Combat Challenge vs. Lightning Bolt

[fnuffer]

Hey all!

I need a little help with an issue that came up during an encounter tonight:

The Fighter is adjacent to the BBEG, who he has marked. The BBEG casts Lightning Bolt. The BBEG's primary target is the ranger, the first secondary target is the warlord, and the second secondary target is the fighter.

All targets are adjacent to the BBEG, but only one OA hits. The fighter claims a Combat Challenge basic attack because the first attack against the ranger is an attack that does not include him (page 76, PHB).

The DM says that no, since the fighter is one of the secondary targets, he is included in the attack, and does not get a Combat Challenge basic attack.

Lightning Bolt says Primary Target, then Attack, then Hit, then Secondary targets, all on separate lines (page 162, PHB).

The fighter maintains that each target line is a different attack, compared to a Thunderwave, where all targets are in the target line (page 159, PHB).

The DM says that all targets in an attack power are part of the same attack, where targeted individually or as a group.

Additional facts:
The fighter has both his OA and interrupt action available.
The fighter has marked the BBEG.
The BBEG is dazed, so only gets one action.

Does the fighter get the Combat Challenge basic attack? Can you site rules (page #, etc) to support your statements?

Thanks all!

http://forums.gleemax.com/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=18145302

 

[Danceofmasks]

It does boil down to the definition of "attack," which in 4e is a nebulous region of ambiguity.
About 1/3 of the time they mean an attack roll, another 1/3 of the time they mean an attack power, and the rest of the time they mean something else entirely (such as implying both primary attack rolls of a power).

Hypersmurf would be much more concise than I can be on this issue, and I'm sure there are a bunch of old threads that expand on the various definitions of attack.
Unfortunately, my search-fu is teh suck, so I fail at providing links to those threads.

However, in this particular instance, I'm going to side with the fighter.
'cos though attack can often mean an attack power (which then includes all dice rolls therein), this is a question of procedure.

On P.59, you do not begin to decide which targets are secondary until primary attacks have been resolved.
This allows attack powers with multiple stages to (for instance) hit one target till it's down then switch (which you can't do with say, twin strike), or in the case of lightning bolt, to zap secondary targets that are a certain distance from the primary (up to 20 squares distant from the caster if the primary is at range 10).
The cost for this flexibility in decision-making is that until primary attacks are resolved, there are no secondary targets.

So .. there'd be a -2 penalty for the mark as well as triggering the CC.

Intent can't really be claimed here, 'cos if those OAs had killed the BG, there'd definitely be no secondary targets!

For a less ambiguous case, let's say the power in question is force orb (wizard 1) instead.
The BG can't claim to be targeting the Fighter (if he's an intended secondary) while resolving the primary, because there are no secondary targets if the primary misses (since the secondary attack only occurs on a hit).

 

[Obryn]

Here's how I've run it in my games so far. I'm positive others have done it differently, and it's possible I'm doing it wrong.

In this case, IMHO it clearly triggers the combat challenge. The caster doesn't know that there will be a secondary target until after he hits. At the time of his attack roll, there is exactly one target, and it's not the fighter.

Now, as danceofmasks said, there's some strange situations. One is where a creature has an attack ability that says something like "make two basic attacks, one against each of two targets." In these cases, since it's one attack ability with two targets, I consider it fine so long as one of those two is the fighter. Again, YMMV - but this differs in that neither of these is a secondary attack.

-O

 

[DracoSuave]

A secondary attack is a seperate attack from the primary. So, the primary attack would potentially trigger Combat Challenge, and then the secondary attack would not if the fighter decided to hold on to his CC.

Until the primary hits, the secondary attack does not exist, and the caster does -not- have to declare his secondary targets until he gets to that part of the power. All steps are done in order, and resolving the primary attack comes before declaring targets for the secondary attack. (PHBII, How to read a power gives the lowdown on order of power resolution)

 

[Goumindong]

The fighter indeed gets his CC in this instance. It interrupts the attack and and then the attack goes off.

The fighter also gets an OA on the ranged attack triggers

 

[DracoSuave]

Oh yeah, he -does- get both.

The moral of the story: Seriously, -don't- use a ranged power beside a fighter.

 

[fnuffer]

First off, thanks for all the replies. I was able to glean a clear ruling, I believe.

Lightning is a ranged attack (PHB page 162). Page 270 in the PHB states "A ranged attack against multiple enemies consists of separate attacks, each with its own attack roll and damage roll."

Since one of that attacks did not include the fighter, the Combat Challenge basic attack is triggered.

The definition of ranged attack fully resolves the issue, with no wiggle room.

Also, ty for the pointer PHB2 order of power resolution.

 

[Keenath]

"A ranged attack against multiple enemies consists of separate attacks, each with its own attack roll and damage roll."

Edit: Never mind. I just reread this quote for the third time and suddenly understood what it actually said. A ranged multitarget attack is explicitly a series of individual attacks, not just a series of attack rolls. Much as I don't like it, that does indeed put the kibosh on my interpretation.

How about some complicating factors?

If you let the Fighter have his Interrupt in the stated situation, then what if the Fighter were the primary? Would he get to use his interrupt on the secondary attacks? Technically the secondaries are attacks that don't include him, by the same logic... but the power as a whole did include him.
So, as per the above rule, apparently the answer is yes. By RAW, a lightning bolt is three separate ranged attacks, two of which didn't attack the fighter, so he gets to hit you. Ouch, man.

Does it change things if the defender in question were an Assault Swordmage? His attack is a reaction, so the attack resolves in its entirety before the Aegis activates, which suggests he can't use his Aegis even if he's the third guy hit, even if he's attacked with a contingent secondary (like the blast from a Force Orb).
Same answer, here. He made two attacks that didn't include the Swordmage, so the Aegis activates. Same for the Force Orb; if you hit anyone with it other than the swordmage, he'll get to smack you.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Does it change things if the defender in question were an Assault Swordmage? His attack is a reaction, so the attack resolves in its entirety before the Aegis activates...

Not necessarily true.

PHB p268, Immediate Reaction: An immediate reaction might interrupt other actions a combatant takes after its triggering action. For example, if a power lets you attack as an immediate reaction when an attack hits you, your action happens before the monster that hit you can take any other action. If a monster has a power that lets it make two attack rolls against you as a standard action, and the first one hits, you can use an immediate reaction before the next attack roll.

If the primary attack of the lightning bolt satisfies the trigger condition of the Aegis, the reaction will occur before the secondary attacks... at least, as long as we consider the person casting Lightning Bolt to be a monster.

-Hyp.

 

[Keenath]

If the primary attack of the lightning bolt satisfies the trigger condition of the Aegis, the reaction will occur before the secondary attacks...

I stand corrected.