That isn't how reaction timing works with turns.

"If the reaction interrupts another creature's turn, that creature can continue its turn right after the reaction."

It is your turn on your reaction, you are interrupting the other turn. In your example, the paladin, when they make their attack roll, is doing so in their turn on their reaction. They decide to take the roll straight rather than with disadvantage.

The way I read it, the attack roll cannot be made with advantage. If the roll was not going to be made with advantage because they also had disadvantage, then there is no interaction.

Quote from WolfOfTheBees >>

That isn't how reaction timing works with turns.

"If the reaction interrupts another creature's turn, that creature can continue its turn right after the reaction."

It is your turn on your reaction, you are interrupting the other turn. In your example, the paladin, when they make their attack roll, is doing so in their turn on their reaction. They decide to take the roll straight rather than with disadvantage.

You're saying that someone taking an opportunity attack is .. taking a mini turn in the middle of someone else's turn? I'm pretty sure that's not right.

Quote from Ophidimancer >>

Quote from WolfOfTheBees >>

That isn't how reaction timing works with turns.

"If the reaction interrupts another creature's turn, that creature can continue its turn right after the reaction."

It is your turn on your reaction, you are interrupting the other turn. In your example, the paladin, when they make their attack roll, is doing so in their turn on their reaction. They decide to take the roll straight rather than with disadvantage.

You're saying that someone taking an opportunity attack is .. taking a mini turn in the middle of someone else's turn? I'm pretty sure that's not right.

 I mean, the rules literally say that it isn't the creature being interrupted's turn. It might be no one's turn, but if that's the case, then XTGE doesn't tell us how to adjudicate that.

I'm not going to quote because that would get really big, instead ill just reference your points in order:

1. Adv/disadv. are determined at the same time because they are introduced in a rule that ties them together. The section of the basic rules that makes them is literally titled Advantage and Disadvantage. They are necessarily tied together. Advantage and Disadvantage don't have their own separate rules, there are only rules that cover both of them. Within their section of the rules, there is not a single sentence that refers to either of them individually (with the exception of an example of having advantage/disadvantage and how to interpret the dice rolls). They are exclusively written together, therefore they must be determined together.
2. If there is no Advantage then it plays out with the disadvantage like normal because the condition that needs to be met for the Wildhunt's ability to activate (being attacked with advantage) is not being met. 

Quote from WolfOfTheBees >>

That isn't how reaction timing works with turns.

"If the reaction interrupts another creature's turn, that creature can continue its turn right after the reaction."

It is your turn on your reaction, you are interrupting the other turn. In your example, the paladin, when they make their attack roll, is doing so in their turn on their reaction. They decide to take the roll straight rather than with disadvantage.

That's not right. If it were, bugbears would get their reach extension on attacks of opportunity, which we know they don't. Extra Attack would apply to AoOs, which we know they don't. It would never, ever, be necessary for any feature to specify "on your turn," which we know is rules language for "you can't use this feature when you take reactions during other creatures' turns."

Nothing you quoted suggests the conclusion you draw. If I'm speeding down the highway and a police officer interrupts my drive to pull me over and ticket me, I can continue my drive after the ticketing. And when I tell the story afterward, I will absolutely say "I was pulled over and ticketed during my drive."

Hopefully you weren’t driving during the interruption of being pulled over. And the quote from the reaction rules that I did provide does say that your turn continues after the reaction, implying that it was not continuing during the reaction. Again, it may not be the reacting creatures turn during their reaction, but it isn’t the creature’s that is being interrupted either, as their turn continues after the reaction. Maybe that’s an interpretation thing. But I don’t really know what this even has to do with the question in puts #1 because these aren’t things that happen at a particular time.The shifter feature doesn’t say that it applies when a creature would make a roll with advantage, it just is “while shifted.”

Quote from Mog_Dracov >>

Advantage and disadvantage have to cancel out before you take any other ability into account.  It makes no sense any other way.

