Dimensional Vortex question

16 posts / 0 new
Last post
Hey all, a question came up in today's adventure that I think didn't need to be addressed, but one of my own teammates felt the need to bring it up.

Dimensional Vortex:

Hit: You teleport the target 5 squares. The target then makes its melee attack against a creature you choose. If no creatures are within range of the target, the attack is expended.

In general I have used this power in one of two ways that may be incorrect. One of the ways I concede I may have been wrong, but the other way is bogus IMHO.

1) Anytime a creature rolls a 20 against one of my allies, I pretty much always will use DV against them as this A) Saves my ally from high damage and B) Does a crap load of damage against an enemy instead.
Now this is the one I question as it states "The target then makes its melee attack . . .".
Does this mean when you use DV the creature RE-ROLLS the attack against the creature you designate it to attack? Or do you keep the old attack?
As said, when it rolls a crit I always use it to force it to crit against another monster, but after re-reading the phrasing that may be incorrect.

2) If no enemies are within 5 squares, I usually teleport the mob next to me and force it to waste it's attack on a random square.
A player just brought up that it says "The target then makes its melee attack against a creature you choose. If no creatures are within range of the target, the attack is expended." The fact it says creatures means that I have to teleport it away from anyone within attack range or else it will still get to attack my ally.
I think this isn't true and the way I have been doing it is correct, but it still is shady gray area.
---
What are your thoughts on all this?

1)  You should redirect a 20 against a weaker ally or againSt itself because;

2)  The target can be forced into attacking itself.

The sentence:  If no creatures are within range of the target, the attack is expended is basically impossible since the target is always within Range of its attack (Range 0)

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Now this is the one I question as it states "The target then makes its melee attack . . .".
Does this mean when you use DV the creature RE-ROLLS the attack against the creature you designate it to attack? Or do you keep the old attack?
As said, when it rolls a crit I always use it to force it to crit against another monster, but after re-reading the phrasing that may be incorrect.

In my opinion, the attack should be rerolled.  I've seen it run both ways, though.


1)  You should redirect a 20 against a weaker ally or againSt itself because;

2)  The target can be forced into attacking itself.

The sentence:  If no creatures are within range of the target, the attack is expended is basically impossible since the target is always within Range of its attack (Range 0)




That very sentence is a pretty good indicator that they did not intend the creature to be able to attack itself with this power. And while it doesn't count for much, it also fits the fluff. The enemy was mid-hit when interrupted. How exactly do you teleport the enemy into the path of his own attack? I'd say that's a pretty good case for that being RAI for this particular power.

Plus they haven't been terribly consistent with whether the general rule is that enemies can or can't be made to attacks themselves anyway. Several powers explicitly say they can, several powers explicitly say they can't, several powers seem to hint at one way or the other, and then the majority are just completely silent on the matter.
Answers

1) Either reading can be argued but considering it is an interrupt that occurs after the hit (Trigger: An enemy hits an ally with a melee attack ), it makes sense that you keep what the monster rolled to resolve the interrupt.

and

2)  If you teleport the monster next to you then it will either attack you or something else (another monster preferably).  If there is nothing else there, then attacking an empty square is illegal if you are a valid target - it will attack you.  Some people argue the monster just attacks itself, which is legal since it is a creature in range of its own attack.  Some people argue that's not what the power should do - too bad the power isn't worded that way.

Comments from the DM's POV
Ugh, it's a poorly worded power.  Critical hits that don't happen against PCs that suddenly happen against monsters - coupled with the awesome control aspect of teleporting someone - also makes it also a very good power (talk about a huge swing in damage and re-arranging the battlefield at the same time).

Maybe too good?  Who knows, but we've house ruled it so that the monster can't attack itself (RAW it can).  AFAIK the DM is not forced to announce that a hit is a critical hit, so bear that in mind too if you've got a player who is just sitting on that and that's bugging you.
If no creatures are within range of the target, the attack is expended is basically impossible since the target is always within Range of its attack

That very sentence is a pretty good indicator that they did not intend the creature to be able to attack itself with this power.

Agreed.

On that last point, the DM kind of does have to announce if a hit was a crit, because there are numerous game elements that have that as a trigger so it is required player knowledge.

That very sentence is a pretty good indicator that they did not intend the creature to be able to attack itself with this power.



Agreed. Unfortunatly they did nothing to prevent it from happenning RAW. The Target is a creature and thus fits the Target description, unless the Triggerring Power Targets an enemy.

RAI i will concede it should probably not allow Self-Targeting.

RAW is unquestionable in that it can since nothing says it cannot if its a valid target within Range.  



Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Sorry, been out of town for a few days so haven't been able to respond.
---
Okay, so the first question is up in the air, but leaning towards "Keeping the roll it made". That's how I've been doing it, so I'm okay with that. ^^ Put the fear of a 20 into the DM. XD

The second one is still so confusing. It's leaning towards "Yes, you must teleport it adjacent to nobody or else it gets to attack them.", but the thing is the power says "You choose the creature" yada yada. This implies that (And I know this is bad since it's taking into account of description more than game terms) when you teleport the creature you get to choose which direction it is facing when it is teleported. So yes, the power says "Choose a creature for it to attack", but why couldn't I just teleport him next to me and have him "face" the other way for the attack? (i.e. attack an adjacent square?) It sounds REASONABLE to me. /shrug
No one has to keep track of which direction a creature is facing in 4th Edition

RC 201 Facing:  A creature that is taking part in an encounter is assumed to be in constant motion, looking here and turning there. Because of this assumption, no one has to keep track of which direction a creature is facing.

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

The attempted point was that the fluff strongly suggests that this is a case of teleporting the target mid-swing so that they hit something else, as opposed to things like confusing the target as it decides who to attack.  The lack of the Charm or Fear keyword lends credence to this assessment of RAI.  I think it's very unlikely that Endrek is referencing any potential facing rules in order to determine the result of DV by RAW.

Given the above description, and how likely it is to be RAI, it seems unlikely that self-targeting is RAI.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
He was referencing Facing so i just wanted to clarify that. The thing is, you could Teleport it adjacent to you and make it attack one of its allies 2 squares the other of you or even in the opposite direction if it has Reach. It doesn't matter where and how you place it. You get to choose a new Target for the Triggerring Attack and it can be itself RAW.


Fluff is irrevelant. The revelant points are:

- An enemy hits an ally with a melee attack

- As an Interrupt, You teleport the target 5 squares.

- The target then makes its melee attack against a creature you choose. 


Also, since the Trigger requires a Hit that you Interrupt, we are a Step #4 where you compare the Attack Roll results vs Target Defense, and thus after Step #3 of Making An Attack Process, which is to make the Attack Roll. For this reason, you keep the original Attack Roll IMO.

RC 214 Making Attacks:

1. Choose Power  
2. Choose Targets
3. Make Attack roll
4. Compare Attack roll to Target's Defense  
5. If hit, deals damage and other effect 
6. If the Power has more than 1 target, repeats Steps 3 through 5.

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Sorry, been out of town for a few days so haven't been able to respond.
---
Okay, so the first question is up in the air, but leaning towards "Keeping the roll it made". That's how I've been doing it, so I'm okay with that. ^^ Put the fear of a 20 into the DM. XD

The second one is still so confusing. It's leaning towards "Yes, you must teleport it adjacent to nobody or else it gets to attack them.", but the thing is the power says "You choose the creature" yada yada. This implies that (And I know this is bad since it's taking into account of description more than game terms) when you teleport the creature you get to choose which direction it is facing when it is teleported. So yes, the power says "Choose a creature for it to attack", but why couldn't I just teleport him next to me and have him "face" the other way for the attack? (i.e. attack an adjacent square?) It sounds REASONABLE to me. /shrug



Teleport it to a square adjacent to another enemy and direct it's attack at that enemy. Why do you want to teleport the enemy next to you so badly?


Teleport it to a square adjacent to another enemy and direct it's attack at that enemy. Why do you want to teleport the enemy next to you so badly?



This is all in the situation of either A) A solo monster or B) The only enemy left.

As a Swordmage and tank of the group, I wouldn't use this ability on a Marked enemy (Save for a Critical, maybe) because I can reduce the damage they deal by so much. Thus, I'd use it on an unmarked enemy and then follow up with Booming Blade on my turn to keep it near to me.
That's why.

Also, since the Trigger requires a Hit that you Interrupt, we are a Step #4 where you compare the Attack Roll results vs Target Defense, and thus after Step #3 of Making An Attack Process, which is to make the Attack Roll. For this reason, you keep the original Attack Roll IMO.

Except that the power says that the target 'makes its melee attack' not 'continues its attack'.

As you have noted, making an attack has a series of steps.  If you make an attack, you start at step 1 and move through the steps sequentially to the end.

Now, in this instance, the creature has specified for it what power it has to use and what targets it has to choose (so it doesn't get to make any choices in Steps 1 and 2), but it's still making an attack, and so rolls a new attack roll for that attack.

There are wording choices that would indicate the target re-uses the same attack roll, but they would need to be pretty specific that you're continuing the same attack sequence or carrying over the old attack roll, because that's not the default when a power forces a creature to make an attack.
Fair point, but the Power doesn't say the enemy remake its attack. So the Triggerring Atatck that is being Interrupted by Dimensional Vortex  is alaready initiated in Making An Attack Process and doesn't redo all over....

Make it's attack implies to me its the same Power......and same roll since nothing says it redo it. It simply use its Attack Roll results vs ANOTHER Target's Defense on Step 4.

In other words, the Triggerring Attack that has been made and was hitting is Interrupted and the enemy makes its attack against another creature. I only see the Target of the Triggerring being invalidated.


 

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter