The dominated condition and sneak attack

[Smurtis]

Okay, so I need to ask someone who works for the company, but I can't ask the developers because they're wrong or the freelancers because even though they write the rules they aren't actual employees so they don't know anything. I can't ask the managing editor or the head of R&D either because "name dropping" isn't a good argument. So I guess I should just grab the employee directory and start calling everyone to ask them until someone agrees with you and then they'll be right and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong? Does that sum it up?

Either there's an official source for rules arbitration or there's not. Seeing as WotC has experience with this sort of thing considering there are professional M:tG tournaments and all, I'd think they'd have this thing sorted out.

I see you pushing this same "argument" but i dont see you putting it to practice, other than getting a CS agent to answer an, IMO, incomplete question... Why not write out specific question and submit it three times? or call all these people you apparantly know and ask?

Here's the question i would provide if i knew where to put it:

If a PC is dominated they can attack their allies if the power says "target creature". However, the issue in question is; can the dominated PC attack an ally with a "target enemy" power (which also includes Sneak attack which targets enemies only)? Before you answer, please refer to the RAW definition of "dominated" and how the rules specifically say that the role of enemy and ally do not change while dominated.

Write the question clearly and in detail, leaving out no questionable scenerios... point out the rules in the book... maybe it does need to be amended... But sending an incomplete question to a "source", you can expect an incomplete/incorrect answer...

 

[Abstruse]

I see you pushing this same "argument" but i dont see you putting it to practice, other than getting a CS agent to answer an, IMO, incomplete question... Why not write out specific question and submit it three times? or call all these people you apparantly know and ask?

Here's the question i would provide if i knew where to put it:

If a PC is dominated they can attack their allies if the power says "target creature". However, the issue in question is; can the dominated PC attack an ally with a "target enemy" power (which also includes Sneak attack which targets enemies only)? Before you answer, please refer to the RAW definition of "dominated" and how the rules specifically say that the role of enemy and ally do not change while dominated.

Write the question clearly and in detail, leaving out no questionable scenerios... point out the rules in the book... maybe it does need to be amended... But sending an incomplete question to a "source", you can expect an incomplete/incorrect answer...

You want it done, you do it. I already did mine.

And yes, I'm amazingly close and personal friends with everyone on my Facebook and Twitter. Why don't I give Neil Gaiman and Warren Ellis a call real quick and see if they'd like to meet up with me, Kevin Smith, Eli Roth, and the guys from Rooster Teeth for a beer.

 

[Smurtis]

You want it done, you do it. I already did mine.

Well, i decided to look into where to send them questions lol... under the WotC website, I found it under "contact us" and "email"...

I sent the following question 3 times:

If a PC is dominated they can attack their allies if the power says "target creature". However, the issue in question is; can the dominated PC attack an ally with a "target enemy" power (which also includes Sneak attack which targets enemies only)? Before you answer, please refer to the RAW definition of "dominated" and how the rules specifically say that the role of enemy and ally do not change while dominated.

Example:

A rogue PC gets dominated by a Vampire. The vampire forces the rogue to use an attack that targets a creature (in this case his ally). By some means, the rogue does gain combat advantage. Does the rogue get to add sneak attack damage, even though sneak attack states "target enemy takes extra damage" while hitting his ally, while dominated?


If it helps, here are the 3 different reference numbers for everyone to follow, if they can:

110218-000156
110218-000158
110218-000161

I believe it said i have to wait 2-3 business days. So, i'll keep you posted. I understand alot of people say these guys arent an official source, none the less, it would be nice to see their views...

 

[Aulirophile]

Okay, so I need to ask someone who works for the company, but I can't ask the developers because they're wrong or the freelancers because even though they write the rules they aren't actual employees so they don't know anything. I can't ask the managing editor or the head of R&D either because "name dropping" isn't a good argument. So I guess I should just grab the employee directory and start calling everyone to ask them until someone agrees with you and then they'll be right and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong? Does that sum it up?

Either there's an official source for rules arbitration or there's not. Seeing as WotC has experience with this sort of thing considering there are professional M:tG tournaments and all, I'd think they'd have this thing sorted out.

You might think that, but you'd be wrong. MT:G is in a whole different category (for good reason).

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Rules of the Game)

Also, you're wrong. A vetted article, from an editor/developer who is actually involved in writing rules (the dominate rule specifically, in fact!), discussing the current incarnation of dominate, says so. Allies are still your allies, enemies are still your enemies, and all that implies. The example he uses is great, as it specifically says "ally" and he says "nope, dominator can't benefit from that, not an ally."

So... yeah, rules update that changes the rules would be just fine if you want to be right. Only way it is going to happen, I'm afraid.

 

[moxcamel]

Again, I don't know how anyone who has dismissed WotC CS as underpaid, uninformed lackeys will be able to claim anything from the results of these queries. If you believed they are incompetent 3rd party drones before, then if they give the answer you want are you going to suddenly change your mind and believe them now? After all, a broken clock is still right twice a day, and being right for the wrong reasons is just as bad as being wrong.

And if all three of them come back to support using sneak attack while dominated, then it just reinforces your point that they are simple underpaid 3rd party chimps.

So I just don't see how anything definitive can come from this for the "you can't use sneak attack while dominated" crowd.

