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.
OK, a Dominated creature is Dazed, and you choose its one (standard/move/minor) action.
A Dazed creature can normally take Free actions.
Can you force a Dominated creature to take free actions in addition to its one S/M/M action? Instead of? More than one free action?
"Drop your sword (free), charge at your buddy (single S/M/M action allowed by Dazed), then fall prone (free)": Legitimate for a dominated target?
"Tell me who your boss is." (Talking, a free action: Legitimate?)
Also: Is a Dominated creature still an "enemy"? I want to make my puppets run (lowering their defenses) in a zig-zag through my allies, letting them make opportunity attacks. Allowed?
__________________ Post-Gencon Update! Breakfast Crunch!Daily (Weekdays) useful stuff for your RPG needs! This week is Zombie Week! You can has feed! LizardGames, now in easy-to-read Feed form! Do you have mad 133t Joomla and CSS skills? Do you want to do unpaid work on a site hardly anyone knows exists? If so, email me! (Hey, I'm honest, at least...)
Enemy or ally do not make sense, if you consider them states or conditions of some kind. An ally is simply a "willing target of your choice". An enemy is a target of your choice, whether willing or not.
You can make opportunity attacks against your friends, if you like.
Enemy or ally do not make sense, if you consider them states or conditions of some kind. An ally is simply a "willing target of your choice". An enemy is a target of your choice, whether willing or not.
You can make opportunity attacks against your friends, if you like.
I agree, the "enemy" and "ally" distinction is made by the player when they choose to use their power(s).
As for free actions, since they are the purview of the DM anyway, I'd allow simple ones, like "drop your weapon" but compelling information... I'd have to look at other powers... but gut feeling is that that would be stepping on the toes of other charm effects.
I generally interpret dominated as giving the creature that is dominating the target one action.
That one action could be to drop prone, throw their weapon away, make an attack, move etc.
Personally I think having the dominated target attack, then drop their weapon, then fall prone is a little harsh, you are already making them effectively miss their turn and hinder the rest of their team.
OK, a Dominated creature is Dazed, and you choose its one (standard/move/minor) action.
A Dazed creature can normally take Free actions.
Can you force a Dominated creature to take free actions in addition to its one S/M/M action? Instead of? More than one free action?
No, you said it yourself: one. From the glossary, "The dominating creature chooses your action."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lizard
"Tell me who your boss is." (Talking, a free action: Legitimate?)
This of course works, but not like you imply. You choose the action, you don't request an action. The dominated creature should respond to this, "Who your boss is." The dominated creature doesn't choose the response, it's given to him.
The "one action only" thing makes sense to me; it's how I interpreted it, but some folks on RPG.net have apparently been using the "Free action loophole".
On allies/enemies: I agree it ought to be up to the player, but this opens up some nasty loopholes -- my ranger might decide that all orc minions near him are "allies", so his "nearest enemy" is the orc chieftain, making it way too easy to cherry pick a quarry. But I suppose that's another thread.
(Really wish they'd fix the auto-alert when replies are posted thing, already...)
__________________ Post-Gencon Update! Breakfast Crunch!Daily (Weekdays) useful stuff for your RPG needs! This week is Zombie Week! You can has feed! LizardGames, now in easy-to-read Feed form! Do you have mad 133t Joomla and CSS skills? Do you want to do unpaid work on a site hardly anyone knows exists? If so, email me! (Hey, I'm honest, at least...)
The "one action only" thing makes sense to me; it's how I interpreted it, but some folks on RPG.net have apparently been using the "Free action loophole".
On allies/enemies: I agree it ought to be up to the player, but this opens up some nasty loopholes -- my ranger might decide that all orc minions near him are "allies", so his "nearest enemy" is the orc chieftain, making it way too easy to cherry pick a quarry. But I suppose that's another thread.
(Really wish they'd fix the auto-alert when replies are posted thing, already...)
I never even thought of that...
.... luckily that's covered under the sack-of-rats rules.
This question came up in the game I'm playing in. The enemy dominated our characters and then forced us to attack each other then use our action points (free action). Couple this with the interpretation that action point use overrules the "only one action while dazed" and we were pretty well screwed.
FTR I agree with the interpretation that action point use can give an additional action when dazed, however - now I am concerned we will to run into creatures that can dominate frequently.
