The Warlock's Curse

[stobil]

I agree the wording can be misinterpreted. If you read the second paragraph in the "Warlock's Curse" section first, and then mentaly replace all of the single references in the first paragraph with group references. It takes some doing, but it can be done.

You've not met the rogue, then?

Actually, no one in our group is playing a rogue, and I have no idea what a rogue can do. So, they have a power similar to the Warlock curse ability? Can they do damage with this ability more than once per round?

 

[Eric Finley]

The one that I find most persuasive isn't Dooming Action (or its analogues) which let you do it more than once per round - the intent there obviously has nothing to do with whether it should apply multiply within a single attack.

The kicker is really the feat Whirlwind Sneak Attack (Martial Power p.149). With this epic feat, you choose one encounter attack power with multiple targets, and with that power only you can deal sneak attack damage to all of the targets hit.

Add that to the fact that the errata'ed wording on Sneak Attack and Warlock's Curse is identical, and you have a clinched argument IMO. Yes, the actual section text is ambiguous and ought to be fixed (or a "nothing is truly simultaneous" clause inserted into the bit about rolling attacks on multiple targets in the combat section). But this makes it crystal clear.

 

[Rel]

Actually, no one in our group is playing a rogue, and I have no idea what a rogue can do. So, they have a power similar to the Warlock curse ability? Can they do damage with this ability more than once per round?

He's referring to Combat Advantage which allows extra Sneak Attack damage. Even though a Rogue may have Combat Advantage against multiple targets he still only gets to do Sneak Attack damage vs. one target each round, barring a special feat or power that states otherwise.

 

[Nail]

He's referring to Combat Advantage which allows extra Sneak Attack damage. Even though a Rogue may have Combat Advantage against multiple targets he still only gets to do Sneak Attack damage vs. one target each round, barring a special feat or power that states otherwise.

Bingo.

....and I know the rule well, as I play a warlord: giving the rogue an extra attack after he's hit with a sneak attack that round is not very useful.

 

[Kinneus]

As it stands, the only benefit to cursing multiple targets is that your ability to gain temporary hit points is expanded across multiple targets. Sadly, since temporary hit points don't stack...not a particularly great benefit.

Not a great benefit for Infernal Warlocks, sure. But it's pretty sweet for Star Pact Warlocks and Dark Pact Warlocks, since their boon stacks.

 

[CapnZapp]

One target. One damage. One round.

Or, even more to the point: you get to apply sneak attack damage only once per round.

Not once per target. Not once per attack. Once and only once per round.

Not a great benefit for Infernal Warlocks, sure. But it's pretty sweet for Star Pact Warlocks and Dark Pact Warlocks, since their boon stacks.

Exactly.

That this makes Warlocks of different pacts play differently only makes the game better, in my opinion.

An Infernal Warlock wants one (and only one) cursed enemy fall each round. This he uses to move through the battlefield inflicting harm upon his foes without having to worry too much about Opportunity Attacks (and being attacked in general).

A Star Warlock wants to "save up" his enemies so they fall in clusters; giving large bonuses which then the PC uses to fire off this big dailies and encounter powers.

Same class, completely different modus of operandi.

 

[jasin]

Hee, hee, hee! Of course you think so.

Silly rabbit! Multiple instances of striker bonus damage per round without bothering with minor actions or positioning to set it up is for PHB2 classes!