Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Alraiis" data-source="post: 4458610" data-attributes="member: 61131">To use another example, consider the rogue's Dance of Death.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; That could only happen if it had absolutely no knowledge about the rogue's ability to redirect the attack.&nbsp; This is consistent with Hyp's reading, since the target is not &quot;restricted&quot; from attacking whomever it chooses.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Alraiis, post: 4458610, member: 61131"] 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 [i]worse[/i] 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification