Reliable

2 posts / 0 new
Last post
There are a number of problems with the Reliable keyword:

1. The wording in the Rules Compendium (and the online Compendium) uses the original PH definition, not the new definition included in the update documents.  This is confusing, and the rules updates should also change the RC entry to match the official definition.

2. The new definition of Reliable should be changed so it doesn't work with non-attack-roll powers.

The original definition of Reliable ("If you miss when using a reliable power, you don't expend the use of that power.") was problematic because you got the power back if you missed at least once with a multi-attack power.

The new definition ("If you don't hit when using a reliable power, you don't expend the use of that power.") is better, but still problematic.

With the new wording, if an attack power that does not make any attack rolls somehow gets the Reliable keyword added to it, it will be recovered every single time it's used.  This is clearly not intentional or desirable.

Some better wording would be: "If you miss every target when using a reliable power, you don't expend the use of that power."

3. Some game elements apply a Reliable effect without the keyword.  Unfortunately, they use the old definition of Reliable, not the updated one.  These game elements should be changed so that they are recovered only if you miss all attack rolls, not just one.

The following game elements are affected:


  • Speaker of Prophecy (Heir of Siberys epic destiny)

  • Sword of Kings (Legendary Sovereign epic destiny)

  • Ruinspoke Scrounger

  • Triflik's blade

I agree and support the proposed change too.

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter