooting, or penalty shootouts in football. Movement is assumed to be occurring anyway.

If you want to rules lawyer in one direction (time is meaningless to my movement phase), you need to rules lawyer the other direction too (time is meaningless to arrow flight. It's instantaneous).

So where's this 0.2 second arrow flight coming from? It takes the same amount of time for my Cragtop Archer to fire an arrow 5ft as it does for my Cragtop Archer to fire >4000ft.

[shaga]

I'd say there should be an indivisible unit of time for actions just to help resolve weird things and corner cases. I don't agree that its necessarily a full 'chunk' action like a move or a standard. For instance, lets say someone is making a full attack. It seems mechanically reasonable to do something in reaction to his second attack specifically.

I'd chunk things up the following way: An immediate and/or readied action must be taken at a point where the game state could be taken to be static without creating a new mechanical ambiguity. The key thing to imagine here is someone casting timestop as a readied action. Everyone should be in a mechanically meaningful static state when this happens.

So if you're using a grid, you shouldn't be able to do it between someone being in one grid cell and the next (creates a mechanically ambiguous situation). You shouldn't be able to do it when an arrow is in flight, since attack rolls resolve instantly (You're creating a new state which is ill-defined. There are no rules for how fast an arrow is versus a scorching ray). But you should be able to do it during someone's move action at any 5ft interval you like (but not say 'between when someone disappears and reappears while they're teleporting').

So my take on this would be, if you want to dodge an archer's shot with an immediate action you need to move such that you have cover, since there is no state between deciding to attack you and having finished attacking you. That 'time' doesn't exist in the game rules.

The in-character explanation could simply be, anything that isn't quasi-static like this happens too fast to perceive and react to without some sort of specific power or ability. A DM who's willing to figure out the ambiguous states could relax this in specific cases by requiring e.g. a Reflex save in order to react in time, but that starts getting into new territory.

I think that's what my DM is trying to pass but I don't think it is supported by RAW. If it says you can use an immediate action "any time" it means any time and if you want to use it while an arrow is mid flight I don't see anything saying you can not.

[Ziegander]

Fair point, well argued but missing a key detail: So what?

I roll to hit. I hit.
You use your immediate action to move 5ft.

What rule where says I now miss?

When did I say that using an immediate action for an ability that foils attacks after you have already been hit by an attack should foil an attack that has already hit you?

I didn't.

I said that immediate actions, unless specified otherwise, can be used at any time, which agrees with established, and quoted, rules.

[shaga]

I said that immediate actions, unless specified otherwise, can be used at any time, which agrees with established, and quoted, rules.

So one side says this and the other

Immediate actions can be used at any time but at a "mechanically meaningful static time" unless otherwise specified by the spell/power/feat/item/ability that is part of the immediate action.

[Gotterdammerung]

So one side says this and the other

Immediate actions can be used at any time but at a "mechanically meaningful static time" unless otherwise specified by the spell/power/feat/item/ability that is part of the immediate action.


Yes, that is the logical counter argument for "the other side". (and I agree with it.)

The rule does say Anytime. And it is easy to step outside the rules and define time with a real world definition. But in this case time is defined within the mechanics of combat. You can not wait until an attack roll is successful and damage is rolled and then decide to counter the result (unless the ability has specific text that allows you too) because there is no mechanically measurable time in between the declaration of the attack and the resolution of the attack.

[Ydaer Ca Noit]

Yes, that is the logical counter argument for "the other side". (and I agree with it.)

The rule does say Anytime. And it is easy to step outside the rules and define time with a real world definition. But in this case time is defined within the mechanics of combat. You can not wait until an attack roll is successful and damage is rolled and then decide to counter the result (unless the ability has specific text that allows you too) because there is no mechanically measurable time in between the declaration of the attack and the resolution of the attack.

For some reason you tie the attack roll with the damage dealing. I agree you can't interrupt after you know that the attack hits, but what if you want to interrupt after you are sure the opponent is going to hit you, but before you know if he will miss or hit?

[Gotterdammerung]

For some reason you tie the attack roll with the damage dealing. I agree you can't interrupt after you know that the attack hits, but what if you want to interrupt after you are sure the opponent is going to hit you, but before you know if he will miss or hit?

