SNEAKY ATTACK says that if you use your Elven Accuracy to reroll an attack against an enemy granting you combat advantage and your second roll missess, you do not expend Elven Accuracy.

One of my friends (and player) thinks that since it is a free action, he can use the power repeatedly in the same turn until he hits the enemy.

In my opinion, (DM) it means that you consider the power not expended for that turn and that you can use it again and again in your next turns until you hit

Am I wrong? 


 

the rules state that you can take any number of free actions per turn with the only limit being free action attacks.  Elven accuracy is not an attack.  However the rules also state that the DM has the freedom to limit how many free actions a player can take during a turn. 

With all that being said the player is obviously trying to abuse a power / feat combination to ensure that a power of his choice hits no matter what.  Since according to him he can just keep rolling over and over until he hits.  Point out to him that this is an obvious attempt to abuse the combination.  Allow him to do it once, to see how cool his found (yet not allowed abuse) trick is and then say that you're ruling that he can only use elven accuracy once per power.  that's a good compromise.  So he misses with power A, uses elven accuracy and misses again, elven accuracy is not expended, he uses power b, misses with power b, uses elven accuracy again (because he's using a different power) and gets a hit.  that works.  His current interpretation, however, does not.

if he keeps debating it, send him our way, he can try to argue it with us and see how far he gets.

He can't use it again to affect the same attack, but he doesn't have to wait until his next turn, just the next time he makes an attack (which could happen on the same turn or between turns).

No, you can't repeatedly use it on the same attack.

By the time you figure out the power isn't expended, the trigger for using the power has come and gone.

Sep 18, 2012 -- 2:25PM, Mand12 wrote:

No, you can't repeatedly use it on the same attack.

By the time you figure out the power isn't expended, the trigger for using the power has come and gone.

He isn't using it on the same attack roll though. He is using it (again) on the rerolled attack roll Elven Accuracy made that still missed.

Also Elven Accuracy doesn't have a trigger, so it isn't bothered by pesky things like timing rules.

So, RAW, yes, he can keep rerolling till he hits.

Elf Racial PowerElven Accuracy

With an instant of focus, you take careful aim at your foe and strike with the legendary accuracy of the elves.

Encounter  
Free Action      Personal

Trigger: You make an attack roll and dislike the result.

Effect: Reroll the attack roll. Use the second roll, even if it’s lower.



So, is this just another Compendium error?  It lists it both in PHB and in HotFL.  If the HotFL one is of this form, then the PHB one is out of date.  I don't have a hardcopy on hand.

as far as I know elven accuracy is a triggered free action, like it says on the printing mand gave.

Huh, I guess they added a trigger line in HotFL. Point still stands though, when you reroll the attack roll and it misses, you've "made an attack roll and disliked the result." The trigger happened again, so you can use the power again.

i think the argument for this not working is twofold:

The one I advanced was that even though yes there's no limit set in stone for how many free actions you can use per turn, the DM has the right to say that you can't based on the rules stating a DM can limit the amount of free actions a player can use per turn.

The other being that when you figure out that your elven accuracy has also missed and it is the considered not expended you're passed the trigger you could declare is available to trigger the power again.  Since if we look at stack of events, the attack is missed with EA, you trigger the feat which enables you not to expend the power, the trigger of missing is passed.  You can't say that you use a triggered action based on missing when it is no longer the current event in the chain.  That's like saying you can trigger a power that runs off hitting when you're at the damage phase. 

At least this is my current understanding, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

RAW Sneaky Accuracy allow Elven Accuracy to be triggered over and over since it let you reroll an attack roll (provided you dislike it ) and will be expended only whe you'll hit.

Trigger: You make an attack roll and dislike the result.
   Effect: Reroll the attack roll. Use the second roll, even if it’s lower. 
     Trigger: You make an attack roll and dislike the result.
        Effect: Reroll the attack roll. Use the second roll, even if it’s lower.  
          Trigger: You make an attack roll and dislike the result.
             Effect: Reroll the attack roll. Use the second roll, even if it’s lower. 
               Trigger: You make an attack roll and dislike the result.
                 Effect: Reroll the attack roll. Use the second roll, even if it’s lower.  
                    And so on until the attack roll hit... 

