Search results

It's one applied attack roll, one damage roll. Taking the better of the multiple attack rolls has no bearing on the damage roll. If it had the "this is two attacks" phrasing, then it would be a different story.

You aren't making any sense.

We'll have to wait for the first turn-based 4E video game to come out. The designers will be forced to explain how everything is really supposed to work and then we'll be able to reverse engineer the rules into something understandable. It's just that easy.

I agree that that ought to be the intent which is why I am considering houseruling that the paladin cannot move away and cannot hide using total concealment or improved cover. While these things may be good tactics, it rubs me the wrong way when the challenge is to play a game of hide-and-seek.

Why would being compelled make the target know where the paladin is? This bit--"DC takes care of all the targeting issues"--isn't supported by anything in the description or elsewhere that I have read. Do you have some reference for this?

You haven't really explained how that ties to the topic, so I can only guess your meaning. Are you saying that allies not granting cover to the enemy somehow negates the cover they provide for using stealth? If so, I think you are getting the two uses of cover confused.

No, the point of that is to explain why a beetle would accept a divine challenge. It doesn't confer any special ability beyond understanding the nature of the challenge.

How is that relevant?

Okay...

True. In some cases, he's around a corner or whatever and there is no way to get to him. In other cases, he's going to be dogged by other characters for moving and/or making ranged attacks while adjacent to enemies. Closing your eyes is a free action. You do before the paladin goes. He makes...

I agree with all the assessments you made in your last post. I don't particularly want the part I quoted to be correct, but there it is. If I were to strip away WotC's intentions, I would add in the two caveats I posted. However, those would be houserules, and honestly, they would seem to go...

It causes damage if the target wants to do anything remotely effective during the encounter. If it only moves or buffs the whole time while taking at least the paladin's attack, all the better.

These are the changes I would make to keep what I think is the spirit of the challenge-- 1. The paladin having total concealment or superior cover breaks the challenge. 2. The paladin moving away from the target breaks the challenge.

The thing with this is that it's great with multiclassing and quite wonderful with another defender getting in the way. All the paladin needs is one good ranged at-will. Even without mulitclassing, he can make a basic ranged attack and get his guaranteed divine challenge damage, which in quite...

That was my understanding also until I actually reread the power. I thought WotC understood the problem and fixed it. However, it is pretty clear cut that "mark, shoot, run" satisfies the requirements. All you need to do each round is make an attack and ranged attacks work just as well as melee.

I don't see how the current wording prevents this in any way. In a game I ran, the paladin used a ranged attack, then ran through all his allies and hid behind a wall. There was no possible way he could have been attacked. After reading a lot of threads on the topic, I had it in my mind that...

After one day, my books looked like I threw them into the bathtub. I couldn't even close one of them. I had to put weights on top to keep it shut. They did get better to the point where I can put then on a shelf without too much fear of the binding exploding, but still look pretty awful. I have...

And 50 cents for a millionaire still buys him a can of Coke. Not my point. I've stated several times now that I am not disputing the value of a pip itself and doing so would be utterly pointless. I am comparing one pip versus many, or one pip versus bonuses that can not be expressed in pips but...

It's decent, but it's no 5E.

Other way around actually--I'm looking at an abundance of defense bonuses rather than attack bonuses which is what gives a lower relative value. i.e. it is easy at higher levels to get a +3 bonus from a neck slot, a +5 bonus from attributes, etc. I'm basing my numbers off the defense section of...