Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Combat Challenge vs. Lightning Bolt
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Danceofmasks" data-source="post: 4723044" data-attributes="member: 70765"><p>It does boil down to the definition of "attack," which in 4e is a nebulous region of ambiguity.</p><p>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).</p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p>Unfortunately, my search-fu is teh suck, so I fail at providing links to those threads.</p><p> </p><p>However, in this particular instance, I'm going to side with the fighter.</p><p>'cos though attack can <em>often</em> mean an attack power (which then includes all dice rolls therein), this is a question of procedure.</p><p> </p><p>On P.59, you do not begin to decide which targets are secondary until primary attacks have been resolved.</p><p>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).</p><p>The cost for this flexibility in decision-making is that until primary attacks are resolved, there are no secondary targets.</p><p> </p><p>So .. there'd be a -2 penalty for the mark as well as triggering the CC.</p><p> </p><p>Intent can't really be claimed here, 'cos if those OAs had <em>killed</em> the BG, there'd definitely be no secondary targets!</p><p> </p><p>For a less ambiguous case, let's say the power in question is force orb (wizard 1) instead.</p><p>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).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Danceofmasks, post: 4723044, member: 70765"] 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 [I]often[/I] 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 [I]killed[/I] 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). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Combat Challenge vs. Lightning Bolt
Top