Velaryon
2019-01-25, 12:42 AM
Suppose a mounted Fighter using the Ride-By Attack feat charges a Swordsage who then uses the Leaping Flame maneuver. Which sequence of events is the correct one?
A) Fighter attacks, Fighter finishes movement, Swordsage appears next to him
B) Fighter attacks, Swordsage appears next to him, Fighter finishes movement
By RAW, it seems like the answer would be B. But what has me confused is that I don't see much point to Leaping Flame if this is the case. Or rather, I don't see why you'd use it against a melee attack. The maneuver says it can be used against a creature that attacks you with a melee or ranged attack, but if they're attacking you in melee, 99% of the time you're already adjacent to them, so why would you need to teleport to be adjacent to them? If all this does is get you inside the reach of a creature with a long reach, then that really doesn't seem worthy of a 5th level maneuver to me.
Even the scenario I outlined above is highly situational, but I'm trying to find some reason why you'd ever want to use this other than to disrupt a sniper.
A) Fighter attacks, Fighter finishes movement, Swordsage appears next to him
B) Fighter attacks, Swordsage appears next to him, Fighter finishes movement
By RAW, it seems like the answer would be B. But what has me confused is that I don't see much point to Leaping Flame if this is the case. Or rather, I don't see why you'd use it against a melee attack. The maneuver says it can be used against a creature that attacks you with a melee or ranged attack, but if they're attacking you in melee, 99% of the time you're already adjacent to them, so why would you need to teleport to be adjacent to them? If all this does is get you inside the reach of a creature with a long reach, then that really doesn't seem worthy of a 5th level maneuver to me.
Even the scenario I outlined above is highly situational, but I'm trying to find some reason why you'd ever want to use this other than to disrupt a sniper.