Multiple attacks, immediate reactions, and conditions

[deleteme123456]

Or TBT (as I'll call it) was only meant to "work" from range, and melee rangers can take it for use against 2 targets.

TBT's push distance may also be 3+WISMOD if both hit (1 + 1 + 1 + WISMOD). In the group I play with (we take turns DM'ing), the current interpretation of TBT is to add "Special: if you hit with the first attack and this pushes your target out of range, increase your reach (melee) or range (ranged) by 1 for the second attack."

It works as probably intended.
Alternatively, you could use primary/secondary attack templating:

Primary attack: Str Vs AC (main-hand, melee), Dex vs AC (ranged)
Hit: 1[W]+Str (melee) or 1[W]+dex (ranged)
Secondary attack (as main attack but off-hand)
Hit: 1[W]+str (etc) and push the target 1 square.
Effect: If the first attack hit, push the primary target 1 square. If both attacks hit the same target, push it an additional 1+Wismod squares.

Awkward but works. I dislike "If this hit..." in the effect line but what can you do?

 

[Sebastrd]

Do you feel that p268 doesn't apply in this case?

"If a monster has a power that lets it make two attack rolls against you as a standard action, and the first one hits, you can use an immediate reaction before the next attack roll."

Let's say "a monster" in this case is a ranger with Twin Strike.

-Hyp.

p268 does not apply to twin strike. It refers to monster powers such as the Astral Stalker's Quick Claws attack, i.e., powers that allow the monster to use one of their powers twice as a standard action.

Powers like Twin Strike and Thundertusk Boar Strike are different in that they require two weapons and allow two attacks as part of the same single action. p268 refers to attacks like Quick Claws that basically allow a monster to spend a standard action to take two seperate actions.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Powers like Twin Strike and Thundertusk Boar Strike are different in that they require two weapons and allow two attacks as part of the same single action.

So it's a "power that lets you make two attack rolls as a standard action", right?

-Hyp.

 

[deleteme123456]

It's my own thread, so I can go off-topic if I want, right?

Let's run with this enemy ranger for a sec. Let's say the PC fighter marked the NPC ranger. The PC ranger is flanking the NPC ranger with the PC fighter.

REF

R=PC Ranger, E=Enemy/NPC Ranger, F=PC Fighter

Now the NPC ranger wants to use Twin Strike or TBStrike, making one hit against each. I can already guess how Hypersmurf will respond. Our playgroup rules that any attack as part of the same action has to be directed against the fighter to avoid the mark penalties (including -2 to hit and combat challenge), but does a literal reading of p268 or elsewhere support the harsher version that the monster basically has to make both attacks against the fighter or take the hit?

 

[Sebastrd]

Now the NPC ranger wants to use Twin Strike or TBStrike, making one hit against each. I can already guess how Hypersmurf will respond. Our playgroup rules that any attack as part of the same action has to be directed against the fighter to avoid the mark penalties (including -2 to hit and combat challenge), but does a literal reading of p268 or elsewhere support the harsher version that the monster basically has to make both attacks against the fighter or take the hit?

No; the rules actually say exactly the opposite. Combat Challenge reads, "While a target is marked, it takes a –2 penalty to attack rolls for any attack that doesn’t include you as a target." Since the NPC Ranger's Twin Strike includes the fighter as one of the targets, it is not subject to the penalty.

 

[Hypersmurf]

No; the rules actually say exactly the opposite. Combat Challenge reads, "While a target is marked, it takes a –2 penalty to attack rolls for any attack that doesn’t include you as a target." Since the NPC Ranger's Twin Strike includes the fighter as one of the targets, it is not subject to the penalty.

Well, this is where we hit the "definition of attack" issue again.

Twin Strike Ranger Attack 1
Targets: One or two creatures
Attack: Strength vs. AC (melee; main weapon and off-hand
weapon) or Dexterity vs. AC (ranged), two attacks
Hit: 1[W] damage per attack.

So, Twin Strike is a Ranger Attack 1. It has an Attack line. The Attack line includes two attacks, and the damage is dealt per attack.

