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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Serin_Marst" data-source="post: 4211076" data-attributes="member: 65111">If I'm reading that right, not quite, but it's still another nail in the coffin of this tactic.Note the "A creature can be subject to only one mark at a time."  As we've heard that "marked" is a keyword, I read that as, only the Paladin or the fighter can have the target marked, not both.  But the whole "kiting" scenario is still in pretty bad shape.Here's how I see it:  The whole scenaio is predicated on the paladin being able to outrun whatever he's got marked with only a single move action.  I'm, frankly, skeptical that he'd even be able to maintain separation for more than a single round.Let's say the paladin has a move of 5 and the target has a move of 6(pretty standard numbers from what we've seen so far), in order to mark the target, the paladin has to be within 5 squares, so a separation of 4 squares as the monster has to be in the fifth.  Paladin marks the target tosses a hammer at it and RUNS 7 squares away (granted, as a DM, i'd just declare that "disengaging" and drop the mark anyway).  So now 11 squares of separation.  Monster shifts away from the fighter(no attack because he can't mark it) and runs after the paladin, covering 9 squares total, leaving them only 2 squares apart.  Same deal next round and the monster is adjacent to the paladin without ever triggering the mark or drawing an AoO from the fighter to lock him down.  Now he either has to run drawing an AoO or shift and just get trivially caught again, or man up and fight like he should have been in the first place.Difficult terain and other party members may stretch it out a little, but ultimately, the result is the same.  Paladin gets caught and only has a couple basic ranged attacks with no bonus damage to show for it.</blockquote>

Verification