Do you mean after you are sure the opponent is going to target you with the attack, but before you know the result of his attack roll?

If that is what you mean, then yes you can interrupt once he declares his intent to attack you.

[Ziegander]

So one side says this and the other:

Immediate actions can be used at any time but at a "mechanically meaningful static time" unless otherwise specified by the spell/power/feat/item/ability that is part of the immediate action.

The rules support what I said. No rules support this , "but at a 'mechanically meaningful static time'" thing that people are pulling from thin air.


You can not wait until an attack roll is successful and damage is rolled and then decide to counter the result (unless the ability has specific text that allows you too) because there is no mechanically measurable time in between the declaration of the attack and the resolution of the attack.

Honestly, that depends entirely on the immediate action in question (though you mention that in passing).

The ruling must be that if an immediate action doesn't give specific rules for exactly when it must be used, then you default to the general rule. That's how all rules in D&D work. And the default rule is that you can use an immediate action at any time.

IMPORTANT NOTE: The ability to use an immediate action at any time does not necessarily mean the capacity to counter attacks with said immediate actions that can be used at any time (including during an attack).

For example, if you use the spell Celerity after an attack hits you, then you are hit by the attack and suffer all of the consequences for being hit, even if you use the granted action to teleport or move. You are, in this case, teleporting/moving after being hit. However, there is no reason for you to do this, because you may use it after knowing that you are being attacked, yet before knowing whether the attack hits or misses. If you move before the attack has resolved, and if you end your movement/teleportation somewhere that the attack could not possibly effect you, then you have effectively protected yourself against that attack. You can do this, because there is nothing in the description of the Lesser Celerity spell (or the higher level versions for that matter) that says that you are restricted when using the spell, and because an immediate action, as outlined by the basic rules defining immediate actions, can be used at any time.

It's pretty simple. Specific trumps general. If nothing specific in the rules states that your use of any given immediate action is limited, then you may use it at any time, because that is the general rule which is not being trumped by anything.

[Gotterdammerung]

The rules support what I said. No rules support this , "but at a 'mechanically meaningful static time'" thing that people are pulling from thin air.

When someone asks you "how much time does it take to cast fireball?" You do not answer with an actual number. You could try to if you wanted but you wouldn't be unequivocally right. The closest equivalency to time that we have within the combat rules is one round is roughly equal to 6 seconds... roughly. So when a rule pertaining to combat says "anytime" it means anytime within the confines of the mechanics of combat. It can not mean anything else, for there is no way to measure specific time in combat. If you say I want to use my immediate action after the arrow has penetrated the skin of my leather jacket but before it penetrates my skin, you have asked the GM to allow you to act outside the parameters of the game. Because flavor text has no place in game mechanics. As far as technical combat is concerned, the moment you described does NOT EXIST. This is what the term "mechanically meaningful time" refers too, it is not "pulled out of the air".



Honestly, that depends entirely on the immediate action in question (though you mention that in passing).

I didn't "mention it in passing". It has been a fundamental disclaimer in all of my posts so far. Besides, we aren't arguing about how the specific immediate actions work. They very clearly work a certain way.

We ARE arguing about the general rules for immediate actions.


The ruling must be that if an immediate action doesn't give specific rules for exactly when it must be used, then you default to the general rule. That's how all rules in D&D work. And the default rule is that you can use an immediate action at any time.

It's pretty simple. Specific trumps general. If nothing specific in the rules states that your use of any given immediate action is limited, then you may use it at any time, because that is the general rule which is not being trumped by anything.

Again, we are not arguing specific rules in order to define general rules. So the specific to general argument does not work here.

What is happening is, you think the general rule means one thing, and we think it means a different thing.



IMPORTANT NOTE: The ability to use an immediate action at any time does not necessarily mean the capacity to counter attacks with said immediate actions that can be used at any time (including during an attack).

No one is arguing this. In fact, I said the same thing in my first post.


For example, if you use the spell Celerity after an attack hits you, then you are hit by the attack and suffer all of the consequences for being hit, even if you use the granted action to teleport or move. You are, in this case, teleporting/moving after being hit.

