Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5274730" data-attributes="member: 51942">The rulesThere's a difference between the aegis and the divine challenge here too - the affected creature is presumed to know the effects of a power on itself, not necessarily any other abilities and benefits that power may grant.  A power that targets an enemy and gives it a -2 to defenses and grant an ally a +2 to defenses would not necessarily impart to the affected enemy knowledge of which ally was granted a defense boost nor even that a defense boost was granted at all.In other words, it is not obvious that the creature marked by the aegis knows of the subsequent ability the swordmage has when the mark is violated - I'd say the creature should not have this information - unless he's aware of the PC being a swordmage (and knows of the aegis - basic swordmage stuff, so if you know what a swordmage is, you'll probably know that too).  Now, for the swordmage this isn't all that important - it's common for marks to have extra enforcement, so some sort of extra punishment should be expected anyhow by the affected creature.  Other powers can be much more severely affected, however.Why this rule makes senseThere's a good meta-game reason for playing like this, and thus a likely motivaiton for this rule in the first place.  When a creature is affected by a power and the imposed effect requires tracking or calculation, doing it this way means that the player of the affected creature can include the effect himself.  That means you don't get effects that make a creature sluggish and leave the player guessing what that means and the DM scrambling to include the effects behind the scenes.  However, that motivation does not support making indirect effects public.  The combat challenge attack doesn't require the target to track anything and so it doesn't need to know.Having said that, I'm convinced this rule is just a good baseline, and players and the DM should deviate from it liberally.  Despite the rules, I don't think it's unreasonable for Combat Challenge to have a visible component - perhaps the monster can see that you're keeping a close eye on it.  It doesn't need to know the details (i.e. exactly what triggers you're looking for).  Similarly, I assume that if the fighter has polearm gamble and a polearm, it's possible for the monster to see this.  It should at least see the big spear pointed at its chest when it steps toward the fighter.What I see most commonly, however, is that this kind of information imbalance is generally played unreasonably to the PC's detriment.  The DM forgets to mention that the tentacle monster has threatening reach, or indeed forgets to mention that it has long tentacles in the first place - and yet still avoids shifting next to the fighter.  That's just natural, not a sign of a petty DM - but it's not reasonable or fun and should be avoided.  Most abilities aren't supposed to be gotcha abilities and the players should be aware of them when they see the monster or at least pass even easy knowledge checks.  They won't know the details anyhow - and neither should the monster, even though the DM obviously does.Playing it that way also gives extra dramatic tension for those combats against prepared opponents - say, a group of assassins hired to kill the PC's and prepared to avoid the PC's common tricks, or a returning villian having a deus ex machina save against the key power of the previous combat.</blockquote>

Verification