Rules Check... Stirge Encounter

[wlmartin]

Our party encountered some Stirges this evening and I was looking for clarification on a few rule issues that came up.

Issue 1 - Stirge Ongoing Damage

Situation : If more than one Stirge latches onto the PC, since the type of damage they take is untyped, the normal rules of same/untyped damage not stacking apply.

Question : Since the main way Stirges attack is to swarm an opponent and suck the life out of them, if more than one attack surely the ongoing would stack or there be some other conditional change rather than the 2nd or further Stirges simply hanging on not doing any further damage.

Outcome : Since there was nothing in the MM stat block to contravene the RAW, the 2 Stirges stuck to the PC did the same 5 ongoing and they did not stack.

We all at the table agreed the RAW was pretty much the way to go but something inside me was nagging saying "Stirges ongoing damage is their attack and more than one stirge would not cancel the others out"

Has anyone encountered Stirges much before and has this rule come up before?

Issue 2 - Fountain of Flame w/ Sturges

Situation : Our Fire Mage cast Fountain of Flame [sblock](Ranged burst 1 vs ref, enemies only, 3d8+int fire damage (half on miss). Zone lasts until end of encounter: enemies entering it or ending turn there take 5 fire damage)[/sblock] and the Barbarian (me) had a Stirge stuck to his face. He decided on a tactic to bathe the himself (and the Stirge) in flame by side-stepping in and out of the zone.

Question : Since the Fountain of Flame causes enemies to take 5 damage when they enter the zone, each time the Barbarian steped in then out, in then out, in then out.. etc does the stirge take the 5 points of damage?

Outcome : The DM ruled that he was sure the RAW prevented this from happening but either way he was ruling it wasn't possible and the 5 damage could kick in only one time per turn (I then spent then next 3 turns popping in and out to drop the Stirge)

I wasn't 100% sure about this one but there was nothing on the Power Card that says the damage occurs the FIRST TIME the monster enters the zone, so the way I read it - it happens every time and if I used a long move action to step in and out of the zone 5 times, the monster should take 25 damage.

This situation would come up rarely since neither monsters or PCs would willingly enter in or out of a damaging threat zone.

Part of me thinks that if this is against the rules it is either
a) Because such damage CAN only occur once unless stated otherwise
b) Because the stirge travelling attached to me may count as forced movement and wouldn't cause penalty to it when I moved in and out (so it didnt get any damage let alone multiple)

Has anyone encountered this situation before or know of any rules that speak for or against it?

Issue 3 - Knight Aura or Marking penalty on an OA

Situation : Our Knight was fighting a Golem type statue and her Aura put the Golem at a penalty of -2 if it chose to attack anyone other than her. Our wizard moved causing the Golem to be granted an OA against him. The Golem took the OA.

Question : Does a situation where a monster is marked or in some other fashion penalized pop activate when a monster makes an OA against an ally?

Outcome : There wasn't really a ruling on this, we simply followed the normal rules in regards to OA but I wasn't 100% sure about this one and was commited to getting a 2nd opinion to see if I was just being picking or if this was against rules.

Part of me is thinking that the Golem didn't choose to attack the Wizard INSTEAD of the Knight, he only had 1 target to chose from so the Aura / Mark action (which grants the Knight a free basic melee) shouldn't kick in since there was no either / or choice and no matter how much he tried he couldn't attack the Knight during the OA.

Another part of me is thinking that the Golem didn't HAVE to strike at the Wizard during the OA, he could have declined and thus limited his exposure to repercussions over doing so.

That being said it still doesn't feel like such an action follows the spirit of the idea of marking. When you mark you make the opponent feel so angry towards you that they can think of nothing but attacking you, if they attack someone else then they suffer a penalty.

However if they have the chance to "trip up" another player as they leave the area, since there isnt a CHOICE involved and its an extra action the Golem wouldnt normally get, I can't see the fact he is marked making him ignore the OA or that if he didn't there was a penalty since he wasn't deciding to hit the KNIGHT or the WIZARD and choosing the WIZARD, he was left with only 1 target to hit.

Has anyone run into this rule before (ie where a Marked opponent attacks through an opportunity and is / is not the penalty applied)

 

[Rhenny]

I don't think I've read any rules or clarifications that would give straight answers to these questions, so DM has free reign to do as he wishes.

I've been playing and Dming for a long time. In my opinion, I'd have the Stirges blood drain stack! It is up to the other players in the party to get those nasty beasts off of the victim before his/her next turn. If they can't...suck away!

For the running in and out of the fire, I'd definitely apply the damage to the Stirge. The barbarian had a good idea...a heroic idea. Go with it.

For the Golem, I would apply the -2 penalty. Even if it has no choice, it still is concentrating on the Knight because of the aura (or the aura makes it more aware of the Knight)...so as it flails at the wizard, it isn't concentrating on the wizard as much as it should.

Just my opinion. Whatever the DM does is fine as long as it keeps the story and fun going.

Cheers!

 

[the Jester]

Situation : If more than one Stirge latches onto the PC, since the type of damage they take is untyped, the normal rules of same/untyped damage not stacking apply.

Question : Since the main way Stirges attack is to swarm an opponent and suck the life out of them, if more than one attack surely the ongoing would stack or there be some other conditional change rather than the 2nd or further Stirges simply hanging on not doing any further damage.

Outcome : Since there was nothing in the MM stat block to contravene the RAW, the 2 Stirges stuck to the PC did the same 5 ongoing and they did not stack.