Sep 18, 2012 -- 3:14PM, Alcestis wrote:

Huh, I guess they added a trigger line in HotFL. Point still stands though, when you reroll the attack roll and it misses, you've "made an attack roll and disliked the result." The trigger happened again, so you can use the power again.

But the "not expended" part doesn't happen until the attack resolves as a miss, which is after the trigger.

Interrupts can't trigger themselves.  Not possible.

actually isn't it more like this:

Make the attack roll and miss
trigger: you make an attack roll and dislike the result (elven accuracy)
miss with EA
trigger:  You miss with EA, EA is not expended
END, EA missing is no longer the current event in the queue.

you can't trigger EA again since missing is no longer the last event in the queue.  You can't use EA again until you use the trigger from the feat to have it not be expended.  you have to let that resolve itself until you can use EA again.  Meaning the triggering event, missing with the attack roll, is no longer the latest event in the queue.  You can't use a triggered action off an event that is no longer the current one in the queue unless the triggered action specifically says you can.  An example of this would be powers that state you did X during your turn.

EDIT: Ninja'ed by Mand !!!  damn you Sir ! :p

Sep 18, 2012 -- 3:58PM, Noctaem wrote:

you can't use EA again until you use the trigger from the feat to have it not be expended

Good point. I didn't think about that.

Sep 18, 2012 -- 3:57PM, Mand12 wrote:

But the "not expended" part doesn't happen until the attack resolves as a miss, which is after the trigger.

Interrupts can't trigger themselves.  Not possible.

That doesn't make sense. The point at which you, presumably, dislike the result is when you find out it missed. Since it missed, it isn't expended, and you can use it again.

It is limitable by RAW by limiting free actions though.

but in order to regain EA, you have to use the trigger that the attack still missed even though you used EA.  Meaning you have to let the miss resolve completely.

Then you go with the feat saying, I still missed my attack even though I used EA, it is not expended.

You have nothing left to use EA on.  The miss is resolved, meaning the chain is broken and you can't use EA again.

Isn't this correct ?  And if not, how so ?

Elven Accuracy's trigger is not only the attak roll you make but that you dislike it, an event that can happen after the miss. 

Are you serious plague or just being silly ?

"Trigger" isn't the right word in your post Noctaem. Sneaky Attack isn't "triggered." It just happens (triggers are always optional, by RAW, so even if something lacks an explicit trigger it has to be a choice). But you don't know if you dislike the result or not until you know if it missed. Since it missed, and you dislike the result, EA hasn't been expended and you can use it again.

It is actually very similar to Transposing Lunge, whose trigger is even more complex. It is an II that triggers off of "hits and takes damage." Now the hit has completely resolved by the time you get to the damage step, but it was FAQed to indicate that you can still invalidate the hit because you are interrupting the compound event "hit and takes damage." EE's trigger is roll and dislike the result. So Plague is being serious, in terms of RAW.

sneaky attack is triggered.  The trigger is missing with EA.  It does not just happen, if that were true then it could happen at any time for any reason.  It is optional because you're not forced to regain EA.

You can dislike the roll right when you roll it, even before you know if you hit or miss.  That's how people use it for crit fishing builds, they roll the dice, see it's not a crit and use EA right away to reroll. There's nothing anywhere that states you have to wait until you know it's a hit or miss.

I can't condone comparing this to transposing lunge because that power has an exception to the general rule built into it.  Meaning it does not follow standard procedure and should not be compared to any other power.  EA does indeed state two things that are used in its trigger.  However both can be met before even knowing if you hit or miss.  You also can't meet one requirement of a trigger and the other later on during your turn then claim that you can use the triggered action.  That's not how it works unless it specifically states you can, like transposing lunge does.  If that were not the case then they wouldn't have to make the exception in the text of that power.