Again, no one arguing with you here. If you wait until after the attack is completely resolved, then the attack had nothing to do with the immediate action and therefore this scenario is pointless. Since it is pointless, it didn't need to be brought up, and it hasn't furthered anyone's understanding.


However, there is no reason for you to do this, because you may use it after knowing that you are being attacked, yet before knowing whether the attack hits or misses. If you move before the attack has resolved, and if you end your movement/teleportation somewhere that the attack could not possibly effect you, then you have effectively protected yourself against that attack.[/I]

Yes you are right about this situation. You can teleport out of range of an attack after it has been declared but before it has been resolved. Again, no one arguing with you here.

But what you can't do is wait til that attack physically hits you for sure, and then decide to declare your intent to cast an immediate action to teleport before the attack hits.

These are the kinds of scenario's we are arguing about.

Even though "the exact moment the sword broke the skin of my arm" is technically "a moment in time" and therefore defined by the word "anytime", as far as a real world definition is concerned, it is still not a viable for you to use your immediate action teleport the moment the sword breaks the skin. Because the word "anytime" is not referring to a flavor text concept of time, but a battle mechanics concept of time and "the moment the sword cuts my skin" is not a recognized time period as far as battle mechanics is concerned.

DISCLAIMER: unless a specific rule for an immediate action says otherwise.

[NichG]

I think that's what my DM is trying to pass but I don't think it is supported by RAW. If it says you can use an immediate action "any time" it means any time and if you want to use it while an arrow is mid flight I don't see anything saying you can not.

My argument is that RAW doesn't recognize any time existing between actions. It doesn't say 'an arrow leaves the bow, travels through the air, first hits the target's outer armor, then pierces the target'. Or to put it in a more severe way: there are no times except those demarked by mechanical borders. 'Any time' still requires that a given time exist. Basically, the arrow is never 'in flight' by RAW.

[Kelb_Panthera]

On a related note; Could I ready an action to step out of an opponents reach as soon as he attempts to attack me in melee? Would this null his attacks?

Depends on how far you move and whether he's used his 5ft step or moved this round, i.e. if you ready your action to "move 10ft back when X swings his weapon at me," and X has already moved this round, then yes he misses you. He does, however, get an AoO because you've moved out of his threatened space.

If it's the first attack in a full attack, and he's capable of a 10ft step or you said 5ft instead of 10, he'll be able to simply move up and continue his full attack after getting his AoO.

If you only ready an action to "move away when X tries to hit me with his weapon," your DM may demand a specific distance, because he feels that "move away" is to vague. I certainly would.

In any case, if X hasn't used his move action, he'll be able to follow you when you move. Though he'll have to wait until his next turn to attack again, and you've already used up your actions without harming him. All in all, it can work, but it's not the most tactically sound plan.

[Gotterdammerung]

My argument is that RAW doesn't recognize any time existing between actions. It doesn't say 'an arrow leaves the bow, travels through the air, first hits the target's outer armor, then pierces the target'. Or to put it in a more severe way: there are no times except those demarked by mechanical borders. 'Any time' still requires that a given time exist. Basically, the arrow is never 'in flight' by RAW.


Agreed. That is my argument as well. Pretty much a shorter version of what I just said in the TL;DR post right before yours.

I like the cut of your jib.

[Ziegander]

Yeah, using Celerity to move out of the way of a sword, "the moment it breaks your skin," is mechanically synonymous to using Celerity to move out of the way before you know if it's going to hit you or not. Hell, getting "hit" by a sword doesn't even necessitate having it pierce your skin at all given the nature of D&D hit points.

So, I'm pretty sure we're all in agreement here.

I'd just like to know exactly what the OP started this conversation about? Have we helped to clear anything up? Giving a more specific definition of his situation might allow us to be more clear.

[shaga]

I'd just like to know exactly what the OP started this conversation about? Have we helped to clear anything up? Giving a more specific definition of his situation might allow us to be more clear.

My DM and I had an argument on how I can use my immediate actions, that's why I started this thread. It was more specific to a cloak from drow of the underdark that lets you teleport 10 ft as an immediate action but I wanted to know in general about immediate actions.
Your answers cleared a lot for me and my DM. We have decided to resolve immediate action within the time units of the combat mechanic, unless the item/spell/whatever says otherwise.

