Paladin Marking. Need some help

[BobTheNob]

I was seeking a little clarification regarding paladin marking

Divine Sanction : Divine power does not explicately say that divine sanction places a -2 to hit penalty on the marked target, where divine challenge does. I have assumed this is standard part of any mark. Can anyone confirm or deny.

Powers that mark (for instance : Arcing Smite, Peircing Smite). These pre-date Divine Power and allow a paladin to mark multiple enemies. These are not explicately stated as being equivelent to Challenge or Sanction, so by RAW they wouldnt have the damage component when the creature attacks a target other than the marker. Confirm / Deny?

If I have got the last point right (i.e. these are not sanctions nor are they challenge) would anyone be of the position that marks resulting from powers such as this should be treated as Sanctions? To me it seems implicit that sanctions represented a clarification of paladin marking and is retrogressive.

Apologies in advance if I have missed something in the texts

 

[Danceofmasks]

You did miss something, but it's not an obvious one (I missed it too, for some time).

Marked is a condition, PHB p277.
So if it's just a "generic" mark, it just imposes that penalty.

Of course, class features such as *cough* being a fighter *cough* really don't care how you imposed a mark .. any mark will do .. so it's down to specific cases.
In the case of a paladin's generic marks, they don't deal damage.

 

[Nahat Anoj]

If I have got the last point right (i.e. these are not sanctions nor are they challenge) would anyone be of the position that marks resulting from powers such as this should be treated as Sanctions? To me it seems implicit that sanctions represented a clarification of paladin marking and is retrogressive.

IMO, no, Divine Sanction does not retroactively change powers that bestow generic marks. However, I think when a PC runs a paladin I'll just make all the paladin powers that bestow generic marks bestow Divine Sanction instead. It's more flavorful and it's easier to remember.

 

[Amaroq]

I've got a paladin in the group I'm DM'ing and I'm inclined to rule the same way as Jonathan_Moyer - does anybody care to comment opinion on whether that is overpowering?

The player in question has been sorta complaining about having to optimize five attributes (Cha + Wis for the paladin-ly powers, Str for the fighter-ly powers, Con for hit points, and Int for the Religion and associated skill checks (we're a half-combat, half-skills-and-story group) ) .. and aside from her "tying people up in combat" defender-ey-ness, she does feel a bit underpowered relative to some of the "look I just had to optimize one attribute" classes.

Will that be game-breakingly overpowered at higher levels, do you think?

Thanks in advance,

 

[Destil]

IMO, no, Divine Sanction does not retroactively change powers that bestow generic marks. However, I think when a PC runs a paladin I'll just make all the paladin powers that bestow generic marks bestow Divine Sanction instead. It's more flavorful and it's easier to remember.

It's been suggested elsewhere, but I think the cleanest thing is to unify all paladin marking mechanics. Make divine sanction just part of paladin marking (any opponent marked by the paladin is subject to his divine sanction), then re-write divine challenge to just apply the marked condition with the other necessary strings attached.

Drop the guy from 3 marking mechanics to 1.

 

[Destil]

I've got a paladin in the group I'm DM'ing and I'm inclined to rule the same way as Jonathan_Moyer - does anybody care to comment opinion on whether that is overpowering?

The player in question has been sorta complaining about having to optimize five attributes (Cha + Wis for the paladin-ly powers, Str for the fighter-ly powers, Con for hit points, and Int for the Religion and associated skill checks (we're a half-combat, half-skills-and-story group) ) .. and aside from her "tying people up in combat" defender-ey-ness, she does feel a bit underpowered relative to some of the "look I just had to optimize one attribute" classes.

Will that be game-breakingly overpowered at higher levels, do you think?

Thanks in advance,

I think it would be acceptable, most of the PHB marking paladin powers are on the weaker side. I may have a few words for your player, though. She really should to choose 2 or the 3 paladin stats and go from there; there's no class in 4E that really only uses one stat without ignoring options. She can still pick up a few 12-s14s depending on race.

 

[Shin Okada]

As Danceofmasks says, "Marked" is a condition defined in the combat rule. So, unless otherwise noted, no matter what method you have used to mark a foe, that foe's attack roll is penalized by 2 when making an attack which does not include you as a target.

So, if some Paladin's power just says "you mark ...", you just mark the designated creatures. Those are generic mark.

If you use your Divine Challenge, the target is marked AND they will take damage as written in Divine Challenge power.

If you use some power which subjects some creatures to your Divine Sanction, the targets are marked AND take damage as written in Divine Sanction column.

Hope this helps.

 

[BobTheNob]

IMO, no, Divine Sanction does not retroactively change powers that bestow generic marks. However, I think when a PC runs a paladin I'll just make all the paladin powers that bestow generic marks bestow Divine Sanction instead. It's more flavorful and it's easier to remember.

Got to admit, this is sort of what I wish fishing for. A mark on its own (i.e. just the -2 to hit) is not a very convincing argument to stop me, as DM, from diverting an NPC to a player who is not the marker. However, chuck a little damage bonus on that, and suddenly the mark becomes very compelling.

Flavor wise, it seems to match as well. What do Paladins do when they mark you and you dont obey the mark? They punish you with divine fury, thats what they do!

Power wise, looking at peircing smite (for instance), you can mark up to your wisdom bonus (our parties paladin is a +3). For an encounter power is that too much to sanction? Certainly not. Look at Valarous Smite(DP, Lvl 1 Enc), its every enemy within 3 squares!

I acknowledge that the RAW interpretation is paladin powers that say mark do not necessarily mean sanction. Does anyone really think that it would break the game interpreting older (PHB1) encounter powers that grant marks that they grant divine sanction instead?

Thoughts?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

In most cases not, but I would be hesitant to make a general change... but if you DM, you could look at newer similar level powers and decide if it would be ok...

A second note: with all the damage beeing automatic, it could become too good to have marked too many people... so maybe it should be an immediate interrupt to deal sanction damage to bring it in line with fighters damage mechanic. (like the hybrid challenge)