Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mengu" data-source="post: 4675735" data-attributes="member: 65726">So I'm hearing mixed opinions here. I'll try to expand on why I'm asking these questions to begin with and maybe we'll go from there.&nbsp;1. The spirit companion does not normally provide a flank, but it does have an opportunity action. It's obviously not counted as a normal creature. That's why I thought it might not provoke opportunity attacks, though since it can be attacked by melee attacks, it stands to reason they could provoke opportunity attacks.&nbsp;2. We have feats and the like, that specifically say &quot;if you are hit by an area or close burst,&quot; or &quot;you gain a bonus against ranged, area, and close attacks.&quot; So it seems they used &quot;melee and ranged&quot; to specifically refer to those two kinds of attacks, but I didn't want to be pulling a fast one, reading rules too literally. The reason for eliminating close and area attack damage I think is because they didn't want the druid potentially taking damage twice from the same attack (sort of like old Shield Other).&nbsp;3. Comparing the boon to Healer's Lore, the difference in wording seemed deliberate, so I was thinking the bonus might not apply to the secondary target, though they are essentially picked as a target after the first target, and so you are using your power on them too.&nbsp;I seem to be able to defend both sides of the argument for 1 and 3. For 2, I'm fairly certain &quot;melee and ranged&quot; means exactly those two kinds of attacks, but I'd like to hear more thoughts on how you think RAW should work on all of these.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mengu, post: 4675735, member: 65726"] So I'm hearing mixed opinions here. I'll try to expand on why I'm asking these questions to begin with and maybe we'll go from there. 1. The spirit companion does not normally provide a flank, but it does have an opportunity action. It's obviously not counted as a normal creature. That's why I thought it might not provoke opportunity attacks, though since it can be attacked by melee attacks, it stands to reason they could provoke opportunity attacks. 2. We have feats and the like, that specifically say "if you are hit by an area or close burst," or "you gain a bonus against ranged, area, and close attacks." So it seems they used "melee and ranged" to specifically refer to those two kinds of attacks, but I didn't want to be pulling a fast one, reading rules too literally. The reason for eliminating close and area attack damage I think is because they didn't want the druid potentially taking damage twice from the same attack (sort of like old Shield Other). 3. Comparing the boon to Healer's Lore, the difference in wording seemed deliberate, so I was thinking the bonus might not apply to the secondary target, though they are essentially picked as a target after the first target, and so you are using your power on them too. I seem to be able to defend both sides of the argument for 1 and 3. For 2, I'm fairly certain "melee and ranged" means exactly those two kinds of attacks, but I'd like to hear more thoughts on how you think RAW should work on all of these. [/QUOTE]

Verification