Monsters and Marked

[BobTheNob]

This is the same argument I have with my DM regarding marks. My wife plays a Warden. She marks everything she can get near, and she never gets to use any of her At-Will "you didn't attack me" powers because the DM insists that the monsters know what she's capable of doing to them as soon as they're marked.

I say (and I've ruled in my own game) that the monster knows it's marked (and knows it takes a -2 to hit anyone but the marking creature) but it doesn't know what that creature's abilities are in regards to an ignored mark, unless the ramifications for ignoring said mark are part of the marking power (like a swordmage or paladin). Fighters and Wardens have special class abilities that kick in if a mark is ignored, but it's not a condition of the mark itself.

If only my DM would see it that way, I'd stop having to bite my tongue, and my wife wouldn't feel like so many of her class features are getting completely ignored. =/

I agree at one level, and disagree at another. As a player, its really cool to pull off those excellent reaction powers associated with the mark, its can make playing the tank fun. Yet the role of the tank is to draw fire away from the reast of the team, and the "artificial" interpretation suits that better.

As a DM I rule both ways. If the party is really in a pinch (i.e. things are looking rough) I play the "creature is marked, creature knows and therefore goes for tank" approach, otherwise (which is more often) I will play the "creature doesnt know" approach so the players can enjoy the playing experience a bit more.

Mind you, I dont tell the players thats my approach, and no-one has really guessed. They just know sometimes I rule one way and the rest I rule the other. Keeps em on their toes.

 

[Stumblewyk]

I agree at one level, and disagree at another. As a player, its really cool to pull off those excellent reaction powers associated with the mark, its can make playing the tank fun. Yet the role of the tank is to draw fire away from the reast of the team, and the "artificial" interpretation suits that better.

I get what you're saying, and it's not like I make a point of getting my monsters marked and then ignoring those marked conditions when I DM a Fighter or Warden, but when it makes more sense to take a swipe at the squishier, less intimidating enemy, some of my monsters do just that.

Or when my one player's Fighter gets on top of a ranged artillery monster, I know it doesn't make HP-conservation sense to try to shift away to get off another ranged attack...but my artillery monster goes "[Expletive Deleted]! This guy is right on top of me!" and tries to step away. Often, it results in them getting whacked and staying exactly where they are, but I feel it adds a touch of realism to the combat.

In the case of my wife's warden, she often marks a monster, and then moves away from them, engaging another enemy. Far too often, at the expense of realism, the marked monster(s) will swarm to the Warden, taking OAs from my Warlord and the Rogue (trust me, the Rogue's not complaining), when it would make far more tactical (and realistic) sense to simply have that monster attack another PC with the -2 (and invoke the Warden's s'nifty "you ignored my mark" powers).

 

[Saeviomagy]

Often, it results in them getting whacked and staying exactly where they are, but I feel it adds a touch of realism to the combat.

Unless your fighter has some power I don't know about, getting whacked when you try to shift away does NOT stop the shift.

If a marked monster shifts or attacks another PC, the attack the fighter gets is an immediate action.

If a monster moves away from the fighter, it provokes an opportunity attack.

Opportunity attacks gain the +wis bonus to hit and end movement. The attack as an immediate action does not.

There are other differences: the immediate action can only be used once per turn, while opportunity attacks can be used multiple times and so forth.

In the case of my wife's warden, she often marks a monster, and then moves away from them, engaging another enemy. Far too often, at the expense of realism, the marked monster(s) will swarm to the Warden, taking OAs from my Warlord and the Rogue (trust me, the Rogue's not complaining), when it would make far more tactical (and realistic) sense to simply have that monster attack another PC with the -2 (and invoke the Warden's s'nifty "you ignored my mark" powers).

Doesn't the warden's power on a ranged opponent only move them towards the warden AFTER they make their attack? You might want to tell your wife that she's getting a really good deal if this is the standard scenario.

You also might want to thank her a bit more for the OAs that she's generating, so she thinks of them as damage that she caused (which is true) instead of her powers not getting to work.

Oh, and do things to try to provoke OAs from monsters if you really want her to get her licks in (works amazingly if your rogue is an artful dodger...)

