Divine Challenge at the end of your turn

[abyssaldeath]

Here is how I understand the rules. Lets say we have a paladin and a wizard and two enemies(lets call them e1 and e2).

round one: Paladin challenges e1 and engages by attacking e1. Wizard atacks e2. E1 attacks the paladin and e2 moves to attack the wizard immobilizes him.

round two: Paladin attacks e1 and notices that the wizard just got hit really hard and challenges e2 to get him to come to the paladin. E1 is now no longer marked or challenged. The wizard uses a close burst spell to attack. E1 continues to attack the paladin. E2 decides to take the damage from the mark and continue to attack the wizard.

round three: The paladin seeing E2 isn't execpting the challenge decides to move the challenge back to e1 and contiue his attacks. E2 is no longer marked or challenged.

The scenario above seems completely legal to me.

 

[AverageTable]

round one: Paladin challenges e1 and engages by attacking e1. Wizard atacks e2. E1 attacks the paladin and e2 moves to attack the wizard immobilizes him.

This much is fine.

round two: Paladin attacks e1 and notices that the wizard just got hit really hard and challenges e2 to get him to come to the paladin. E1 is now no longer marked or challenged. The wizard uses a close burst spell to attack. E1 continues to attack the paladin. E2 decides to take the damage from the mark and continue to attack the wizard.

The mistake is here.

At the end of this round the Divine Challenge on E2 would end and the paladin would be prevented from using Divine Challenge in round 3.

This is because the paladin used the Divine Challenge power during round 2. He must now either:

(1) Challenge a different target, which he didn't do (and couldn't have done because the power can only be used once per turn).

or

(2) Engage E2, which he also didn't do.

Since he did neither, he fails to fulfil the requirements of the power before the end of his turn.

round three: The paladin seeing E2 isn't execpting the challenge decides to move the challenge back to e1 and contiue his attacks. E2 is no longer marked or challenged.

The round would begin with neither enemy challenged and with the paladin unable to use his power this round.

 

[abyssaldeath]

He did indeed challenge a different target in the second round. E1 was still challenged during the paladin second turn untill the paladin switched the challenge to E2. So since E1 was still challenged the paladin meets the challenge a different target potion of the requirments.

 

[Alpha Polaris]

He did indeed challenge a different target in the second round. E1 was still challenged during the paladin second turn untill the paladin switched the challenge to E2. So since E1 was still challenged the paladin meets the challenge a different target potion of the requirments.

No she doesn't. The rule says "On your turn, you must engage the target you challenged or challenge a different target.", in which target refers to E2, since her latest use of the ability targets E2. So here we go: the paladin uses Divine Challenge on E2, so on her turn, or what remains of it, she must engage E2, or target someone else. Can she issue a new challenge ? No, she can't, because she can use it at most once per round. So she has to engage E2.

If we consider her challenging E1 (first use of the Divine Challenge ability), she has now challenged another target, so she won't be stopped from using it on her next turn. But if we consider her challenging E2 (second use of the ability), she has neither engaged E2, nor challenged another target, and if she doesn't comply before the end of her turn, she'll suffer the consequences.

 

[abyssaldeath]

Why wouldn't you consider him still challenging E1? A challenge lasts untill you mark another target or fail to engage the target. Since he did engage the target in the previous round E1 is still marked. Since E1 is still marked then he has fullfilled the challenge another target requirment when he challenges E2.

 

[AverageTable]

Since he did engage the target in the previous round E1 is still marked. Since E1 is still marked then he has fullfilled the challenge another target requirment when he challenges E2.

Correct. But all he has fulfilled is the "challenge another" requirement for the FIRST use of the Divine Challenge power that was made against E1 in the first round and is still ongoing in the second round.

However, when he fulfils that first requirement, he does so by USING the Divine Challenge power AGAIN. Now this SECOND use of the power also has an "engage or challenge another" requirement. Before the end of this second turn he must either engage E2 or challenge a different target than E2. He can't do the latter, so he must do the former.

This has all been argued extensively in this thread, so I don't know what else to tell you that isn't in the posts above.

 

[dcyale]

This can go on forever. None of us knows what they meant when they wrote the text, in that post DDXP re-write. We think we know, but that's not knowing, obviously becasue we think different things.

My reading of the whole challenge is, the first paragraph, the one that starts with "Effect:" talks about the turn you mark the monster.

The second paragraph talks about the monster's turn- the next sequential event.

The third (and I know some people think I'm wrong- and I may be) talks about your next turn- the next sequential event. I think it makes the most sense.

Anyway, that's how I'll be running it at a convention next weekend, but I'll try to make sure I tell them that's my interpertaion and it's subject to someone with authoruty to make a clearer rule to tell me I'm wrong.

I think this one is a dead dog not worth kicking at this point.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The problem I have with this is that "marked" is defined in general. I want to use that definition as much as possible, so I split DC into "mark target" and "damage target" if something would apply to either.

Except that the damage only applies while the target is marked.

"While the target is marked" describes the entire paragraph. While the target is marked, it takes a -2 to attack rolls; also, it takes damage.

Once the target is no longer marked, the -2 and the damage are no longer applicable.

