Marked targets knowing about Combat Challenge

[Nail]

Let's say the Fighter's Combat Challenge was divided into two parts.

Combat Challenge (class feature): You may mark any enemy you attack.
Combat Whack (at-will immediate interrupt): If a marked enemy adjacent to you shifts or attacks your ally, make a basic attack against that enemy.

Would a marked enemy know that the Fighter possesses the Combat Whack power, and that being marked makes him susceptible to being whacked if he shifts?

Dunno.

In the case of Combat Challenge, it both "marks" the target, and places restrictions on thetarget. That one power (class feature) is doing two things, and the target should be informed of whatever power is affecting it and what it does.

In the case of two related powers - one currently active on the target, and another that could be used on the target because of the active one - I don't see any rules that say the target should know all of the options available to his attacker.

...but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. It seems if you want to go that route, you're in for a complicated gaming session......

Do you have a direction you want this to go, Hyper?

 

[Hypersmurf]

In the case of Combat Challenge, it both "marks" the target, and places restrictions on thetarget.

No, it doesn't.

That one power (class feature) is doing two things, and the target should be informed of whatever power is affecting it and what it does.

Let's say the Fighter hits someone with Reaping Strike and marks them. The power they have hit the the target with is Reaping Strike. The effects of that power are a/ deal damage, and b/ mark the target - the Fighter's Reaping Strike has been altered by his class feature.

The Reaping Strike has not placed any restrictions on the target, other than the -2 to attack rolls for the Marked condition. The target is still able to shift, and is still able to attack non-Fighter targets.

The Fighter has a class feature which allows him to take a certain action if the target shifts or attacks a non-Fighter target. But this isn't something that is imposed on the target; this is an ability possessed by the Fighter. The condition imposed on the target is "Marked". "Able to whack a marked target who does X" is not a condition imposed on the target.

In the case of two related powers - one currently active on the target, and another that could be used on the target because of the active one - I don't see any rules that say the target should know all of the options available to his attacker.

Right. And that's the case with Combat Challenge. The power currently active on the target is a modified Reaping Strike which imposed the marked condition. The power that could be used on the target is a Melee Basic Attack, granted by the Fighter's Combat Challenge class feature. Why should the target know that the melee basic attack is an option available to his attacker, when the only thing that has been done to him is to mark him?

-Hyp.

 

[Alraiis]

To use another example, consider the rogue's Dance of Death. If the target knows that any attack it makes against the rogue on its next turn is guaranteed to be redirected to an ally or itself, it will never choose to make that attack. Which would effectively invalidate the Artful Dodger bonus, as it would never come up unless it was completely to the creature's advantage to hit himself, such as if its own attacks healed it (and that scenario would make the power worse for Dodgers).

Dance of Death was clearly written under the presumption that the target could still wind up making that attack against the rogue. That could only happen if it had absolutely no knowledge about the rogue's ability to redirect the attack. This is consistent with Hyp's reading, since the target is not "restricted" from attacking whomever it chooses.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Dance of Death was clearly written under the presumption that the target could still wind up making that attack against the rogue. That could only happen if it had absolutely no knowledge about the rogue's ability to redirect the attack. This is consistent with Hyp's reading, since the target is not "restricted" from attacking whomever it chooses.

In the case of Dance of Death, CustServ disagrees.

The main difference between Dance of Death and Combat Challenge is that you hit someone with the Dance of Death power, and it's that instance of the Dance of Death power that provides the attack reversal... so if they know what Dance of Death did to them, they know about the imminent attack reversal. Whereas you don't hit someone with Combat Challenge in order to mark them; you hit someone with some other power in order to mark them, and then Combat Challenge lets you hit them again later. There are two different powers at work, unlike Dance of Death which is a single power.

(Here's my conversation with CustServ on Dance of Death, for reference

PHB p57 states: "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."

This suggests that effects of the form "And if you do X, Y will happen!" are known to the target.

Is this true in the case of:
1. Hellish Rebuke (Warlock Attack 1): the target knows that if the warlock takes damage, the target will also take damage?
2. Riposte Strike (Rogue Attack 1): the target knows that if he attacks the rogue, the rogue will get an immediate interrupt attack?
3. Dance of Death (Rogue Attack 27): the target knows that if he makes a melee attack against the rogue, it will automatically be redirected (possibly against himself), with no way to prevent it?

