What is "an attack"?

[Mengu]

This is something that occasionally creeps up and I have to make an on the fly decision to keep going. Usually rule in favor of the attacker. For instance in the case of Furious Assault combined with an area attack, I apply the damage to all targets.

I just wish the wording on some of these were more in lines of "when you use an attack power" instead of "when you make an attack" to differentiate between the two. Currently, all we can do is guess at an intent on a case by case basis.

 

[Festivus]

For me, "Attack" is defined as when the power contains the word "Attack", within the constraints of the "Target" parameter. So if the "Target" reads "Each creature in burst", then the "Attack" operator would be one attack against all creatures in the burst (even if you are making multiple d20 rolls).

 

[Felon]

Every single case of this confusion about what attack means can similarly be shown to be either a problem with the interaction of two rules that can't be resolved by any definition of 'attack' or simply a non-issue when you read the rules that define what an attack is.

THE ARBITER OF ATTACKS HATH SPOKEN! NON-ISSUE SAYETH HE MANY TIMES!

One should exercise care when dealing in absolutes.

In the case of a close or area attack however this is not an issue. It is ONE attack, the PHB clearly states this. There is no 'retroactivity' here because damage is applied to all targets at the same time.

If it's ONE attack, Furious Assault applies to everyone taking damage. If so, then if it was used on the last guy I hit with a close attack, it would then retroactively be applied to all of the guys we already deducted hit points from. It may not be retroactive in some technical sense, but it is in a practical sense.

Note this flies right in the face of what Prestidigitalis pointed out, that the Arcane Fury feat exists specifically to allow the extra damage to affect all the targets hit by a close or area power, even though Furious Assault specifically says "the attack deals 1[W] extra damage..." and thus, by your reckoning, should already do so.

 

[Aulirophile]

Indeed "hit with an attack" means you rolled a d20 and hit. Furious Assault only applies to that one attack roll (just as if you had Hunter's Quarry on a target and hit with a Burst power, you could add HQ to that one target, not the whole attack).

A careful reading of pages 270-274 of the PHB makes what an "attack" is pretty clear, actually. So long as you keep the type of attack straight, you should be fine.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

I just can't see Furious Assault applying to more than one enemy. I play a Half-Orc Barbarian in one campaign, and it never even occurred to me to interpret it that way.

 

[Kingreaper]

EDIT:actually, I was wrong. The feats I'm thinking of specify ATTACK POWER, not ATTACK, which is a significant difference. Disregard.

 

[Aulirophile]

I just can't see Furious Assault applying to more than one enemy. I play a Half-Orc Barbarian in one campaign, and it never even occurred to me to interpret it that way.

It doesn't, so that works out well for you.

 

[Artoomis]

Another issue that comes up sometimes is whether applying damage is part of the attack or not.

The answer seems to be that sometimes it is, and sometimes its not - it depends upon context. By definition, applying the damage form an attack that has an attack roll is part of the attack but comes after the attack roll and determining if you hit.

Sometimes interrupts happen between the attacks roll and damage, sometimes the interrupt that is worded the same way might be clearly meant to come after the damage is applied.

<Sigh> One must determine the right way to turn this from context. In most cases, only one way or the other actually makes any sense.

 

[Mengu]

I keep reading and rereading the pointed out sections in the book, and Furious Assault. I still don't see how you can reach a clear conclusion. I can spin it both ways.

Under Area Attack:

"Multiple Attack Rolls but One Damage Roll: When you make an area attack, you make a separate attack roll against each target in the area of effect, but you make a single damage roll that affects all the targets."

Now trying to use Furious Assault:

I make an area attack. I hit an enemy. The area attack deals 1[W] or 1d8 extra damage.

If Furious Assault said "when you make an attack roll" or "when you use an attack power" I'd be clear. But it says "attack" which to me is still ambiguous.

I'm probably wrong to let the extra damage apply to area attacks, but if that's not the case, I don't want to shortchange the half-orc when I DM, and am fine doing it wrong until I see a clarification. In the player seat, I do the exact opposite, and apply it to only one target because I can't assume a DM will have the more generous interpretation.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

So there is still some room/ambiguousness left for debate.

The only thing all of your statements have in common is:
An attack needs an attack roll ==> e.g. Rain of Steel's effect is no attack.
Or worded the other way round:
there is an attack roll ==> it is an attack.