Thank you all for your replies.

[Baalthazaq]

When did I say that using an immediate action for an ability that foils attacks after you have already been hit by an attack should foil an attack that has already hit you?

I didn't.

Where did I say you said that? (Oooh, this game is fun!)


some immediate actions, check the ones I quoted, are specifically designed to be used in exactly that point between the arrow leaving the bow and before it finishes its flight. Humans can and do react in time intervals faster than 0.2 seconds.

As I said (and I really don't want to just repeat my whole last post...), so what? ANY time. Any time. Any time. However you emphasize it, most times in D&D are meaningless.

There is no 0.2 second flight. There is no time between actions. Is the arrow in flight before the roll? After the result?

You can say you're using your immediate action "when the elf's elbow is bending". Go for it. Irrespective of what you say your action is going to occur at some real point in D&D stages otherwise it is meaningless without houseruling what that does.

There are no rules for interrupting elbow bending.

If you invent a time (arrow flight), and insert your action there, you are inventing rules. There is no arrow flight. So it is not RAW any more than trying to do it during "hammer-time", or "overwatch" or "the discard phase". It needs to be a time which exists in D&D, which is discrete, not analog.

You might as well start saying "I cast my immediate spell 3 rounds before the event that triggered it". Remember... any time, means any time.

[Deophaun]

You can say "I teleport away when his blade touches my skin." That's fine. You're still going to have either teleport before the attack roll, or after and take the damage because hitting means that the target has dealt damage. There's simply no interval between the attack roll and damage, no phase to check if the target is still there. The wording is always "you hit and deal damage." (A great example of why D&D's HP system is an amalgamation of health, morale, endurance, and luck, and not pure health).

This is true regardless of your view on time in D&D.

[Curmudgeon]

For example can you use an immediate action after someone has fired and arrow at you but before it reaches you? What about using the immediate action when the arrow is half way to you or 10 feet from you or after it pierces your cloths but before it injures you??
No, you can't do these things. With an immediate action you can interrupt and preempt any single action, but you can't normally split somebody else's action into pieces. There is no action between firing an arrow and it hitting/missing its target; that's only a game mechanic, and then only sometimes ─ if the DM/player doesn't roll their attack and damage dice at the same time. (There are some special abilities that specifically allow you to do something between an enemy's attack and damage rolls, but those are exceptions to the normal action rules.)

[Deophaun]

No, you can't do these things. With an immediate action you can interrupt and preempt any single action, but you can't normally split somebody else's action into pieces. There is no action between firing an arrow and it hitting/missing its target; that's only a game mechanic, and then only sometimes ─ if the DM/player doesn't roll their attack and damage dice at the same time. (There are some special abilities that specifically allow you to do something between an enemy's attack and damage rolls, but those are exceptions to the normal action rules.)
Immediate actions are not tied to other actions, but to time. Actions do not represent discrete units of time, either. In fact, a free action is said to "consume a very small amount of time." It cannot do that if the free action itself represents a discrete unit of time.

But, as I said earlier, there is no distance between the attack roll and damage. They occur simultaneously in game terms, regardless of what the DM is doing. If the attack hits, you get damage, unless your immediate action explicitly says otherwise (specific trumps general).

This is not to say that arrows fly to their target. It is reasonable per RAW to declare that arrows hit and deal damage the instant they leave the bow.

[shaga]

One last question. If we take the rule that unless the specific immediate action doesn't say it, you can only use the immediate action between "mechanically meaningful time". How would you understand the "third eye dampening" That item says: "You can activate a third eye dampening to reduce all variable numeric effects of the next power, psi-like ability, spell, or spell-like ability that affects you to the minimum value (if this power or spell would affect multiple creatures, only you are protected). This protection lasts until the end of your next turn. This ability functions once per day." [MiC page 141]

Can you use this item, after you rolled your save? Do you need to use it before you know you failed your save or after? Or do you have to use the item, after the spell is cast but before you even know if there is a save. What if the spell has an attack roll. Do you have to use the item before you know if the enemy caster succeeded on his attack roll? (and possible waist a charge if he misses) or can you wait after the attack roll and only use it if the spell hits you?