Thank you for contacting us. Yes, all enemies would know all the conditions imposed on them and all of the effects of the power in all three of the examples you provided. Everything is designed to be completely transparent, but we encourage DMs to run the game the way they like. Please let me know if you need anymore help!

Marc
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast

The niggle that we have concerns Dance of Death in particular.

The power as described looks like a "Surprise! You shouldn't have done that!" power... in the next round, the enemy attacks you, but you trick him into hitting someone else.

But if he knows that this is what will happen if he attacks you, it changes it from a "You shouldn't have done that!" power into a "You'd better not do that!" power. Since there is no way to circumvent the redirection, a creature affected by Dance of Death, who knows its effect, simply won't make a melee attack, so the consequences will never occur.

Which is fine... but then, if you're an Artful Dodger, you grant a bonus to the attack roll that we've just determined will never occur. It seems a bit pointless having a bonus to something that will never happen, which is why we wondered if perhaps this is not a situation the "Enemy knows all effects" rule is intended to cover.

The power as written seems to include an assumption the enemy doesn't know his attack will be redirected.

I'm glad you wrote back. I have discussed this with a few of my colleagues. Here is what we agreed upon. The statement is ""Whenever you affect a creature with a power, that creature knows exactly what you've done to it and what conditions you've imposed." So the creature knows exactly what you've done to it. What did you do? You attacked it, or cast a spell upon it. This is the extent of what the creature knows about the power. It does not specify that it know's the complete intricacies of how the power works. It will also know what conditions you've imposed. A list of all the conditions that can be imposed is on page 277.

With that said if a rogue uses the Dance of Death Power against an enemy, all it knows is that you have hit it with an attack. This attack does not impose any conditions so all the enemy knows is that it has been attacked. It does not know how exactly Dance of Death Works. The same applies to the other powers you asked about.

I apologize for the confusion the first time. I hope this helps clear things up. Please let me know if you need anymore help!

Marc
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast

But "Also, it takes radiant damage equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier the first time it makes an attack that doesn't include you as a target before the start of your next turn" is not a condition described on p277; however, it is given as an example of something the enemy knows when a paladin uses Divine Challenge on him.

Under your latest ruling, the enemy should know that a/ he has been targeted by a class feature, and b/ the 'marked' condition has been imposed on him. Since the potential radiant damage is not a condition, he shouldn't know that he will take damage if he attacks someone other than the paladin. But p57 states that he does... which suggests that "What you've done to it and what conditions you've imposed" conveys more information that "You've used a power" and "Conditions from p277".

Or is the Divine Challenge example in error, and in fact a creature targeted with Divine Challenge does not know he will take damage if he attacks someone other than the paladin?

Hello again,

I went and discussed this with my team again and I spoke specifically with a colleague who keeps regular contact with the developers of D&D. From this discussion, I found that unfortunately, the last answer I gave you is not correct. The first answer I gave you is correct. Now I understand, how frustrating this must be for you now that I have given you two different answers, and again I sincerely apologize for the confusion that I have caused. I am 100% sure now of the answer that I am about to give you. The developers intended that the creature is completely aware of what the power does that is effecting him. However, instead of coming up with rules for each power that states what portions of the power are known and which portions of the power are unknown to a creature, they intended for the DM to use their discretion to fit their game.

So, as the rules are written, and as intended, if you attack a creature with the Dance of Death power, that creature knows exactly how that power works. Now the DM can choose how much knowledge the creature has about that power. If they feel the game would be more fun, or if it would fit their campaign better to have the creature not know all of the effects of a power they can certainly choose to play it that way.

Again I apologize for the confusion that I have caused.

Marc
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast

-Hyp.

 

[James McMurray]

Monster's are not supposed to have "gotcha" abilities. Why should the players?

Personally, since the rules are silent on whether a monster knows about a fighter's challenge or not, I'll keep doing what I'm doing. If a rule shows up, let us know. In the meantime, have fun theorizing.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Monster's are not supposed to have "gotcha" abilities. Why should the players?

