Healing Strike

[Ganadai]

Healing Strike Cleric Attack 1
Divine radiance gleams from your weapon. When you smite your
enemy, your deity bestows a minor blessing in the form of healing
for you or one of your allies.
Encounter ✦ Divine, Healing, Radiant, Weapon
Standard Action Melee weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. AC
Hit: 2[W] + Strength modifier radiant damage, and the
target is marked until the end of your next turn. In
addition, you or one ally within 5 squares of you can
spend a healing surge.

Forgive me if I'm overlooking something here, but I've checked the errata, compendium and searched several forums.

Why does Healing Strike mark the target? It seems that the only thing it does is screw over other people who may have previously marked the target.

 

[Dalzig]

It marks the enemy because it does.

Fluff reason: The enemy is so offended by your divine action of healing an ally that he feels compelled to pummel on you for a turn.

I have a feeling the mark is meant to be a drawback to the power to help balance it out.

 

[charlesatan]

It marks the enemy because it does.

Fluff reason: The enemy is so offended by your divine action of healing an ally that he feels compelled to pummel on you for a turn.

I have a feeling the mark is meant to be a drawback to the power to help balance it out.

The mark isn't a drawback. Theoretically, you use Healing Strike so that not only do you heal an ally, but the opponent also gets penalties for attacking that wounded ally of yours.

 

[ac_noj]

I really don't like that power, the mark is annoying and it's too unreliable for a heal.

 

[FadedC]

The attack does good damage (2w) and has one of the most powerful possible riders (granting a healing surge). I'm not sure what there is not to like. I even took a multiclass feat to give this one to my fighter (obviously the mark doesn't help me there).

 

[brehobit]

The attack does good damage (2w) and has one of the most powerful possible riders (granting a healing surge). I'm not sure what there is not to like. I even took a multiclass feat to give this one to my fighter (obviously the mark doesn't help me there).

Ditto. It's a great choice for the fighter (who has lousy 1st level encounter powers IMO).

As a GM I'd always allow a mark _not_ to occur if the player wished. Same as allowing pushes/pulls/slides/shifts to be shorter than the power calls for.

Mark

 

[fba827]

The mark isn't a drawback. Theoretically, you use Healing Strike so that not only do you heal an ally, but the opponent also gets penalties for attacking that wounded ally of yours.

Yeah, I was coming to post this but it was already said for me. Thanks

If your ally had a mark on the enemy, then your healing the ally won't last that long as he'll probably get whacked again. Or, even if not, at least the ally will be less tempting to the enemy....

healing is good, but healing and distracting an enemy so that it goes after you while your ally whacks it again is even better (and chances are high that if you're healing you ally you weren't ask bad off as him to begin with).

 

[robsenworldaccount]

I agree with the above poster who suggested that it was meant to balance the power. I would assert that its more a tic for a tac that "allows" the player to have such an ability at lower level.

 

[Maxim Machinery]

Healing Strike is an awesome power. Of awesomness. +2.

 

[Ganadai]

The mark isn't a drawback. Theoretically, you use Healing Strike so that not only do you heal an ally, but the opponent also gets penalties for attacking that wounded ally of yours.

That would be nice if the opponent got a penalty from the mark, but unlike the fighters combat challenge and the paladins divine challenge, no where does it say that a clerics mark imposes a penalty on the opponent. The only thing it does is remove a previous mark already on the opponent from a fighter or paladin. I suppose that's a good thing if it's the fighter or paladin who need the healing.