 It doesn't make sense that way either. The A/D clause starts with a reference to circumstances that cause the A/D. In terms of order of operations, this implies that the circumstances resolve before the rule comes into place. This feature is one of those circumstances.

Quote from WolfOfTheBees>>

Hopefully you weren’t driving during the interruption of being pulled over. And the quote from the reaction rules that I did provide does say that your turn continues after the reaction, implying that it was not continuing during the reaction. Again, it may not be the reacting creatures turn during their reaction, but it isn’t the creature’s that is being interrupted either, as their turn continues after the reaction. Maybe that’s an interpretation thing.

But I don’t really know what this even has to do with the question in puts #1 because these aren’t things that happen at a particular time.The shifter feature doesn’t say that it applies when a creature would make a roll with advantage, it just is “while shifted.”

 The question in post #1 was answered in post #2. You had it completely correct. I do not understand how the "whose turn do reactions happen on" tangent even arose. It boggles my mind.

yeah, this has gotten tangled.

Based on the original post (which I'm now reading correctly), you tally all advantage and disadvantage first. They negate. Racial ability never comes into play.

I don't know why this became so complicated. The rules for Advantage/Disadvantage clearly state it does not matter how many instances of either matter. You only need to focus on the roll itself. In most of the examples considered above, it is an Attack roll. If 5 things apply Advantage to that Attack roll and 1 thing applies Disadvantage to that Attack roll, then it is a normal roll. If 1 thing applies Advantage to that Attack roll and 20 things apply Disadvantage, then it is a normal roll. The rules literally spell this out. There is no order of resolution to consider. There is no timing of effects to consider. Only what roll is being made.

In the Wildhunt shifter example. We are referring to the enemy Attack roll. The race feature states "no creature within 30 feet of you can make an Attack roll with Advantage against you." It does not say anything about applying Disadvantage to the roll. It does not say it 'cancels' the Advantage on the Attack roll. 

You can try to make the case that it is the same effect all you want, but it's not. Different effects can apply the same outcome, but that does NOT mean the effects being considered work in the same way. You are trying to make something more powerful than it actually is because you want to apply Disadvantage.  The feature says no Attack rolls against you can be made with Advantage. The Advantage/Disadvantage of the roll are determined. If the roll would be made with Advantage, then they can not use the Advantage on the roll against you. Think about if someone were next to you and the Attack targeted them. The roll would have Advantage.

Quote from Zairenna >>

I don't know why this became so complicated. The rules for Advantage/Disadvantage clearly state it does not matter how many instances of either matter. You only need to focus on the roll itself. In most of the examples considered above, it is an Attack roll. If 5 things apply Advantage to that Attack roll and 1 thing applies Disadvantage to that Attack roll, then it is a normal roll. If 1 thing applies Advantage to that Attack roll and 20 things apply Disadvantage, then it is a normal roll. The rules literally spell this out. There is no order of resolution to consider. There is no timing of effects to consider. Only what roll is being made.

In the Wildhunt shifter example. We are referring to the enemy Attack roll. The race feature states "no creature within 30 feet of you can make an Attack roll with Advantage against you." It does not say anything about applying Disadvantage to the roll. It does not say it 'cancels' the Advantage on the Attack roll. 

You can try to make the case that it is the same effect all you want, but it's not. Different effects can apply the same outcome, but that does NOT mean the effects being considered work in the same way. You are trying to make something more powerful than it actually is because you want to apply Disadvantage.  The feature says no Attack rolls against you can be made with Advantage. The Advantage/Disadvantage of the roll are determined. If the roll would be made with Advantage, then they can not use the Advantage on the roll against you. Think about if someone were next to you and the Attack targeted them. The roll would have Advantage.

So you're in the camp that thinks that an attack roll with Advantage against a Wildhunt Shifter would still have Advantage even if it cannot roll with Advantage?

