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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="theNater" data-source="post: 4249891" data-attributes="member: 62560">That's where I get what designers are trying to do without being one of them.You may notice that in the post you are quoting I justify marking with a ranged attack as cover fire that has a chance to do damage, as well as provide cover.  I found saying that very easy.I'd like to point out that unavoidable effects are not new to this edition.  3rd edition's magic missile, for example, neither requires an attack roll nor provides a saving throw.  Do you have the same objection to 3rd edition?  Even if you did, note that marked is a minor debuff, where magic missile was moderately impressive damage.If he's going to get swamped by the paladin's allies in either case, what's the downside to running the guantlet?  If he's got a good enough defensive position to not want to abandon it to avoid the damage, isn't it good enough that he can handle a little extra damage?I know that if a guy walked up to me and said "Fight me or get kicked in the jimmy", I'd take it as a challenge.  As for the fighter, well, even hits that don't actually damage you can hurt.  Most people will not claim a stubbed toe as damage, but will limp for a few seconds.  Of course, if the fighter misses, that may mean the monster had to dodge, and so isn't in a very good position to take their shot.  With the oozes, I figure a solid hit(or forced dodge) would set up some pretty good wobbling throughout(try poking some free standing Jello sometime, then imagine being that Jello and trying to attack somebody).BeauNiddle already spoke to this: reaping strike is certainly a better power to use here than cleave.  If you manage to roll high enough to hit, you get a good solid shot in; if you don't, at least you don't feel like you totally wasted your turn.  (The damage from missing with reaping strike and damage from cleave are pretty small, but at least they're something.)Yeah, acid arrow goes all area effect if it hits its primary target, it's pretty cool.  And it does a little damage(to the primary target only) if it misses.As for Evasion, I'm a little confused by what you mean when you ask if it would *still* negate that.  Have we confirmed the presence of Evasion in 4th edition?  It felt to me like a "be awkward to the wizard" power, which doesn't strike me as something that would be held onto.Same thing it was the first time you asked.These look like 3rd edition examples.  This is precisely what the Races and Classes quote suggests the developers are trying to move away from for 4th edition.  While these weren't game-breaking(by themselves), I found them annoying.  It's not much fun being the wizard when the party runs into a critter with high spell resistance, and it's not much fun being the bard when you run into a bunch of deaf foes, or foes that deafen your allies.With the examples you gave, I'm starting to think you could have the villain here use the following mechanic:Resist 5 radiantThis takes a lot of the bite out of the paladin's divine challenge without completely removing it(even if the damage is totally negated, the marked condition will still be on the guy), and so his atheism/faith in a stronger diety protects him from those sorts of strikes without entirely preventing the party members who work with a divine power source from participating.</blockquote>

Verification