[Ydaer Ca Noit]

I find it strange, so many feats/abilities give the option to do an action, or to use an option, or a reroll, or something, after the attack is made and before the damage is dealt. So, it looks to me like the "after the attack, before the damage" option is already in the game. Why can't a player choose to use his immediate action then?

[NichG]

I find it strange, so many feats/abilities give the option to do an action, or to use an option, or a reroll, or something, after the attack is made and before the damage is dealt. So, it looks to me like the "after the attack, before the damage" option is already in the game. Why can't a player choose to use his immediate action then?

I don't think this is an inconsistent position to take. I think it'd be equally consistent to take these things as an example of exception-based design, where the ability to do that is being remarked upon in particular by these specific rules because it is not something that can normally be done, and so these rules are saying 'this thing can, for whatever special reason, do something above and beyond the normal case'.

[Ydaer Ca Noit]

I don't think this is an inconsistent position to take. I think it'd be equally consistent to take these things as an example of exception-based design, where the ability to do that is being remarked upon in particular by these specific rules because it is not something that can normally be done, and so these rules are saying 'this thing can, for whatever special reason, do something above and beyond the normal case'.

I think that they are not presented to show that the items works differently than the normal, but to explain how the item works.
Because otherwise in every case with an item that in its description it says "you can activate it as an immediate action before you know if the attack hit, but after you know the rolls result", there would be a huge question about how the item works.

Also, I can't accept them as exceptions, if there isn't a rule for it to be the exception of. The only rule so far is that it can interrupt "any" time I want it to. Am I reading this wrong?

Now, I understand that you tie the time the attack lands with the time you take the damage, because it would be unfair otherwise. But if I want to interrupt just before the arrow is thrown, but when it is too late to change a target, why shouldn't I? It happens just a moment before the arrow leaves.
^That is what I mean the attack is rolled, but the result is not known.

[shaga]

I think that they are not presented to show that the items works differently than the normal, but to explain how the item works.
Because otherwise in every case with an item that in its description it says "you can activate it as an immediate action before you know if the attack hit, but after you know the rolls result", there would be a huge question about how the item works.

Also, I can't accept them as exceptions, if there isn't a rule for it to be the exception of. The only rule so far is that it can interrupt "any" time I want it to. Am I reading this wrong?

Now, I understand that you tie the time the attack lands with the time you take the damage, because it would be unfair otherwise. But if I want to interrupt just before the arrow is thrown, but when it is too late to change a target, why shouldn't I? It happens just a moment before the arrow leaves.
^That is what I mean the attack is rolled, but the result is not known.

Their problem is the rules don't say, you roll range attack, the arrow leaves the bow, moves with a speed of xx feet per round and then hits its target. The rules say, you roll range attack and the arrow hits or misses. There is no in-between for you to act. You can act before the attack, after the attack but before the damage (if it has hit) and even after the damage, that's the options available by the rules.

[Baalthazaq]

I find it strange, so many feats/abilities give the option to do an action, or to use an option, or a reroll, or something, after the attack is made and before the damage is dealt. So, it looks to me like the "after the attack, before the damage" option is already in the game. Why can't a player choose to use his immediate action then?

There is no "then".

You can't shoot a cyclops in his second eye.
You can't shoot a fish in the foot.
You can't teleport to a bungalow's second floor.
You can't time travel "before" the big bang.
You can't hide "under" the center of the earth.

You can't act in a time that doesn't exist.

What you're confusing here is something that takes place in a mechanic as a time.

Here: We sometimes play that volume at the table, is volume in the dungeon.
At what point in the 6 second turn is "When a player makes a noise at the table"?

"After hit, before damage" is time periods out of game. Not in game. I'm fairly sure I can't interrupt the halfling's player "getting a drink".

