Help with interpretation on some rules.

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1033.msg25690;boardseen#new

I cannot claim credit for this, as it was conceptualized by other players, but I though I would repost it here so that it can get more coverage and hopefully, you can all help me determine if it does work or not, and in the meantime, improve my understanding of the rules.

In a nutshell...

Heavy blade opportunity - use at-will for AoO instead of normal attack.
Two-weapon flurry - make 2nd AoO at -5 to-hit penalty. The trick here is that it explicitly states that your off-hand attack is an opportunity attack.
Twin strike - make 2 attacks as a standard action.

What do you all think? Blade cascade machII?

Runestar said:

What do you all think? Blade cascade machII?

Click to expand...

Not really.

Nothing stops the -5 to the off hand weapon attack.

So yes, the PC replaces the second attack with an attack power, but that attack power is still at -5. In fact, that attack power has all of the modifiers that have been defined for that situation.

The next time, the attack power is at -10, etc.

So, one main hand attack at normal, one main hand attack at -5, one main hand attack at -10, etc. At some point, it stops because the primary hand misses the opportunity attack and the Two-Weapon Flurry does not kick in.

A PC would be lucky to get 3 attacks in. However, if he keeps rolling 20s, he keeps going.

Well, his argument was that as a penalty, the -5 would not stack with itself, since nothing in the entry suggests that this is cumulative. So even if you trigger it multiple times, the penalty still stays at -5, because it simply overlaps the prior penalty.

Is this how the penalty rules work in 4e?

I haven't checked the link or read the specific, relevant rules, so I'm not certain it applies in this situation, however the rules state that penalties always stack (only bonuses use stacking rules and types).

Runestar said:

What do you all think? Blade cascade machII?

Click to expand...

Two-Blade Flurry requires that you attack with your off-hand weapon. One of the attacks from Twin Strike is with your main hand, so it doesn't meet the requirement of the feat. You'd end up getting one attack with your off-hand weapon with no Str bonus.

Correct, and it be the off-hand attack from twin strike which triggers 2-blade flurry, would it not?

I admit my grasp of the current 4e rules is still very shaky, which is why I am calling on all of you to help dissect this combo to see if it works or not, and in the process, improve my understand of how the rules interact with one another.

Thinking of it more as a theoretical though exercise, and less so of another attempt to break the game.

Consider a 3.5 example:

The Improved Trip feat allowed you, when you successfully tripped an opponent, to make a melee attack against them as if you had not used the original attack to trip.

The Elusive Target tactical feat had the Cause Overreach ability, which granted you a free trip attack. A free attack, with the restriction that it can only be used to trip.

So when Cause Overreach triggers, you get your free attack which can only be used to trip, and trip someone. Improved Trip triggers, and you are now allowed to make a melee attack as if you had not used the original attack to trip.

So you've still got the use of the original attack... which has the restriction that it can only be used to trip. Improved Trip doesn't remove that restriction... so you have an attack that can only be used to trip, that you can only use against the opponent you just successfully tripped. Improved Trip doesn't let you use that attack to hit the guy with your flail, because it's still restricted to being a trip by the wording of Cause Overreach.

Similarly:
Heavy Blade Opportunist lets you use an at-will power instead of a basic attack for your OA.
Two-Blade Flurry lets you make an OA, with the restriction that it must be made with your off-hand weapon.

The combination means that Two-Blade Flurry lets you use an at-will power for your OA, with the restriction that it must be made with your off-hand weapon.

So even if you choose Twin Strike as the at-will power for your OA, it must be made with your off-hand weapon... which means that Two-Weapon Flurry won't trigger a second time, since Two-Weapon Flurry triggers when you make an OA with your primary weapon.

Regardless of which at-will power you choose, the extra attack from Two-Weapon Flurry is "an OA with your off-hand weapon", which is not something that can trigger Two-Weapon Flurry.

-Hyp.

Correct...

So the combo would go something like this.

1) Enemy provokes AoO, I make the AoO with twin strike, 2-weapon flurry trigger, I make a 2nd AoO using twin strike (via blade opportunity).

2) The twin-strike entry states that you make 2 attacks, one with my main-hand (primary weapon), the other with my off-hand. This means that when I make an OA with my off-hand, I actually get 2 attacks, 1 from my primary weapon and a 2nd from my off-hand weapon.

3) If the primary hand hits (remember that my off-hand attack now consists of 1 main-hand and 1 off-hand attack) connects, I get yet another OA courtesy of 2-weapon flurry, which is again made with twin strike. And step(2) repeats again until you end up missing all your attacks, at which point the combo is exhausted.

Runestar said:

2) The twin-strike entry states that you make 2 attacks, one with my main-hand (primary weapon), the other with my off-hand. This means that when I make an OA with my off-hand, I actually get 2 attacks, 1 from my primary weapon and a 2nd from my off-hand weapon.

3) If the primary hand hits (remember that my off-hand attack now consists of 1 main-hand and 1 off-hand attack) connects, I get yet another OA courtesy of 2-weapon flurry...

Click to expand...

No, because there's a key element that's being missed.

Assuming for a moment Twin Strike works, despite the off-hand restriction:

When you make the OA with your off-hand, you get two attacks, one from your primary weapon and a second from your off-hand weapon. But these two attacks are not two OAs; rather, they are both part of the Twin Strike power, which is the attack granted by Two-Weapon Flurry - that is, an OA with your off-hand weapon.

So if your primary weapon hits, you satisfy two conditions:
1. You hit with an attack with your primary weapon.
2. You hit with an opportunity attack (Twin Strike) with your off-hand weapon.

What you have not done is hit with an opportunity attack with your primary weapon. Twin Strike is an OA, and it grants an attack with your primary weapon, but that attack is not itself an OA; rather, it is part of the power which, due to Heavy Blade Opportunist, is the OA. Any hit you achieve with the power you use (from HBO) is a hit with an opportunity attack with your off-hand weapon (from TWFl)... even if it's delivered with your primary weapon.

It can't be a hit with an opportunity attack with your primary weapon, because TWFl doesn't grant an opportunity attack with your primary weapon, it grants an opportunity attack with your off-hand weapon.

And since TWFl only triggers from a hit with an opportunity attack with your primary weapon, the TWFl/HBO-granted Twin Strike can't trigger TWFl a second time.

Key point: The OA is Twin Strike. The individual attacks are part of the OA, not OAs themselves. Either (or both) attack can result in "a hit with an OA", but the OA that is hitting is Twin Strike, which is an OA with your off-hand weapon.

-Hyp.

Runestar said:

Well, his argument was that as a penalty, the -5 would not stack with itself, since nothing in the entry suggests that this is cumulative. So even if you trigger it multiple times, the penalty still stays at -5, because it simply overlaps the prior penalty.

Is this how the penalty rules work in 4e?

Click to expand...

Penalties add together unless they are from the same power.

Click to expand...

These penalties are not from the same power, they are from the same feat.

So, if Hyp is incorrect and it is allowed multiple times, the penalties would stack and eventually the attacker would miss and it would not be infinite.

If Hyp is correct, it's a moot point.