A Possibly Brilliant Strategy?

[Rechan]

The question is: should the skeleton be immune to eyebite because of fluff reasons (i.e. "the skeleton has no eyes") or for balance reasons? Because the fluff is irrelevant to game mechanics.

The warlock can use its daily on undead (the charmy illusiony thing). So yes, Eyebite is legit.

Unless the statblock says "It's immune", then it's not unless you rule 0.

Also, not only does the rules say "The skeleton knows what you did to it" re Divine CHallenge, but that Int 3, if I recall, is high enough to be able to speak.

The mark, in general, is to prevent big nasty monsters from charging past you and attacking the wizard. The AoO prevention isn't a bad trick tho.

 

[Sir_Darien]

And OA rules as I understand them: you can make one OA per turn per opponent that provokes it.

I believe an opportunity attack is an immediate action, which means that a creature can only make one per round.

I could be mistaken however...

 

[Rechan]

I believe an opportunity attack is an immediate action, which means that a creature can only make one per round.

I could be mistaken however...

From the quickstart rules:

Opportunity Action: When an enemy lets its guard down, you can take an opportunity action. You can only take one opportunity action on each combatant's turn (if available). An opportunity action interrupts the action that triggered it.
The most common opportunity action is an opportunity attack. When an enemy leaves a square adjacent to you, or
when an adjacent enemy makes a ranged or an area attack, yon can make an opportunity attack against that enemy.
Immediate Action: Interrupts and reactions are immediate actions. Specific powers define the trigger for these actions. You can take only one immediate action per round, and you can't take an immediate action on your turn.
An interrupt lets you act before the triggering action is resolved. If the interrupt invalidates the triggering action, that action is lost.
A reaction lets you act immediately in response to a triggering action. The triggering action is completely resolved before you take your reaction.

OA and IA are separated. My interpretation is that you can take 1 opportunity attack per turn, per opponent.

 

[ebenmckay]

Looking further into zombie and ooze stats from monsters in KotS, I see that they both have an INT of 1, which shows that skeletons are in fact smarter. So if I want a monster that attacks with no regard for its own safety, a monster that might walk (or flow) blithely through a wall of fire because the adventurers are on the other side, it needs an INT 1?

Also, Eyebite is psychic damage. Fluffwise it's a mental attack that happens to be delivered from the caster's eyes. So whether or not the skeleton has eyes is irrelevant. The presence or absence of a mind might matter, though.

 

[ZetaStriker]

Well, yeah, it's a risky strategy for a striker due to low HP, but it's a sound strategy for the warlock because he has multiple abilities that make him harder to hit (shadow walk, eyebite). It would be sound for a rogue because he's designed to move in and out of melee. The ranger is meant to stay out of the way, so it wouldn't be as good an option for him. Decent risk for the warlock with a high payoff.

Shadow Walk could help, but not Eyebite... it can't make an opportunity attack against something it can't see.

 

[David S. Raley]

The paladin player was fighting honorably, not running but dueling the skeleton warrior he marked one-on-one, when the player of the warlock decided to get sneaky. In addition to attacking the blazing skeleton with Eyebite, the warlock insisted on sauntering past the marked skeleton warrior every turn. This meant that the skeleton warrior with his pitiful INT and his super-powered AoO ability couldn't resist taking a swing.

The phrase "couldn't resist" makes me feel that the controlling stat should be Wisdom rather than Int. The low Int would keep the skeletons from devising any wonderful strategies but the good Wisdom score should prevent them from doing anything self-destructive.

 

[ebenmckay]

The phrase "couldn't resist" makes me feel that the controlling stat should be Wisdom rather than Int. The low Int would keep the skeletons from devising any wonderful strategies but the good Wisdom score should prevent them from doing anything self-destructive.

Welcome to the forum!

To answer this, I look at the most careless-about-its-survival creature I can think of: the zombie. It has an INT of 1 and a WIS of 8. Maybe the designers didn't intend the zombie to be as carelessly suicidal as I imagine it to be, but it seems to me that monster INT will determine caution more than WIS.

 

[Sir_Darien]

From the quickstart rules:
.
OA and IA are separated. My interpretation is that you can take 1 opportunity attack per turn, per opponent.

Thanks for setting me straight, Rechan.

I misread that as I was looking through last time.

 

[Gort]

To be honest - as others have said - since the skeleton knows exactly what's been done to it by the paladin marking it, I'd say that it can act sensibly in combat.

It's not like "Ow, it hurts when I do that!" is a particularly brain-taxing exercise.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Int 3 is more than most animals. Most animals would stop attacking in such a situation. A frog (which is really dumb) will learn not to try to eat a wasp after making that mistake once.

Suggested tactics for dumb monsters is a good idea, IMO, but not necessary in this case.

I've seen this argument a few times.

Shouldn't this reasoning mean that the skeleton would... I don't know... stop attacking the PCs at all? After all, it knows that standing next to the paladin gets it whacked. It continues to do so in the hopes that it will kill him. Why should getting whacked in exchange for a chance to hurt someone else be any different?