Sustain Provokes?

[Hypersmurf]

The ambiguous use of "using a power", and "attack" in the PHB, not to mention the different entries on OA where two say "power", and the other says "attack" (which could mean attack power, or could mean attacks that result because of a power)...

... or could mean a power that isn't an attack; Wall of Fog, for example, despite being a Utility power with no Attack line, is a power with an Attack Type of Area, and falls into the category of "Area Attack".

Which is why I see a possible interpretation of p268's "making an area attack" to mean "using an area power", because any area power is a power with an Attack Type of Area, which makes it an Area Attack, even if it isn't an attack. And that reading would make p268 consistent with p271 and p290.

CustServ disagree with that reading, and consider "make an area attack" to be an entirely separate circumstance to "use an area power".

-Hyp.

 

[Artoomis]

Well, I got an answer:

Actions that provoke opportunity attacks will note this in their descriptions. Sustaining a power that would make a ranged attack roll will provoke an opportunity attack, however, sustaining a power that will simply deal damage would not.

Not quite a complete answer, though, is it? I will ask for more clarification, specifically whether the attack made when using the minor action to sustain the power is of the same type as the original attack.

First question, what allows an OA? The use of a ranged or area attack, or the use of a ranged or area power (which would be more general, of course)? Page 268 seems to be the more precise rule, but its hard to say for sure.

A number of powers (see list below) have ranged attacks and the minor action of sustaining that power grants an attack.

Second is a series of questions (really these are all the same question, just phased in different ways):

1. Is that attack a "ranged attack" in all cases and thus provokes an OA?

2. Are all minor actions to sustain a power exempt from provoking OAs?

3. Are only those minor sustaining actions which specifically state" repeat the attack" or similar language those which provoke an OA?

4. Does it make a difference is the Minor Action is to sustain and it takes another Standard Action to make the attack (like Flaming Sphere)?

 

[Artoomis]

An amazingly quick reponse this time to my clarifying question which is below the answer. I am submitting one more clarifying question.

You said: "It seems, then, that you are saying that a minor action to sustain a power could provoke an Opportunity Attack if it was a ranged attack (or an area attack, of course). Right?" - That is correct.

If the power itself is a ranged power, then sustaining the power and making an attack (such as Con vs Will), this attack can provoke an opportunity attack.

Sustaining the sword will not provoke an opportunity attack (as sustaining the sword does not require a ranged attack roll). Casting Mordenkainen’s Sword will initially provoke an opportunity attack.

Summons of Khirad will provoke, however, because the Sustain requires a ranged attack roll.

Thanks for your answer, Charles.

It seems, then, that you are saying that a minor action to sustain a power could provoke an Opportunity Attack if it was a ranged attack (or an area attack, of course). Right?

I have a clarifying question:

Powers often don't specify the type of attack in the "Sustain' line.

For example, Summons of Khirad starts out with a ranged attack and then has the line: "Sustain Minor: Make a Constitution vs. Will attack against the target..."

So...

QUESTION: Is the attack made during the minor action of sustaining the power the same type of attack as the original attack - in this case, a ranged attack? What about for, say, Mordenkainen’s Sword, where it is the sword that attacks again, would that be any different?

Unfortunately, this is not clear from the text itself.

 

[Artoomis]

I'll post the answer as soon as I get it:

The answer:

William,

Sorry for Charles' confusion on this one. Mordenkainen's Sword is a very odd example, because it's the sword attacking, not the caster. The rules don't cover this circumstance exactly, and so it's going to come down to your Dungeon Master to determine how he wants it to work in his game. If he wants to treat it like the Wizard attacking, he can. If he wants to treat the sword as a different thing, he can do that as well. There's no answer in the rulebook because this sort of thing isn't directly covered.


Thanks, and Good Gaming!

...

Josh
Online Response Crew

Hmmm....

