How do you RP marking?

[ExploderWizard]

The OP isn't trying to rationalize anything. He just needs something to clue his DM into the fact that his character is trying to draw all the hostile attention. Apparently they are a heavy RP table and the DM hasn't yet figured out what it means for combat when one of the monsters gets marked.

In the game world it may or may not have any meaning at all.

For that purpose this thread can be an invaluable tool. Next time read the original post, not just the thread title.

I did. Within the context of the game world there might some situations that an RP description fits great and will be awesome. There may also be situations where no description will appear as anything but stupid.

My advice was to not worry about it because an awesome description some of the time and being stuck trying to come up with anything useful at other times is kind of choppy but tastes vary I guess.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I can't, and that's why Fighter marking is a major problem for me... and the problem remains: if the Fighter's oponent is levels ahead of him and not impressed with his marking tactics at all, why should it work just because the Fighter just hit it for, let's say, a low level damage?

I mix fluff and crunch in my games, we play it that well, and this is something Wizards could work harder.

Instead of endless boring crunch articles where my DDI money seem to be spend on, why not a fluff article, in depth, with tons of suggestions/insporation of how to roleplay some powers?

I used to have the same types of issues but I found just letting go of such concerns was easier than getting into the sordid business of house ruling combat abilities . Its the same for a hunters mark, a warlocks curse, etc.

 

[Obryn]

I can't, and that's why Fighter marking is a major problem for me... and the problem remains: if the Fighter's oponent is levels ahead of him and not impressed with his marking tactics at all, why should it work just because the Fighter just hit it for, let's say, a low level damage?

I mix fluff and crunch in my games, we play it that well, and this is something Wizards could work harder.

Instead of endless boring crunch articles where my DDI money seem to be spend on, why not a fluff article, in depth, with tons of suggestions/insporation of how to roleplay some powers?

It doesn't even have to be that, really. It's simply what the fighter (or any other defender) is good at. The enemy doesn't have to care - it's simply a factor in their decision-making.

A fighter is good at engaging a foe and keeping them engaged. They are good at making it hard for enemies to attack anyone but them. They are good at hitting enemies that move away. They are good at attacking enemies who attack their allies. They're as much opportunists as rogues are.

I think if you interpret a "mark" as something that's going on in an enemy's mind, you're missing the point. It's not a WoW-ish "drawing aggro" or what-have-you. The mark is something the fighter's good at doing, and represents their particular area of expertise.

In the case you mentioned above - a high-level opponent most likely won't worry about the fighter's mark. That's a direct result of the fighter's marking and combat challenge mechanics - if the fighter is having trouble hitting, and is dealing negligible damage, then a high-level foe can and should ignore them completely.

-O

 

[Doctor Proctor]

It doesn't even have to be that, really. It's simply what the fighter (or any other defender) is good at. The enemy doesn't have to care - it's simply a factor in their decision-making.

In the case you mentioned above - a high-level opponent most likely won't worry about the fighter's mark. That's a direct result of the fighter's marking and combat challenge mechanics - if the fighter is having trouble hitting, and is dealing negligible damage, then a high-level foe can and should ignore them completely.

-O

Yeah, that's true. Remember, Defenders don't need the enemy to respect their mark in order to function...they can sometimes be just as happy if they're disrespected.

Note the quote in my sig from the "What class are you?" thing. It says "You'l have to deal with me first Dragon!", and that's what Fighters do. In fact, in our last session we actually fought a Purple Dragon, and I did exactly that!

In the beginning of the encounter the Dragon had a shot with his breath weapon and thought he could get more enemies in the blast by ignoring me (basically, including me in the blast would've left out two allies)...which was his first mistake. I whacked him upside with my Execution Axe for some nasty damage to remind where he should stay focused!

Later, when he ran out of powers and all he had was bites and claws, he mainly used them on me. Not so much because of an RP thing where I was "distracting him", but more out of the very real fear that ignoring would result in another smack upside the head. Eventually, he tried to get away with a move action (there were other melee allies around him, so a shift + move wasn't an option to avoid getting hit by me...in fact, it could've been worse that way because I would've gotten a CC and an OA!) so that he could fly away and harass us from the air. So, again, I smacked him upside the head with my Execution Axe for some nasty damage and stopped him dead in his tracks. He could've blown another action to actually move away, but at that point he was bloodied and practically keeling over, and I guess didn't want to risk even more OA's from the rest of the party, not to mention blowing his whole turn.

