Misdirected Mark and Defenders

[BASHMAN]

Don't forget that this power can also be used to be a total jerk!

Fighter is flanking monster w/ Rogue. Fighter Marks monster so it won't attack rogue. Spoony the Jerk Bard decides to change the mark so that the Rogue is now marking the target. Even better, change the mark to the Wizard so that the monster can shift away from the fighter and charge the wizard. Now, I wouldn't play with people like this on a regular basis (griefers) but at Cons, sometimes it is unavoidable especially when people say "well my character is a gnome who loves practical jokes" as justification for this kind of stuff.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

The real problem here is just the use of the word 'mark' in Divine Challenge. They should have used a different term because it really is NOT a mark. It doesn't quack like a mark, so it really isn't one. This would be irrelevant if there was no other way for paladins to mark things, but there is, and so now we have 2 'flavors' of mark that basically have nothing to do with each other and have to be tracked completely separately.

So in your mind just go to the Divine Challenge power Effect block and mentally replace 'mark' with 'foo', and you are all set. Just poor choice of words on the part of the PHB1 authors.

 

[cmbarona]

... except that there are other effects that interact with the "marked" condition, such as a Fighter attacking a DC'd monster overwriting the Paladin's mark.

IMHO, I think the effects of the Paladin and Swordmage marks should have been class features, and the actual marking mechanic its own power. But I'm sure there's a balance issue I'm missing (maybe it does have to do with the potential range of effects), so no houserules for me.

 

[DracoSuave]

The real problem here is just the use of the word 'mark' in Divine Challenge. They should have used a different term because it really is NOT a mark.

No, it actually IS a mark. It is, in every way, shape, and form, a mark. It has the same effects as a mark, and interacts with the rules in every way a mark does. If there is some way a mark interacts with the rules that DC doesn't, that is because you have forgotten that DC is, in fact, a mark, and interacts with the rules in the same way.

It doesn't quack like a mark, so it really isn't one. This would be irrelevant if there was no other way for paladins to mark things, but there is, and so now we have 2 'flavors' of mark that basically have nothing to do with each other and have to be tracked completely separately.

It isn't the mark that needs keeping tracked separately....

So in your mind just go to the Divine Challenge power Effect block and mentally replace 'mark' with 'foo', and you are all set. Just poor choice of words on the part of the PHB1 authors.

The problem is that DC isn't foo. It's mark + foo. Don't think of it as 'almost a mark.' It is a mark + more. If you have things that interact with marks, they interact with this in -every way.-

Please don't confuse people by saying it's not a mark when it -is- in every way a mark. The problem is in thinking marks do a ton of things marks -don't-, which is why people get confused when -other- things (soldier monsters, clerics, certain paragon paths) deliver marks but don't interract with them with punishments.

If you can mentally separate certain attacks as 'damage + mark' then you can mentally separate DC as 'stuff + mark'.