Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5351592" data-attributes="member: 82106">Victim of the FeywildOK, here's the lowdown. Obviously the power can target the worm, which is what it does. THEN it has an effect on a hit that teleports 2 allies. Now, the allies are NOT targets of the POWER, but they are being teleported and thus the teleport rules need to be applied. Teleport states that the user of the teleport must have LoS to the  destination. RC page214 tells us nothing about an LoS or LoE needed to whoever is being teleported.In this situation we're USUALLY talking about the target of a power, and thus restrictions on LoS and/or LoE will be provided there, but here we are talking about the target of an EFFECT. The question thus is can an effect affect a creature which is not within either LoS or LoE? The general rules for powers would need to be consulted for this to be determined.There are a few different ways to argue this. First we could ask if this is really some sort of AoE. It isn't couched in the standard terms of an AoE though, it simply says "2 allies within 5 squares." The general rules for powers really never spell out one way or another restrictions on 'non-targets' that are effected. However we can ask some reasonability questions. For instance if the Bard can teleport his swallowed ally then what stops a splash effect that doesn't require a hit (say a power that says "creatures within 2 squares of the target take X damage") from taking damage even if they are on the other side of blocking terrain (IE out of LoE)? NOTHING would, in fact this interpretation would mean all such effects work regardless of ANY such consideration. Personally I don't find this reasonable and I would consider this use of the power not to pass a smell test.Frankly I think that even though 'other affected creatures' aren't ever specifically called out in the general rules related to LoS and LoE requirements that the common and reasonable interpretation is that in these situations they are treated in a fashion analogous to a specified target. That is walls (or the guts of a purple worm) block LoE and therefor prevent such effects from working. In a very narrow technical sense you can claim to be correct, there is no rule spelled out that actively prevents what the Bard did from working. It is however almost certainly a contravention of RAI and I'd call it a bit of an example of player rules lawyering (although not a particularly egregious one). It was a clever ploy and I might even give you the benefit of the doubt on it at the table, but next week when you tried to use the same sort of rules interpretation to damage some enemy behind a wall with a splash effect I'd certainly hope you'd keep your desire for rules consistency in your back pocket. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification