When is a power used? (Crescendo Sword)

[Regicide]

The power itself does not use the term 'expended' so talk of when a power is expended is irrelevent. Using a power is a process that includes its resolution, and takes up an entire action.

No. The power is used. What happens because it got used doesn't mean you're using the power, it's simply a result of being used. If someone interrupts your power and kills you before the full effect happens, you don't get the power back, it was used.

I don't see why people keep trying to add an extra state that there are no rules for and would simply complicate things when there is absolutely no need for it. There is no such thing as "using." There is "sustaining" but it's no the same thing.

 

[keterys]

Technically, there is no rule whatsoever that says when a power is used - hence the discussion of whether a power counts as used after you actually resolve its use, or whether it is used when you declare its use.

It rarely matters, of course, except for powers like Crescendo Sword. Of course, the lack of any rule to that effect does mean the CS answer isn't very useful, but hopefully the CS person asked a developer or something to help answer it.

In the meantime, everyone can keep on running it however they want.

 

[DracoSuave]

There is no such thing as "using."

1) The phrase used isn't 'used'. It's 'already used.' That's a -different- meaning. I don't know how else to explain it. You're using -part of a phrase- and saying that it's all that matters. Whether or not a power is -expended- is irrelevent. You have not -already used- the power before you resolve it.

2) But that's irrelevent. There is an action called 'Use a Power.' Use a Power is not a state for a power, it is an -action type.-

Now, let's look at other action types.

Walk- There is such a thing as 'walking' in the rules.
Shift- There is such a thing as 'shifting' in the rules.
Squeeze- There is such a thing as 'squeezing' in the rules.
Ready an Action- There is such a thing as 'readying an action' in the rules.

All these -ing forms mean 'to be resolving the action.' When you are walking, you are 'resolving a walk action.' When you are shifting, you are 'resolving a shift action' (except when a power tells you to shift).

And therefore, when you are using a power, you are 'resolving a use a power action.'

I suggest if you believe that there is no such thing as 'using a power' then you have no idea what 'use a power' means in the rules.

3) There are many examples of rules text in the game that use the -exact terminology- 'using a [foo] power.' For example:
'...each enemy you hit using a melee attack power' (p113)
'Benefit: When using a close arcane attack power' (p202)

For a game term that doesn't exist it appears to actually be used in the PHB. I haven't bothered to look in other books tho, or beyond the class power descriptions.

 

[Regicide]

1) The phrase used isn't 'used'. It's 'already used.' That's a -different- meaning. I don't know how else to explain it. You're using -part of a phrase- and saying that it's all that matters. Whether or not a power is -expended- is irrelevent. You have not -already used- the power before you resolve it.

Resolving is a different word than using and is a better but longer. Resolving the use of a power is not using.

2) But that's irrelevent. There is an action called 'Use a Power.' Use a Power is not a state for a power, it is an -action type.-

Use a power is an action, not an action type.

Now, let's look at other action types.

Walk- There is such a thing as 'walking' in the rules.
Shift- There is such a thing as 'shifting' in the rules.
Squeeze- There is such a thing as 'squeezing' in the rules.
Ready an Action- There is such a thing as 'readying an action' in the rules.

All these -ing forms mean 'to be resolving the action.' When you are walking, you are 'resolving a walk action.' When you are shifting, you are 'resolving a shift action' (except when a power tells you to shift).

And therefore, when you are using a power, you are 'resolving a use a power action.'

Again, those are actions, not action types.

Resolving doesn't mean using.

Those aren't the same things and shouldn't be used for comparison for instance if your "walking" gets interrupted, you may lose a square of movement, you don't lose your entire walk action like you do if the target of your power becomes invalid. The reason should be clear, a power is used as soon as you use it regardless of how it ends up being resolved.

I suggest if you believe that there is no such thing as 'using a power' then you have no idea what 'use a power' means in the rules.

I have a pretty clear idea of what use a power means. It may not be perfect understanding but at least I know it's not an action type.

3) There are many examples of rules text in the game that use the -exact terminology- 'using a [foo] power.' For example:
'...each enemy you hit using a melee attack power' (p113)

To support your argument this quote would have to say "while using", it, if anything, supports mine.

'Benefit: When using a close arcane attack power' (p202)

For a game term that doesn't exist it appears to actually be used in the PHB. I haven't bothered to look in other books tho, or beyond the class power descriptions.

I think it's pretty obvious that the phrase "using" is inexact and being used in preference to more complicated wording. "While resolving" would be more exact although it doesn't sound right for sustained powers which "feels" like you're using it and not just resolving.

Anyway, stateless instant use powers are far cleaner rules-wise and match better with the current rules, such as interrupts and recovered powers. You don't have to wonder if you can recover a power (with demigod for instance) that you are currently "using" because "using" is undefined and may include "sustained" or "duration" or "until the trigger happens" or "until I roll the dice on next round's damage" or "until end of encounter when I stop making attacks with the area of effect" etc.

 

[DracoSuave]

'Use a power' is defined. A power is used when the use a power action is in the past tense. During a 'use a power' action, the action is not in the past tense.

I can't explain it any clearer than that. It's not unintuitive either. It's the English language.

If you need to -invent- rules that don't exist to support your case to counter the English language itself, you don't exactly have a strong argument.

Resolving is a different word than using and is a better but longer. Resolving the use of a power is not using.

Resolving is a different word, I agree.

Resolving an action is part of taking that action.
And 'Using a power' is taking a 'Use a power' action.
And that means resolving a 'Use a power' action is part of taking a 'Use a power' action.

