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.
So, a big battle in our game tonight involved a former-ally-turned-death-knight turning against our enemy (his new master) and fighting on our side. The Paladin used Hallowed Circle, which has different effects for enemies and allies in the area. The Paladin didn't really want the former ally to be considered an enemy (and thus take damage), but he didn't want him to be considerd an ally (and thus gain a bonus to defenses) in case he turned out to be an enemy after all.
Can he be considered neither?
__________________ "Inanimate objects, do you have a soul
That ties to our soul and the force to love?"
I would say it's the paladin's call as to who is whom. After all, if the party were infiltrated by a spy or a doppelganger who planned to betray them, but this plan was still secret when the paladin cast the circle, would the spy be treated as an ally? He has to; otherwise....
you've given the party a 100% accurate Plot Detector. A party in an intrigue-heavy campaign could just gather together and cast this or a similar spell at every short rest, and see who winces in pain. The person using the power defines allies and enemies, when there is any question. And of course he can say 'I'm not sure about that one...leave him out."
I would say it's the paladin's call as to who is whom. After all, if the party were infiltrated by a spy or a doppelganger who planned to betray them, but this plan was still secret when the paladin cast the circle, would the spy be treated as an ally? He has to; otherwise....
you've given the party a 100% accurate Plot Detector. A party in an intrigue-heavy campaign could just gather together and cast this or a similar spell at every short rest, and see who winces in pain.
No, you misunderstand.
The Paladin, of course, decides who's an ally and who's an enemy. I'm asking, can he choose to neither hurt nor help someone? Whether he's an ally or not isn't in question- if the Paladin considers him an ally, he's an ally (even if he's an enemy in disguise). But if he considers him an enemy, he's an enemy (even if he is in fact an ally). But can he choose to consider him neither?
__________________ "Inanimate objects, do you have a soul
That ties to our soul and the force to love?"
-Lamartine
Last edited by UltimaGabe; 7th July 2009 at 05:22 AM..
The power hits "enemies" in the area, and has an effect on "allies" in the area. Whether there exists a third category in D&D (bystanders? noncombatants? neutrals? UN observers?) is not, to my knowledge, addressed in the rules. If you want to get technical and literal, there are likely to be cockroaches, mice, sparrows and other beings on the battlefield that are never modeled in play, so we never pay attention to what happens to them.
I as a DM have had a different situation where the party captured a kobold and took it with them, one half of the party saw him as an ally and the other half as an enemy.
Although some persons did not want to chose between ally/enemie i made them chose cause rules wise it would be easier..
Technically, in 4e, there are two categories of creature. Allies, and enemies, who are defined as all creatures who are not allies. You are explicitly /not/ your own ally. Draw your own conclusions....
OK, so, reasonably, there are 3 categories. Self, Alliles, and all others, who are enemies. So, no, by the often-silly 'RAW,' there is no non-ally/non-enemy category of creature. However, if you wanted to be nice, you could say that ongoing effects on an ally end if the ally becomes an enemy...
Rulewise: it looks a creature is one or the other, no middle ground.
But there is absolutely no reason as far as game balance etc not to let there be neutral designations. I can think of no reason why you couldn't have a third faction that was neither a foe nor friend, it would be fun, it would be useful, it would be flavorful, and it wouldn't break anything...do it!
Bottomline: Rules kind of say no, But in general you can say yes with zero bad results.
Saying the rules say no is the same thing as citing a republican-democrat debate and claiming everyone is either a republican or a democrat. Why would combat rules mention anything that's not an ally or an enemy. Its so rarely an issue it's not worth mentioning.
Saying the rules say no is the same thing as citing a republican-democrat debate and claiming everyone is either a republican or a democrat. Why would combat rules mention anything that's not an ally or an enemy. Its so rarely an issue it's not worth mentioning.
If the definition of "Republican" was "someone who is not a Democrat", then yes, your argument would be valid. However, that is not how this word is defined, so your analogy is invalid.
Enemy is explicitly defined in game terms as another person that is on not your ally. The condition is simple.
__________________ Law's Game Style: Storyteller 83%, Tactician 75%, Specialist 67%, Method Actor 58%, Power Gamer 33%, Casual Gamer 25%, Butt-Kicker 17%
I honestly didn't believe that there were rules on what enemies/allies were. That rule changes the whole feel of this game imo. Everyone who isn't fighting with you against whatever you are fighting is an enemy.
I honestly didn't believe that there were rules on what enemies/allies were. That rule changes the whole feel of this game imo. Everyone who isn't fighting with you against whatever you are fighting is an enemy.
Thats... quite dogmatic.
Game language....
They felt it necessary to say the spell cant detect which beings not in your known allies list (which you chose) are hostile or not (Your spell will not be able to magically auto detect for you so you will have to decide -- darn I wanted the spell to do it for me.).
As far as I am concerned if you want decide the guys in blue are allies for this casting and those in red are allies for your next casting ;-) go ahead.
Dogmatism me thinks comes from rules lawyers hashing with wording ;-) on the net.
Ultimategabe -- I know this is a 'cheater' response but all I can say is "How do you want it to work in your game (presuming you're the DM) ?"
Go with that. As you can see, the rules text will get picked apart and hear several opinions. But the final interpretation really is what you think will work best for you and your game.
Having said that, if you want my opinion --
I would say make him choose one or the other at the time the power is used. Does it make 100% sense? NO! But will it be simpler/faster to make a determination at the start and stick with it rather than reevaluating every round or to try and make the seperate distinction everytime that power or powers with similar wording is used? Yes. So that's how I'd rule it if it were my game.
__________________ If you're bored and like to follow links provided by random strangers, check out my ENWorld Blog http://www.enworld.org/forum/blogs/fba827/
It will have campaign logs and random thoughts...
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
