Leif's Homebrew 4E, OOC1

[Leif]

No problem here.

Excellent! Ozymandias79 has been so informed.

 

[Maidhc O Casain]

Tarkk gets a free basic melee attacks vs. the Dragonshield, and Basher7 and Tarkk now have it flanked.

(Didn't want you guys to miss these notes in my IC Spoiler).

 

[Leif]

Funny thing about that flanking maneuver: You managed to not only flank the dragonshield, but also flank Tarrk between the Dragonshield and the kobold skirmisher. If he takes his free shot at the Dragonshield (probably still the wisest move) he will be open to a flanking attack from the skirmisher.

 

[Maidhc O Casain]

Actually, if you look at the examples of Flanking (and Not Flanking) on pg. 285 of the PH, Tarkk is not flanked (at least not until the skirmisher gets to take a shift to the square where the dragonshield used to be standing).

Also, does attacking someone while you're flanked actually grant the flanker an attack of opportunity? If that's changed too, flanking just got a LOT more powerful!

 

[Leif]

Actually, if you look at the examples of Flanking (and Not Flanking) on pg. 285 of the PH, Tarkk is not flanked (at least not until the skirmisher gets to take a shift to the square where the dragonshield used to be standing).

Also, does attacking someone while you're flanked actually grant the flanker an attack of opportunity? If that's changed too, flanking just got a LOT more powerful!

The skirmisher doesn't have to move at all. He's already more opposite the DS than he would be if he moved into the square where the DS was. (Ok, by the PH, the skirmisher does NOT have Tarrk flanked if Tarrk attacks the DS. My bad. The next post explains the situation better anyway.) On the other thing, I really don't know. Gotta read up on that. [Ok, read up on this -- when you make AsoO, those attacks actually occur in the creature's turn that gave you the opportunity, not on your turn. And AsoO can only be a basic attack.]

I can tell you that if Tarrk attacks the DS, then he is not going to get the benefit of his dex adj to AC when the skirmisher attacks him. <-this is wrong, too. In 4E apparently you have to be dazed, stunned, or unconscious to lose your dex/int adjustment to AC.

The way you did the Slide of the DS, he ends up in AA9 while Basher7 is in Z8, Tarrk is in AB10 (exactly opposite from Basher7, which means that they have the dragonshield flanked), and the skirmisher is in AB11 (not quite perfectly opposite the DS, and NOT flanking).

 

[Leif]

I am comfortable making THIS ruling: Tarrk and the Kobold Skirmisher had already executed a round of attacks against each other, and, therefore, each had MARKED the other. Executing an attack that does not include the foe who has you marked does not give that opponent a bonus to hit you, but it does give you a -2 penalty to attack any other opponent. (And, incidentally, my ruling is still that dex adj to AC would not apply to an oppent that is basically behind you, so IF Tarrk attacks the DS, he will be doing so at -2, and also the skirmisher will be attacking a flatfooted Tarrk.) <-this is STILL wrong, too! No, it doesn't work that way, Leif!

(And, in that situation, Tarrk would grant to the skirmisher Combat Advantage, which would make him +2 to hit Tarrk.) <--THIS, however, is correct.

 

[Leif]

Ozymandias79, are you still interested in joining us? It won't be long now until I am ready to introduce you. Well, probably a week or so I guess..... Depends on how long the current batttle takes to finish. I'd still like to get a look at your finished character before then, too.

 

[Maidhc O Casain]

I am comfortable making THIS ruling: Tarrk and the Kobold Skirmisher had already executed a round of attacks against each other, and, therefore, each had MARKED the other.

You Mark an opponent just by attacking them? I must confess I don't really understand marking at all well. I found the description of the condition so I get that if you're marked you're at -2 to attack anyone besides the one who marked you, but I can't find where it tells how one is marked . . . I always thought it was only brought about by certain attacks or actions since some of the powers specifically say they cause the target to be marked.

 

[Leif]

You Mark an opponent just by attacking them? I must confess I don't really understand marking at all well. I found the description of the condition so I get that if you're marked you're at -2 to attack anyone besides the one who marked you, but I can't find where it tells how one is marked . . . I always thought it was only brought about by certain attacks or actions since some of the powers specifically say they cause the target to be marked.

That's what I've always thought, anyway. I thought that a successful attack (a hit but not a miss) against a target was enough to cause that target to be marked. (Kinda like calling 'dibs' on his a**!) Just now, however, I have been unable to find in the ph (or dmg) just how you mark someone. I did find out the effect of attacking a different opponent from the one who marked you, but I didn't see how to actually mark someoone. I couldn't even find any powers that cause an opponent to be marked!

 

[Lou]

"Marking"

PHB 4e p. 57


"Whenever you affect a creature with a power, that creature knows exactly what you’ve done to it and what conditions you’ve imposed. For example, when a paladin uses divine challenge against an enemy, the enemy knows that it has been marked and that it will therefore take a penalty to attack rolls and some damage if it attacks anyone aside from the paladin."


p. 63 Cleric L1 Healing Strike
p. 74 Warpriest's Challenge L16
p. 76 Fighter Combat Challenge (all attacks by a Fighter, hit or miss)
etc.