Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WalterKovacs" data-source="post: 5404201" data-attributes="member: 63763">Except of course: (a) The powers that do use attack rolls are already using close burst instead of ranged non-provoking, so invoking the latter is being inconsistent with other existing powers (b) Close burst already exists. Ranged non-provoking is an exception. Creating something knew and wordy, just for the sake of being exactly the same as something that already exists, seems like a bit of a waste. Also, even powers like healing word which does't require any attack roll, there are feats (or potential for feats) which can increase the size of bursts (but don't increase ranges of ranged powers) similarly there are powers that increase range but not size of bursts (there are implements for both that I know of). Similarly there are feats for some things that modify stuff so, for example "one other ally in burst", or something to that effect getting a modifier. Players should be looking to see which creatures get targetted anyway. Even if there was no "one target in burst" confussion, they'd still have to see "you or one ally" vs. "one ally". They'd have to see with other burst powers whether it's "all creatures" or "all enemies". Clearing up confusion in one case wouldn't prevent confusion is other cases. In the big picture, players reading the target line, as well as the attack type, is the most universal solution. EDIT: The Line of Effect rules do mean that, in the case of area attacks, since their origin square is the center of the burst, not the caster, so it's possible to attack a target that cannot be seen by the caster (around a corner), so long as there is LoE from the center of the burst. With close bursts, that won't come into play ... but there is stuff like Arcane Reach which allows you to change the origin square for close attack powers, etc.</blockquote>

Verification