The trigger of transposing lunge states that it must be triggered after the hit phase and during the damage phase, it also makes clear that you can't use it for things that don't deal damage.  Are you arguing that EA can be triggered at any time during the hit phase and any time afterwards during your turn or even later on during someone elses turn just because you suddenly decided that you dislike the result ?  I think not.  You have a clear window of when you must decide to use the power, during the hit phase when you roll an attack and decide you don't like the result.  If you use EA during that time, then miss and you have the option to regain it after missing, which means the hit sequence is resolved for that attack, you cannot come back and claim to roll EA again for that attack roll because it is resolved.  You missed.  This is what I believe is RAW.

It happens when something else happens. It is not triggered in a game sense, because that has a definition that it doesn't meet, part of which is it must be optional. You can't choose to expend EE even though you missed, if you missed you keep EE period. So any argument that references Sneaky Attack's timing based on the trigger rules is invalid, because it is not triggered in a game sense.

You can dislike the roll then. You can also dislike it after you know it if missed or not.

So does this. EE is quite clear you have to dislike the roll. SvG. Now as to whether a power should have ever had as a trigger something that involves your personal opinion.... well, that is another discussion, but it doesn't change the actual RAW.

Okay.  so EA is a triggered free action, which acts as an IR unless it has to act as an II to function.  Since you can wait until a hit or miss is resolved before choosing to use it, then it doesn't have to work as an II to function.  So, in theory you can wait until the attack roll and damage has been dealt, since once the attack roll happens, IRs wait until the damage/effect step is resolved as well.  So. . . . can you roll an attack, score a hit, roll minimum damage, and then decide that you dislike the result, reroll, TAKE A MISS if you roll it, and regain your use of Elven Accuracy with Sneaky Accuracy then?  Since, Sneaky Accuracy says "Benefit: If you use your elven accuracy racial power to reroll an attack against an enemy granting you combat advantage and the second roll misses, you do not expend elven accuracy."

Frankly it's a silly argument.  As a DM, I would limit this in the order of RAW limiting free actions during a turn.  But, strictly as written it's like this

Roll an attack, dislike the roll
Use EA
Reroll the attack
>>IF HIT, then you hit and proceed as normal.

>>IF MISS, then Sneaky Accuracy kicks in, EA is not expended. 
Since you just rolled an attacked that missed, then likely you dislike the result
Use EA
Reroll the attack
Repeat until the result of this Reroll is a Hit. 

First of all, thank you for your answers!

I don't want to use my "DM power" to limit my players but, I consider EA very similar to a "reliable" power. 
Maybe I am wrong but, I do not remember a power that let you roll repeatedly for an attack in the same turn until you hit. Do you?


 

Sep 18, 2012 -- 6:02PM, Plaguescarred wrote:

Elven Accuracy's trigger is not only the attak roll you make but that you dislike it, an event that can happen after the miss. 

Precisely.  If you're going on the "dislike" thing, then I can now dislike the attack roll I made two years ago, and trigger Elven Accuracy, by this argument.

Sep 18, 2012 -- 10:02PM, Agonar wrote:

Since you can wait until a hit or miss is resolved before choosing to use it, then it doesn't have to work as an II to function. 

Yes it does, because you're changing the result of hit or miss as per the new roll.  That's what interrupts do.

Sep 18, 2012 -- 6:49PM, Alcestis wrote:

It is actually very similar to Transposing Lunge, whose trigger is even more complex. It is an II that triggers off of "hits and takes damage." Now the hit has completely resolved by the time you get to the damage step, but it was FAQed to indicate that you can still invalidate the hit because you are interrupting the compound event "hit and takes damage." EE's trigger is roll and dislike the result. So Plague is being serious, in terms of RAW.

I hope you realize that this is exactly in accordance with my position that attacks are events.

yeah i can't go with the argument that because it says dislike I can play the rest of my turn after I miss and then suddenly decide that I want to reroll that attack I disliked from earlier.  That's just nonsense to me.  That's not how it works, so me and Mand are agreeing there I think.

I also believe as Mand does that this is an II, that must be used during the hit phase, not afterwards. I also believe that the feat in question requires that the hit phase resolve itself in a miss meaning you can't go back afterwards and change the result with EA that is not expended.

The example of transposing lunge is also suspicious.

