DDXP characters - unexpected tactics?

[Tuft]

I played in DDX.

In Escape from Sembia one of the encounters was vs skeletons on a rocky mountain pass. To the left of the party was a "sheer drop off" or something along those lines. Whenever an effect attempted to push or slide a creature off the cliff, we were informed that the enemy had a chance to "save itself". Presumably a saving throw was rolled, and a pass resulted in the creature falling prone in the last non cliff square he occupied.
Example:

The dwarf successfully used iron tide and was entitled to push target skeleton over the edge.
(DM rolls some dice..)
"Skeleton saved himself from going over the edge. He is now prone."

One other time i think something under curse of the dark dream was slid to where he would have gone over the edge, DM rolled dice, then skeleton DID go over the edge.
I assume that was a failure on the saving yourself throw.

What I wanted to know. Thank you!

 

[tomBitonti]

I played in DDX.

In Escape from Sembia one of the encounters was vs skeletons on a rocky mountain pass. To the left of the party was a "sheer drop off" or something along those lines. Whenever an effect attempted to push or slide a creature off the cliff, we were informed that the enemy had a chance to "save itself". Presumably a saving throw was rolled, and a pass resulted in the creature falling prone in the last non cliff square he occupied.
Example:

The dwarf successfully used iron tide and was entitled to push target skeleton over the edge.
(DM rolls some dice..)
"Skeleton saved himself from going over the edge. He is now prone."

One other time i think something under curse of the dark dream was slid to where he would have gone over the edge, DM rolled dice, then skeleton DID go over the edge.
I assume that was a failure on the saving yourself throw.

What if the push was onto a hidden pit?

Is the "fall prone" option a consequence of beginning a fall into a pit, or is it used to interrupt the push action? If the second case, can the the one being pushed elect to fall prone at any point in the push?

Note that even in 3.5E, this is a problem. Players generally learn to not have their back to a lethally dangerous terrain feature. On the other hand, my impression is that there are a lot more of these push effects in 4E: That there are more of them, that they push you further, and that they are harder to resist.

I think in 3.5E that I would allow a player a reflex save to avoid a fall, and even allow adjacent players a reflex save to catch the player who is about to fall. That's all house rules, but seems reasonable to me. Especially since a pit trap would have the same mechanic, that is, to provide a reflex save to avoid a fall.

 

[helium3]

The PM system is enabled if you click on the Support the Site link above and pay to become a community supporter. There are various benefits you can pay to receive. If either member doesn't have PM's enabled, you probably can't send or receive a PM from them. Personally I wanted to enable the search functions, as well as supporting the site.

PMs are not enabled for you, either. I'm pretty certain that PMs are not enabled for the board as a whole.

I was PM'ing a mod back around the 1st of February. So, unless one of them snuck into my account and changed something, I'm pretty sure PM's are still enabled.

If you tried to send me a PM and failed, it's either because (as Zinovia said) you aren't a "community supporter" or because I put you on ignore after I discovered you couldn't PM. I will take you off ignore and if you can PM and still want to discuss the issue, please do so.

 

[rkanodia]

I came up with a possible solution to the 'mark your allies to clear enemy marks' issue:

A target can be marked by multiple creatures at the same time. However, if it makes an attack including ANY of the marking creatures as a target, then it ignores the effect of all marks.

This prevents the Fighter from marking the Wizard to clear an enemy mark, and it also prevents a party full of paladins from crippling the enemy under a mountain of marks.

 

[Mogling]

Remaining text omitted.

Does that mean that I could mark one of my own teammates to take away an opponents mark?

Hmm, I suppose that monsters won't follow the same mechanic. (I get thrown off by the lack of symmetry in the mechanics.)

IIRC the pal mark and the fighter mark do stack so id assume that marks from different sources stack, or at least marks from different classes stack. I could see a case where 2 pal both mark the same creature for damage every round no matter who attacks but then a 2 pal team would be at a disadvantage

 

[Oldtimer]

IIRC the pal mark and the fighter mark do stack so id assume that marks from different sources stack, or at least marks from different classes stack. I could see a case where 2 pal both mark the same creature for damage every round no matter who attacks but then a 2 pal team would be at a disadvantage

No, the paladin mark and the fighter mark don't stack. Only one mark at a time on a given creature.

 

[Kraydak]

Consider what marking does.

Defenders have abilities that work only on marked targets.
Being marked means you get a -2 to hit anyone but the guy who marked you.
To be marked often requires an attack roll and thus HP damage.

So you've marked your ally to get rid of an opponents mark.
Your ally now cant attack any of your opponents without a penalty.
Many of your abilities no longer work since they're focused on your friend.
You've likely caused him damage in the process, (albeit likely minor damage).
You've 'Wasted' an action better suited to actually killing off the actual problem causing monster itself.

While their might be a FEW situations where it's worth this...in general I suspect the problems outweigh any potential benefits.

Or you could be a paladin 1, starting your turn more or less where you want to, within 5 squares of the target you want to mark and within 5 squares of a marked ally. While those conditions aren't automatic, they are fairly liberal, and let you minor to mark your ally, move->minor to (re)mark your foe (clearing the ally of his mark) and standard->attack of choice. Precious little opportunity cost there.

 

[cdrcjsn]

Or you could be a paladin 1, starting your turn more or less where you want to, within 5 squares of the target you want to mark and within 5 squares of a marked ally. While those conditions aren't automatic, they are fairly liberal, and let you minor to mark your ally, move->minor to (re)mark your foe (clearing the ally of his mark) and standard->attack of choice. Precious little opportunity cost there.

Unless you're fighting more than one foe.

Instead of marking two, you've only marked one.

 

[Kraydak]

Unless you're fighting more than one foe.

Instead of marking two, you've only marked one.

The sample paladin 1 *can* only mark 1 person at a time. That is part of what makes this work: his marks overwrite any one his target (acting as a mark dispel) *and* clear his previous target (acting as a mark dispel on his own previous mark).

 

[cdrcjsn]

The sample paladin 1 *can* only mark 1 person at a time. That is part of what makes this work: his marks overwrite any one his target (acting as a mark dispel) *and* clear his previous target (acting as a mark dispel on his own previous mark).

Ah right. I didn't see that little caveat that the mark disappears if you use the Divine Challenge again.

Still though, sounds reasonable to me. A defender cancelling an opposing defender's Mark doesn't sound so far fetched nor broken.