Defenders handing out free attacks (to opponents)

Frostmarrow · May 20, 2008

We all know leaders can hand out free attacks to allies. But what if defenders hand out a free (basic) attack to an opponent, provided all the opponent's attacks (for that round) are directed at the defender?

It might be easier than marking to govern, especially in miniature free games.

Also, the marking mechanic is not looking like it is going to acheive what it is supposed to acheive. Defenders mark their opponents in order to draw their attacks. If the opponents refuse they take damage. The obvious tactic here is to mark an opponent and then avoid the marked opponent.

It would be more heroic to hand out a free attack. What do you think?

Ingolf · May 20, 2008

Frostmarrow said:
We all know leaders can hand out free attacks to allies. But what if defenders hand out a free (basic) attack to an opponent, provided all the opponent's attacks (for that round) are directed at the defender?

It might be easier than marking to govern, especially in miniature free games.

Also, the marking mechanic is not looking like it is going to acheive what it is supposed to acheive. Defenders mark their opponents in order to draw their attacks. If the opponents refuse they take damage. The obvious tactic here is to mark an opponent and then avoid the marked opponent.

It would be more heroic to hand out a free attack. What do you think?

I think you'll end up with a dead Defender.

Also, only the Paladin's mark causes damage if the marked target attacks someone other than the Paladin, and the whole "mark and avoid" tactic doesn't work anymore.

Mort_Q · May 20, 2008

Free attacks don't take away regular attacks. What purpose would it serve?

Naszir · May 20, 2008

Interesting. What might it be called? Locked in Combat?

I haven't been able to play any of 4e yet but Marking to me seems to be not quite right. I like your thinking and will keep this in mind when I get the opportunity to play 4e.

Mustrum_Ridcully · May 20, 2008

Mort_Q said:
Free attacks don't take away regular attacks. What purpose would it serve?

If I understood Frostmarrow correctly, the attacker only gets the extra attack if he attacked the Defender in the first place.

My opinion: I think it might be to dangerous, and somehow, it also doesn't feel right. It might be easier just get the penalties of mark to anyone within 4 squares, and just special abilities like the Paladins abilities require picking a specific target (which should be easier to remember then the -2 attack penalty of a Mark.)

Frostmarrow · May 20, 2008

Ingolf said:
I think you'll end up with a dead Defender.

Also, only the Paladin's mark causes damage if the marked target attacks someone other than the Paladin, and the whole "mark and avoid" tactic doesn't work anymore.

You don't have to use it all the time. If the monster is already attacking you, there is no need in baiting it. But on the other hand if the monster starts looking for the party wizard you can snap it out of that: "Come on, hit me, you get a free attack..."

It took an awful lot of extra text to make 'mark and avoid' unviable.

vagabundo · May 20, 2008

Frostmarrow said:
Also, the marking mechanic is not looking like it is going to acheive what it is supposed to acheive. Defenders mark their opponents in order to draw their attacks. If the opponents refuse they take damage. The obvious tactic here is to mark an opponent and then avoid the marked opponent. ?

Bit early for that statement really.

Naszir · May 20, 2008

Mort_Q said:
Free attacks don't take away regular attacks. What purpose would it serve?

Wouldn't the purpose be to keep the an opponent locked in combat with the defender instead of bypassing them? Just like Marking?

Frostmarrow · May 20, 2008

vagabundo said:
Bit early for that statement really.

It's just a hunch. The playtesters says marking works. But playtesters play nice.

Mort_Q · May 20, 2008

Naszir said:
Wouldn't the purpose be to keep the an opponent locked in combat with the defender instead of bypassing them? Just like Marking?

Sure, but then they'd still get to attack on their turn. Similar to marking, but... ouch.

Frostmarrow said:
It's just a hunch. The playtesters says marking works. But playtesters play nice.

The DM is the one the generally will be making decisions for the marked. If the DM isn't playing nice (at least for some definitions of the word), then the games already gone to hell.

I don't think I get your point.

Defenders handing out free attacks (to opponents)

Frostmarrow

First Post

Ingolf

First Post

Mort_Q

First Post

Naszir

First Post

Mustrum_Ridcully

Legend

Frostmarrow

First Post

vagabundo

Adventurer

Naszir

First Post

Frostmarrow

First Post

Mort_Q

First Post

Similar Threads