[Gotterdammerung]

One last question. If we take the rule that unless the specific immediate action doesn't say it, you can only use the immediate action between "mechanically meaningful time". How would you understand the "third eye dampening" That item says: "You can activate a third eye dampening to reduce all variable numeric effects of the next power, psi-like ability, spell, or spell-like ability that affects you to the minimum value (if this power or spell would affect multiple creatures, only you are protected). This protection lasts until the end of your next turn. This ability functions once per day." [MiC page 141]

Can you use this item, after you rolled your save? Do you need to use it before you know you failed your save or after? Or do you have to use the item, after the spell is cast but before you even know if there is a save. What if the spell has an attack roll. Do you have to use the item before you know if the enemy caster succeeded on his attack roll? (and possible waist a charge if he misses) or can you wait after the attack roll and only use it if the spell hits you?


This ability has special wording and was designed to allow you to use it to counter an ability, spell, or spell-like ability that affects you. It is based off of the damp power spell which also does this. So by my interpretation the proper time to activate it is the moment you know the spell will affect you but BEFORE the damage roll. So after the attack roll is resolved, SR is checked but before saves and damage.

[Deophaun]

I find it strange, so many feats/abilities give the option to do an action, or to use an option, or a reroll, or something, after the attack is made and before the damage is dealt. So, it looks to me like the "after the attack, before the damage" option is already in the game. Why can't a player choose to use his immediate action then?
Because there is no such thing as "after the attack, before the damage," no matter your conception of time in D&D.

Pg 139 of the PHB: "If the attack roll result equals or exceeds the
target’s AC, the attack hits and you deal damage." It does not read "If the attack roll result equals or exceeds the target's AC, check to make sure the target is still valid and, if so, then deal damage."

There is no range on dealing damage. There is no line of effect. There is only the attack roll. Unless an ability explicitly says it is changing the attack roll, or preventing the damage roll, once you are hit, you take damage. It doesn't matter if you teleport away the instant you are hit. The attack hit, so you take damage. End. Of. Story.

[Tar Palantir]

I find it strange, so many feats/abilities give the option to do an action, or to use an option, or a reroll, or something, after the attack is made and before the damage is dealt. So, it looks to me like the "after the attack, before the damage" option is already in the game. Why can't a player choose to use his immediate action then?

Also note that the most common wording on these things is something like "after an attack is declared, but before the results of the attack are known", akin to the MtG analogue of after an action is declared, but before it's resolved. As DM I tend to allow this timing for all immediate actions, so you can use Abrupt Jaunt to pop away when the opponent goes to take a swing at you, but if you wait long enough to know whether or not that swing'll connect, you have to live with the results of that attack.

[Dimers]

"You can activate a third eye dampening to reduce all variable numeric effects of the next power, psi-like ability, spell, or spell-like ability that affects you ..."

Can you use this item, after you rolled your save? Do you need to use it before you know you failed your save or after? Or do you have to use the item, after the spell is cast but before you even know if there is a save. What if the spell has an attack roll. Do you have to use the item before you know if the enemy caster succeeded on his attack roll? (and possible waist a charge if he misses) or can you wait after the attack roll and only use it if the spell hits you?

My take on this is, if you're rolling a save or if the caster has rolled a successful attack, you've been affected. So if you don't activate the third eye before those events, you don't get its protection against that attack. Don't wait to see whether your save succeeds -- it's too late. Don't wait to see whether the caster hits your touch AC -- also too late.

[Downysole]

My take on this is, if you're rolling a save or if the caster has rolled a successful attack, you've been affected. So if you don't activate the third eye before those events, you don't get its protection against that attack. Don't wait to see whether your save succeeds -- it's too late. Don't wait to see whether the caster hits your touch AC -- also too late.

By this logic, as soon as the DM says "roll a will save", you can't use any of your abilities you might have otherwise been able to use (such as immediate actions).

So, why is the spell Avoid Planar Effects an immediate action?

Your party plane shifts onto a plane with a fire-dominated trait. The DM rolls fire damage, but the cleric says I cast Avoid Planar Effects. According to your logic, it's too late. I think that the logic built into the game is that the immediate action can place after an action has been declared (such as plane shifting to the elemental plane of fire) but before the consequences can take place (such as burning to death).