__________________ Avocado's number: The number of avocados needed to make 1 mol of guacamole -- Amedeo Avocado
"We are the group the bad guys level up on." -- Dagger75, Epic Commoner
"It's like chess or physics, but stupider." -- R. Newman
This question came up in the game I'm playing in. The enemy dominated our characters and then forced us to attack each other then use our action points (free action). Couple this with the interpretation that action point use overrules the "only one action while dazed" and we were pretty well screwed.
Well, now fortunately this won't happen again. One action, not multiple actions.
I'd agree with the "one action" interpretation. One action period - ignore the fact that dazed creatures can use a free action as well. In this case your character is dominated, and so the dominating creature dictates your single action.
Powers used can only be at-wills, and under no circumstances would I let a dominating bad guy spend an action point for the character, nor would I allow the expenditure of an item power that is triggered as a free action. Spending an action point or using a daily free-action item power defeats the point of limiting the dominated action to at-wills, that being to avoid having any character resources diminished while they are dominated.
It sucks enough to be dominated and forced to attack your friends or move to a spot you didn't choose. It is far worse to have your precious limited daily or encounter powers (or action points!) be used against your allies, which is why the rules don't allow it. I know that action points and many item powers are a free action, but it's against the spirit of the rules to allow a dominating creature to use them up. Also, it's no fun! Dominated = 1 action that cannot be an encounter or daily or their equivalents (AP=encounter, items = daily or encounter).
I lean toward the one action. I don't think making character's use action points, item dailes, powerful free action class encounters, ect is in the spirit of the rules - though it very well may be within the letter of the rules.
In the games I have run where charaters were dominated, I didn't feel a need to do anything more than one action. The one action is bad enough - the player misses a turn *and* helps the enemy - is more than enough penalty.
On the question of allies and enemies. For a dominated character I let the character continued to determine who are friends and foes, except for the creature that dominated the charcter - who is now the character's "very special friend."
So, can dominated characters not spend free actions at all, in any way? Like, they can't talk, they can't quickdraw a weapon, etc?
If the dominater can't choose the action, can the player? Can the player choose to AP and take a real action?
The at-will restriction seems to take care of any AP, item, whatever type abuse that might occur. I've never tried to use a free action as a DM, but I've also never stopped a player who I've told I'd dominated from using them. Stopping them from RPing being dominated (ie, talking, as a free action) sounds really poor.
Dominating someone into dropping their weapon and surrendering (going prone) sounds pretty appropriate.
If the dominater can't choose the action, can the player? Can the player choose to AP and take a real action?
The dominater chooses the action, that much is clear, isn't it? Now, can the player use free actions in addition to whatever he's made to do? I still don't think so. He "chooses your action." It's not, "He chooses your main action, but you may choose additional free actions."
Right, exactly. But implicit in the concept above of you not getting free actions is that it says it chooses 'your action' (singular). It would be ludicrous for you to be able to take extra actions outside of the dominate control... so... what rule prevents the PC from taking free actions (like talking)?
Cause if the PC can take free actions, they'd certainly be under the control of the dominate. Which brings back the 'Okay, it drops your weapon then jumps you into the pit with the Otyugh' theory of dominate.
I suspect this is just a case of the rule being improperly defined, but I'm also curious what way would work better for the game.
So, can dominated characters not spend free actions at all, in any way? Like, they can't talk, they can't quickdraw a weapon, etc?
Quick Draw is not a free action, it is "part of" your attack action, so this would be allowed until either interpretation.
As far as the main discussion goes, as GM I would play that the dominated character cannot be forced to spend action points or valuable resources, and may only be ordered to perform one action.
Quick Draw is not a free action, it is "part of" your attack action, so this would be allowed until either interpretation.
Actually, how would the creature even know to use Quick Draw? Does it get an inventory of your abilities? Or, can the creature use its own Quick Draw (assuming it has it)?
It knows how to use your at-will abilities, somehow... it seems likely that it gives an order and you effectively go about it to the best of your abilities.
And yeah, my bad on Quickdraw. Something like battle harness armor would have been better.
At any rate, the 'only one action' camp is still saying that you'd deny the ability to talk while dominated, correct?
What about if the vampire, say, who was dominating used an ability that gave the dominated target a free action attack? Vampires often have classes, this is not so far-fetched actually.
When you usually get only one action (dazed) 'choose your action' is correct, but it's not binding to 'can only take one action', but dazed does not in fact limit you to only one action, so it seems unlikely the intent is that you can't take any other actions whatsoever. For example, a dominated character who moves through a zone of tar that has a rule 'As a free action at the start of your turn, make an Athletics or Acrobatics check to avoid being immobilized until the end of your turn' could presumably do so.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
