Psion and his cool powers, help please

[wlmartin]

Hi,

I have read on the WotC forums regarding these and am not 100% sure I understand it properly so if anyone can help - that is great.

The question refers to powers that take control of a monsters action(s) and permit it to do something.

Telepathic Projection :
While the target is affected by your Telepathic Projection, when you start your turn the target makes a melee basic attack as a free action against a target you choose

On a miss : The target makes a random melee attack against a creature

So, it seems that when you have control of a creature in this fashion, you are permitted to allow it to attack itself according to the debates on the WotC forums. What I don't get is... what is the reasoning for this?

(see wotc forum link here : Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible)

Also : On the miss, can the random attack include itself (ie if there are 3 people close, its a 1d4 to see if he gets himself or the others)

I want my psion to be able to do this and all the evidence and discussions point to the fact that he can but when my DM asks me why, I want to know that I am not talking rubbish.

The way I read it, if a creature can choose to make a melee basic attack hitting itself intentionally (ie it might want to make itself bloodied to get enraged) then the RAW allow this to happen. If this is not possible, its not possible for me to do it if I take control of the creature.

If it said "another creature" or "adjacent creature" or "nearby ally" then I see that I would not be permitted to use it to attack itself but it states just "target I choose" or "random creature".

What ideally I am looking for is a specific ruling from WotC on the subject and/or a coherent argument supporting that when I mind control someone, I get to do this.


Thanks in advance

 

[Jhaelen]

Well, the power doesn't mention any restrictions regarding the choice of the 'target'.

I want my psion to be able to do this and all the evidence and discussions point to the fact that he can but when my DM asks me why, I want to know that I am not talking rubbish.

the more important question will be:
"Would your DM allow it if given proof it's possible according to RAW?"
I know that my DM probably wouldn't because it smells of cheese.

Likewise, for pcs hitting themselves with powers in order to trigger beneficial effects is a no-go in our group. It's basically an extension of the 'bag of rats' rule.

 

[radja]

Likewise, for pcs hitting themselves with powers in order to trigger beneficial effects is a no-go in our group. It's basically an extension of the 'bag of rats' rule.

agreed, but as a DM I do allow hitting yourself with ranged area powers. I don't want to prevent the wizard from centering a fireball on himself. If the wizard benefits: good for him. No basic attacks or other powers though, unless the power specifically allows it. Also: no, you're not your own enemy. Being a member of the band 'Lit' will not help you there either.

 

[jodyjohnson]

Creatures hitting themselves is a fairly common if not usually comedic trope.

Obviously a DM ruling on this has severe implications on the utility of the effect.

 

[Unwise]

Do the rules that give a monster a saving throw from being told to jump off a cliff also work for non-move actions? I know in my games a monster gets a saving throw against pulling a lever to drop themselves into a magma pit. It seems odd if the saving throw is limited to move actions. Why would they be hesitant to jump into a lava pit, but not to pull a lever that drops them into a lava pit?

If standard actions that cause them harm also gave a saving throw, it seems like a good compromise. That way they might hit themselves, but you run a 50% risk of having them do nothing.

Also, what are the rules for attacking a person in the same square as yourself? I certainly would not allow a monster to use its halberd against itself effectively. That is not to mention the fact that you cannot swing an axe at yourself as well as you could swing it at somebody else.