|
9 months ago ::
Sep 19, 2012 - 11:16AM
#31
|
|
|
well I don't agree that it's what the rules say. Your reading would allow someone to come back to any attack roll at any point and time. This is not how II's with triggers work, the event that they use to trigger can't be 3 turns ago. I'm surprised you don't see how flawed that logic is. IMHO, your view is not RAW, and certainly not RAI. I also don't believe that you can chain EA the way you state it can be done. Regaining EA requires that the miss be resolved completely so you can regain it.
So agree to disagree. Either way we already gave the OP an option that everyone agrees on, limiting the amount of free actions the player can take during his turn.
Triggers specifically say they must be satisfied. If I make an attack roll but don't dislike it, the trigger isn't satisfied. The reason I used transposing lunge as an example it because part of its trigger, hitting, has in fact been completely resolved and it is still interrupted. Because the power says so, doesn't matter that that isn't the normal rule. By identical logic, any time I make an attack roll and dislike the result, I can interrupt it. Doesn't matter when I dislike it. That is the RAW. Which is why the power shouldn't have been "and dislike the result." That is just a stupid way to phrase a power, but since that is what it says....
That you don't like what the rules say is not an indication they are illogical. The rules are doing exactly what they say they do.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 19, 2012 - 12:02PM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Mar 28, 2010
|
it's not that I don't like what the rules say, I have my own view of what the rules say. What I don't agree with is your point of view which doesn't make sense with what the rules say in my view. you state that because of the wording of the trigger I can choose to re-roll an attack roll from 3 sessions ago because I've now decided I dislike the result (and therefore meeting both requirements). If this makes sense to you by the rules, then you go right ahead. To me, by the rules, it does not.
The problem that you don't seem to catch onto is that transposing lunge does have a double trigger requirement. You have to have hit and you have to have dealt damage. that much is clear and we agree on. The part you don't seem to see is that by the same trigger it also tells you exactly when you can use it, and if you don't use it during that window, well you can't turn around during the next turn and say I use transposing lunge now for that hit last turn where you took damage. That's not how it works. you're saying it is, by comparing both and saying they use the same logic, I disagree.
"Non nobis Domine Sed nomini tuo da gloriam" "I wish for death not because I want to die, but because I seek the war eternal"
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 19, 2012 - 12:14PM
#33
|
|
|
But they have identical logic. Both parts of the trigger must be satisfied, but not at the same time because one part of the trigger has already resolved, and the trigger rules say you can use a triggered power when the trigger is satisfied. So, yes, by RAW, it doesn't matter when I decide I dislike the attack roll. It happens, trigger is satisfied, I use EE. It could well have been I am level 30 and when I was level 1 I accidentally killed the destined savior and just now I decided I disliked the result. Trigger is just now satisfied, so I use EE. The error is in making a trigger that is dependent on a player's perception, rather than an objective event. While it might be silly it is what the rules actually say and it has plenty of precedent for powers with compound triggers.
Your argument doesn't make any sense. I am using EE the moment I "dislike the result." Which is the trigger. Triggers rules say you have the choice to use a triggered power when the trigger is satisfied, not before and not after. So your comparison to using Transposing Lunge the next turn is nonsense, you're past the trigger. But not for "dislike the result." Which happens, literally, whenever you decide you dislike the result.
Hell, by strict RAW, if I roll a 1 and decide I dislike the result right then this wouldn't work, because I haven't technically gotten to comparing defenses and etc, but it'll be too late, the trigger will have passed. This makes sense by the rules.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 19, 2012 - 12:44PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Aug 18, 2003
|
It is worded stupidly. It should have a trigger similar to divine guidance, which is an ally makesan attack roll against your oath target. EA could be trigger, you make an attack roll, effect; roll again and use either result.
Or, trigger, you make an attack roll and miss. Effect; roll again and use the second result even if lower.
The mention of not liking the result is too open ended, and really has no reason to be listed as part of a trigger
"Five million Cybermen, easy. One Doctor? NOW you're scared!" - Rose Tyler
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 20, 2012 - 2:11PM
#35
|
Date Joined:
May 28, 2009
|
It could be argued that you "must use the second roll" (i.e. the one from the first use of EA), no matter how many times EA is triggered...
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 20, 2012 - 3:44PM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Sep 29, 2009
|
It could be argued that you "must use the second roll" (i.e. the one from the first use of EA), no matter how many times EA is triggered...
Always my thought on dealing with infinite elven accuracy shenanigans.
It may be a cheessy rules argument but trying to get infinite elven accuracy is cheessy.
The sea looks at the stabillity of the mountian and sighs.
The mountian watches the freedom of the sea and cries.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 20, 2012 - 4:06PM
#37
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
An Elven Accuracy's reroll is always a second roll to the triggering dice roll.
Yan
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 22, 2012 - 10:01AM
#38
|
|
|
An Elven Accuracy's reroll is always a second roll to the triggering dice roll.
So, you recursively trigger EA and you eventually hit, which means that all of those EAs previous couldn't have happened, so you actually missed and EA has been expending since you did hit finally.
So, end result: no hit, no more EA for this encounter. The end.
As an aside, I'd like to point out that Transposing Lunge itself doesn't have a trigger. It can be used as part of the Aegis of Shielding trigger, which is an immediate interrupt of your marked target hitting one of your allies.
Transposing Lunge by itself is a Standard Action attack.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 22, 2012 - 9:16PM
#39
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
So, you recursively trigger EA and you eventually hit, which means that all of those EAs previous couldn't have happened
This could be true if Elven Accuracy's trigger was that you miss but its not. Its trigger is simply that you make an attack roll and dislike the result.
Yan
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 23, 2012 - 6:32AM
#40
|
Date Joined:
Jul 26, 2008
|
It could be argued that you "must use the second roll" (i.e. the one from the first use of EA), no matter how many times EA is triggered...
I agree. I think the reroll wording of this and many similar powers makes it so that you can not benefit from another 'reroll' to the same attack roll. "You must use the second roll." So there's no point in trying to reuse Elven Accuracy in conjunction with Sneaky Attack even if it could otherwise grant a third, fourth, or fifth reroll...
Exception: Elven level 10 Racial Utility daily Determined Accuracy states:
"Trigger: You use elven accuracy to reroll an attack and dislike the new result.
Effect: Reroll the attack roll with a +2 power bonus. Use this result, even if it’s lower."
This would be an exception to the "you must you the second roll" rule, since it explicitly breaks the elven accuracy restriction. Specific overrides general.
|
|
|
