Divine Challenge/Sanction Question

[DogBackward]

Just wanted to get some other peoples' opinions on this. In our game last night, my Paladin had an Arbalester marked with Divine Sanction. They're basically the same rules, so this question goes for Divine Challenge as well.

The Arbalester used a power that lets it use two basic attacks on different targets. I say this provokes the radiant damage from my Sanction because it's using one power twice, which means at least one of those basic attacks is attacking a creature other than me. My DM said it didn't, because it was attacking us both at the same time.

The power it used didn't allow it to make any attacks, just to make one of its other attacks twice. The first against me, which didn't provoke the Sanction, and the second (completely separate attack) against my ally, which should have.

What do you guys think?

 

[Flipguarder]

I think from raw it can be interpreted either way. But at the end of the day, your argument won't work, because it isn't the same power. The monster block has seperate powers, and one of the actual powers, lets him use another twice. He's not using one power twice, he's using one power once.

But where your point of view could have merit, is in the idea of "what constitutes an attack?" Personally I define attack as attack power. So I suppose I agree with your DM

 

[abyssaldeath]

PHB 270: Melee attacks target individuals. A melee attack against multiple enemies consists of separate attacks, each with its own attack roll and damage roll.

As per the PHB melee attacks with multiple attacks consist of completely separate attacks and will trigger DC/DS if all attacks aren't against the Paladin. The same is true of Ranged attacks.

 

[Flipguarder]

ill take that

 

[DracoSuave]

Works for me.

Defenders tend to have good game againat monsters that attack multiples.

Monsters with multiple attacks can sometimes, however, have good game against a defender.

It evens out,.

 

[Klaus]

PHB 270: Melee attacks target individuals. A melee attack against multiple enemies consists of separate attacks, each with its own attack roll and damage roll.

As per the PHB melee attacks with multiple attacks consist of completely separate attacks and will trigger DC/DS if all attacks aren't against the Paladin. The same is true of Ranged attacks.

So: if it is a burst or blast power, it gets past a mark. If it is a melee or ranged power with more than one target, it gets the mark's effects.

In PC terms: Twin Strike -> mark applies. Dire Wolverine Strike -> bypasses mark.

 

[Shin Okada]

"Attack" and "Power" are completely different concepts.

A Power may include several attacks as part of it.

There are 4 types of attacks in 4e. Melee, Ranged, Close & Area.

Melee and Ranged attacks are done against single creature.
Close and Area attacks may target multiple creatures simultaneously.

Divine Challenge and Divine Sanction rules refer to "Attack", not "Power".

So, yes, in that case the Arbalester will damaged by Divine Sanction because it made an attack which does not include your Paladin as a target.

Edit: The above statement regarding Melee/Ranged attack is wrong. Some times, a Melee/Ranged attack may target multiple targets at once. In that case if one of the target is the Paladin, the creature does not suffer radiant damage.

In this case, the Arbalester is not targeting multiple targets with one ranged attack, but attacking twice. So, whether if the attack included the Paladin as a target or not should be checked for each of those attacks.

 

[DracoSuave]

Actually it's not because the arbalester is necessarily targetting two different monsters with the same attack. Ranged, Melee, Area, or Close, that doesn't matter.

What matters (from my understanding of this thread, I don't know which monster exactly you're talking about) is the power it uses to do so doesn't say that you're attacking two different target.

It says that you use two powers on two different targets.

So... let's say you had a wizard who had a power that said 'Use two at-will powers on two different targets.' Well, clearly, each at-will use is a different event. The power itself isn't attacking anything, but creating two different attack events.

Basic Attacks are themselves powers, and if a power is telling you to use two of them, you're using a total of three powers. The original power, then the two uses of Basic Attack.

 

[Mahali]

There are two different ways you to handle it and both are RAW due to vagueries in how "attack" is used.

I'd always gone with "if you can choose each target and don't always choose the marker then you're effected". They would be effected if you used Twin Strike (can be same target) but not Passing Attack (must be different).

I've since switched to "one or multiple damage rolls". If you only roll damage once then you're good. If you roll damage more than that it counts as a seperate attack.

I think this makes markers more defendery and the game more fun.

 

[DogBackward]

Okay, cool. This has only prompted my GM to houserule the Arbiter's attack to a burst targeting one or two creatures, but at least now he knows I was right. And isn't that what's really important, in the end?

Thanks guys.