Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 4957629" data-attributes="member: 53980">Honestly meaning no offense, but I don't understand your confusion.Unsurprisingly, I still agree with those who believe that the RAI/RAW support Effects being used outside of combat (without an enemy target).In the PHB on page 272, it says that you can choose to target a square instead of an enemy.&nbsp; It goes further to state that &quot;this tactic is useful when an enemy has total concealment&quot;.&nbsp; Either the paragraph is poorly phrased, or the intent is clearly that you can target squares instead of creatures if you so desire, including when a creature has concealment.&nbsp; The sentence is inclusive, not exclusive.I don't think I've seen anyone argue that using an Area of Effect attack (which targets squares rather than creatures to begin with) on empty squares to gain the effect is illegal.&nbsp; It seems clear to me that if that is legal, then melee and ranged effects are also intended to be legally usable outside of combat.&nbsp; Why should AoEs be so much better than single target attacks, after all?Yes, there are a few powers (like the Swordmage's Vorpal Doom) that can be abused under these circumstances, but a broken power does not make for a broken rule.&nbsp; (For example, imagine there was a encounter power that, due to it's phrasing, allowed party members to make melee basic attacks when an enemy experiences forced movement even though that clearly wasn't the intent; in this case it's clearly not the rules for forced movement that are to blame, but rather the poorly phrased power).&nbsp; The vast majority of effect powers don't break the game even if you allow them to be used outside of combat.&nbsp; The few that do break are easily fixed (usually by changing effect to hit).So what if the Swordmage can expend his Dual Lightning Strike to teleport across the chasm?&nbsp; The Warlock could use Ethereal Stride to do it too, and a level sooner no less.&nbsp; The rest of the party still has to find a way across (you can't normally teleport other characters).&nbsp; Additionally, if you don't want the PCs teleporting across the chasm, make it 6 or more squares wide.&nbsp; Problem solved!I can understand those who think this is rules-lawyering.&nbsp; IMO, it isn't, but I can appreciate the viewpoint.&nbsp; FWIW, I'm a DM myself.&nbsp; It seems to me the argument is rather clear though.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Fanaelialae, post: 4957629, member: 53980"] Honestly meaning no offense, but I don't understand your confusion. Unsurprisingly, I still agree with those who believe that the RAI/RAW support [b]Effects[/b] being used outside of combat (without an enemy target). In the PHB on page 272, it says that you can choose to target a square instead of an enemy. It goes further to state that "this tactic is [i]useful[/i] when an enemy has total concealment". Either the paragraph is poorly phrased, or the intent is clearly that you can target squares instead of creatures if you so desire, [i]including[/i] when a creature has concealment. The sentence is inclusive, not exclusive. I don't think I've seen anyone argue that using an Area of Effect attack (which targets squares rather than creatures to begin with) on empty squares to gain the [b]effect[/b] is illegal. It seems clear to me that if that is legal, then melee and ranged [b]effects[/b] are also intended to be legally usable outside of combat. Why should AoEs be so much better than single target attacks, after all? Yes, there are a few powers (like the Swordmage's Vorpal Doom) that can be abused under these circumstances, but a broken power does not make for a broken rule. (For example, imagine there was a encounter power that, due to it's phrasing, allowed party members to make melee basic attacks when an enemy experiences forced movement even though that clearly wasn't the intent; in this case it's clearly not the rules for forced movement that are to blame, but rather the poorly phrased power). The vast majority of [b]effect[/b] powers don't break the game even if you allow them to be used outside of combat. The few that do break are easily fixed (usually by changing [b]effect[/b] to [b]hit[/b]). So what if the Swordmage can expend his Dual Lightning Strike to teleport across the chasm? The Warlock could use Ethereal Stride to do it too, and a level sooner no less. The rest of the party still has to find a way across (you can't normally teleport other characters). Additionally, if you don't want the PCs teleporting across the chasm, make it 6 or more squares wide. Problem solved! I can understand those who think this is rules-lawyering. IMO, it isn't, but I can appreciate the viewpoint. FWIW, I'm a DM myself. It seems to me the argument is rather clear though. [/QUOTE]

Verification