Multi-attack actions = one attack or three?

[DracoSuave]

Okay.

Let's say I use a ranged power with multiple targets.

So, first we resolve the target: line:

'Target: One or Two creatures'

Let's make that Nifft and KirinsDad. And let's say Nifft was the one who marked me.

So, the first one... Nifft. We resolve that attack. He's marked me, so we check what I selected as the target: Nifft and KirinsDad. Okay. Then we attack KirinsDad, and see what I selected as the target: Nifft and KirinsDad. Okay.

The fact that each attack roll is specific to an individual does not change the fact that the targets selected included the marker. That's all the mark cares about, did the marker get selected with that attack, and in both cases... yes it did.

Contrast that with:

'Make a claw attack against each target.'

This is a different thing. 'Claw Attack' is a specific power, and so you look at the claw attack power to determine its target. In this case, each target is selected separately, and each instance of the claw attack power is resolved separately. Whereas the original power has selected every target, no attack is made by -that- power. Instead, the claw attack power is doing the attacking.

It'd be like if you had the power:

'Target: All enemies in range
Effect: Use an at-will attack power against the target'

 

[Aulirophile]

Targeted =! attacked, all target says in how to read a power is that it designats the target of the attack power, not the attack(s). You can target someone without attacking them. You can attack someone with targeting them, but you cannot attack someone without attacking them.

 

[KarinsDad]

Okay.

Let's say I use a ranged power with multiple targets.

So, first we resolve the target: line:

'Target: One or Two creatures'

Let's make that Nifft and KirinsDad. And let's say Nifft was the one who marked me.

So, the first one... Nifft. We resolve that attack. He's marked me, so we check what I selected as the target: Nifft and KirinsDad. Okay. Then we attack KirinsDad, and see what I selected as the target: Nifft and KirinsDad. Okay.

The fact that each attack roll is specific to an individual does not change the fact that the targets selected included the marker. That's all the mark cares about, did the marker get selected with that attack, and in both cases... yes it did.

Except the mark doesn't care about who got targeted or selected by the attack. It cares about who got attacked.

Effect: Whenever an enemy marked by you is adjacent to you and shifts or makes an attack that does not include you, you can make a melee basic attack against that enemy.

Combined with the rule:

A melee attack against multiple enemies consists of separate attacks, each with its own attack roll and damage roll.

This does not state "separate attack rolls", it states "separate attacks". It might be a single power, but it is separate attacks.

If it is separate attacks and Combat Challenge cares about any attack, not the targeting, then Combat Challenge cares about each and every separate attack.

I don't like this and wouldn't do it in my game, but that appears to be RAW.


Contrast this with Close or Area attacks that don't have "separate attack" language. They state "separate attack rolls". That's the difference between melee/ranged and close/area.

When you make a close attack, you make a separate attack roll against each target in the area of effect, but you make a single damage roll that affects all the targets.

 

[DracoSuave]

Targeted =! attacked, all target says in how to read a power is that it designats the target of the attack power, not the attack(s). You can target someone without attacking them. You can attack someone with targeting them, but you cannot attack someone without attacking them.

But marked doesn't ask 'are you attacking the marker.'

It asks 'Are you targetting the marker.'

You take a –2 penalty to attack rolls for any attack that doesn’t target the creature that marked you.

Marked does not -care- if you attack the marker. If you have a power:

'Target: One enemy, and one creature'

and

'Hit: The targetted enemy takes 1d6+4 fire damage, while the other target gains +2 AC'

then if the other creature is your marker, well... he got targetted. He didn't need to be attacked.

(And yes, that is a hypothetical and would not be templated that way)

 

[Aulirophile]

Fighter

Whenever an enemy marked by you is adjacent to you and shifts or makes an attack that does not include you, you can make a melee basic attack against that enemy.

Paladin

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

Warden

An enemy marked by you makes an attack that does not include you as a target

Battlemind

An adjacent enemy marked by you deals damage to your ally with an attack that doesn’t include you as a target

Swordmage

If that attack hits and the marked target is within 10 squares of you x3

War Priest

The next time that enemy shifts or attacks a creature other than you

Son of Mercy

The target of your lawbreaker’s doom power is adjacent to you and makes an attack that does not include you.

