Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="webrunner" data-source="post: 4778430" data-attributes="member: 63727">Okay, let's look at this again. If a bard uses Misdirected Mark to cause a monster to be marked by the Fighter, does it now know that the fighter can get extra attacks on it, or not?  If you believe it is, then how?  Combat Challenge doesn't give the bard any extra abilities.  The fighter didn't do anything at all. All that happened was the bard said "he did it!".  It isn't an aura or something that says "whenever a party member marks a creature by you" or something.  It doesn't even trigger on when you mark.  There are two triggers in Combat Challenge, and neither of them have happened yet.If you believe it isn't, then how is it different then using the Combat Challenge mark, as the combat challenge 2nd trigger doesn't depend on how the creature was marked?  The exact same condition, the exact same game state, exists either way.  There are no effects in play that are different.As for the "that would mean" section: If I understand correctly, you believe that a monster is effected by a different ability then it's been explicitly hit with, just because the rules don't say it isn't?   That's what happens under the assumption that they are two different abilities.  Why not add Warlock's Curse damage on to the mark while you're at it?  Nowhere in the rules say that you don't add warlock's curse damage when a fighter hits a guy!4e uses exception-based design.  You don't rule based on what the rules don't say, you rule it based on what they do with exceptions taking precedence.From "my POV" this isn't my POV.. this is what the rules say, explicitly.  You're adding these things saying "the rules don't say that this isn't an exception", but that isn't th eway the rules work.</blockquote>

Verification