Warrior of the Wild once per encounter?

[Dykstrav]

The Warrior of the Wild feat allows you to use the Hunter's Quarry class feature "once per encounter." The way I read this, this allows you to do an extra d6 to the nearest target, once per encounter, as a minor action. In essence, it gives you another encounter power.

I have a player who continues to insist that it instead functions as written on page 104 of the Player's Handbook exactly as if his character was a ranger. Thus, he concludes that he should be allowed to designate a new target once his current target is defeated. I disagree, since it requires another minor action to designate another target. I think that if it's a "once per encounter" thing, it's gone once you use it once.

Which way is the right way to play it?

 

[DevoutlyApathetic]

The Warrior of the Wild feat allows you to use the Hunter's Quarry class feature "once per encounter." The way I read this, this allows you to do an extra d6 to the nearest target, once per encounter, as a minor action. In essence, it gives you another encounter power.

I have a player who continues to insist that it instead functions as written on page 104 of the Player's Handbook exactly as if his character was a ranger. Thus, he concludes that he should be allowed to designate a new target once his current target is defeated. I disagree, since it requires another minor action to designate another target. I think that if it's a "once per encounter" thing, it's gone once you use it once.

Which way is the right way to play it?

Neither. This was errata'd. The Quarry only lasts until the end of your next turn so you can get two Quarried hits from it. One potentially on the round you Quarry them and one the following round on your turn.

 

[Nifft]

It works like neither of you think: he can't designate Quarry more than once per encounter, but he can deal the extra damage each round. However, thanks to the errata update docs, the Quarry effect only lasts until the end of his next round, so he has two opportunities to deal the extra damage.

Cheers, -- N

 

[ryryguy]

It's errata'd.

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/UpdatePH.pdf

Warrior of the Wild [Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 208
Add the following sentence to the end of the second paragraph of the benefit
section: “The target you designate as your quarry remains your quarry until the​

end of your next turn.”

OK, actually that doesn't directly address your query... but it kind of wouldn't make much sense if it worked the way your player is suggesting.

I definitely agree that you can only use it to desginate a quarry once per encounter. I suppose that you can actually get the benefit from it twice though - once in the round you use it, once in the following round.

 

[Dykstrav]

Thanks for the quick and accurate responses. Merciful Pelor, I didn't think errata for a book that just came out a month ago would have such overarching and comprehensive differences from the printed material. "Easier for the DM to run the game," my ass. It's going to be a major headache to incorporate this errata into my campaign already. Just going over the NPC stat blocks for my game will take a significant chunk of my prep time this weekend.

Sorry if that comes across as a bit snarky, I don't mean it to. I do genuinely appreciate your responses and input, I'm just extremely frustrated with the physical product quality of 4E. The smudgy pages, bowed covers, and wrinkly pages were sorta annoying, and this errata a month after the books came out is just adding fuel to the fire.

 

[inati]

Would you rather they didn't bother to errata it then? Sure, it would have been preferable that they didn't have to do any correcting in the first place, but at least they are correcting flaws asap, which you must admit is infinitely better than letting broken things like Warrior of the Wild continue on.

 

[Nifft]

Thanks for the quick and accurate responses. Merciful Pelor, I didn't think errata for a book that just came out a month ago would have such overarching and comprehensive differences from the printed material.

IMHO, it looks like the multi-classing stuff got thrown in at the last minute, and is the most poorly written, designed and tested stuff in the books.

The rest isn't all that bad.

Cheers, -- N

 

[FadedC]

It is definitely a major pain that that the PHB and MM are such a minefield of eratta. It would be almost impossible for any but the most experienced and dedicated player to avoid making mistakes due to not realizing something in the book was outright changed.

Even still, given the choice between 3e that had major errors and balance problems in their books and didn't fix them, and 4e that had major errors and balance problems in their books and did fix them.....I'll take 4e.

 

[Dykstrav]

Even still, given the choice between 3e that had major errors and balance problems in their books and didn't fix them, and 4e that had major errors and balance problems in their books and did fix them.....I'll take 4e.

I guess it's a point of personal preference. You can argue a broken rule in play at the table or you can run through constant errata during your prep time, so what you're choosing is when it's going to eat up your time. This is also hoping that all your players are also on board with the latest errata; otherwise you'll have the experience of pausing the game to flip through a rulebook and a stack of printed pages stuffed in the back cover because all the players aren't on the same page.

It's not the rules in and of themselves that's making me ill, it's the logistics of implementing the most current version.

It wasn't until I started prepping for this weekend's game that I finally started to understand why some 3.5 players are "waiting for 4.5" although WotC has repeatedly said that it won't happen. But I'll stop that line of thinking right now, because I'm just interested in running a 4E game and not trying to start another edition wars thread.

Again, let me stress that I actually like 4E as a game. It's alot of fun, but it's not perfect, and the product quality leaves alot to be desired. But I'll still play it.

 

[FadedC]

I guess it's a point of personal preference. You can argue a broken rule in play at the table or you can run through constant errata during your prep time, so what you're choosing is when it's going to eat up your time. This is also hoping that all your players are also on board with the latest errata; otherwise you'll have the experience of pausing the game to flip through a rulebook and a stack of printed pages stuffed in the back cover because all the players aren't on the same page.

It's not the rules in and of themselves that's making me ill, it's the logistics of implementing the most current version.

It wasn't until I started prepping for this weekend's game that I finally started to understand why some 3.5 players are "waiting for 4.5" although WotC has repeatedly said that it won't happen. But I'll stop that line of thinking right now, because I'm just interested in running a 4E game and not trying to start another edition wars thread.

Again, let me stress that I actually like 4E as a game. It's alot of fun, but it's not perfect, and the product quality leaves alot to be desired. But I'll still play it.

Yeah it's kind of a no win situation either way. Obviously it would be nice if the game just had no errors at all, but at this point I know it's not realistic.

The good news is that it's not TOO hard for a player to just review the erratta for their particular character and make the adjustments. It's more of a pain for the DM to keep up with it, particularly since many monsters have erratta too.

Maybe there will be updated books at some point, though I can't imagine spending the money on them.