"Domination" Domination

[Xyrlove Woodsoul]

I was just curious, if anyone else has a problem with: x gets dominated; dominator makes x run thru crowd; crowd gets OA vrs. x; x = dead. (?)

Because that's pretty much what happens if anyone gets dominated in my games. Or, at least, what should happen, that is, if monsters or players are trying to win the battle (which they are).

I mean, as a gm, I don't want to do that (the above) when I have a monster dominate someone. And my players don't really want to dominate someone and do likewise (but its impossible to resist doing. And it's hard not do it while running a monster, especially, if the monster/dominator is intelligent). In all, it's not very much fun for anyone. Especially, since one of my groups have a lot of domination powers, and when they face monsters with domination powers, the entire battle turns into "Ring-Around-the Rosey."

And when a dominator makes a dominated creature charge, and maybe trigger one OA, then it seems fine. But that's the exception.

Would it be that bad of a house rule to rule that while dominated, movement or making a ranged attack, doesn't provoke OA? I mean, with the new monster damage expressions, one can still do considerable damage forcing x to use an at-will attack. And my players optimize their characters, thus, their at-wills are pretty powerful as well. And "out of turn" attacks are nice in-and-of-themselves.

If that would be a bad houserule, then does anyone have any tips in how to make "Dominated," more manageable?

 

[RangerWickett]

We could eliminate opportunity attacks. I always thought it was pretty silly that if I'm dueling D'artagnan and suddenly a goblin runs past me, I'll break off from my swordfight to stab the goblin.

We could make it so that opportunity actions are now immediate interrupts, so you only get one a round. And maybe taking one causes you to grant combat advantage yourself. But that's getting into house rules territory.

 

[Dausuul]

If you're having a problem with this, then yes, I think that would be a good house rule. I'm fairly sure domination is balanced around the idea that you're going to deny the victim a turn at the same time you make the victim smack somebody else; provoking a zillion OAs is not the intended use.

Another possibility, which is more complicated but easier on suspension of disbelief, would be to say that dominate effects have trouble overriding a victim's instinct for self-preservation. If you compel a dominated creature to do something that would expose it to direct harm (provoke an OA, enter damaging terrain, attack itself), it gets a free save to end the dominate effect. So you can try to make a dominated creature run the gauntlet, but you might be better off making it whack its buddy instead.

Eliminating OAs altogether would severely cripple the party fighter and have a big effect on the game generally, so I'd make that a last resort.

 

[Thanlis]

Heh. I find it tempting to provoke OAs when I have someone dominated, as player or as GM, but I also find it possible to resist. My general feeling is that charop tends to make the game break down, since the game isn't designed for optimizers. This doesn't make optimizers bad people, it's just something to be aware of.

I think your suggested house rule is excellent. Failing that, suggest detente. Failing that, ignore my failure to know the rules.

 

[OnlineDM]

Yes, you DO get a saving throw to avoid throwing yourself off a cliff while Dominated. I don't have access to the Compendium or rule books at the moment, but I'm sure someone can quote the Dominated rules for me.

I like the suggestion of allowing a saving throw against provoking on OA while dominated as well; it's not quite the same as moving into hindering terrain, but the effect is similar (taking damage).

 

[Ryujin]

House Rule: When you have dominated an opponent you have temporarily made the opponent into an ally, for purposes of targeting spells and opportunity attacks.

 

[S'mon]

I think the appropriate ruling would be that the dominated creature gets a save for each square entered where it can see that doing so would provoke OAs from the dominator's allies, and/or that each time it's attacked by an ally of the dominator it gets a save to end the effect.

Edit: I think the latter (save per attack) is probably a better ruling as it does not require a judgement call.

 

[Nullzone]

Generally when I'm dealing with Dominated effects, I just set the player up for some bad mojo; move him in range of the brute, set him up to interfere with the party wizard, etc. I try to just ignore the OA-fest when I can.

However, if the players start doing that crap, I remind them that monsters can do it too, so if they start playing that game they'd best be prepared for the other shoe to drop.

I'd be willing to consider a "Saving throw if you take damage during the dominated action" which ends the action immediately. Avoids the OA fest, but also forces the PC to still contend with the Dominated effect, and doesn't require you to stop one step at a time to make a new saving throw.

 

[OnlineDM]

As for the "saving throw to avoid throwing yourself off a cliff" when dominated, I was at first worried because I see nothing about this in the online DDI Compendium. However, in the hard copy Rules Compendium, page 231, there's this passage:

If the dominator tries to force the creature to throw itself into a pit or to move into some other form of hindering terrain, the creature gets a saving throw to resist entering the terrain.

I'm disappointed that this isn't in the online Compendium, but at least it's in the book.

 

[Aegeri]

If I allowed monsters to take OAs against dominated PCs, I would have so many dead PCs by now it wouldn't be funny. Actually I have never allowed anyone (PCs or monsters) to take OAs against dominated creatures. I'm not sure if I misinterpreted how dominated worked originally (back in 2008!) or if I just decided that was more logical. It has worked so well in practice that I wouldn't change it anyway.

Edit: As usual, the online compendium is wrong and the RC is correct. I really have no idea why the online compendium maintains a completely incorrect set of rules on many things, but there you go.