This may get just a bit long. Sorry

You said: "If the power itself is a ranged power, then sustaining the power and making an attack (such as Con vs Will), this attack can provoke an opportunity attack."

Okay, that seems clear enough.

But you also said: "Sustaining the sword will not provoke an opportunity attack (as sustaining the sword does not require a ranged attack roll). Casting Mordenkainen’s Sword will initially provoke an opportunity attack"

I am having a little trouble making those two answers work with each other.

Sustaining the swords means "it attacks again," which, on the surface, seems different than making another attack (INT vs,. REF, in this case), but the sword's attack can only be done by making a ranged attack (per the power) of INT vs. REF which seems pretty much the same as any other attack made when sustaining a power.

If the rule is that any sustaining action that involves making an attack uses the same type of attack as the power does originally, then that would be a predictable, objective rule and M's Sword would work as a range attack and provoke an OA.

So, on further consideration, I think the rule you state about attacks made when sustaining a power are of the same type as the power and may draw OAs if they are Ranged or Area attacks is the right answer and M's sword is not an exception.

Agreed? Or no?

Thanks for you help and amazingly prompt response time!!

 

[Caliban]

When a game does define terms in the english language to mean specific things, semantics are important. The entire reason this thread exists is because certain terms and words, when not defined, are ambiguous.

The ambiguous use of "using a power", and "attack" in the PHB, not to mention the different entries on OA where two say "power", and the other says "attack" (which could mean attack power, or could mean attacks that result because of a power) are the reason this thread exists in the first place. So, the only "definitive" answer to this thread is going to require a semantic argument. It may be that sustaining a power qualifies as "using" a power for the purposes of an OA (but not for daily/encounter restrictions). Or it may be that attacks, whether or not they are caused by using a power will provoke OAs. However, in any case, it means clarifying what using a power means and/or whether "attacks" (and what that means) provoke OAs.

That's kind of my point. The arguement that Hype is presenting assumes that the term "use a power" is only used one way in the text.

To me, the phrase "you can only use a power once a day/encounter" is clearly a contextually different use of the word "use" than in the phrase "using a ranged or area power provokes an OA".

 

[Artoomis]

To summarize the answers from CustServ:

1. Any attack actions taken while sustaining a power may result in OAs if the attack is a ranged or area attack.

2. The attack taken while sustaining a power is of the same type as that listed in the power's description.

3. M's Sword is an oddball situation in that it specifically states "the sword attacks." CustServ takes no position on whether that falls within (1) and (2) above or not, saying that this decision is up to each DM.

My opinion is that, for simplicity's sake and in the interest of having one simple rule, that one treats M's Sword like all other instances of sustaining powers and consider and attacks the sword makes as ranged attacks that provoke an Opportunity Attack.

 

[KarinsDad]

That's kind of my point. The arguement that Hype is presenting assumes that the term "use a power" is only used one way in the text.

To me, the phrase "you can only use a power once a day/encounter" is clearly a contextually different use of the word "use" than in the phrase "using a ranged or area power provokes an OA".

I initially agreed with you until I found page 292:

Use a Power

That is an explicit game definition of using a power (not a very good one, but it is there nonetheless and its intent is fairly obvious).

It is a separate definition than the Sustain a Power definition found in the Durations section.

Page 268 states that a Ranged Attack provokes.
Page 290 states that a Range Power provokes.

I do not think that page 268 trumps 290 to indicate that only attacks provoke. Instead, 268 is generic OA rules and 290 is specific OA rules.

Cleric casts Knights of Unyielding Valor. It is a Ranged Power. It provokes OA.


Ditto for the page 268 "making a ranged attack" phrase. The phrase "making a ranged attack" is generic text in a section on Triggering. The section is not giving rules about how OAs work, that is found on page 290 in the OA section. Page 268 is giving rules on Triggering.

The phrase "uses a ranged power" as per the OA rules on page 290 is specific due to the game term "Use a Power" rules on page 292.


If the Use a Power section did not exist on page 292, then I would agree that "use a power" is not a game mechanic phrase.