 

[Smurtis]

Again, I don't know how anyone who has dismissed WotC CS as underpaid, uninformed lackeys will be able to claim anything from the results of these queries. If you believed they are incompetent 3rd party drones before, then if they give the answer you want are you going to suddenly change your mind and believe them now? After all, a broken clock is still right twice a day, and being right for the wrong reasons is just as bad as being wrong.

And if all three of them come back to support using sneak attack while dominated, then it just reinforces your point that they are simple underpaid 3rd party chimps.

So I just don't see how anything definitive can come from this for the "you can't use sneak attack while dominated" crowd.

lol, well, i'd like to think of myself as a mature person, with no biased opinion of what is right and wrong. I simply look at the rules laid out for us and support them, unless otherwise proven. I would hope that most of the people who reply here with some intellectual guide, would do the same.

My comment with regards to the CS being underpaid, was an exaggeration lol... My point was, that the one SINGLE contact given by ONE person's claim to a private conversation, with the qestion and answer not entirely being explained and provided, may not be a great source to back your entire argument on

Personally, if i get 3 CS agents responding with clarity on the subject, I will most certainly reconsider my views and re-examine... Can i change the rule book? no... but will i reply in turn to WotC to perhaps update that ruling? Of course i will... CS agents may or may not be a great source, but they are people just like us (and we dont get paid lol)... some of them may have more knowledge than the next, and some may have more passion than the next... But to listen to just 1 CS agent who didnt even acknowledge the RULES in the books, is a very weak defense to hold on to.

BUT!!!!!

If they do come back and say that the rule book is right, and that we cant attack allies with "enemy" targets, i hope you in turn would also concede, as i would if the decisions come back in your favour

 

[Mapache]

Yes, prove to us that CS is wrong by quoting something about a game that's 1) a CCG and not a roleplaying game and 2) not even a Wizards of the Coast product.

CCG in that case doesn't stand for collectible card game. It's the unfortunately-chosen abbreviation for the Living Forgotten Realms Character Creation Guide, which are the official rules for taking part in RPGA games, which have been spun off into a separate organization but are still under WotC oversight.

 

[Brys]

So, this was the question I sent:

Sneak Attack says "When you make an attack with a light blade, a hand crossbow, a shortbow, or a sling and hit AN ENEMY granting combat advantage to you, that enemy takes extra damage based on your level." (HofFL, pg 174).
Dominated says: "In spite of [being dominated], the creature's allies remain its allies, and its enemies remain its enemies." (Rules Compendium pg.231)
If a dazed cleric (granting combat advantage) is in a party with a rogue who is being dominated by a creature, can the dominating creature make the rogue add Sneak Attack damage if the rogue hits the cleric with a basic attack?

This was the answer I got:

Hi Brys,

Thank you for contacting us. Because your enemies remain your enemies and your allies remain your allies a dominated rogue swinging at his ally would not be able to get the extra sneak attack damage.

Please let me know if there is anything else I can do for you.
We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.

To login to your account, or update your question please click here.

Don
Online Response Crew
Wizards of the Coast
1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada)
425-204-8069 (From all other countries)
Monday-Friday 9am-6pm PST / 12pm-9pm EST
Saturday-Sunday 10am-4pm PST / 1pm-7pm EST

I don't think this "proves" anything. The point of this was to back up my earlier claim that CS tends to provide different answers depending on how the question is asked. I think CS should be removed from the conversation entirely and leave it to the fanatical (unpaid) rules lawyers to debate the issue and arrive at a consensus.

I consider the debate settled when a consensus has been found. I don't expect the decision to be unanimous. I believe the consensus comes down on the side of "you can't be forced to sneak attack your allies". You are always free to play however you want in your own game.

 

[Smurtis]

A couple days ago i submitted the following question 3 times, in hopes to get 3 responses from different WotC CS agents:

If a PC is dominated they can attack their allies if the power says "target creature". However, the issue in question is; can the dominated PC attack an ally with a "target enemy" power (which also includes Sneak attack which targets enemies only)? Before you answer, please refer to the RAW definition of "dominated" and how the rules specifically say that the role of enemy and ally do not change while dominated.

Example:

A rogue PC gets dominated by a Vampire. The vampire forces the rogue to use an attack that targets a creature (in this case his ally). By some means, the rogue does gain combat advantage. Does the rogue get to add sneak attack damage, even though sneak attack states "target enemy takes extra damage" while hitting his ally, while dominated?

Unfortuneatly, the same rep replied all 3 times lol... but, it does go hand in hand with Brys' correspondance as well... possibly, even from the same guy lol

Hi Smurtis,

Thank you for contacting us. on Page 230 of the Rules Compendium it states all that you have said and continues to say:

In spite of this condition, the creatures allies remain its allies and its enemies remain its enemies.

Please let me know if there is anything else I can do for you.

We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.

To login to your account, or update your question please click here.

Don
Online Response Crew
Wizards of the Coast
1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada)
425-204-8069 (From all other countries)
Monday-Friday 9am-6pm PST / 12pm-9pm EST
Saturday-Sunday 10am-4pm PST / 1pm-7pm EST

Not exactly the best detailed answer that i would have preferred, however, combining this with Brys' above post, really, IMO, concludes that someone being dominated CANNOT be used to target their allies with powers that target "enemy" in their description or keyword. Note how the agent even refers to the rule book.

 

[moxcamel]

The wording isn't definitive, but I agree that the sentiment of the CS's reply is very likely against being being able to use sneak attack while Dominated. Thanks for doing this Smurtis.