I also believe that every single step of everything you do, is an event.  Using an attack roll is an event, so is using EA, using the feat to regain EA, missing, etc etc..  You can't go back with II to an earlier event in the chain.  If you believe that then as Mand stated and as I stated earlier, you could go back in time or use EA during someone elses turn later to re-roll attack rolls that you suddenly decided you disliked the result of.  Which makes no sense. 

Sep 19, 2012 -- 6:14AM, Mand12 wrote:

Sep 18, 2012 -- 6:49PM, Alcestis wrote:

It is actually very similar to Transposing Lunge, whose trigger is even more complex. It is an II that triggers off of "hits and takes damage." Now the hit has completely resolved by the time you get to the damage step, but it was FAQed to indicate that you can still invalidate the hit because you are interrupting the compound event "hit and takes damage." EE's trigger is roll and dislike the result. So Plague is being serious, in terms of RAW.

I hope you realize that this is exactly in accordance with my position that attacks are events.

I hope you can read "compound event" and realize it isn't. 

@Noctaem: Makes sense or not, it is what the rules say. The rules often don't make sense.

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.

Sep 19, 2012 -- 6:12AM, Mand12 wrote:

Sep 18, 2012 -- 6:02PM, Plaguescarred wrote:

Elven Accuracy's trigger is not only the attak roll you make but that you dislike it, an event that can happen after the miss. 

Precisely.  If you're going on the "dislike" thing, then I can now dislike the attack roll I made two years ago, and trigger Elven Accuracy, by this argument.

If it takes you two years to compare the attack roll to the target defense to determine if it hit or miss, your doing something wrong. 

I see people using Elven Accuracy like this all the time. People roll, miss and decide to use Elven Accuracy to reroll.

Sep 19, 2012 -- 10:51AM, Plaguescarred wrote:

Sep 19, 2012 -- 6:12AM, Mand12 wrote:

Sep 18, 2012 -- 6:02PM, Plaguescarred wrote:

Elven Accuracy's trigger is not only the attak roll you make but that you dislike it, an event that can happen after the miss. 

Precisely.  If you're going on the "dislike" thing, then I can now dislike the attack roll I made two years ago, and trigger Elven Accuracy, by this argument.

If it takes you two years to compare the attack roll to the target defense to determine if it hit or miss, your doing something wrong. 

I see people using Elven Accuracy like this all the time. People roll, miss and decide to use Elven Accuracy to reroll.

Something wrong, yes, but something in accordance to RAW as you would like me to believe it.  That your argument leads to a situation beyond your credence is a problem with your argument, not mine.

Sep 19, 2012 -- 10:40AM, Noctaem wrote:

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.

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.

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.

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

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...

Sep 20, 2012 -- 2:11PM, WibbleNZ wrote:

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.

An Elven Accuracy's reroll is always a second roll to the triggering dice roll.

Sep 20, 2012 -- 4:06PM, Plaguescarred wrote:

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.

Sep 22, 2012 -- 10:01AM, Undrhil wrote:

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.

Sep 20, 2012 -- 2:11PM, WibbleNZ wrote:

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.

Compendium reports:

Sneaky Accuracy

Heroic Tier
Prerequisite: Elf, rogue, Sneak Attack class feature
Benefit: If you use your elven accuracy racial power to reroll an attack against an enemy granting you combat advantage and the second roll misses, you do not expend elven accuracy.

I think it's enough to say that the power text should be rewritten.

On the topic of Sneaky Accuracy, I had related question.  

Say you had an elf avenger MC rogue (with sneaky accuracy) attack his OoE target.  He attacks with Overwhelming Strike.  Assuming his OoE target is the only adjacent enemy he can roll twice due to Oath of Enmity.  Say neither of the attack rolls hits so he uses elven accuracy.  He rerolls both rolls and he misses the second roll on one reroll but hits with the other, which he selects.

Does sneaky accuracy allow him to not expend elven accuracy, since he missed with a second roll granted from elven accuracy?

The second roll didn't miss, because you didn't pick it.