So, as you can see, my mark was ignored multiple times in that encounter. It was no big deal though, and a helluva lot of fun, because I got to tack on the extra damage. I think all told, I probably did about an extra 40-50 damage (out of his 340HP total) due to him violating my mark and provoking an OA. For other Defenders, it can be even more fun. Auto-damage for the Pally, teleporting or damage mitigation for the Swordmage, and extra attacks or slides for the Warden...all of these can really add to the firepower of a Defender and make for exciting encounters.

The only time a DM ignoring your marks universally becomes a BIG issue is that if he says that there's no RP reason for the enemy to get a -2 on attacks against your allies, and therefore you can't have it. If that's the case, then that's pretty crappy, and I would expect the DM to come up with a valid RP mechanic for everything else in the game, such as the bonus to saves for Elites and Solos, which he probably can't, because being "tough" applies equally well to the PC's. In which case I would argue that Elites/Solos just being "better" at it is the same argument for why Fighters get to mark...at least IMO.

 

[RigaMortus2]

and the problem remains: if the Fighter's oponent is levels ahead of him and not impressed with his marking tactics at all, why should it work just because the Fighter just hit it for, let's say, a low level damage?

First off, why would the Fighter (or party) be facing enemies that are much higher levels?

Second, its not so much the damage that is dealt, but the fact that the Fighter hit the opponent to begin with. If he hit them once, he can do it again. Does the opponent want to take that chance?

Also, if the opponent is not impressed with the Fighter's marking tactics, then allow them to move. The Fighter will get their free attack, they still have to roll to hit, and the Fighter may still miss their attack. Maybe if the Fighter starts connecting with those attacks more than he misses, the opponent will start to think twice and become impressed by the Fighter's marking tactics.

 

[ExploderWizard]

First off, why would the Fighter (or party) be facing enemies that are much higher levels?

In a freeform exploration type game the PC's might find themselves encountering all manner of power levels.

Second, its not so much the damage that is dealt, but the fact that the Fighter hit the opponent to begin with. If he hit them once, he can do it again. Does the opponent want to take that chance?

Which makes sense if the fighter has to hit to mark. An attack (successful or not) will do the trick.

 

[ValhallaGH]

In the game world it may or may not have any meaning at all.

This thread doesn't give a damn about the context of the game world.
It cares about the context of the DM's brain.

Think on that for a second.











Now do you see why it matters how you describe your mark? Now will you quit getting in the way as people try to help the OP?

 

[ExploderWizard]

This thread doesn't give a damn about the context of the game world.
It cares about the context of the DM's brain.

Think on that for a second.











Now do you see why it matters how you describe your mark? Now will you quite getting in the way as people try to help the OP?

Just so we are clear, you are saying that roleplaying a particular activity (marking) has no connection to the imagined game world?

This means that your first reply in this thread indicates that the player is shouting these hideous taunts to the DM. In this case since the player is not refering to the context of the game world (what his character would be saying to a foe) the DM can demonstrate his understanding of the message by backhanding the rude player across the mouth.

He should remember the mark at least.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Well, I can see that my ignore list is getting longer. That's a shame, you can never tell where a real insight will come from .....

So, ourchair, has this discussion been helpful?

 

[ourchair]

Fighters marking (hello Wow!) is one of my beefs with 4E.

Why should an intelligent oponent focus on Fighter if the strikers are the real menace...? What if, on the curse example, the villain is a cold calm folk that would smile when the Fighter curses his dad?

I totally get where you are coming from. After all, intelligent opponents shouldn't be COMPELLED to attack someone just cause they marked them, though the others make a point about how ignoring a mark can lead to more punishment.

I suspect your point is that an intelligent opponent may have more tactically important goals than just trying to 'win' the fight - such as complete the ritual, take out a sworn arch-enemy PC, etc.

However, the reason I ask about the whole marking thing is that my DM seems to recognize the mark but we end up with fights where the artificers are hurt well past bloodied and my 79 HPs are totally untouched, simply because of neglecting the mark.

Great suggestions, everyone. I particularly liked Destil's description of the Warden, as I am playing a Warforged Warden abusing reach weapons. Also, this makes complete sense:

Personally, I don't see it so much as cursing as more the marking (same term even) you see in say football or basketball - you move in such a way as to block, harrass and interfere with your opponent. You can't just ignore someone who is marking you in one of these sports.

The OP isn't trying to rationalize anything. He just needs something to clue his DM into the fact that his character is trying to draw all the hostile attention. Apparently they are a heavy RP table and the DM hasn't yet figured out what it means for combat when one of the monsters gets marked.

Yes. Exactly. However, the DM knows what marking does, it just sees to slip the mind when in actual play. Hence, bloodied leaders and untouched defender. (Which I reckon for fiendish-aligned DMs is actually a GOOD game.)