CustServ on "What is 'an attack'?"

[mneme]

I think the key problem is that the game has two definitions of attack (use an attack power, make an attack roll) and quite a number of abilities that trigger off these without making it clear which one they're using.

IMO:

The Paladin's mark cares about making attacks that -target- without including him. No target = no damage. Anything else is against the spirit of the ability (and wierdly broken, as the paladin becomes much more effective against monsters that use conjurations).

Invisiblity cares about attack -powers-. Any use of an attack power -- even one that doesn't include attack rolls, will break it. If you want to run around in stance, though, that's cool.

Evasion/Minions refer to attack -rolls- doing damage; they only apply to the roll, hit, and miss lines.

Seal of Binding refers to attack -powers-. The subject of a seal of binding is immune to all effects of all attack powers, and all attacks of non-powers. This probably makes the subject immune to lava, as I'd certainly word lava as a trap that makes an attack in its space every round doing automatic damage. This is funky -- lava that was a trap wouldn't damage the target (traps do damage with attacks), but falling damage or lava that was just an environmental feature would.

However, all of this is interpretation, as there are clearly two+1/2 (ie, also "both") things that are referred to as "attacks" in the game, and only interpretation makes it clear which something is referring to.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Wall of fire isn't a ranged power, it's an area power.

Likewise Cloud of Daggers.

The Paladin can't use Martyr's Blessing to save someone from Cloud of Daggers, whether it's the initial attack or the effect of being in the square next turn.

-Hyp.

 

[eamon]

I asked CSR about what counts as an attack for the purposes of ending greater invis:

What exactly is an attack which will end greater invisibility? Would an area effect without any targets and which does not directly damage anyone, such as wall of ice (on the same page #165), count as an attack (it involves no attack roll, but is nevertheless an attack power)?

How about a cloud of dagger's in a square without any opponents (an attack power that's not actually targeting anyone)?

How about a bull rush or a grab (which involve an attack roll but no attack power)?

And Joe said:

Attack Powers, or anything that includes and attack roll counts as an attack.
If there is any question, the DM will have to make the final call.

Suggesting that either an attack roll or anything designated as an attack power would suffice to count as an "attack", at least within the context of greater invisibility.

 

[Ginnel]

Likewise Cloud of Daggers.

The Paladin can't use Martyr's Blessing to save someone from Cloud of Daggers, whether it's the initial attack or the effect of being in the square next turn.

-Hyp.

Heh I was getting mixed up with ranged and close fair do's.

melee, ranged, area, close, the paladin in the example can't throw himself in front of an attack against an area

 

[RigaMortus2]

Likewise Cloud of Daggers.

The Paladin can't use Martyr's Blessing to save someone from Cloud of Daggers, whether it's the initial attack or the effect of being in the square next turn.

-Hyp.

Interesting...

 

[Lurker37]

Here's the real question:

Why don't minions, Evasion, Mettle etc use language like "Take no damage (if any) from the 'Miss:' component of attack powers?" OR "Are immune to all effects of any attack power that misses them"?

Why use such confusing language?

This question is the one likely to lead to the errata we obviously need, since I have to agree that any attempt to use 'attack' as a keyword is going to end in the sort of nonsense Hypersmurf is pointing out. This problem can't be corrected by defining attack as a keyword. The feats, features and powers referring to other attack need to be clarified, since it is crystal clear that they are not all using the same interpretation of 'attack'.

Problem is, I'm not sure this is the sort of question CustServ will respond to, and there's no 'Suggestion Box'.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Is there any errata on this yet? As far as what defines an attack?

 

[eamon]

Is there any errata on this yet? As far as what defines an attack?

No errata, but for most purposes it seems that an attack is as described in the combat section.

However, since "attack" might also be a modifier describing a power (an attack power, after all) or even a general descriptive term, you'll probably need to decide on a case by case basis in general (for instance, consider invisibility). Mechanically though, it looks to me as though an attack can be defined as precisely those of the combat section; a melee, ranged, close or area attack.

CS has said as much when I asked them about the interaction with marks, and it looks to be consistently usable, so far.