Riposte Strike, etc., and Page 57

[Alraiis]

This is sarcasm.

Right?

It's more that it doesn't quite do what it says it does. No creature will EVER attack the rogue for that round if they know what exactly Dance of Death will do to them. The ability still isn't "useless," since it means the rogue won't get attacked, but the Artful Dodger bonus is useless since it's never going to come into play unless the creature is compelled to attack the rogue through domination or similar means. This doesn't seem intended.

 

[small pumpkin man]

I fail to see how that is so. Care to elaborate?

Uh, miscommunication. I didn't realize you meant the Artul dodger bit . I'll go stand over there now.

 

[Runestar]

but the Artful Dodger bonus is useless since it's never going to come into play unless the creature is compelled to attack the rogue through domination or similar means. This doesn't seem intended.

Bingo. The artful dodger bonus implies that the designer intended enemies to continue attacking the rogue even after they have been affected by dance of death. The problem then comes with how this is supposed to be implemented. Is the DM expected to continue attacking? Are they supposed to use special abilities as well? It is hard to say "just attack normally", now that the DM controlling them knows of the possible repercussions.

There was a joke at gleemax about Orcus accidentally nailing himself with his touch of death ability and killing himself after falling prey to dance of death. But it does belie a more serious issue - this is clearly a power which requires the DM to address the issue of metagaming seriously. Only problem is - how far should he push this?

 

[NeoNick]

My interpretation on RAI is that a mob don't know about the Riposte strike as it isn't marked or anything. The riposte is like any other interupt abilities a char can have. It happens as a reaction - nothing has happened before that reaction, no marks, no penalties to the mobs, etc. My interpretation of a riposte is it to be a counter-attack, a reaction that is very similar to other forms of interupts.

Does the mobs know about all /interupt/ abilities the PCs have? I think not.

 

[Runestar]

Does the mobs know about all /interupt/ abilities the PCs have? I think not.

They don't know about your interrupts because you don't announce that you are using them until the proper scenario comes up, by then, it is too late for the enemy to alter his strategy as he has already committed to it.

It may well ought to be an interrupt (or at least, be treated as one), but the fact remains that you are still activating it during your turn, and effectively announcing your intention for the whole world to know. It is like asking "Would you still fireball me if you knew that I could render myself resistant to fire in a heartbeat?" Obviously, if I did, I wouldn't bother in the first place, that is the whole point to counters.

I agree somewhat with what the RAI may have been, but I still feel that it was poorly conceptualized to start with, and could do with some serious rephrasing.

 

[NeoNick]

I totally agree that the phrasing is very unclear.

And I understand that other people can interpret the text differently than I do. If I was to just read it RAW I would not come to the same conclusion as I do when I read it trying to get the RAI.

 

[Hypersmurf]

For what it's worth, here's the response I got from CustServ:

PHB p57 states:
"Whenever you affect a creature with a power, that creature knows exactly what you've done to it and what conditions you've imposed. For example, when a paladin uses divine challenge against an enemy, the enemy knows that it has been marked and that it will therefore take a penalty to attack rolls and some damage if it attacks anyone aside from the paladin."

This suggests that effects of the form "And if you do X, Y will happen!" are known to the target.

Is this true in the case of:
1. Hellish Rebuke (Warlock Attack 1): the target knows that if the warlock takes damage, the target will also take damage?
2. Riposte Strike (Rogue Attack 1): the target knows that if he attacks the rogue, the rogue will get an immediate interrupt attack?
3. Dance of Death (Rogue Attack 27): the target knows that if he makes a melee attack against the rogue, it will automatically be redirected (possibly against himself), with no way to prevent it?

Thank you for contacting us. Yes, all enemies would know all the conditions imposed on them and all of the effects of the power in all three of the examples you provided. Everything is designed to be completely transparent, but we encourage DMs to run the game the way they like. Please let me know if you need anymore help!

Marc
Customer Service Representative

Edit - ooh, wait, on further query, Marc has recanted and reversed his position. Dialogue continues... more later!

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Further conversation with Marc:

The niggle that we have concerns Dance of Death in particular.

The power as described looks like a "Surprise! You shouldn't have done that!" power... in the next round, the enemy attacks you, but you trick him into hitting someone else.

But if he knows that this is what will happen if he attacks you, it changes it from a "You shouldn't have done that!" power into a "You'd better not do that!" power. Since there is no way to circumvent the redirection, a creature affected by Dance of Death, who knows its effect, simply won't make a melee attack, so the consequences will never occur.

Which is fine... but then, if you're an Artful Dodger, you grant a bonus to the attack roll that we've just determined will never occur. It seems a bit pointless having a bonus to something that will never happen, which is why we wondered if perhaps this is not a situation the "Enemy knows all effects" rule is intended to cover.

The power as written seems to include an assumption the enemy *doesn't* know his attack will be redirected.

I'm glad you wrote back. I have discussed this with a few of my colleagues. Here is what we agreed upon. The statement is ""Whenever you affect a creature with a power, that creature knows exactly what you've done to it and what conditions you've imposed." So the creature knows exactly what you've done to it. What did you do? You attacked it, or cast a spell upon it. This is the extent of what the creature knows about the power. It does not specify that it know's the complete intricacies of how the power works. It will also know what conditions you've imposed. A list of all the conditions that can be imposed is on page 277.

With that said if a rogue uses the Dance of Death Power against an enemy, all it knows is that you have hit it with an attack. This attack does not impose any conditions so all the enemy knows is that it has been attacked. It does not know how exactly Dance of Death Works. The same applies to the other powers you asked about.

I apologize for the confusion the first time. I hope this helps clear things up. Please let me know if you need anymore help!

But "Also, it takes radiant damage equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier the first time it makes an attack that doesn't include you as a target before the start of your next turn" is not a condition described on p277; however, it is given as an example of something the enemy knows when a paladin uses Divine Challenge on him.

Under your latest ruling, the enemy should know that a/ he has been targeted by a class feature, and b/ the 'marked' condition has been imposed on him. Since the potential radiant damage is not a condition, he shouldn't know that he will take damage if he attacks someone other than the paladin. But p57 states that he does... which suggests that "What you've done to it and what conditions you've imposed" conveys more information that "You've used a power" and "Conditions from p277".

Or is the Divine Challenge example in error, and in fact a creature targeted with Divine Challenge does not know he will take damage if he attacks someone other than the paladin?

Hello again,

I went and discussed this with my team again and I spoke specifically with a colleague who keeps regular contact with the developers of D&D. From this discussion, I found that unfortunately, the last answer I gave you is not correct. The first answer I gave you is correct. Now I understand, how frustrating this must be for you now that I have given you two different answers, and again I sincerely apologize for the confusion that I have caused. I am 100% sure now of the answer that I am about to give you. The developers intended that the creature is completely aware of what the power does that is effecting him. However, instead of coming up with rules for each power that states what portions of the power are known and which portions of the power are unknown to a creature, they intended for the DM to use their discretion to fit their game.

So, as the rules are written, and as intended, if you attack a creature with the Dance of Death power, that creature knows exactly how that power works. Now the DM can choose how much knowledge the creature has about that power. If they feel the game would be more fun, or if it would fit their campaign better to have the creature not know all of the effects of a power they can certainly choose to play it that way.

Again I apologize for the confusion that I have caused.

-Hyp.

 

[Alraiis]

Thanks for finding that, Hyp. I was hoping they had put more thought into it, but I guess, like so many things, it's up to the DM to fix.

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

Marc seems like an alright guy, at least.

<Shrug>