Sep 25, 2012 -- 5:19PM, Alcestis wrote:

The second roll didn't miss, because you didn't pick it.

Another interpretation.  The second reroll missed but you hit the target.

Sneaky Accuracy doesn't necessarily depend on hitting the target or not.  Just depends on whether "second roll misses."

Sep 25, 2012 -- 5:26PM, Dzance wrote:

Sep 25, 2012 -- 5:19PM, Alcestis wrote:

The second roll didn't miss, because you didn't pick it.

Another interpretation.  The second reroll missed but you hit the target.

Sneaky Accuracy doesn't necessarily depend on hitting the target or not.  Just depends on whether "second roll misses."

If by "interpretation" you mean "ignoring the rules" then sure.

You didn't pick the second roll, so the second roll never got to stop 4 of the attack process to determine hit/miss/crit. It would have missed if you'd picked it, but you didn't, and it never got compared to a defense.

So, again, the second roll didn't miss, because you didn't pick it.

You ignore the roll that you don't pick its not a miss. Otherwise Oath of Emnity would cause attacks to both count as hit and miss.

Sep 25, 2012 -- 5:30PM, Alcestis wrote:

If by "interpretation" you mean "ignoring the rules" then sure.

You didn't pick the second roll, so the second roll never got to stop 4 of the attack process to determine hit/miss/crit. It would have missed if you'd picked it, but you didn't, and it never got compared to a defense.

So, again, the second roll didn't miss, because you didn't pick it.

Thumbing through the RC...

I thought Elven Accuracy, Wand of Accuracy (believe there is an FAQ to that effect) specifically allow you to use the elven accuracy action as an interrupt.  E.g. you do go to step 4 and see whether or not you hit, and "Compare the attack roll to the target's defense."  Then if you don't like the result you can use Elven Accuracy or Wand of Accuracy to reroll.


EDIT: Found the PHB FAQ...

"Can I wait until the Dungeon Master has determined if I have hit or not to use my Wand of Accuracy class feature?

Yes, you can use this ability at any point during the resolution of the power."


EDIT 2:
Oath of Enmity Effect (relevant portion):"When you make a melee attack against the target and the target is the only enemy adjacent to you, you make two attack rolls and use either result...  If an effect lets you reroll an attack roll and you rolled twice because of this power, you reroll both dice."

So Oath of enmity lets you make two attack rolls and use either result.  Elven Accuracy then lets you "reroll the attack roll. Use the second roll, even if it’s lower."  Twice.  As a free action 'interrupt' both die rolls can be compared to the defenses of the target (Step 4).  But then you still need to "use either result" (per OoE).

In the scenario I posited, one reroll from Elven Accuracy missed, and the other hit.   Based on that verbage, it appears you wouldn't expend elven accuracy due to the Sneaky Accuracy feat.

Basically when attacking your Oath of Emnity you'd roll - see if you hit or miss, roll - see if you hit or miss, then select one of the attack roll that you dislike, use Elven Accuracy and then roll - see if you hit or miss, roll - see if you hit or miss and select one of the attack roll.

But only the selected attack roll is the one that would count for the purposes of determining if you actually hit or missed the target though.

See above post.  Oath of Enmity specifically grants rerolls to both attacks rolls.

Looks like you covered that scenario.  The question is really whether the target needs to be missed or not.  

Or whether a 'missed reroll' is sufficient to trigger Sneaky Accuracy.

Wand of Accuracy changes an attack roll. OoE forces you to pick between two attack rolls and apply one. These are not the same thing.

OoE does what it says it does. You get to roll two dice and pick one. One, singular. The unpicked die does exactly nothing.

Yes it let you reroll both roll Dzance but Oath of Emnity let you make two attack rolls and use either result.  Which means you end up using only one of the two roll for the attack roll's result. The other is discarded.

Sep 25, 2012 -- 6:03PM, Alcestis wrote:

Wand of Accuracy changes an attack roll. OoE forces you to pick between two attack rolls and apply one. These are not the same thing.

Not the same, but Wand of Accuracy appears to be very similar to Elven Accuracy in terms of trigger timing. 