Again, you are applying the ability recursively.

I'm applying the ability each time the ability is used.

Even simpler, the verbiage could say "On your turn, you must engage the target you challenged or challenge a different target and engage them." The lack of these simple phrases implies you are working too hard at interpretation.

It does say that.

"On your turn, you must engage the target or challenge a different target."

I don't want to engage the target, so I challenge a different target. Since I just used Divine Challenge, I check the rules:

"On your turn, you must engage the target or challenge a different target."

Well, I can't challenge another different target this turn, so on my turn, I must engage the target.

The ability says "or", you say "and". Isn't this clearly different than the ability states?

No.

"You lose if you go out of bounds or fall down" is identical to "You lose if you go out of bounds and you lose if you fall down". It's not identical to "You lose if you go out of bounds and fall down".

"The mark ends if you mark a new target or fail to engage" is identical to "The mark ends if you mark a new target and the mark ends if you fail to engage". It's not identical to "The mark ends if you mark a new target and fail to engage".

Again, it is clear the ability can only be used once a round. Why do you insist the ability expires before I have a chance to make the choice of engage or pick different target?

It doesn't. You have the choice to engage or pick a different target, but since you have already used the ability this round, the "pick a different target" route is closed to you. Thus, if you used the Divine Challenge power this turn, you must engage on your turn.

Second, I am reading from the beginning: You mark the target. "You mark the target. The target remains marked until you use the power against another target, or you fail to engage the target." Until that choice is made, the mark remains.

And when must you choose a different target or engage the target? On your turn. So you have until it is no longer your turn to either choose a different target or engage.

Yes, the previous challenge must be resolved first: you challenged a different target. Ok, the first DC is done. Now we work on the second target. He is marked until I mark another target or fail to engage.

Exactly. ... on your turn. Once your turn is finished, if you have neither chosen a different target (which you can't) or engaged, you've failed that condition.

-Hyp.

 

[Daag]

Isn't Divine Challenge an attack itself? Divine Challenge is not marking, it's an ability that puts the marked condition on another creature, and also has the secondary effect of doing damage in certain circumstances. It's a magical compulsion that puts a condition on a target creature. And as such, it's meets its own requirements of engaging a target. I can't really think of any other power that would put a condition on a creature and not be considered an attack.

That's how I look at it.

In any case, I agree with Loki's interpretation and is how me and my group will run it, should anyone ever make a paladin. It really restricts the paladin's ability to mark and do his job as a defender otherwise, compared to the fighter anyway.

Daag

 

[kouk]

I interpret the Divine Challenge to literally mean you can't just target someone as your last possible action unless you are already adjacent.

However, I allow that tactic in games. That was the way everyone at the table interpreted it originally, which leads me to believe it makes more sense inherently.

But the main reason I allow it is because it makes the Paladin a fairly effective Defender if it is allowed.

The Paladin's Challenge is (I feel) far inferior to the Fighter's. The Fighter has many more ways to mark several enemies, and a marked enemy takes significantly more damage when violating the fighter's mark or even trying to move away. And he might not even be able to move away! The Fighter's Challenge takes no action by itself, and theoretically can grant many attacks against a single target (it is not limited to just one enemy attack a round, as the Paladin's is).

The Paladin's challenge is just a minor damage effect should an enemy attack someone else. Yes, it is guaranteed damage, but one instance of 6 or 7 damage is not terribly impressive, even with scaling of 3 additional at each tier (especially since OA's also improve at each tier as they are basic attacks). It also takes an action to use, whereas the Fighter's does not.


The only real advantage the Paladin's Challenge has is that it can be used at range. However, with the literal interpretation, the Paladin basically has to end up in melee in the same round, so there's no benefit to being ranged, nor purpose. Yes, Paladins can attack with ranged weapons: but why would they? Their powers aren't suited for it, it would be an emergency measure at best for when you are unable to get near your enemy. Fighters could attack at range and Mark as well, so there's no real gain for the Paladin in comparison.

If you let the Paladin mark an enemy at the end of the round, what's the real problem? Real problem. Is the party Paladin really going to try to kite a creature? Is he really going to attempt to stay out of melee or stand around and do nothing? Would the party members stand for that behavior?

All allowing Challenging at the end of a round even when not adjacent to an enemy does is make it difficult for a single enemy to attack one of the Paladin's buddies, and only the first time in the case of multiple or area attacks against your friends. It's a different enemy than the one who was marked before, because the previous one is no longer marked. The single enemy that would be getting marked is within 5 squares, so he's already pretty close -- it's not like he's Challenging a guy on the other side of the map.

I think we also agree from a flavor standpoint that the Defender shouting out at an enemy he intends to go after fits, even if he can't in that particular round. Rounds are supposed to be abstractions of flowing time after all; the end of one round is basically the start of the next. Or in other words there is no real distinction in the "Game World" except for things with durations.

I've seen a Paladin in a same party as a Fighter, and the Fighter has a much more compelling Challenge -- no comparison. These are both Defenders, so theoretically they should be about as good as Defending, no? Even if you allow the Divine Challenge at the end of a round, a Fighter is still better at the job. No need to rule harshly against the Paladin in addition.