Furious Bolts is (even) better than it looks

89 posts / 0 new
Last post
Furious Bolts seems to get short shrift vs. Demon-Soul Bolts in most sorcerer discussions, and I think I figured out why: you're reading it wrong.

Specifically, the Secondary Target line vs. the Secondary Hit line. Yes, the secondary hit line requires a new target each time, but the secondary target line for the first additional attack is "One creature within 10 squares of the primary target". That includes the primary target itself, meaning Furious Bolts is a true double-attack.

So for the sake of comparisons at level 11, it's not attacking everyone once vs. attacking one guy three times, it's attacking one guy twice and then the rest of the field once vs. attacking one guy three times, and that's a much more even comparison. Bolt of Power vs. Swords of the Marilith is still an unquestioned win for Marilith though.

(I guess this could've gone in the Sorcerer handbook, but it appears to be dead, so, yeah, it gets its own thread.)
Yup, just like Chaos Bolt and a couple others.

Though, while not an issue when fully optimized to have high attack and rerolls available, it's worth noting that you do have to hit for the Secondary to occur on Furious Bolts.
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
Well, that's what greater magic weapon is for. And life's losing hand if you miss anyway.
Yup, just like Chaos Bolt and a couple others.




Doesn't the "can't target a single creature more than once" clause in Chaos Bolt prevent double-tapping, even on the primary target? Or are there wording shenanigans I'm missing?
I think it's timing shenanigans, since that clause doesn't come until the hit line of the second attack (and you've already hit a target twice, so no takesies-backsies).
Yeah, it has the same target line but a more general restriction. No double attacking with chaos bolt.
Yeah, it has the same target line but a more general restriction. No double attacking with chaos bolt.



RAW, I disagree. The wording and timing are the same with both powers, if one works the other should.
The wording is not the same, so neither is the RAW.
RAW, you're wrong.
To be perfectly clear, here is the RAW difference:

Chaos Bolt may not attack one creature twice with a single use of the power. You cannot attack a creature twice without breaking that.

Furious Bolts may not repeat its _secondary attack_ against the same person twice. You can attack one creature twice with the power as a whole without breaking that.
To be perfectly clear, here is the RAW difference: Chaos Bolt may not attack one creature twice with a single use of the power. You cannot attack a creature twice without breaking that. Furious Bolts may not repeat its _secondary attack_ against the same person twice. You can attack one creature twice with the power as a whole without breaking that.



aaaand wrong.

The restrictive clause has zero meaning until you've hit with the Chaos Bolt secondary attack, because it's in the secondary hit line. By the time it comes into play, guess what, you've already hit the target twice. The secondary target lines work the same for both powers, so they either both work or *somehow* both don't.

Edit: cleared up an error 
You appear to have "rules as written" confused with "rules as kinda look similar if you squint and never get close to them."

The restrictions are on different things, say different things, do different things, and apply to different things.
You appear to be confused on how to read attack powers?
Rigorously.
Furious Bolts:

Attack with Primary
Use secondary attack to hit primary target because they are within 10 of themselves. Note it says 'a creature' not 'a different creature'.
Use secondary attack to attack every other creature on the board once.

The primary and secondary attacks are separate and can therefore target the same creature, but the secondary can never target something it already has.

Seems pretty straightforward to me.
That's not the issue though, bohrdom. We all agree there. The issue is that naflem wants to ignore the lack of such a limitation only applying to the secondary attack on chaos bolt.
Not ignoring anything, just pointing out that it doesn't come into play in time to actually prevent a hit on the same target from the secondary attack. I understand 100% what the intent of the power was, but it's just not written that way (I know, imagine that).
Not ignoring anything, just pointing out that it doesn't come into play in time to actually prevent a hit on the same target from the secondary attack. I understand 100% what the intent of the power was, but it's just not written that way (I know, imagine that).



So you're saying the primary and secondary can both target the same creature?
Not ignoring anything, just pointing out that it doesn't come into play in time to actually prevent a hit on the same target from the secondary attack. I understand 100% what the intent of the power was, but it's just not written that way (I know, imagine that).



