The "correct" way to deal with marks

[Flipguarder]

So the marked condition has led me to an inner debate about how it works as a condition. I am playing a defender and I am also DMing a different campaign. And as such there are a few questions I'm going back and forth on.

1. Do creatures understand what being marked means (as for the penalty to attacks against others)?
2. Do creatures feel any compulsion or even suggestion that they "should" attack the marker?
3. Does a creatures intelligence have anything to do with how they perceive/react to marks?
4. As a DM is it a legitimate strategy to simply decide that say, orcs ignore the guy with lots of armor and a shield because he seems hard to hit?

I'm not so much interested with peoples opinions on this subject (but meh, say what you will). I'm more interested if there is any errata or articles from WOTC about how they intended this mechanic to function.

 

[Nifft]

1/ Yes, else marks wouldn't work.
2/ "Feel"?
3/ Kinda: intelligent monsters handle tactical combat more intelligently, including dealing with marks.
4/ Sure. Orcs are smart enough to know squishy guys bleed easier.

Go read DMG p.26-27, and p. 40-41.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

So the marked condition has led me to an inner debate about how it works as a condition. I am playing a defender and I am also DMing a different campaign. And as such there are a few questions I'm going back and forth on.

1. Do creatures understand what being marked means (as for the penalty to attacks against others)?
2. Do creatures feel any compulsion or even suggestion that they "should" attack the marker?
3. Does a creatures intelligence have anything to do with how they perceive/react to marks?
4. As a DM is it a legitimate strategy to simply decide that say, orcs ignore the guy with lots of armor and a shield because he seems hard to hit?

I'm not so much interested with peoples opinions on this subject (but meh, say what you will). I'm more interested if there is any errata or articles from WOTC about how they intended this mechanic to function.

As I understand it, the marked condition means that a creature feels specially threatened by one particular creature.

Since this ability is most common to Defender players and Soldier monsters, it almost always means "the big armored guy with the huge sword right next to you", so that's the example I'm going to use.

So, to answer your questions:

1.- Yes. The marked creature could try to attack someone else, but it cannot ignore the big armored guy with the huge sword

2.- No compulsion, just the fact that there's a big armored guy with the huge sword that will whack you if you don't do something about it first.

3.- Maybe. Sometimes an opponent with better intelligence or wisdom might try to ignore the big armored guy with the huge sword to attack the weakling in the robe right behind him... However, instincts die hard and he will not be able to put 100% of his attention on the attack (-2 to attacks)

4.- Maybe the standard Orcs won't, but maybe the Orc assassin or the Eye of Grummush might try to ignore a mark once in a while

The mechanics are not errataed, and they work perfectly as intended in every 4E game I have played

 

[Skallgrim]

The rule, as written, is designed to give the DM a choice when running such monsters. I think the mechanic functions pretty well, and pretty well as intended (barring edge cases, like whether a specific swordmage aegis and powers which are associated with that aegis are well-matched, etc.).

The mechanic, fundamentally, is supposed to allow a choice by the DM. Some monsters will include remarks on this in their tactics, or there may be tactical notes for a given fight in a given adventure, but fundamentally, the mark is supposed to allow a choice, between suffering the mark, or attacking the marker. It shouldn't be a "rule" that is followed.

Beyond the basics of -2 to hit. the associated effects are way too varied for any hard and fast rule (and would vary with the monster, anyway).

On question 1, the monster would have to understand what the mark was, as it is a condition affecting it, and all creatures are aware of conditions affecting them (even if they don't know where they came from), unless otherwise noted.

You can't possibly say whether or not a creature "feels" a compulsion, as you can mark everything from fearful kobolds to mindless undead to controlled constructs.


I would hope that a creature's intelligence would have an influence on all their decisions in combat, including marks. Otherwise, either the smart ones are hosed, or the dumb ones get free benefits.

I can't see why Orcs wouldn't make decisions about who to attack based on things like armor, whether or not a mark was involved (and, of course, they could just "aid another" to help take the armored guy out, too).

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

I can't see why Orcs wouldn't make decisions about who to attack based on things like armor, whether or not a mark was involved (and, of course, they could just "aid another" to help take the armored guy out, too).

For the record, "The big armored guy with the huge sword" was just a figure of speech.

The orcs would feel equally threatened by the foppish elf with no armor, but a sword that explodes with green fire

The point is, the -2 to attacks if they ignore the mark represents the fact that the orc cannot keep their eyes off the character marking them, for whatever reason you want to narrate

 

[Wormwood]

1. Do creatures understand what being marked means (as for the penalty to attacks against others)?

Yes.

2. Do creatures feel any compulsion or even suggestion that they "should" attack the marker?

DM call.

3. Does a creatures intelligence have anything to do with how they perceive/react to marks?

Dm call.

4. As a DM is it a legitimate strategy to simply decide that say, orcs ignore the guy with lots of armor and a shield because he seems hard to hit?

Yep. The Dm could decide to ignore the mark, thus allowing the fighter to kick some more ass. PROTIP: When I DM, I enjoy allowing the fighter to kick ass.

I'm not so much interested with peoples opinions on this subject (but meh, say what you will). I'm more interested if there is any errata or articles from WOTC about how they intended this mechanic to function.

Sorry. Everything you need to know is in the PHB and DMG. Errata is unnecessary in this case.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Generally speaking:

(a) Creatures know they are marked.
(b) They might consider it. Once they see what happens if they ignore the mark (divine challenge zapping then, fighter attacking then, swordmage teleporting over, etc ...) they will probably factor that into their decision. Heck, the penalty on the attack might be enough.
(c) I've found the best way to make these kinds of decisions is checking out the tactics section. They'll give a good idea of the way the particular monster should fight. (i.e. do they go after the closest party member, the one that looks most lightly armored, do they all swarm around one, etc, etc, etc ...)
(d) Depending on the group, they may prefer "smart monsters", where basically the DM plays the monsters as fully aware of most of the PCs abilities and thus makes decisions appropriately in combat, or they may prefer the monsters are "realistic" and thus played as being ignorant of some of the PCs tricks.

 

[Regicide]

I can't see why Orcs wouldn't make decisions about who to attack based on things like armor, whether or not a mark was involved (and, of course, they could just "aid another" to help take the armored guy out, too).

If I was a monster I'd definitely attack the guy in scale who trains every day in combat and in not getting hit, he's an easy target. The myopic old guy with glasses who has spent his entire life in a library studying books and is wearing hide armour and leaning on a staff to support himself is damn near impossible to hit.

As for marks, whatever. Attack the closest target. If you can't kill the closest target you're going to lose anyway and should be running.

 

[Goumindong]

Its important to note that in many cases they know about the penalty, but may not know that the fighter can take an attack for any actions, since those powers are separate and not known.

 

[Dr_Sage]

I like the way my DM roleplays this.

Usually the creatures respect the marks unless they absolutely HAVE to do something different. Monsters know they are marked but they do not know what will happen if they choose to ignore it (they are at least "aware" of the -2 penalty of course).

Once our paladin used Piercing Smite to kill one orc and mark other 2 that were attacking my fighter, while my fighter was marking and smashing their leader.

The Orc Leader desperately commanded the others to ignore the palladin and keep hitting me, so he could try to escape (coward!). What happened was that the 2 orc minions were instantly killed by the Paladin's Challenge.

I congratulated the excelent roleplay of my DM. Certanly the orc leader did what a desperate creature would do, even not been the smartest thing to do.

I consider marks GREAT roleplay elemments and I will also respect them in my furure games as a DM.