[Dimers]

That specific item says "the next power or spell that affects you", meaning the trigger has to be adjudicated after the item has been used. I don't have the SC, so I can't look up the wording on avoid planar effects. I certainly don't mean my response to apply to all immediate actions ever! Ya dig? :smallsmile:

[Downysole]

That specific item says "the next power or spell that affects you", meaning the trigger has to be adjudicated after the item has been used. I don't have the SC, so I can't look up the wording on avoid planar effects. I certainly don't mean my response to apply to all immediate actions ever! Ya dig? :smallsmile:

So, in this case, the language seems to indicate that the last chance you have to activate this item is after you realize you're about to be affected, but before you are actually affected. For instance, if you make your spellcraft check and realize someone's about to get hit by a scorching ray and see him pointing his finger your way. Bam, hit the third-eye. If he fires off at you, you take 4-8-12 points of damage, no big deal.

Hope he's not bluffing.

[LordotheMorning]

I hope this hasn't been answered in the thread already...

The Shadowcaster mystery "Flicker" allows you to teleport 5ft/cl once per round as an immediate action. Say I had Blacklight active on my person. An enemy wizard casts a targeted spell on my ally, and in response I flicker near him and block the Wizard's line of sight with my blacklight.

Does the Wizard still cast the spell or can he then simply switch targets to one of the my other allies?

Similarly, what would happen if you readied an action to cast dispelling screen in front of yourself if you get a spell cast at you. Would the enemy wizard use his spell, hit the screen, and have it fizzle, or could he simply target somebody else?

[Downysole]

I hope this hasn't been answered in the thread already...

The Shadowcaster mystery "Flicker" allows you to teleport 5ft/cl once per round as an immediate action. Say I had Blacklight active on my person. An enemy wizard casts a targeted spell on my ally, and in response I flicker near him and block the Wizard's line of sight with my blacklight.

Does the Wizard still cast the spell or can he then simply switch targets to one of the my other allies?

Similarly, what would happen if you readied an action to cast dispelling screen in front of yourself if you get a spell cast at you. Would the enemy wizard use his spell, hit the screen, and have it fizzle, or could he simply target somebody else?

I think you have to go back to order of operations and asking yourself what you can react to. If you want to react to seeing a Wizard point his finger at your buddy by using your immediate action, then the Wizard could probably point his finger someplace else if he wanted to. If you want to react to seeing a Wizard point his finger at your buddy and have a yellow-red ray come out, you can still use your immediate action, but I would say that you are too late to block line of sight, but not too late to potentially jump the grenade.

Again for the dispelling screen, what are you reacting to? Spellcraft check to determine that it's an evocation spell and a spot check to see that he's staring at you, or seeing the bead of red coming towards you? The Wizard again has the right to change his action based on your reaction just as much as you have the right to use your immediate actions based on his actions. It's only when he's committed that he can no longer change his mind (like once the bead or the ray has left his hand), but your options change once that has happened (by blocking line of sight, it doesn't matter because the ray's on its way, or you might dispel the effect from hitting you, but if the blast point is between you and the Wizard, it might still hit your buddies).

So there's a lot to think about there, but a pretty clear set of order of operations to follow.

[LordotheMorning]

I think you have to go back to order of operations and asking yourself what you can react to. If you want to react to seeing a Wizard point his finger at your buddy by using your immediate action, then the Wizard could probably point his finger someplace else if he wanted to. If you want to react to seeing a Wizard point his finger at your buddy and have a yellow-red ray come out, you can still use your immediate action, but I would say that you are too late to block line of sight, but not too late to potentially jump the grenade.

Again for the dispelling screen, what are you reacting to? Spellcraft check to determine that it's an evocation spell and a spot check to see that he's staring at you, or seeing the bead of red coming towards you? The Wizard again has the right to change his action based on your reaction just as much as you have the right to use your immediate actions based on his actions. It's only when he's committed that he can no longer change his mind (like once the bead or the ray has left his hand), but your options change once that has happened (by blocking line of sight, it doesn't matter because the ray's on its way, or you might dispel the effect from hitting you, but if the blast point is between you and the Wizard, it might still hit your buddies).

So there's a lot to think about there, but a pretty clear set of order of operations to follow.

So then technically there's an unwritten rule when it comes to rays vs. targeted spells: Rays are not truly instantaneous, even if it says they are in the spell description.