If Twin Strike includes two attacks, and one of those two attacks includes the fighter as a target and the other of those two attacks does not include the fighter as a target, does that satisfy the conditions of the Combat Challenge?

When Combat Challenge says "any attack that doesn't include you", is it referring to a power, to an attack power, to the attack line of a power, or to an attack granted by a power?

When Twin Strike explicitly specifies that you make two attacks, are you making one attack that includes two targets, or two attacks?

-Hyp.

 

[deleteme123456]

And consider how is the ranger making two attacks fundamentally different than a wizard making one attack with multiple attack rolls (e.g., scorching burst)? Just to heap some fuel on everyone's fires.

So I think for the most part, except for weird powers like Thundertusk Boar Strike, treating the ranger's attacks as separate attacks (just part of the same action) works pretty well, resolve each separately (but declare both, unless there's a secondary attack line) in sequence. The fighter mark is another problem and I suspect that as long as the group knows how it's being played, it doesn't come down to a huge difference. My players often found it nice that the elite wasn't just ripping the fighter to shreds, because otherwise the fighter was running out of surges too fast or the party running out of healing in one encounter (where as with damage spread, the others can use second wind, fall back after they get hit again, etc.).

 

[Khime]

So I think for the most part, except for weird powers like Thundertusk Boar Strike, treating the ranger's attacks as separate attacks (just part of the same action) works pretty well, resolve each separately (but declare both, unless there's a secondary attack line) in sequence.

I'm wondering how that logic would work when interacting with effects that occur differently on a hit and a miss. Specifically the Warlord's Bravura Presence - If the Ranger uses an action point to attack with twin strike, and he hits with his offhand but misses with his main hand, is the attack considered to have hit and missed? Does he get a free attack/move and also grant combat advantage now?

 

[deleteme123456]

I'm wondering how that logic would work when interacting with effects that occur differently on a hit and a miss. Specifically the Warlord's Bravura Presence - If the Ranger uses an action point to attack with twin strike, and he hits with his offhand but misses with his main hand, is the attack considered to have hit and missed? Does he get a free attack/move and also grant combat advantage now?

Well Bravaura only grants a basic attack, so unless you find a way around that (a feat in martial power 2, if such a thing exists?) then it's currently moot in that context but there may be others. Do we use Reliable's miss = miss with all?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Well Bravaura only grants a basic attack...

Right, but Bravura Presence is based on any attack made as the result of an action point.

Bravura Presence: When an ally who can see you spends an action point to take an extra action and uses the action to make an attack, the ally can choose to take advantage of this feature before the attack roll. If the ally chooses to do so and the attack hits, the ally can either make a basic attack or take a move action after the attack as a free action. If the attack misses, the ally grants combat advantage to all enemies until the end of his or her next turn.

The ally who can see you spends an action point to take an extra action and uses the action to use Twin Strike. The ally can choose to take advantage of Bravura Presence before "the attack roll".

If "the attack" hits, he gets a basic attack or a free action. If "the attack" misses, he grants combat advantage.

Now, given that it refers to "the attack roll", that suggests to me that Bravura Presence operates on a single attack roll, not on the entirety of a power. So Twin Strike is an action that you use to make two attacks.

It looks like you could, conceivably, choose to take advantage of Bravura Presence before each attack you make as the result of an action point... so the ranger could potentially gain two basic attacks if both his Twin Strike attacks hit.

Area and Close powers run into the Reliable problem - we know that "A ranged attack against multiple enemies consists of separate attacks, each with its own attack roll and damage roll" and "A melee attack against multiple enemies consists of separate attacks, each with its own attack roll and damage roll", so a ranged attack or melee attack can never include an attack that both hits and misses, since each attack is resolved separately. Area and Close powers, however, are a single attack with multiple attack rolls, so a single Area power can be an attack that both hits and misses.

Bravura Presence's reference to 'the attack roll' could still suggest that an Area power is evaluated one attack roll at a time for purposes of the class feature, but it's iffier.

(All of this is assuming that the wording of Bravura Presence in Martial Power is still substantially the same as in the excerpt.)

-Hyp.