Commander's Strike, is it an attack in itself?

[Kazoo]

If I mark the warlord with Aegis of Shielding and he uses Commander's Strike on one of my allies, does my Aegis of Shielding reduce the damage, even though the Warlord is not the one actually swinging the weapon?

It seems like it might because the power (commander's strike) is initiating an attack. It even adds the Warlord's Int Mod to the damage. My take on it is that the Warlord is making the attack, he's just using the ally as the weapon.

On the other hand I can see how it wouldn't because the Ally is actually rolling the attack dice.

 

[talarei07]

no the warlord isnt attacking anyone

 

[Nifft]

The Warlord is using an attack power.
That power grants his ally (let's call him "the Fighter" for no particular reason) an attack.
The Fighter is the one making the attack.

The terminology is a bit wonky, and WotC isn't always clear on what they mean by "attack" (sometimes they mean "an attack", sometimes they mean "an attack power"), but in this case there's been enough rules clarification.

Cheers, -- N

 

[talarei07]

or you could read it as yes its an attack but it deals no damage so swordmage warding is kinda useless because the other character is actually doing the damage not the warlord

 

[Tony Vargas]

The exact wording of the Aegis might matter.

4e uses the word 'attack' ambiguously. It could variously refer to an attack roll, an attack power, or an action used to make an attack roll or use an attack power (and, yes, there's an odd case or two where you can make an attack roll without using an actual attack power).

Where the rule are ambiguous, you just have to use your best judgement as a DM.


More generally, if a soldier were marking the warlord, would you aply the -2 to the ally's MBA, if the Warlord used C'sS to have the ally attack someone other than the soldier? What if a different soldier marked the ally, and the Warlord had the ally attack the soldier marking him via C'sS?

 

[Shin Okada]

Those terms are not so vague.

Attack Power ..... Power with "Attack" in the colored top-line of the stats block. It usually let you make some kind of attack, but not always.

Attack .... There are 4 types of attacks. Area, Close, Melee, Ranged.

Attack Roll .... A d20+modifier rolls made to see if an attack hits a target or not. An attack may involve several attack rolls.

Commander's Strike is an attack power, as it is indicated so.

But the warlord does not make an attack with this power. An ally does.

As an ally makes a basic melee attack, he will usually make one attack roll.

 

[Dr_Sage]

Those terms are not so vague.

Attack Power ..... Power with "Attack" in the colored top-line of the stats block. It usually let you make some kind of attack, but not always.

Attack .... There are 4 types of attacks. Area, Close, Melee, Ranged.

Attack Roll .... A d20+modifier rolls made to see if an attack hits a target or not. An attack may involve several attack rolls.

Commander's Strike is an attack power, as it is indicated so.

But the warlord does not make an attack with this power. An ally does.

As an ally makes a basic melee attack, he will usually make one attack roll.

I agree with you.

Even if the warlord is using an attack power, he is not making the attack, his buddy is. So IMHO for every situation/effect the warlord is merely commanding.

Lets say a rogue used riposte strike against a warlord. Our hero them smartly could use commanders strike to avoid the riposte attack, by letting his ally do the attack. By the same tolken if the ally was "victim" of a previous riposte strike attack, and then got a free basic attack by the warlord, he could get riposted fort it.

At least the way I see this.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Attack .... There are 4 types of attacks. Area, Close, Melee, Ranged.

That's 'Attack Type' not merely 'attack.' There is no difinitive defintion for 'attack' by itself. If you get something clearer, like 'attack roll' or 'successful attack' (which implies an attack roll) or 'hit' or 'attacks & does damage,' you can draw a solid conclusion. 'Attack,' by itself, though, is ambiguous.

 

[DracoSuave]

Specific Beats General.

So, first off, Aegis of Shielding's damage reduction can only apply on an attack that hits.

Interpretation the First:

In general, when a power grants a basic attack to an ally, the granting power does not hit the target. However, Commander's Strike is not worded the same way- It has an attack line that gives a basic attack to an ally... and -more- importantly, it has a -hit- entry that tells you what to do.

That means that if you are resolving that line, you must have hit with Commander's Strike. And to have hit with Commander's Strike means you must have attacked with Commander's Strike.

So, while most powers that grant bonus attacks would not trigger Aegis of Shielding, Commander's Strike -does- trigger the damage reduction.

Interpretation the Second:

Commander's Strike does attack the target, after all, it has a line that says 'Attack:'. However, the penalty from the marked condition only penalizes your attack rolls. Commander's Strike never has you make an attack roll, therefore the -2 to attack never applies to the basic melee attack granted by the power (unless the ally is marked themselves)

----------------------

So:

Commander's Strike is an exception to the general rule on granted basic attacks because its wording contradicts the general rule. However, the marked condition does not affect the basic attack because you are never making an attack roll. It -does- however effect the damage because that is part of the Hit: line, and Aegis modifies damage from a hit, not damage rolls.

 

[Shin Okada]

Though Commander's Strike power does have "Attack" line, that does not automatically indicate that the Warlord is attacking.

AFAIK no rule says if someone using an attack power or a power with "Attack" line is considered to be attacking.