Question on Immediate Interrupts

[Havrik Stoneskimmer]

The part that sees some table variation, is when exactly do you use the power... In some groups, you have to declare you're using an interrupt the moment someone decides to attack you. In some groups, you wait to hear if they hit you and by how much. In some groups you also get to hear how much damage they do and what conditions they inflict before using the interrupt. I'm in the last camp. When I DM, I rattle off everything at the same time, "31 vs AC, take 28 poison damage, you're slowed and taking ongoing 10 poison damage, save ends both, don't forget you're in his gas aura and have vulnerable 5 poison on top of that." Then the sorcerer says "no thank you, immediate interrupt, I pop Sudden Scales putting me at AC 33, and that misses."

I don't think I would play it that way at my table, because it diminishes powers that trigger on a hit rather than an attack. Even in cases where the player knows they've been hit, I wouldn't tell them the damage and let them decide whether to be hit or not - with the possible exception of powers that are flavored to actually rewind time or predict and avoid the future, etc. In that case there's a narrative reason for the PC to be able to decide based on the projected damage whether or not to use the power.

I do however let players ask "would a 22 hit?" before using Heroic Effort or similar powers that give a static boost to a roll, so as not to waste a power when it doesn't make a difference. Not sure if that's strictly by the book or not.

 

[Infiniti2000]

This power can't prevent the fighter mark - that occurs whether the fighter hits or misses. And it's an encounter power, so I don't see blocking a single hit from the rogue as a big deal in terms of grind. I feel like the only thing that makes sense is for him to interrupt the rogue's attack.

Good points! I totally missed the word encounter up there. Also, I forgot the fighter's attack power because (a) I mostly DM and monsters that mark usually do it on a hit, and (b) none of the players run a fighter, in either campaign!

 

[NewJeffCT]

The BBEG can likely use it whenever he wants, but MAKE SURE you're not using metagame knowledge, and make sure you're party thief knows this. This otherwise seems like simply punishing him for being effective, which is not cool. However, is not worried about the fighter's mark? That will screw him up in the long run, especially if the fighter hits and the rogue doesn't. The other point here is that you're simply contributing to grind. If the party cannot use its strikers effectively, then the combat will just take longer, possibly making it less fun for everyone, except maybe the DM.

Whatever you decide, just consider all the angles and choose wisely!

we haven't really experienced a lot of grindi-ness with 4E yet, but we're only at level 8.

A single 3.5E combat would often take an entire session, wall-to-wall. Because I have a big group, I would have to throw a lot at them to challenge them. And, with all the math involved in buffing & debuffing, everybody would be recalculating practically after every turn, so people would be sitting around waiting an hour for their next turn. 8/9 PCs, plus NPC and summoned allies vs half a dozen major bad guys, any summoned evil creatures, and probably 10-20 or more minor bad guys for support/muscle, healing, counter-spelling and dispelling.

The only thing I've noticed with 4E is if the two strikers have a run of bad luck with dice rolling, then the combat can get a bit grindy.

I think the group will have no problem getting through 2 warm-up encounters, have the showdown with the BBEG and then have time for some good role-playing afterwards. 3 encounters in a session was unheard of before.

 

[MarkB]

I don't think I would play it that way at my table, because it diminishes powers that trigger on a hit rather than an attack.

More recent powers have tended to word on-attack interrupt conditions as "enemy hits or misses you" rather than "enemy attacks you", which suggests that they were always intended to be usable even after you know the result.

Even in cases where the player knows they've been hit, I wouldn't tell them the damage and let them decide whether to be hit or not - with the possible exception of powers that are flavored to actually rewind time or predict and avoid the future, etc. In that case there's a narrative reason for the PC to be able to decide based on the projected damage whether or not to use the power.

It's worth mentioning that some interrupt powers specifically say that you can use them even after the damage has been announced. What this says for interrupts in general is debatable - some would say that text is illustrative of how such powers should work in general, whilst others would say that the text is there to call out a specific exception to the general rule.