So you're saying the primary and secondary can both target the same creature?



Does anything in either Target line prevent that from happening?
Not ignoring anything, just pointing out that it doesn't come into play in time to actually prevent a hit on the same target from the secondary attack. I understand 100% what the intent of the power was, but it's just not written that way (I know, imagine that).



So you're saying the primary and secondary can both target the same creature?



Does anything in either Target line prevent that from happening?



Unless I misunderstood, we're all saying the same thing...
The rule is "you can attack a creature only once with a single use of this power." It doesn't matter if that's put in either target line, either attack line, either hit line, or a special line. As long as it's not in the flavor text or title, there's no way around that restriction by tricky reading.
Well, unfortunately I dont have a Rules Compendium (and the online Compendium isn't giving me squat), but I believe that attacks follow a specific sequence of events. If this is true, anything stuck on a "hit" line doesn't matter until you've actually hit with the attack, which happens after choosing your target and rolling to hit. As I've said before, once the hit occurs, you've already moved on to dealing damage and anything else on the hit line, and the restriction kicks in. It would prevent any further attacks from hitting a target twice. If this is not correct and if someone could post the exact wording of the attack sequence, please do so and feel free to shove it in my face.
I'm afraid you're misinformed. The relevant rules on target selection (pages 105-108, which are the rules the section on making attacks references as well, so there is no room for confusion or dispute between rule segments here) actually make no reference to the Target: line of the power at all, instead stating that you must meet line of effect, range, and all conditions given by the power. It even specifically notes that many powers have elaborate targeting requirements.

In short, the power must be read as a whole to check validity. That a given creature satisfies the Target: line is a necessary, but not sufficient, requirement for targeting to be legal.
I may be reading the powers wrong, and suffer from a bad case of the LSM, but if i'm not mistaken it would seem that both Chaos Bolt and Furious Bolts would be able to double tap the initial target and then be forced into targeting creatures other than the original due to specified text. 

I don't know if this is what you're both arguing but this is my take. 
Furious can because the restriction is only that you not have attacked the target with the secondary attack.

Chaos can't because the restriction is that you only attack a creature once for each use of the power.
Furious can because the restriction is only that you not have attacked the target with the secondary attack. Chaos can't because the restriction is that you only attack a creature once for each use of the power.


Here's where i may be wrong but the "only attack a creature once fro each use" restiction does not come into play until after you hit(w/even number) and damage.

Secondary Hit Line:     Hit: 1d6 psychic damage. If you rolled an even number for the secondary attack roll, repeat the secondary attack. You can attack a creature only once with a single use of this power.

I'm going to say based on the fact that the restriction is only written and applied after the secondary and damage it would only be for the subsequent attacks, being the "tertiary and so on" attacks. As long as you keep coming up even numbers.

Edit- Italics and Bold mine. 
Yep, that's where you're wrong. There is no "come into play" here. Targeting restrictions do not have a timing and are not restricted to appearing in the Target: line of a power.

This targeting restriction applies to the entire power, so it must be met whenever you target the power regardless of where in the text it is placed.
If you want to get into the serious rules-lawyering with Chaos Bolt though, I have a better one for you:

The wild magic rider does not contain the secondary attack lines, and can thus be construed as a restriction on when you can make that attack rather than a requirement in order to make the attack, allowing non-wild sorcerers to use the secondary attack,and to use it on rolls a wild sorc couldn't. Still couldn't attack one guy twice though.
Plaguescarred: It should have been in a special line, but it is not necessary for it to be in one for the restriction to function. Choosing Targets has no "timing window" (which is why interrupts can negate attacks) and doesn't care where you put the restriction in the text.
Sorry lost post during edit and crashed delete & repost:

The problem is ''You can attack a creature only once with a single use of this power.'' is in the Hit line of Chaos Bolt's Secondary Attack and thus this limitation doesn't come up until you hit with the Secondary Attack according to its Power Sequence (RC 92)

It should have been in Secondary Attack or Special line

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

The problem is ''You can attack a creature only once with a single use of this power.'' is in the Hit line of Chaos Bolt's Secondary Attack and thus this limitation doesn't come up until you hit with the Secondary Attack according to its Power Sequence (RC 92)

It should have been in Secondary Attack or Special line


This is what I'm interested in
Plaguescarred: It should have been in a special line, but it is not necessary for it to be in one for the restriction to function. Choosing Targets has no "timing window" (which is why interrupts can negate attacks) and doesn't care where you put the restriction in the text.



