Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Divine Challenge: Switching targets means you don't have to engage?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hypersmurf" data-source="post: 5005449" data-attributes="member: 1656"><p>Right. In this analogy, "Engage Box 1" involves removing a pebble.</p><p></p><p>So my choice is to either Engage Box 1 or Open Box 2. No problem - I open Box 2.</p><p></p><p>But opening Box 2 presents me with a <em>new</em> pair of choices - I can either Engage Box 2, or Open Box 3 (or Box 1 again). And I must do one of those things before the end of the round. Except that opening another box is forbidden by the "only open one box each round" rule, so if I don't want to suffer the DC penalty, <em>I must engage Box 2</em> before the end of the round.</p><p></p><p>Opening Box 2 doesn't count towards <em>Box 2</em>'s choice of opening a different box. Challenging Target 2 doesn't count towards <em>Target 2</em>'s choice of challenging a different target. That only satisfies the requirement of the initial challenge on Target 1.</p><p></p><p>Edit - oops, missed that there was a second page now!</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The rules text doesn't "reset". The rules text applies to each use of the power. It's different.</p><p></p><p>At the start of round 2, there is a Divine Challenge in play, on Target 1. Under your proposed revision, the rule would say "If you do not engage Target 1 before the end of the round, you suffer Consequences."</p><p></p><p>I challenge Target 2, ending the mark on Target 1, which imposes another requirement - "If you do not engage Target 2 before the end of the round, you suffer Consequences."</p><p></p><p>I engage Target 2, and so I don't suffer the Consequences for failing to meet the requirements of the challenge on Target 2. But I didn't engage Target 1, and even though Target 1 is no longer marked, the power that was in play at the start of the round gave me an ultimatum - engage target 1 before the end of the round or else - which I failed to meet. I suffer Consequences.</p><p></p><p>The existing rules text prevents this, because the act of challenging Target 2, in addition to removing the mark on Target 1, also satisfies the requirements of the existing challenge.</p><p></p><p>-Hyp.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hypersmurf, post: 5005449, member: 1656"] Right. In this analogy, "Engage Box 1" involves removing a pebble. So my choice is to either Engage Box 1 or Open Box 2. No problem - I open Box 2. But opening Box 2 presents me with a [I]new[/I] pair of choices - I can either Engage Box 2, or Open Box 3 (or Box 1 again). And I must do one of those things before the end of the round. Except that opening another box is forbidden by the "only open one box each round" rule, so if I don't want to suffer the DC penalty, [i]I must engage Box 2[/i] before the end of the round. Opening Box 2 doesn't count towards [i]Box 2[/i]'s choice of opening a different box. Challenging Target 2 doesn't count towards [i]Target 2[/i]'s choice of challenging a different target. That only satisfies the requirement of the initial challenge on Target 1. Edit - oops, missed that there was a second page now! The rules text doesn't "reset". The rules text applies to each use of the power. It's different. At the start of round 2, there is a Divine Challenge in play, on Target 1. Under your proposed revision, the rule would say "If you do not engage Target 1 before the end of the round, you suffer Consequences." I challenge Target 2, ending the mark on Target 1, which imposes another requirement - "If you do not engage Target 2 before the end of the round, you suffer Consequences." I engage Target 2, and so I don't suffer the Consequences for failing to meet the requirements of the challenge on Target 2. But I didn't engage Target 1, and even though Target 1 is no longer marked, the power that was in play at the start of the round gave me an ultimatum - engage target 1 before the end of the round or else - which I failed to meet. I suffer Consequences. The existing rules text prevents this, because the act of challenging Target 2, in addition to removing the mark on Target 1, also satisfies the requirements of the existing challenge. -Hyp. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Divine Challenge: Switching targets means you don't have to engage?
Top