Immediate Interrupts: Rule vs Etiquette?

[abyssaldeath]

My DM always made the D20 rolls in front of us and the damage rolls behind the screen. We never knew what modifiers were we applied, but depending on if we were hit with high or low rolls let us get an idea if we need use buffs to up our defenses.

 

[deleteme123456]

My DM always made the D20 rolls in front of us and the damage rolls behind the screen. We never knew what modifiers were we applied, but depending on if we were hit with high or low rolls let us get an idea if we need use buffs to up our defenses.

That's my general approach. They can see the d20, I know their defenses, so I tell them if it's a hit or miss. They have the opportunity to use the interrupt then before they know damage.

There are items later (in Dragon and/or AV) that have other similar effects but different wording. One item says "after you see the attack roll", some items have no wording (not even the "after you've been hit by...")... so it's hard to determine exactly what the rule should be, but in general, and especially since the power is already easily the best wizard utility 2, I don't have a problem with making the player think about it a little. Besides, shield does still help until the end of your next turn or something, so if there are other attacks coming your way, the shield might block them or divert them to a less menacing target like that juicy dwarf fighter over there...

 

[Nail]

I've been playing it as "You've been hit, do you wish to use Shield or not?" but my player argued that it's not fair to make him decide unless he knows if the power would work and prevent him from taking damage.

I agree with your player. He should know by how much he's been hit, so he can know if using Shield is appropriate. Don't nerf this power.

I've been treating Shield the same way I treat the Swordmage's Aegis of Assault immediate reaction: nowhere does it imply that the basic attack granted by the power will always hit. It merely gives the player the chance to make the basic attack.

You are comparing Apples to Oranges here. An OA does not depend on knowing something about the enemy's attack beforehand. Shield does.

 

[the Jester]

I don't tell my players if the +4 bonus will make the attack miss. Heck, the bonus lasts until the end of the pc's next turn, so even if they still get hit by the triggering attack, it isn't necessarily wasted- it will help them defend against any other attacks until they go again.

However, I love Mouseferatu's suggestion.

 

[Nail]

My DM always made the D20 rolls in front of us....

This really is a crucial peice: Rolling your dice in front of the players increases tension. I always roll attacks, damages, and saves in front of the players.

Additionally, rolling in front of everyone reduces the incentive by all parties to "fudge" the dice a bit.

I disagree with the practice of the DM rolling attacks secretly, comparing his number to what he recorded as my PCs defences, and then announcing: "You're hit!" There are tons of modifiers to rolls, and it's highly unlikely that the DM will remember all of them, for every player. It's far better for the DM to announce his hit as a player would ("Orcus just rolled a 48 to hit your AC. Does he hit you?").

Moreover, telling the players the number increases the tention, especially if they see you've rolled poorly, but you still got a high number. You'll start hearing the tension crackle around the table when that occurs.....

 

[Doctor Proctor]

That's my general approach. They can see the d20, I know their defenses, so I tell them if it's a hit or miss. They have the opportunity to use the interrupt then before they know damage.

I would play it this way personally. I think that the player should have an idea of whether it will hit or miss, but definitely don't give them damage. There are several powers that specifically say that they can be used after damage is announced, so leaves those as the special ones.

I also probably wouldn't tell them what kind of attack was hitting them. For example, you might have a big Solo that has a basic melee attack and a huge damage melee attack that applies a condition. Tell the Wizard that he's attacking, and that's he's hit, but not which attack it was. This will mean the Wizard has to think "Should I burn the power now, or hope that this was his weak attack?"

 

[Nail]

I also probably wouldn't tell them what kind of attack was hitting them.

Not that it matters, but I think this is a horrible idea, and as a player I would feel like I was being jerked around.

Is there any rules basis for not telling the player what defence was targeted???

 

[malraux]

That's my general approach. They can see the d20, I know their defenses, so I tell them if it's a hit or miss. They have the opportunity to use the interrupt then before they know damage.

There are items later (in Dragon and/or AV) that have other similar effects but different wording. One item says "after you see the attack roll", some items have no wording (not even the "after you've been hit by...")... so it's hard to determine exactly what the rule should be, but in general, and especially since the power is already easily the best wizard utility 2, I don't have a problem with making the player think about it a little. Besides, shield does still help until the end of your next turn or something, so if there are other attacks coming your way, the shield might block them or divert them to a less menacing target like that juicy dwarf fighter over there...

I think that by the rules, there's pretty good evidence to say that the wizard would not have to know for sure if his shield would work, as most of the powers that do similar things explicitly call out that you know the result beforehand.

That said, I prefer the "he hits 21 vs AC" style of info management. its just easier that way for me. This makes the power slightly better than it should be, but given that its a defensive power, it really doesn't make the wizard overpowered.

If I were to really change it, I would drop the initial bonus to ac and ref, but still keep the +4 for the remaining duration. ie Effect: You gain a +3 power bonus to AC and Reflex defense against the power you interupt. Aftereffect: You gain a +4 power bonus to AC and Reflex defense until the end of your next turn. To me, that balances the reliability of the power with the ability to use it.

 

[Engilbrand]

It says, "You are hit by an attack." It doesn't say, "You are attacked." This is a metapower. If you have an AC of 18, and the DM gets a 20, he says, "I hit you." You then say, "I use Shield, so I have an AC of 22." The DM says, "I didn't hit you." You then describe the scene accordingly.
The DM doesn't need to tell you that he got a 20. Maybe it was a 23. You know that you're hit, and you use the Shield hoping to negate the hit. Either way, though, it wasn't an obvious miss. It was a hit that is negated.
I tend to roll all dice and ask if anyone wants to do something before I describe the entire scene.

Normal:
Me- Your AC is a 20. He hits. Do you want to use anything?
Player- No.
Me- The Orc charges into you and you can feel his axe sparking off of your armor into your face.

This circumstance:
Me- Your AC is a 20. He hits. Do you want to use anything?
Player- Yes. I use Shield.
Me- The Orc charges you and you can see his axe coming right down onto you. At the last second, your arms comes up with a shield of force and barely manages to knock the axe to the side.

Or, if the Shield didn't help:
Me- Your AC is a 20. He hits. Do you want to use anything?
Player- Yes. I use Shield.
Me- The Orc charges you and you can see his axe coming right down onto you. At the last second, your arms comes up with a shield of force. Unfortunately, you put it up to slow and over to the side too far. While the axe does make contact with the Shield, he manages to have it be a glancing blow and continues his momentum. The axe makes contact with your armor and you can feel a sharp pain in your shoulder.

 

[deleteme123456]

Not that it matters, but I think this is a horrible idea, and as a player I would feel like I was being jerked around.

Is there any rules basis for not telling the player what defence was targeted???

I definitely do tell my players which defense is being hit. That seems like they would know--"he attacks your reflexes" etc. I just don't tell them by how much. They will sometimes correct me or say "did you include the +2 from second wind" etc. and I'll double-check if I forgot it, which might tell them that I barely hit, but that doesn't come up very often.