D&D 4th Edition RulesAsk questions about 4th-Edition rules and the like in here. General discussion about 4E or any other game belongs in General RPG Discussion, above.
The Fighter can do it. The Bard can only give the mark to the Fighter. Just like with your interpretation.
What does that have to do with anything I said? In my example the fighter isn't doing anything. It could be the first turn of the entire campaign so the fighter hasn't done anything except roll initiative. How does the monster suddenly know about fighter class features, given that the fighter didn't do anything at all whatsoever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goumindong
Round 1
Fighter attacks enemy 1: Marks him. [At this point, what do you think enemy 1 knows?]
Bard attacks enemy 2: Marks him, assigns the mark to the fighter[at this point, what do you think enemy 2 knows]
Enemy 2 attacks bard: fighter whacks enemy 2 with CC [are you saying this is impossible? because you've said earlier it was possible. At this point what does enemy 2 know?]
Enemy 1 attacks bard: nothing else happens
Enemy 1 attacking the bard would still trigger combat challenge, as fighter marks aren't one-at-a-time like divine challenge.
It always trips me up that it's not an OA considering that the other 'combat' ability IS related to OAs.. it's actually possible to get both a Combat Challenge and an OA in one action if the enemy is adjacent to you and does a ranged attack against an ally...
What does that have to do with anything I said? In my example the fighter isn't doing anything. It could be the first turn of the entire campaign so the fighter hasn't done anything except roll initiative. How does the monster suddenly know about fighter class features, given that the fighter didn't do anything at all whatsoever.
Does the Fighter get to use the CC interrupt for the Bard's mark?
If yes, then the monster knows about it with my interpretation.
You cannot use common sense to explain rules. It has never worked and it never will work. As an example, if a Fighter marked foe teleports 10 squares away and attacks a different PC, it is still marked and still at -2, even though the Fighter is 50 feet and cannot harm or threaten the foe in any way. Common sense says that the mark should no longer apply, but the rules don't.
__________________ The first sign of a broken rule is when someone suggests that the way to stop it is by readying an action.
Does the Fighter get to use the CC interrupt for the Bard's mark?
If yes, then the monster knows about it with my interpretation.
Yes, the fighter can use the CC Interrupt on the bard's mark. But how does *any* interpretation of the rules rule that as being a rider on the mark itself. It isn't the fighter's mark, the fighter did nothing except be the target of another ability . Combat Challenge has no trigger that 'activates' on bard marking. As such the "fighter's unique mark" hasn't been used, but fighter still gets to use his combat challenge because the interrupt trigger is still being met. At the time of marking Combat Challenge has *not yet been used*, which means your interpretation is in flat contradiction to the rules: it's when the ability is used, not when the ability is able to be used
Does the Fighter get to use the CC interrupt for the Bard's mark?
Yes. He also gets to use his CC interrupt on any adjacent enemies that have a Paladin's DC, a Swordmage's Aegis, or marks from any other source. The only requirement is that an enemy has the Marked condition, the source and method of that condition are irrelevant.
At the time of marking Combat Challenge has *not yet been used*, which means your interpretation is in flat contradiction to the rules: it's when the ability is used, not when the ability is able to be used
Actually, CC has not been used, but it has been activated as long as the Fighter has a mark. CC (as written in the PHB) is not just the mark, it is also the interrupt. When the Bard gives the Fighter the mark, he also allows the Fighter's CC to work and hence, the monster knows about it.
You view CC as two different abilities. I view it as the rules for one ability.
This is not a contradiction to the rules. This is a different interpretation of the rules.
No matter how you spin it, my interpretation is consistent within itself just like your interpretation is consistent within itself. But neither interpretation has to be consistent within the other interpretation and that is where your logic here is flawed. You are trying to force inconsistencies derived from viewing the rules within the narrow rose colored glasses of your interpretation onto my interpretation.
If you refuse to see the differences between the interpretations here, there is nothing I can do about it. You will always think that my interpretation is flawed, just because it is not your interpretation because your interpretation colors how you view the rules. You appear to not be seeing the big picture of either interpretation and how the rules work for both.
The rules work fine for both. They just work slightly differently. Either interpretation is firmly within the framework of RAW, they just have a different "rules as interpreted".
__________________ The first sign of a broken rule is when someone suggests that the way to stop it is by readying an action.
Actually, CC has not been used, but it has been activated as long as the Fighter has a mark. CC (as written in the PHB) is not just the mark, it is also the interrupt. When the Bard gives the Fighter the mark, he also allows the Fighter's CC to work and hence, the monster knows about it.
This part. This is the part that is quite literally insane. There is no rule, ever, that states that you know the rules of another power that someone else allows to work.
When a wizard uses a power that dazes, that does not give the enemy the knowledge that the rogue can now sneak attack him.
When a wizard uses a power that dazes, that does not give the enemy the knowledge that the rogue can now sneak attack him.
It does if the DM figures the monster is intelligent enough to know how rogues work. Most probably are. Many are smarter than the most characters and have probably been around the block more.
But monsters are lemmings and just plow themselves to death on the character's swords. If they aren't, DnD doesn't work. So most of this thread is pretty much moot.
Any argument that operates under the assumption that monsters with higher Intellegence Wisdom scores than a fighter are somehow stupider than players is a flawed argument at the outset.
Some monsters have the knowledge skills to know what players can do, and a monster group that can communicate this to each other has the advantage of knowledge.
It does if the DM figures the monster is intelligent enough to know how rogues work. Most probably are. Many are smarter than the most characters and have probably been around the block more.
But monsters are lemmings and just plow themselves to death on the character's swords. If they aren't, DnD doesn't work. So most of this thread is pretty much moot.
But we are not arguing that "mosnsters know about fighter abilities because they are smart enough to know about fighter abilities". He is claiming that they explicitly know how it works because it can be used on him.
Furthermore, no one was saying that "monsters don't know about fighter abilities after they've been used" or that "monsters cannot communicate about other abilities after they've been used" or that "monsters cannot see a player do something and then make an inference after that has occurred about what the player can do".
In fact, had you two read back a few pages, you would have seen me explain all of that and how it was likely to work and why. [Though i would likely reject the idea that they know about CC before the fight, since knowledge skills do not typically give that information, nor do they give that information about classes, since classes are not race/society based information. You could know about a dragonborns breath weapon for instance, but not the fact that he was a cleric.]
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
