Question regarding multiclass: Shaman Spirit ability

[JonnyDoH]

Okay, so I have a group of fellow players who have all selected strikers as characters. In order to fill the gap of both Leader/Healer and Defender/Tank, I'm thinking of creating a bard with the Spirit Talker multiclass feat.

Here's what I'm thinking:

A Cunning Bard, that makes a strong utilization of the "Misdirected Mark" At Will Ability. The wording is such that you can mark a target by an Ally with a successful hit of this power.

With the Spirit Talker Multiclass feat, you have the ability to Conjure a Spirit.

Now, the question that remains is: Is the Spirit you summon considered an *Ally*? i.e. Can you summon a spirit ally, then use Misdirected Mark to place a mark on a target, with the Spirit being the "giver" of the mark?

Nothing in the new conjuration rules on p. 220 specifically says anything pertaining to that question.

It might be suicidal, but it also might save those fragile strikers I have to heal. Just thinking up possibilities...

 

[1of3]

Considering that something Summoned is explicitely called an allied creature on the next page, I'd say that conjurations neither allied nor creatures.

 

[robsenworldaccount]

If it feels like you have to mash it into the rules: it probably wasn't intended.

Go w/ what you feel is balanced. This way you and your friends know each encounter you survive was due solely to your playing the game as intended.

 

[DracoSuave]

Spirits are not summoned creatures. They are conjurations, and do not qualify as allies, enemies, or even creatures. They have the same status in the game as spell effects like Mage Hand and Flaming Sphere.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

More to the point, what is the benefit of allocating a mark to an ally? Unless the ally has some sort of feature/power of some kind which provides an explicit benefit from the mark then the mark is just an empty thing.

Lets say hypothetically your spirit can be allocated a mark. It has NO feature which lets it DO anything to a marked enemy. Within the core classes there are only 2 which can benefit from a mark, paladin and fighter. Warlocks and Rangers have "mark like" features, but neither of them IS a mark, so they cannot benefit from a misdirected mark.

So, basically the bard's misdirected mark at-will is of no value in a party without either a fighter or a paladin (or I guess a swordmage perhaps if you are using those).

As an aside, the feat Student of the Sword seems to suffer from the same problem. Except for the case of a paladin taking this feat I can't see anything in RAW that would give a character ANY benefit from SotS' marking mechanic. Maybe there is a FAQ entry on this subject or something. I have to ASSUME that the intent was that the feat grants the same benefits of the mark as those granted by the Combat Challenge feature of the fighter class, but they did fail to mention that in the feat text.

 

[Duelpersonality]

A mark still applies the -2 penalty to attack rolls for attacks that don't include the "marker" as a target. Misdirected Mark is essentially a debuff, and used properly it can be an effective tactic even without an ability that triggers on an attack by a marked enemy.

 

[Mort_Q]

My Beast Protector beast master ranger would love the ability to have his beast mark opponents... not sure I can justify the feats and the charisma bump to get Misdirected Mark though... likely not worth it.

 

[JonnyDoH]

Hah, ok. Thanks for all the replies! Yes, the effect does feel a little "mashed in", so I suppose I'll have to figure out another way to keep the damned fool strikers in my party alive (without a defender! *Sigh*).

We'll see...

Oh, and to AbdulAlhazred: Duelpersonality is right on the money as to what I was thinking for the Misdirected Mark Ability... I've been in campaigns where the defender wasn't doing his duty to mark targets, and the leaders and strikers got pounded on by "boss" monsters. It wasn't pretty. *Any* debuff I can use to hinder that from happening again is welcome.

Plus, I'm starting up another campaign where everyone was told to "play what they want"-- it seems as though everyone but me has chosen to play a striker. I can imagine certain fights aren't going to be too pretty...

 

[WalterKovacs]

The bard could just as easily use the power that gives a -2 to all attacks. It's basically the same as marking it, except that the summoned spirit would also be harder to hit (and you are doing 1d6+ instead of 1d8+).

 

[Saeviomagy]

The bard could just as easily use the power that gives a -2 to all attacks. It's basically the same as marking it, except that the summoned spirit would also be harder to hit (and you are doing 1d6+ instead of 1d8+).

No, the key with a mark is that the target DOESN'T have -2 to hit ONE PERSON.

A creature with -2 to hit just does less average damage. That's not as valuable as a creature's damage being redirected to the right place.

Which would you rather? 4 foes who each hit a different party member for 20 damage each, or 4 foes who all hit the same party member for 18 damage each?

Not to mention that in this particular case, the spirit can turn any amount of damage under 10+level into 0 damage, and any amount over that into 5+level... That can potentially be a massive amount of mitigation.

As for whether it's legal? I think it probably is: the spirit can, after all, be targeted with attacks, and it's definitely an ally.