Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DracoSuave" data-source="post: 5466764" data-attributes="member: 71571">Wrong.Powers that say 'target creature' can explicitly be used against any creature, regardless of their ally/enemy status.  On top of that, unlike powers that explicitly target allies, they cannot be ignored by the target.The section I pointed you too also says that.  You should go back and read it.Sneak Attack is used in conjunction with a power.  So a power still applies.  Regardless, that point is relevant.  The definition of enemy is not 'An opponent of your power.'  God, are you even reading the same thing I am?It is... verbatim:"Enemy" refers to a foe of your character, and "Ally" refers to your character's companions in an encounter.  This is from the section 'Creatures, Enemies, and Allies' in the 'Choosing Targets' section of RC, and the player's creation books in essentials.And when after the question was raised, time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time again, Wizards responded by adding text to the rules to state, explicitly, that status does not switch, yes, I think it IS the spirit of the rules that status does not switch, because they've not only suggested the spirit is that status does not switch, they've put it in writing.The question here is not some new question that recently came up, where the intension of design and development has yet to be commented on.  The question was asked, and there in the updates to the PHB lies a direct and explicit answer.   The intent of the designers is clear.Except, the dominated condition TELLS YOU THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN.  What SPECIFIC?  What game rule tells you that the dominated condition does not apply its own rules?  Warning: Reductio Ad Absurdum approaching.When you play the Specific beats General card, you require two things:  You require a specific rule, and you require a contradiction.  So, let's see if we can apply SvG to this situation... the rule being excepted, as you claim, is the dominated condition, as that is the rule you say does not apply.The specific rule, in this case, what, exactly?  Your argument here is that being dominated allows the switch of ally/enemy status, and thusly is 'an exception to the rules.'  Thusly, dominated is the specific rule.So:General Rule:  Dominated.  It states that ally and enemy status does not switch as a result of dominated.Specific Rule:  Dominated.  It states... that...ally...and...enemy...status...does...not...switch...as...a...result...of...dominated....Not only do you lack a contradiction here, you in fact have a tautology!  Dominated doesn't act as an exception to the rule on how dominated works!  You can't enter the argument that 'Because he's dominated, it therefore is an exception to the rules on how dominated works!'This is a time to use Draco's Corrolary to SvG.  When you have a general rule, and there is no specific exception to that general rule, you apply the damn general rule.</blockquote>

Verification