Ranger vs Paladin

[Tonester]

This is a bit of a tough one, but if I had to decide - I'd go with the Ranger suffering -2 to hit the Warlock and would also incur the radiant damage. Specific > General.

Divine Challenge specifically states:
"... takes -2 penalty to ATTACK ROLLS for ANY ATTACK which does not include you as the target."

Did they make an attack roll against someone other than the Pally?
Did they "attack" anyone other than the Pally?

If you answered yes to either/both of those questions, then Divine Challenge kicks in, imo. If that isn't what they intended, they would have to SPECIFICALLY say so in the description/mechanics of Twin Strike.

*edit*
Lets also not forget... Twin Strike is technically a "Ranger Level 1 Attack POWER". If that power grants 2 different attack rolls and 2 different attack targets, then it provides 2 different attacks. Period.

 

[Tonester]

DC says that the penalty and damage is factored in when the Paladin isn't a target of the attack.

This is very incorrect. DC says the penalty and damage is factored in when the Paladin isn't a target of ANY attack... not THE attack.

We don't have many lawyers here, do we?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Divine Challenge specifically states:
"... takes -2 penalty to ATTACK ROLLS for ANY ATTACK which does not include you as the target."

Did they make an attack roll against someone other than the Pally?
Did they "attack" anyone other than the Pally?

If you answered yes to either/both of those questions, then Divine Challenge kicks in, imo.

Well, again, consider a Fireball such that both the Paladin and the Warlock are in the Burst.

The Wizard casting the Fireball makes an attack roll against the Paladin, and an attack roll against the Warlock. So the answer to your first question is "Yes".

He has made an attack against the Warlock, so the answer to your second question is "Yes".

But has he made an attack that does not include the Paladin as a target? The only attack he has made is the area burst, Fireball, which includes the Paladin as a target... so despite making an attack roll against the Warlock, he has not made an attack that does not include the Paladin as a target, and he does not suffer Divine Challenge damage.

Multiple attack rolls does not automatically mean more than one attack has been made. Divine Challenge doesn't care how many attacks you make against people who aren't the Paladin, as long as all of those attacks include the Paladin as a target.

In the case of Twin Strike, I'm pointing out that the power itself specifies "two attacks". It's not the two attack rolls the Ranger makes that make me ask about Divine Challenge; it's the fact that the power specifies that more than one attack occurs when you use it.

-Hyp.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Yeah we do ... divine challenge happens to say the first time the ranger makes an attack that doesn't include the paladin.

If the standpoint is from twin strike being two separate attacks, then it's no different to the scenario of the ranger twin striking (both vs.) the paladin, then someone else provoking an OA from the ranger and causing him to burn (if he takes it).

edit: was @tonester

 

[Danceofmasks]

Well, I reckon the ranger doesn't take damage.

Why?
Both attacks are part of the primary attack.
Procedure is selecting targets for primary, then resolving them. Then selecting targets for secondary, etc. .. secondary are actually separate.
Since while resolving either twin strike attack, the paladin is selected as a target.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Since while resolving either twin strike attack, the paladin is selected as a target.

He's a target of Twin Strike, but is he a target of the one attack out of the two attacks which is directed at the Warlock?

-Hyp.

 

[Otterscrubber]

Yes, I agree they are different. I just find the difference to be irrelevant for the purpose of DC. In both cases, you are using one action to attack multiple creatures, regardless of the number of attack rolls involved.

I think the difference here is a wizard casting scorching burst has no choice but to make several attack rolls at different targets. It is one attack affecting multiple targets. Twin strike, both attacks could be aimed at the paladin. The purpose of a mark is force a subject (the ranger) to attack the paladin in this case, whenever possible. If he has a choice to attack the paladin, but chooses instead to attack another target, then he suffers the effects of the mark.

I would rule the ranger does indeed suffer if he uses twin strike to attack another target even if one of the attacks was at the pally. Which is the opposite of my initial reaction when I started reading this thread. But the more I thought about it the more letting the ranger ignore this ability of the paladin's, specifically designed to force a subject to behave a certain way, was chapping the paladin's mojo in a big way.

 

[Danceofmasks]

That's not my point .. from where I stand, a primary attack can include multiple attacks.

On the question of whether the ranger burns if the paladin is the primary target for two-wolf pounce (ranger daily 5), while the warlock is the secondary target, I'm less inclined to venture an opinion as yet.

Gotta go .. might look into it when I get back, in about 9 hours or so.

 

[Boarstorm]

I think the difference here is a wizard casting scorching burst has no choice but to make several attack rolls at different targets. It is one attack affecting multiple targets. Twin strike, both attacks could be aimed at the paladin. The purpose of a mark is force a subject (the ranger) to attack the paladin in this case, whenever possible. If he has a choice to attack the paladin, but chooses instead to attack another target, then he suffers the effects of the mark.

And the challenge would succeed in its purpose simply by forcing a single shot from twin strike at the paladin. That's one less d10 (or whatever) the soft target has to soak up.

I reiterate my belief in the mainattack/subattack system I briefly mentioned earlier.

 

[Reln]

I have to add to this. lest say the ranger chose to TS only the Warlock, would he take the DC damage twice or once?

EDIT: I just reread DC and it says "first time he makes an attack that doesn't include you" so my line of thought is kind of blown, but it still makes you look at it from another direction.

The thing that stands out to me is it says "that doesn't include you as a target". The paladin is a target, even though he is not the only target.