Even if one were to assume the target, and not the bolded attack part was the most relevant, both terms appear. It isn't "Attack Power" it is "Attack." Melee attacks are separate attacks. The PHB is explicit about this, and you have no specific rule to over ride the fact that a multiple melee attacks are seperate attacks, and you have nothing to support the idea that "attack power" targeting the Marker is sufficient, since neither the MM nor "how to a read power" agree that targeting functions like that.

In short: Attack Power =! Attack.

 

[eamon]

For what it's worth, I asked CS this weekend:

Every hydra has an at-will attack that permits several usages of it's basic attacks. Assuming I want to attack the defender (so as to include him in the attack and not violate the mark), do I need to attack him with all attacks, or is one attack enough?

Specifically, if the targets the defender with one of the basic attacks granted by Hydra's Fury and targets a different PC with the other basic attacks granted by Hydra's Fury, would the attack rolls of the other targets take a -2 penalty?
​

I chose the word target where possible rather than attack so as not to emphasize the fact that you can view this as distinct attacks. And yes, the grammar is... special. Don answered and said it had been escalated (and I thought they didn't answer in the weekend ), and just now Kelly wrote:

Hydra's Fury counts as one attack power, but it still counts as making multiple, different attacks. The hydra would have to target the defender with all the attacks, or take the penalty for each attack not targeting the defender.
​

Should I follow up?

 

[DracoSuave]

In short: Attack Power =! Attack.

If you're going to make an argument that 'attack' can only refer to the instance of attack roll, and that melee and ranged attack powers cannot target multiple people with multiple attacks...

"A melee attack against multiple enemies consists of separate attacks, each with its own attack roll and damage roll."

PLEASE make sure that the very rule that you are using to prove your point doesn't actually refer to the attack power itself as an attack.

The -very rule- you're using says that the power IS itself an attack.

It says, an attack consists of separate attacks.

The term IS ambiguous even in the very rule that you use to make your point.

The only thing that use a term that is NOT ambiguous is the Marked condition itself, and the marked condition (which all these other things are predicated on) uses the target, not 'is or is not attacked'

Target is NOT ambiguous, it's very clear what the target of anything is. It's what is said under Target: for player powers, or what a monster power tells you it targets.

--------------------------

Also, the hydra example is a bad one to use to disprove it, because it consists of individual power uses, not one power that consists of multiple attacks. It literally tells you to use a different power on each separate target, and that's why it triggers, because each separate power is treated individually.

 

[Zaran]

I would step back from the rules a bit when I am faced with the hydra situation. The fighter using a single attack would basically be attacking one head. The other heads would be free to attack others since they basically each have a brain and thus would be different targets. If the fighter attacked with an power that marks more than one opponent I would declare that more than one head is marked even if the figher only gets to apply damage once. The hydra is a special case though.

Now against monsters with only one brain like the dragon who gets to use claws and a bite I would say that they would indeed be seperate attacks and would suffer the mark because the dragon would have to pull its attention away from the fighter to aim at others.

 

[KarinsDad]

If you're going to make an argument that 'attack' can only refer to the instance of attack roll, and that melee and ranged attack powers cannot target multiple people with multiple attacks...

I think the rules he is using are:

When you attack, you make an attack roll to determine whether your attack hits your target. You roll a d20, add a bonus for whatever attack you’re using, and compare the result to one of the target’s four defenses: Armor Class, Fortitude, Reflex, or Will.

and

MAKING AN ATTACK
All attacks follow the same basic process:
1. Choose the attack you’ll use. Each attack has an attack type.
2. Choose targets for the attack (page 272). Each target must be within range (page 273). Check whether you can see and target your enemies (page 273).
3. Make an attack roll (page 273).
4. Compare your attack roll to the target’s defense (page 274) to determine whether you hit or miss.
5. Deal damage and apply other effects (page 276).

The rule you quoted is a follow up rule that quantifies a special situation for these core rules.

 

[KarinsDad]

I would step back from the rules a bit when I am faced with the hydra situation. The fighter using a single attack would basically be attacking one head. The other heads would be free to attack others since they basically each have a brain and thus would be different targets. If the fighter attacked with an power that marks more than one opponent I would declare that more than one head is marked even if the figher only gets to apply damage once. The hydra is a special case though.

Now against monsters with only one brain like the dragon who gets to use claws and a bite I would say that they would indeed be seperate attacks and would suffer the mark because the dragon would have to pull its attention away from the fighter to aim at others.

Froms a rules perspective, this is a rationalization to get the result that you want.

The Hydra is a single creature by the rules, regardless of how many brains it has.