Defenders and Monsters that Swallow Whole

[Tellerve]

Has the conditions of Combat Superiority been satisfied?

If the fighter hits with the OA, what does he get to do?

Doesn't push require the monster to be moved away from the fighter? That might be difficult.

He could push himself out of the gullet of the creature

Having said this, I think what I may like less about the swallowed defender using his powers is the fact if my dwarf fighter gets swallowed he can still swing his waraxe inside the beast. If they had said only attacks with weapons that are one-handed and have the off-hand property I'd be a bit more happy. In fact, I think I'll be house-ruling that one.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yeah, I don't think you could push, pull, or slide a creature that you are inside simply because you would have to move yourself as part of the action and you don't have a way to do that. I'll freely admit that is an interpretation of the rules and it is perfectly reasonable to interpret it the other way, but it has the virtue of at the same time producing a more 'realistic' result (I mean I can see the fighter making the monster stop moving, but pushing it around from inside its guts?).

I think there is a basic principle at work here. In order for a power/feature/feat/etc to produce a result it is necessary that the mechanics of the effect can be produced without violating some other rule or requiring another effect which would not normally be caused to happen (in this case movement of the fighter).

Another argument against the push would be 'which direction would you push the monster?' Normally you push things directly AWAY from you. I don't think you can determine which direction that IS while the fighter is inside the monster. Now that admittedly doesn't exclude a slide, but I think it does pretty well exclude a push or a pull.

 

[arscott]

Seems like there are a number of situations where the swallowed target can't take the necessary action to actually take advantage of his or her mark ability.

For example, most of the swallow abilities daze the target, rendering the swallowed creature incapable of taking immediate actions. That negates all marks except the paladin's. Swallow abilities that limit the swallowed creature to basic attacks will allow the fighter's mark but still prevent swordmage and warden marks. And a target swallowed by the Astral Dreadnought doesn't even have line-of-sight to the Dreadnought.

I say that if the defender is subject to a weak-sauce swallowfication that still allows it to make immediate attacks, then allowing it to use its mark is perfectly reasonable.

 

[Goumindong]

Agreed....


...although why some are obsessed with discovering "how the fighter knows the monster has attacked/moved" is beyond me. It's simply unnecessary for the fighter to know these things. If the creature shifts or attacks (not including the fighter), the fighter gets to attack. How you explain that is entirely up to you, and such explanation need not require the fighter knowing anything....other than allowing him some opportunity to attack.

Lets try it this way: If a unswallowed fighter is blinded, does he get a MBA if his marked adjacent enemy shifts?

No, you cannot make an OA or II against an enemy that you cannot see. [This is why there are feats and abilities that let you make OA's against invisible enemies, and why stuff like blindsight exists etc]

 

[Black Knight Irios]

No, you cannot make an OA or II against an enemy that you cannot see. [This is why there are feats and abilities that let you make OA's against invisible enemies, and why stuff like blindsight exists etc]

And why do you assume that the fighter/defender can't see the enemy?
Where do the rules tell you that the swallowed defender can't see.

If you say it is dark inside a creature - you are right (most of the time).
If I say the defender might have a light source you are still right but never the less the defender can see the enemy.

 

[Saeviomagy]

If the defender stops marking the creature that swallowed him, how does that reduce the damage he suffers or change the fact that he is cut off from healing/etc. The swallower will only have an easier time attacking the defender's allies.

It means the monster doesn't have to attack him. IIRC, monsters can attack their swallowees. Spreading damage appropriately is better than hogging it all.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

It means the monster doesn't have to attack him. IIRC, monsters can attack their swallowees. Spreading damage appropriately is better than hogging it all.

How do they attack the swallowed creature except for automatic damage?

The sight of a purpleworm eating himself just to bite the swallowed fighter one more time would be kinda amusing.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Paladin mark yes, Fighter immediate attack: no.

Aren´t you dazed when swallowed?

 

[Black Knight Irios]

Paladin mark yes, Fighter immediate attack: no.

Aren´t you dazed when swallowed?

Wether you are dazed or not depends on the monster that swallowed you.
Therefore, your first sentence should depend on the monster that swallowed the defender.

Being swallowed is already not the best thing for your defender to happen - to weaken him even more by denying what he should get by the rules is just kind of lame.

If you as a DM think that it does not fit the flavor of the defender to get his punishing abilities while swallowed, you should at least allow your player to come up with a flavorful way to describe how he could get his abilities going and if they seem to make sense at least a bit allow their usage.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Hmmh seems i was missing some posts between i opened the thread and when I replied, so i got ninjad for 2 hours or so... damned dota...

yes, if the moster doesn´t daze the fghter an extra base attack would not be so terrible for a big monster...

hmmh i wanted to say opportunity attacks are qut of question, but actually i could imagine beeing able to hurt the monster so bad when it tries to move that it stops immediately...