Ampersand: Sneak Attack

[Just Another User]

Except the power explicitly indicates that you attack the target and deal weapon damage, so Fingers will be knifing his boss in this scenario.

As you certainly know there are situations where being able to move an extra 4 squares (sigh) is worth a little damage.

But for those that have no problem groking the artful dodger variant of positioning strike, could someone being so kind to describe me how it works against:

a stone golem

a ozee

a 30 feet long snake

an incorporeal creature

a gelatinous cube

or a number of other creatures that I could imagine, specifically creatures mindless, which can't reasonably be taunted or even bluffed, or that don't technically feel pain, or creatures which can't be phisically "shoved" or that deal some kind of damage or negative effect on touch or, well, you get it (I hope.)
Halfling vs ogre, I can make it work, even if it hurts, the problem is that in D&D you fight weirdest things than ogres and using some of the powers against some of the mosnters (crimson edge against a mummy?) would be excedingly weird, and there are onyl three way I can see to making then works

a) surgically remove my SoD

b) something like nth pages of exceptions for every power/monster ("you can't use power X against monster A, B, C" or "monster A is immune to powers x, y, z"

c) empowerer the rule 0 to pre-3e levels, something that I could even like but I can't see the 4e designers do it.

 

[Khaim]

Let's assume there are powers that let you get a healing surge once per encounter when you're damaged. Let's also assume that there are talents or feats which let you do something with a healing surge other than heal -- such as remove an ongoing condition. Neither of these is unlikely from what we've seen. There would, then, likely be many situation where you'd want to do just a little damage to a friend to trigger a condition. Perhaps your warlord has a great power he can only use if Bloodied, and he's just a few hit points shy, and his initiative is next...

This is a serious issue, I think. It came up in Bo9S, even, with the Crusader's 1st-level(!) stance that let him heal 2hp any time he hit someone. So can I punch teammate A to heal teammate B? Can I use my fists and do subdual damage, which barely counts? Can I intentionally do minimal damage (1)?

And oh, let's not even get near that quagmire that is the mind-control debate...

 

[Lizard]

This is a serious issue, I think. It came up in Bo9S, even, with the Crusader's 1st-level(!) stance that let him heal 2hp any time he hit someone. So can I punch teammate A to heal teammate B? Can I use my fists and do subdual damage, which barely counts? Can I intentionally do minimal damage (1)?

And oh, let's not even get near that quagmire that is the mind-control debate...

I'm going to have to assume it's been addressed in some way. The game balance implications of letting Player A use their abilities on Player B, or damage Player B to allow him to trigger an ability, are pretty major, and it's not possible the playtesters never thought of it. Either they have some blanket and irrational restrictions, or these options were factored into balancing the powers.

 

[glass]

But for those that have no problem groking the artful dodger variant of positioning strike, could someone being so kind to describe me how it works against: a stone golem

You trick the golem into overextending its lunge so that it stumbles into the place where you wanted it to be.

a ozee

You trick the ooze into overextending its lunge so that it wobbles into the place where you wanted it to be.

a 30 feet long snake

You trick the snake into overextending its lunge, then attack its tail so that it has to quickly get its tail out of the way and under it in the square where you want it to be.

an incorporeal creature

You trick the spectre into overextending its lunge ...do you see a pattern forming here?

a gelatinous cube

Just to be different: You attack the cube, and then as you step back by pure luck it meanders into the square where you wanted it to be.


glass.

 

[glass]

I'm going to have to assume it's been addressed in some way. The game balance implications of letting Player A use their abilities on Player B, or damage Player B to allow him to trigger an ability, are pretty major, and it's not possible the playtesters never thought of it. Either they have some blanket and irrational restrictions, or these options were factored into balancing the powers.

It is not irrational to say that you are not looking for opportunities to attack your allies in combat.


glass.

 

[Lizard]

It is not irrational to say that you are not looking for opportunities to attack your allies in combat.


glass.

Sure you are, when you know what attacking them can do!

WOTC has made a design decision to ratchet up the 'game' aspect of D&D to 11. So expecting players to stop thinking in a gamist fashion and start thinking narrativist is sheer folly, and I can't imagine that's their only game balance mechanism. If I have an ability which can move someone X squares, and there's a tactical advantage to moving my buddy X squares which outweighs the slight damage I'll cause him, I'll do it -- and so will most D&D players, *especially* the new players WOTC hopes to recruit from the wonderful world of MMORPGs, where tactical advantage is all and any loophole is exploited until the game is patched. "Spirit of the thing" doesn't enter into the equation; if there's a way to use something the developers put in as a "fun toy" so as to kill monsters/grief players/break the system, they'll use it. And asking new DMs -- again, the focus of 4e -- to suddenly be expert game designers and house-rule when an ability can and can't be used on a PC is ludicrous.

As a DM, I will have to assume players will have ways to trigger 'bloodied' conditions, healing surges, and all sorts of other conditional powers on each other, and plan encounters accordingly, and hope the rules were written to support this.

 

[Thyrwyn]

Why is this a problem? I can see two failry reasonable responses:

Group1 - "Attacking your allies is silly. Next."
Group2 - "You want to give up your turn to damage the fighter so you can move him 1 (or 3 or 5) squares? OK."

The first is fairly self explanatory and I have no problem with it.

The second could be the rogue saying "that idiot fighter is out of position again. . . you know, if I stumbled into him, I bet he'd move. . ."; the hp loss (since hp represent more than health) are representative of the loss of focus the fighter suffers as he has to tear his attention away from his enemies.

No "gamism" required. Just another narrative tool. Could be the in-joke of the party, too: "Throg is not the brightest candle in the menorah - no head for tactics - but he's tougher than 3-day old Bulette steaks. Sly Willy spends half his time getting Throg to stand where he should."

I have no problem with this, either.

 

[ThirdWizard]

I've searched for a YouTube video of Yusuke shooting Kuabara in the back with his spirit gun to fling him at the enemy in Season 1 of Yu Yu Hakusho, but I can't find it for the life of me! Just imagine it in your head with no video representation.

 

[glass]

Sure you are, when you know what attacking them can do!

It can kill them!

Seriously, the rules assume you are constantly looking for opportunities to attack (and defend from) your enemies but not your allies. Without that assumption the whole combat system breaks (in any edition) -one little power is the least of your worries.


glass.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

I've searched for a YouTube video of Yusuke shooting Kuabara in the back with his spirit gun to fling him at the enemy in Season 1 of Yu Yu Hakusho, but I can't find it for the life of me! Just imagine it in your head with no video representation.

I know the scene that youre talking about. It's the first time that Yusuke and Kuwabara "defeat" the Toguro Brothers and episode or two before Yusuke gets invited to the Dark Tournament. To me that was always a good example of Aid Another in combat...