Note: It's real easy to sway me to the opposite side of the fence.

PC Warlock: "Your honor. Obviously I was sustaining the power and not using it. The fact that the Baron died is not because of my use of the power, it's because he was standing next to the Curse of the Golden Mist when it attacked him. I had nothing to do with that because I was not using the power."

Ranged Power: check
Making an Attack (as per page 268): check

 

[Hypersmurf]

My opinion is that, for simplicity's sake and in the interest of having one simple rule, that one treats M's Sword like all other instances of sustaining powers and consider and attacks the sword makes as ranged attacks that provoke an Opportunity Attack.

If you treat "the sword attacks" as "the wizard makes a ranged attack", which therefore provokes, then will you also treat Freezing Cloud (when a creature enters the cloud) as "the wizard makes an area attack", which also provokes?

-Hyp.

 

[Artoomis]

If you treat "the sword attacks" as "the wizard makes a ranged attack", which therefore provokes, then will you also treat Freezing Cloud (when a creature enters the cloud) as "the wizard makes an area attack", which also provokes?

-Hyp.

Oh, that's an easy one.

No... Freezing Cloud requires no action to sustain it.

Remember that the rules clarification, or interpretation, if you prefer, (restated for clarity and simplicity) from CustServ is:

While sustaining a power, a ranged or area attack will allow an OA. The attack type (ranged, area, close, etc.), when unspecified, is of the same type listed in the power's description.

I put the "when specified" clause in there specifically to address future powers that may actually specify something different from the base power's attack type. For example, though they did not do this, M's sword could easily have been written as "Sustain Minor: When you sustain the sword, it makes a melee attack (Intelligence vs. Reflex)." It's possible, I suppose, some powers might get written that way in the future, so I allowed for it in the re-stated rules from CustServ that I wrote above.

So, following the rule from above:

Sustaining M's Sword is a minor action that results in an attack and that attack is a ranged attack, thus it provokes an OA.

Freezing Cloud requires no sustaining, thus any attacks done in future rounds are the result of something that is not an action (despite the rule "...Any creature that enters the cloud or starts its turn there is subject to another attack...") and thus does not provoke an OA. In this case, the attack role is simply a convenient way to adjucate whether someone gets hit by the cloud.

Thanks for the really easy question, Hyp.

I think I've really got this one nailed with a simple rule that covers all situations. Now that I've said that, I suppose someone will come up with a tricky situation.

Next question?

P.S. I have no heartburn with any DM would rules that M's Sword was really meant to work the way I re-wrote it above and thus does not provoke an OA. That's simply a question of a DM deciding on the intent of the rule. I simply happen to think it's easier to have a blanket rule without any exceptions to complicate it.

 

[Hypersmurf]

No... Freezing Cloud requires no action to sustain it.

Remember that the rules clarification, or interpretation, if you prefer, (restated for clarity and simplicity) from CustServ is:

While sustaining a power, a ranged or area attack will allow an OA. The attack type (ranged, area, close, etc.), when unspecified, is of the same type listed in the power's description.

But that's based on p268 - the OA is provoked because you're making a ranged or area attack.

p268 doesn't care what action you're taking, or if you're taking an action at all - it cares about whether or not you're making a ranged or area attack.

A Warlord power that lets someone make a ranged attack as a free action will have the attacker provoke an OA - he's making a ranged attack. Even if the Warlord power let him make a ranged attack wiuthout taking an action, he'd still provoke an OA, per p268 - he's making a ranged attack.

Bigby's Grasping Hands can be used to make an attack in round 2, even if you haven't Sustained the power - this will still provoke an OA, because it's a ranged attack.

And, of course, since you're using a CUstServ answer on which to base your position, I'd point out that when I asked CustServ "Does the wizard provoke an OA when someone moves into the Freezing Cloud, since there's an area attack?", they said "That's how the power's written".

-Hyp.