 

[Stumblewyk]

Unless your fighter has some power I don't know about, getting whacked when you try to shift away does NOT stop the shift.

I said shift, I shouldn't have. I should have said "move". I used improper terminology - I blame the baseball game I was trying to watch while making my post.

Doesn't the warden's power on a ranged opponent only move them towards the warden AFTER they make their attack? You might want to tell your wife that she's getting a really good deal if this is the standard scenario.

What I meant was that she marks a creature (or 3), and then moves away, often with the extra space of shift movement granted from Form of the Relentless Panther. When other, valid, closer, more threatening targets are still in range of the marked enemy/ies, they still still move to the Warden.

Don't get me wrong - I love OAs. The rogue loves OAs. We all love OAs. They're free damage (when they hit). But...the DM's convoluted explanation as for why his monsters will never NOT attack the Warden while marked are just ridiculous sometimes. As a result, she's built her Warden to be impossible to kill. Because we all know she's going to get absolutely pounded on, at the expense of the DM often ignoring damaging other PCs when it's far more tactically sound to do so.

 

[Mesh Hong]

What I meant was that she marks a creature (or 3), and then moves away, often with the extra space of shift movement granted from Form of the Relentless Panther. When other, valid, closer, more threatening targets are still in range of the marked enemy/ies, they still still move to the Warden.

I'm not sure I am actually following the complaint here. Are you complaining about a marked creature attacking the person who marked it?

If you are I am confused, marking something is goading it into attacking you rather than anyone else. Surely if that creature then attacks you your mark is doing its job?

 

[Stumblewyk]

I'm not sure I am actually following the complaint here. Are you complaining about a marked creature attacking the person who marked it?

If you are I am confused, marking something is goading it into attacking you rather than anyone else. Surely if that creature then attacks you your mark is doing its job?

I'm frustrated by the lengths the DM will go to to avoid provoking effects his monsters don't know will occur. It smacks of power-gaming, and when it comes from a DM, it smacks of "DM-vs-PC competition".

She's doing her job. She absolutely is. She keeps monsters off of the rest of the party.

 

[Mesh Hong]

I'm frustrated by the lengths the DM will go to to avoid provoking effects his monsters don't know will occur. It smacks of power-gaming, and when it comes from a DM, it smacks of "DM-vs-PC competition".

I can understand your frustration and as a DM I try to allow all my groups powers to work in the way they would like some of the time (but a creature will rarely kill itself by activating divine challenge). For me a creature witnessing an impressive power by another PC or suddenly taking a lot of damage will encourage it to forget about the mark and go for a different target.

I have looked at the Wardens mark abilities and the only one I can see that you are referencing is Wardens Grasp which is an immediate reaction, slide the target 1 square, and it is slowed and cannot shift until the end of its next turn.

Well personally as a creature I wouldn't have a problem taking that from time time, its hardly Discipline the Unruly!

If I were you I would ask your DM what is so bad about these effects that he is passing up easier targets? Its not like he's taking damage or losing an attack.

 

[Stumblewyk]

If I were you I would ask your DM what is so bad about these effects that he is passing up easier targets? Its not like he's taking damage or losing an attack.

His justification is that "the monster knows what will happen if they don't attack the Warden". But the rules state that the monster doesn't. The monster knows they'll take a penalty to hit anyone but the Warden, but not that the Warden has nifty tricks like Warden's Fury and Warden's Grasp that they'll get to use if they ignore the Warden. Same goes for the Fighter. As stated before, other Defenders are different, because their marks carry other built-in conditions.

 

[Mesh Hong]

Well if your DM is as stubbon and short sighted as that the only option left to the players is "adapt and exploit".

To be honest if you are getting regular needless opportunity attacks anyway you are already reaping undue benefits from the situation so there is no other advice that can be given.

 

[Stumblewyk]

I know, I know. And frankly, part of me does feel guilty for complaining about it. We do get a fair amount of OAs out of the deal. But it just feels so unnatural and forced. And then the DM complains about how the rest of the party never even approaches Bloodied unless he rolls well on area attacks.

It is what it is. I didn't even set out in this topic to really complain about how my DM handles this...I was just commenting on the differences between the Warden and Fighter marks from Defenders like Paladins and Swordmages.