Correct. There are several examples of creatures in the game with a "if you're already taking ongoing damage, instead increase it by x" clause, or a "If you're already taking ongoing damage, you also take a -x to saves against it" clause, in their abilities. Stirges are not one of them and don't really need to be, imho.

That said, I've used a higher level version of the stirge as a minion and gave it a "if already taking ongoing increase by 2" clause and it worked well.

Situation : Our Fire Mage cast Fountain of Flame [sblock](Ranged burst 1 vs ref, enemies only, 3d8+int fire damage (half on miss). Zone lasts until end of encounter: enemies entering it or ending turn there take 5 fire damage)[/sblock] and the Barbarian (me) had a Stirge stuck to his face. He decided on a tactic to bathe the himself (and the Stirge) in flame by side-stepping in and out of the zone.

Oooh, interesting. And I don't know off hand if there's anything in the RAW to prevent the fighter from doing this. A quick look at the Rules Compendium doesn't show anything to prevent this, either. The fighter used some good tactics, I'd allow it, and it looks like the RAW do as well.

EDIT: D'oh!! Actually, there's a huge catch on this, I'll explain in a sec.

...b) Because the stirge travelling attached to me may count as forced movement and wouldn't cause penalty to it when I moved in and out (so it didnt get any damage let alone multiple)

Whether or not you want to enter the zone is immaterial. If you're the wizard's enemy and you enter the zone, you take damage. If forced movement is putting you in the zone, you are still entering the zone. However, with forced movement, you get a save to fall prone instead of entering something like that. This, however, was not forced movement per se... and I just realized why you can't do this.

The stirge has the fighter grabbed. That means the fighter's immobilized.

Situation : Our Knight was fighting a Golem type statue and her Aura put the Golem at a penalty of -2 if it chose to attack anyone other than her. Our wizard moved causing the Golem to be granted an OA against him. The Golem took the OA.

The golem made an attack that did not include the knight as a target. Whether the golem could have directed that attack at anyone else is immaterial; the golem suffers a -2 penalty.

I'm not sure off hand what else the knight gets to do to the golem, but most defenders get a free attack or something. If the pc in question had been a divine challenging paladin, the golem would have suffered radiant damage. Opportunity attacks are NOT exempt from marking or aura penalties and should not be treated as such.

 

[mudlock]

One: You did it correct by RAW, but yes, this is something others have complained about. (If you fix this, I recommend against going to 5-per; maybe something like 5 plus 2 (or maybe just 1) per additional.)

Two: I believe you did it correct by RAW, but everyone and their grandmother has been complaining about zone damage shenanigans such as this one forever. (House-ruling a "once per turn" or "once per round" in there would not put you in bad company.)

Three: You got this one wrong. An opportunity attack, even if the creature doesn't have a choice of who to attack, is still an attack that does not include the marking/defender-aura-ing creature, and so still triggers the mark's or aura's effects.

EDIT: ninja'd! (And good catch on the grabbed=immobilized!)

 

[wlmartin]

The stirge has the fighter grabbed. That means the fighter's immobilized.

[FACEPALM]

I can't believe I didn't spot this, noone else did and none of the others commenting so far did, +1 to you for realizing it.

It seems weird that the attack to bite in stat block for the monster is vs AC, since it is grabbing as part of the attack you would imagine it would be against Reflex, just like a grab is... but yes the PHB states on P290

Hit: The enemy is immobilized until it escapes
or you end the grab. Your enemy can attempt to
escape on its turn.

So the only way I could have got the stirge in/out/in/out like I suggested would be if I was forced moved in some fashion that was seperate from me making a move action, since being immobilized I couldn't.

Seems so obvious now, well done good man!

 

[Blue]

Issue 1 - Stirge Ongoing Damage

Situation : If more than one Stirge latches onto the PC, since the type of damage they take is untyped, the normal rules of same/untyped damage not stacking apply.

Correct, more than ongoing damage of the same type (or untyped) doesn't stack. Yeah, it feels a bit off, it's an escape valve to prevent game balance craziness.

Issue 2 - Fountain of Flame w/ Sturges

Situation : Our Fire Mage cast Fountain of Flame [sblock](Ranged burst 1 vs ref, enemies only, 3d8+int fire damage (half on miss). Zone lasts until end of encounter: enemies entering it or ending turn there take 5 fire damage)[/sblock] and the Barbarian (me) had a Stirge stuck to his face. He decided on a tactic to bathe the himself (and the Stirge) in flame by side-stepping in and out of the zone.

Current, this would work (barring what another poster mentioned abotu they barbarian was immobilized when grabbed). Used forced movement to put foes in and out of zones works, and is so effective that that charop folks even have a name for it.

However, with the recent wizard redo, there's been some word around that they are thinking of changing the rules so a zone only applies damage once per turn or once per round. This isn't the rule yet.

Issue 3 - Knight Aura or Marking penalty on an OA

Situation : Our Knight was fighting a Golem type statue and her Aura put the Golem at a penalty of -2 if it chose to attack anyone other than her. Our wizard moved causing the Golem to be granted an OA against him. The Golem took the OA.

Classic use of a mark. Preventing OA (or punished them for doing so) against allies is meat and potatoes of a mark, one of the most common uses.

BTW, you mention if since the foe couldn't attack the knight the mark doesn't count. Mark isn't about choice - a fighter could mark a foe, and a a different PC could dominate that foe and force it to attack another monster. The attack would be at -2 since it's marked an not attacking the fighter, poor for the players, but the fighter then could use their combat challenge if available to attack the monster.