I mean, I know the rules for Adv/Dis, I've read them over a lot for this thread. I just think that it is one valid interpretation to say that the attack rolls does not have Advantage because the Wildhunt ability prevents it from having Advantage, therefore it can have Disadvantage applied to it. Let's say there is a melee opponent and the Shifter is Dodging. I think the attacker does not have Advantage, therefore it suffers Disadvantage from the Dodge.

Quote from Ophidimancer >>

Quote from WolfOfTheBees >>

I mean, that is what the Advantage/Disadvantage rules say. You can have advantage and it can count as not having advantage when you also have disadvantage. It counts as neither. Thus you wouldn't be making a roll with advantage, you'd be making a single roll.

Ok, but are you specifically saying that you can have Advantage even if you are not rolling Advantage? Same with Disadvantage?

Because if having Advantage and Disadvantage on the same roll means that you have them both, but you don't roll with either, that means that stuf like Rogue's Sneak Attack can never be regained in a situation where they had Disadvantage. Like, they couldn't negate it with Steady Aim and then get a friend to flank the enemy for a regained Sneak Attack.

 “If circumstances cause a roll to have both advantage and disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them, and you roll one d20. This is true even if multiple circumstances impose disadvantage and only one grants advantage or vice versa. In such a situation, you have neither advantage nor disadvantage”

Once a Rogue has disadvantage on an attack they can’t get sneak attack, it doesn’t matter if they get multiple forms of advantage on top of that

Quote from Mswayze >>

 “If circumstances cause a roll to have both advantage and disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them, and you roll one d20. This is true even if multiple circumstances impose disadvantage and only one grants advantage or vice versa. In such a situation, you have neither advantage nor disadvantage”

Once a Rogue has disadvantage on an attack they can’t get sneak attack, it doesn’t matter if they get multiple forms of advantage on top of that

 If a rogue's attack roll has both advantage and disadvantage, it's considered to have neither of them and therefore does not have disadvantage to prevent Sneak Attack.You don’t need advantage on the attack roll if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it, that enemy isn’t incapacitated, and you don’t have disadvantage on the attack roll.

While not official ruling per se, you can find the Dev discussing this possibility on X:

@KeithAmmann Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait. You can Sneak Attack when you have both advantage and disadvantage? I thought having any source of disadvantage AT ALL disqualified a rogue from Sneak Attacking.

@Dan_Dillon_1 If you have advantage and disadvantage, they cancel each other out and you’re not considered to have either. Doesn’t matter how many of one, though. They don’t “stack.”

@KeithAmmann You're saying a hidden rogue with a hand crossbow can Sneak Attack an enemy at long range?

@Dan_Dillon_1 Yes

@JustJohnForever However, if hidden (Adv) and at long range (Disadv, assuming no other special qualifiers), then he could only make a SA is there was an adjacent ally as SA (except for circumstances directly cited) requires Adv to use; the Adv/Disadv cancellation leaves the rouge without Adv.

Quote from Mswayze >>

“If circumstances cause a roll to have both advantage and disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them, and you roll one d20. This is true even if multiple circumstances impose disadvantage and only one grants advantage or vice versa. In such a situation, you have neither advantage nor disadvantage”

Once a Rogue has disadvantage on an attack they can’t get sneak attack, it doesn’t matter if they get multiple forms of advantage on top of that

If circumstances cause a roll to have both advantage and disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them

So if the Rogue has both Disadvantage and Advantage it means they have neither Disadvantage nor Advantage, meaning the Disadvantage went away and the Rogue can now trigger the other conditions for Sneak Attack. Because there is another way to trigger Sneak Attack besides Advantage, remember?

It's interesting. One way of interpreting it is that ... if you have advantage, you  cannot attack. 'You cannot make an attack with advantage.' It's not a particularly fortunate wording. 

Anyways I'm with the OP: You can't have advantage against the shifter - so, no matter how much you're a barbarian using Reckless Attack, you don't get advantage. And so, if the shifter is blurred, you have disadvantage.