Which means that resolving a power is part of using a power.

Which means that if you are resolving a power, you have not used the power yet, as you are in the process of taking your Use a Power action.

Logic.

Use a power is an action, not an action type.

Again, those are actions, not action types.

They are kinds of actions you can take. My fault for using 'action types' which is a game term. I mean 'kinds of actions.'

Regardless, not relevant to the argument.

Resolving doesn't mean using.

Those aren't the same things and shouldn't be used for comparison for instance if your "walking" gets interrupted, you may lose a square of movement, you don't lose your entire walk action like you do if the target of your power becomes invalid.

No, but you don't get your move action back if it negates your entire movement. Ask fighters about that one. Negating an action doesn't mean you haven't spent that action, or that you haven't used that action. And no one is claiming that, either.

The reason should be clear, a power is used as soon as you use it regardless of how it ends up being resolved.

The Reliable keyword says this is also incorrect. The keyword shows that a power's 'used' trait can be dependant on the resolution of the action itself. If, through some means, Crescendo Blade got the Reliable keyword then it doesn't become used, then unused if you fail to hit.

If you miss every target when using a reliable power, you don’t expend the use of that power.

If the power were already used, then Reliable couldn't work. Reliable does work, which means that the power is not already used. Used, in the case of Crescendo Sword, obviously means 'expended'. And if it didn't, then recovering the use of Crescendo would be meaningless, as you'd expend it after resolving -anyways-.

To support your argument this quote would have to say "while using", it, if anything, supports mine.

Your premise was that 'using a power' does not exist. That was directly disproven by counterexample. The word 'while' is a strawman you're inserting in to make it seem as tho your premise is untouched, as is the idea that there is no 'using a power' state by claiming it is inexact.

However, the english language has a clear definition for it. It is called 'Present Tense'.

 

[Regicide]

If you need to -invent- rules that don't exist to support your case to counter the English language itself, you don't exactly have a strong argument.

You're inventing the "using" rule. You're giving it definition. You're saying how long it lasts and what it entails. Not me.

Which means that if you are resolving a power, you have not used the power yet, as you are in the process of taking your Use a Power action.

Logic.

Hardly. While the arrow is flying you're not "using" the bow. The bow is used, the power is used, and the fate of the target has yet to be resolved.

 

[DracoSuave]

You're inventing the "using" rule. You're giving it definition. You're saying how long it lasts and what it entails. Not me.



Hardly. While the arrow is flying you're not "using" the bow. The bow is used, the power is used, and the fate of the target has yet to be resolved.

It's good to know that you stop using a bow after you've declared it, cause that way you don't have to worry about adding in proficiency bonuses, or any of that junk.

 

[Ltheb Silverfrond]

When you expend a power is not exactly covered in the rules. This is NOT M:TG. There is no stack. There is merely a vague Order of Operations that govern what to do. The rules are silent in this case as much as they are silent about crafting. (in 4E) This leave the players/DM with deciding, either through group consensus, DM fiat, or some other method, an acceptable Order of Operations for how to use a power.

Not your cup of tea? Want a more concrete answer? OK.

My Take: A power is expended the moment you announce using it and spend the appropriate resources to use it. (Use Actions, spend additional resources, and declare legal targets)

Why?

Look at the 6th level Fighter utility power "Battle Awareness." It requires "no action" to use. If the power were not expended the moment you spent the "no action" (basically declaring you are using it) you could declare the use of the power INFINITE times when rolling initiative and always go first. (or get slapped by your DM)

 

[webrunner]

Reading the thread, the rules seem to only 'work' if you use the following interpreation:

1) you declare what power you're using, and you're then committed to using it.
2) it isn't actually used, in the past tense, until the action resolves or fails to resolve.

if 1) isn't true, then things like dailies are regained when interrupted, which makes interrupting dailies/encounters rather pointless. Plus, you would have to apply that to ACTIONS as well, making interrupts completely useless, as the character could just use their action again.
If 2) isn't true, then reliable powers wouldn't function under the rules.

Sometimes if the rules don't explain something you have to figure it out by process of elimination: If case A is true, then so-and-so thing would be broken, so case A cannot be true.


Incidentally, I had a bizarre situation where a daily, with a miss effect was interrupted by an enemy teleporting away. We couldn't really figure out at the time whether the "miss" effect (which was a Daze.. adding to the confusion as you cant take interrupts while dazed) triggered or not. I mean, i didn't technically 'miss', as I hit, but the enemy made itself not a valid target, so I didn't hit.

 

[DracoSuave]

Well regarding that, if an enemy makes itself an invalid target, anything describing a target can't happen, so that includes Hit:, Miss:, and Effect: lines.

Basicly, a lot of the argument for 'Crescendo Sword can get itself back' is based around a lot of rules lawyering that purposefully take a blind eye to the full wording of the power and basic understanding of english. The argument smells like a bunch of fast talk trying to sell a used car as a new one.

It's filled with holes, and expects the game to work in ways that it doesn't, trying to break new rules ground. It feels, to me, like a method for getting a large number of uses of a daily power until you finally get an encounter power back. It's the sort of argument Munchkin McMinmaxer'd bring up to try to astound a DM who isn't used to this sort of milarky.

It's -really- simple.
Are you using the power? In the process of using the power? Yes.
Have you already used the power while you are using the power? No.

Does it make sense to have already done something you're currently doing? No. Do the rules make an exception to that in this case? No.

I don't understand how it could be interpreted any other way without willfully ignoring how the english language works. In the absense of game rules stating otherwise, sometimes you just need to apply common sense.