Granting vs Gaining CA

[Smurtis]

Hey all... I have a question that until recently i always thought was the same thing... and perhaps it is, but we'll see lol

Basically, there are conditions that may say you GAIN Combat Advantage (CA) and times it says the target GRANTS CA... are these the same? Let me post an example that got me thinking about all this:

Claw Gloves (lvl 4): When in beast form and an enemy is GRANTING combat advantage to you, your melee attacks deal 1d10 extra damage to that target.

Question: If a druid with these gloves finds herself to GAIN CA on the target (via powers or positioning, etc), does he still get the +1d10 damage bonus? Or does the target specifically have to Grant it? Like, being dazed granting him CA?

**Edited to clarify the example***

 

[vaultdweller]

There is no difference between a target granting CA and you gaining CA against a target.

 

[malraux]

Grant CA means that everyone who attacks you has CA. Gaining CA means that for your next attack you have CA against the target.

 

[Smurtis]

Grant CA means that everyone who attacks you has CA. Gaining CA means that for your next attack you have CA against the target.

OK, i understand that... but can you help with the example I provided? Does someone who GAINS CA able to utilize effects/bonuses that require the opponent to be GRANTING CA specifically?

 

[vaultdweller]

OK, i understand that... but can you help with the example I provided? Does someone who GAINS CA able to utilize effects/bonuses that require the opponent to be GRANTING CA specifically?

Yes.

 

[twilsemail]

CA is a sort of variable condition that exists between two (or more) creatures. If you gain CA against a creature, that creature is granting CA to you. These are just interchangeable terms describing the condition.

CA is like a river. The Mississippi Nile flows from Lake Victoria*. It also flows to the Mediterranean. Both terms are true at the same time. If you affect the flow from Lake Victoria, you also affect the flow to the Mediterranean.

*I know, I know, this is debatable.

 

[twilsemail]

Grant CA means that everyone who attacks you has CA. Gaining CA means that for your next attack you have CA against the target.

This isn't really true. In the least it's not universally true.

A power or effect that makes a target grant CA can make them grant CA to everyone, an ally, enemies, allies or yourself (or mixes or some other grouping I've not mentioned).

ex. Recitation of Foreknowledge (Bard Enc. 3; AP 8) the target grants CA to one of your allies.

Similarly, you or an ally can gain CA against all enemies, or against one enemy. This CA may last until you attack, until the end of your turn, or until the end of the Encounter (or until some other condition is met).

ex. Essence of Arcane Blood (Essence Mage Enc. 11; AP 45) You gain CA against all targets of your arcane attacks until the end of your next turn.

 

[Smurtis]

CA is a sort of variable condition that exists between two (or more) creatures. If you gain CA against a creature, that creature is granting CA to you. These are just interchangeable terms describing the condition.

I'm not sure i agree 100%... I still believe at a very small level there is a difference between the two... Allow me to present another specific example and tell me what you think:

Cunning Stalker Feat: You GAIN combat advantage against enemies that have no creatures adjacent to it other than yourself.

Aversion Staff +1: You gain a +2 item bonus to all defenses against attacks made from enemies that are subject to an effect you caused.

Question:

If you GAIN CA from cunning stalker, do you gain the +2 item bonus for the staff property? I believe this to be true only if the target would be GRANTING CA... But since the effect is GAINED, you become the target, not the enemy... but your statement is suggesting that gaining and granting CA is the same, which would then suggest that since they are the same, you would gain the bonus, even though the effect targets yourself...

This is why i believe that at a very fine level, the two are two seperate conditions... what do you think?

 

[Nullzone]

The wording of gains/grants implies a difference in scope, but doesn't explicitly delineate the relationship of enemy:friendly actions. I believe that, for your specific examples:

- Aversion Staff would not grant you the bonus because you have not inflicted any kind of effect on the enemy; you simply have the benefit of CA on your own turn against him thanks to the feat.

- Claw Gloves would work because the enemy grants CA, regardless of its source.

 

[twilsemail]

Condition was probably the wrong choice of words... state of being maybe?

Effect is such a poorly defined and over-used word in 4e that the power of that staff is ridiculous.

By some peoples readings sliding a target into difficult terrain would net you the benefit as well.

I think the primary problem with your example is the definition of “effect” and where CA falls within that definition.

No I don’t think the feat would gain you the benefit of the item. I also do not believe CA is an “effect” as the word is generally used within 4e.

If you'd used a power that caused the enemy to grant CA, then yes the item would apply.