OoE does what it says it does. You get to roll two dice and pick one. One, singular. The unpicked die does exactly nothing.

Sep 25, 2012 -- 6:04PM, Plaguescarred wrote:

Yes it let you reroll both roll Dzance but Oath of Emnity let you make two attack rolls and use either result.  Which means you end up using only one of the two roll for the attack roll's result. The other is discarded.

It's parsing RAW (not unlike earlier in this thread).  But did you physically reroll an attack roll *twice* due to Elven accuracy (in conjunction with OoE)?  Yes.  Did a second roll miss (per on Step 4) of the RC attack sequence?  Yes.  Did another hit?  Yes.  Selecting one of the rerolls doesn't (necessarily) invalidate that you did physically reroll once (due to Elven Accuracy) and missed when you compared defenses.  You just chose the other roll that hit.  Again, parsing RAW.

And I agree with OP.  Sneaky Accuracy is poorly worded and probably should be rewritten.

And EE involves rerolling, not rolling and picking. Again, not the same thing. OoE does only what it says it does. You are inventing things for OoE to do that it does not do. That has a name.

The second roll does nothing because you did not pick it. This is not a difficult concept.

Sep 25, 2012 -- 6:21PM, Alcestis wrote:

And EE involves rerolling, not rolling and picking. Again, not the same thing. OoE does only what it says it does. You are inventing things for OoE to do that it does not do.

Agreed.  You reroll twice due to EA, and pick either of the rerolls due to OoE.

The second roll does nothing because you did not pick it. This is not a difficult concept.

But you still 'missed' on one of the rerolls when you compared defenses per step 4.  So you didn't pick that reroll.

Making Attacks (RC p 214): "4. Compare the attack roll's result to the target's defense.  The attack specifies what defense to check.  If the result is equal to the specified result or higher, the attack hits the target.  Otherwise, it misses."  It is at this point with the missed reroll, that you pick the reroll that hits.  

Or does OoE require you to pick the (re)roll before reaching Step 4?  (If that's the case than I concede you're right.)

After some introspection I think you/Plaguescarred are probably right (certainly with RAI).  I don't see anywhere in OoE that states you can choose after resolving the attack rolls (step 4)... Although I don't see that in Elven Accuracy or Wand of Accuracy verbage, either.

OoE says you roll and pick. It says nothing about picking after you compare to defenses. Roll. Pick. Rolling is step 3. The second roll doesn't hit, or miss, or crit, or anything, because it is never compared to a defense.

EE is "and dislike the result." Presumably you don't like it because you missed. Or because you hit (niche case). Though again by strict RAW if you roll a 2 and haven't yet compared to see if you hit/miss/crit (could be a low level monsters or some such for all you know) and you dislike the result right then, you have to use it or the time to trigger it will be past. Personal feelings in a trigger is idiotic.

Wand of Accuracy isn't even strictly speaking a power, but it functions as an Interrupt so you can add the bonus after you've compared. There can't be any debate about that, becaus of the FAQ. But again, adding a bonus and picking a roll are not the same thing, so the comparison is null.

You're comparing rerolling mechanics to roll twice and pick. They are not the same thing. They happen at different times. They do different things. The only reason they even interact is because OoE specifically says they do, if that line didn't exist you'd only get to reroll the roll you picked and not both. These are in every way different.

Pure RAW, Oath of Enmity states, "you make two attack rolls and use either result."  So the question is whether the result is determined in Step 4 of the attack sequence...  before you pick which (re)roll to use.  

Your readings otherwise make sense, RAI.  

And as a rule of thumb, in actual game play the less controversial interpretation is generally the best.

Sep 25, 2012 -- 6:57PM, Dzance wrote:

Pure RAW, Oath of Enmity states, "you make two attack rolls and use either result."  So the question is whether the result is determined in Step 4 of the attack sequence...  before you pick which roll to use.  

Your readings otherwise make sense, RAI.  

And as a rule of thumb, in actual game play the less controversial interpretation is generally the best.

Rolling is step 3. Use either one. You need to invent text to pick after step 4. If you have to invent text to justify an interpretation, it isn't a good interpretation. It is actually engaging in the Munchkin Fallacy.