Should a monster know that a PC has the Polearm Gamble feat, or the Disruptive Strike power?

What's the difference between "An enemy attacks your ally: make an attack" and "A marked enemy attacks your ally: make an attack"? Should the monster be oblivious to the possibility of one, but know about the other?

-Hyp.

 

[eamon]

I think the rules function best if you don't read too much into them - that's just a fancy way of saying that it won't help trying to pin down exactly what "condition" means and that there is no exact description possible which can tell you what a victim of an attack or effect knows about that attack or effect - it depends on the context.

That said, it's clear that a creature suffering from one of the "named" conditions will generally be aware of that. A creature will generally not be aware of potential future attacks - it only knows what has happened, not future possibilities such as the "Dance of Death" counter or the combat challenge ability.

So, in general it makes sense and follows the rules to not be aware of future possibilities. Nevertheless, I think you shouldn't hide combat challenge specifically, nor other abilities like it. These abilities aren't about being sneaky, but about tactical maneuvering that you'd presume might be visible. From a "realism" perspective it makes sense that just as you'd instinctively realize someone can take an OA, you'd instinctively realize someone that's actively threatening you a little differently. From a gaming point of view, it's hard enough to inject a little description into many actions, and it's a lot more fun if the DM describes a monster as controlling a large section of the battlefield with it's well coordinated limbs (threatening reach) or that a pair of monsters fights almost as one with their backs together (they gain an AC boost when adjacent to each other).

It's simply unreasonable to assume that many of these fairly basic game mechanics are invisible in-game, and it's unfair to assume that somehow only the PC's can perceive the consequences of effects with significant game mechanic effects. So, whereas the rules don't dictate exactly what's obvious, your game will be more fun if you don't overdo the secrecy bit.

Taking into account that that huge dude in the corner with the enormous jagged blade might actually hit you with it isn't metagaming, it's just being reasonable, even if there's no rule that permits you to conclude that he has an attack power using it.

 

[James McMurray]

Should a monster know that a PC has the Polearm Gamble feat, or the Disruptive Strike power?

I'm sure your overly analytical brain won't understand this, but: it depends.

What's the difference between "An enemy attacks your ally: make an attack" and "A marked enemy attacks your ally: make an attack"?

Flavor text.

Should the monster be oblivious to the possibility of one, but know about the other?

Sometimes.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'm sure your overly analytical brain won't understand this, but: it depends.

We have two characters with polearms, standing side-by-side. One of them has the Polearm Gamble feat. An orc intends to move up to them and smack them with a sword.

The one with the feat will be able to take an OA when the orc closes. The one without the feat will not.

Let's say the one without the feat is stronger, higher level, and more confident. The one with the feat is lower level and a bit nervous.

Is there a way for the orc to know that approaching the nervous one involves more immediate danger than approaching the tough, confident one?

-Hyp.

 

[Cadfan]

Why should the target know that the melee basic attack is an option available to his attacker, when the only thing that has been done to him is to mark him?

Because marking isn't a "thing" in game. No one says, in character, "Oh my gosh! I've been marked!" They think that the Fighter's really got their number, and if they blink wrong, he'll clobber them. Or that the Paladin has set his God's eye upon them, and they'd better react. Or that the Swordmage has cast a spell upon them.

I don't think you can divide up marking, and the effects of marking in a particular instance, and treat them like separate things. That presumes that "marking" has a consistent in game nature, and it doesn't.

Is there a way for the orc to know that approaching the nervous one involves more immediate danger than approaching the tough, confident one?

Next to the orcs is a many tentacled beast who's tentacles reach and writhe thirty feet out from his body. Is there any way, under the rules as written, to know that this monster has threatening reach?

If the answer is no, what does that tell us about this debate?

If I inflict 11 points of ongoing radiant damage on your character by using a paragon path ability that isn't a power, does your character know about it during my turn? Does he not figure it out until his turn starts and he takes damage?

Does any page exist in the entirety of the game that explicitly states that a character has any idea of how wounded he is, other than "bloodied" and "dead?"