Interrupts can negate attacks because the rules specifically say they can.
Certainly, but that the rules I'm stating don't clash with other rules, while your claim does, is relevant evidence on the matter.

The problem is ''You can attack a creature only once with a single use of this power.'' is in the Hit line of Chaos Bolt's Secondary Attack and thus this limitation doesn't come up until you hit with the Secondary Attack according to its Power Sequence (RC 92)

It should have been in Secondary Attack or Special line


This is what I'm interested in



Then get ahold of the book and read the various sections we've referenced. There's not really anything more to the argument than what's already been said.
Next time I'm in a bookstore I'll look it up, but I'm not terribly worried about it - I know I'm right :P  I'd love to hear more input from others on it though.
Next time I'm in a bookstore I'll look it up, but I'm not terribly worried about it - I know I'm right



That's the winning attitude !
Next time I'm in a bookstore I'll look it up, but I'm not terribly worried about it - I know I'm right :P  I'd love to hear more input from others on it though.



Yes, you, self-admitted non-reader of any of the material in question, who didn't even know that adding additional damage types to a power added the relevant keyword, "know you are right".

This conversation has let us know many things about you, but that wasn't one of them.
I'd love to hear more input from others on it though.


Not much left to say. Reading the rules, and reading the powers, they're technically correct. By RAW, both powers are double taps. Sadly, restrictions are not retroactive and by the time Chaos Bolt tells you that you can't target someone twice, you're already resolving the attack. It's obvious what the intention is, but that's not what the rules say.

It's a very clear ruling.  I wouldn't expect any legit DM to let that fly, though.  But by RAW, the interpretation of double-tap is correct.

 Sadly, restrictions are not retroactive and by the time Chaos Bolt tells you that you can't target someone twice, you're already resolving the attack. 

Do you have a citation for that? *curious*

Keith Richmond Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
Yes, you, self-admitted non-reader of any of the material in question, who didn't even know that adding additional damage types to a power added the relevant keyword, "know you are right".


Curious to know where this is coming from, but I'm guessing a different thread? This is a shared account; just to clear up confusion.

By RAW, it cannot double-tap because there is no rule that gives a time limit for invalidation. A restriction in the hit line is just as good as one in the target line would be.


I see. Does the Power Sequence (RC 92) that Plaguescarred referenced earlier have anything relevant?
By RAW, it cannot double-tap because there is no rule that gives a time limit for invalidation. A restriction in the hit line is just as good as one in the target line would be.


Is there precedent for this? I would very much like this to be true so I don't have to houserule this nonsense.

It's unclear. We generally resolve powers top down. It's easy enough to argue the first target is a valid target for the secondary attack. But multi-attacks break this rule, as they get resolved separately. This is a multi-attack. So we can argue the invalidation in the hit line applies.

Obviously it would have been best to write the power as "Secondary Target: One creature within 5 squares of the target last hit by this power other than the primary target". I believe this is the intent.

There are a handful of powers where they indicated secondary target needs to be within X squares of primary target, and they didn't catch onto the fact that they needed to spell out "other than the primary target" since a creature is within X squares of itself. Furious Bolts is one, but Lightning Clash (Swordmage), Skip the Rock (Rogue), Coralling Shot (Seeker), Hammer Throw (Hammer of Moradin), Numinous Cascade (Falme of Hope) and a few more such powers are out there. Intent on all of them is pretty clearly that the target be other than the primary target, but RAW fails to indicate this.

Ruling these using RAI at your table instead of RAW is a fine house rule, but honestly... The failure to word these powers as intended makes for more interesting options than everyone going for the well advertised powers like RoB/SoB for multi-attacks.