I don't care about RAI. What I am saying is the RAW.

As a rule of thumb, this is the rules Q&A forum. The actual rules are what matter, controversy be damned. If people want to houserule in their home games, fine, but it isn't appropriate fodder for this forum.

I agree that the OoE feature is vaguely written so RAW is probably on your side.  Rather than saying "you make two attack rolls and use either result" (compare to Elven Accuracy trigger which says, "you make an attack roll and dislike the result"), it should say "use either roll," to be crystal clear.  The "result" of an attack roll is a Hit or Miss (per Step 4 (see Elven Accuracy), followed by Steps 5 and 6).  But since it isn't clear where the delineation would otherwise be I'll assume that "result" means "die roll" and not the "result" from the die roll (as is the case with the Elven Accuracy trigger, which again has similar wording to Oath of Enmity).  Two interpretations and Occam's Razor says you're right, but Wand of Accuracy FAQ suggests otherwise.

EDIT: Btw, where in the attack sequence are you able to use Elven Accuracy as an interrupt?  After step 4? After step 5? After step 6?  Wand of Accuracy FAQ states it can be used "at any point during the resolution of the power," so I'm guessing Elven Accuracy would be the same.

EDIT 2: Strict RAW, What's the difference between the definition of "result" from the EA trigger and "result" from OoE?  Unless Rules Update/Errata changes the verbage of OoE they both seem to indicate the exact same thing...  If EA lets you interrupt the "result" at any point in the attack sequence (like Wand of Accuracy) then OoE would appear to let you resolve both attacks to the exact same point (whether Step 4, 5, or 6) and then selecting one of the end results.  If you redefine "result" in OoE to mean "die roll" shouldn't you also redefine "result" in EA to mean "die roll"?  Compare the above verbage.

If Elven Accuracy doesn't operate like Wand of Accuracy and "result" only means "die roll" (as you're implying "result" does in the case of Oath of Enmity), then Elven Accuracy is a far weaker racial power then I originally envisioned; hardly worth it for alpha strikers and high initiative optimizers.  This interpretation of "result" also nerfs Deva's Memory of a Thousand Lifetimes power as well -- "Trigger: You make an attack roll, a saving throw, or an ability check and dislike the result".


Again compare:
Oath of Enmity: "you make two attack rolls and use either result"
Elven Accuracy: "you make an  attack roll  and dislike the result"
Deva Memory..: "You make an  attack roll..and dislike the result"

Are you saying "result" in these three powers means different things?

Seems to me that result either means "die roll."  Or "resolution of the attack roll" (like the Wand of Accuracy trigger).  You suggested the latter interpretation for Elven Accuracy.

I'm not sure how most DM's play with EA, but 'What's good for the goose is good for the gander'.

What is everyone's experience playing with Elven Accuracy (or Memory of a Thousand Lifetimes)?  Does your DM allow you to reroll (or just add a die roll with MoaTL) after determining whether you hit or miss?

Sep 26, 2012 -- 5:18AM, Dzance wrote:

I'm not sure how most DM's play with EA

FWIW All DMs ive seen or played with has let the attack determine if it hit or miss before using Elven Accuracy. I never seen one objecting this.

And a few of the Virtual Tables on the market have built-in automations that automatically tell if an attack roll hit or miss a target.

I must say it is also usually the case for Immediate Interrupts triggering off of an attack roll.

Thanks for responding.  That's how I thought most DM's treat EA...

I wasn't trying to be overly argumentative; in fact have a great deal of respect for you, Alcestis and others who frequent these Q&A forums.

It seems to me that RC made a sweeping change when it ruled that only free actions that need to operate as an interrupt are treated as an interrupt (see Wildblood Speed as an example of a real nerf).

Had the PHB FAQ been written after RC, I'm not sure wand of accuracy would have been allowed to interrupt during/after step 4.  Or EA.  Or MoaTL for that matter.  (IMO none of them "need" to interrupt after Step 3 to "function").  But doing so certainly makes it funner for players with those powers/features.

I think my example with OoE follows similar logic of how it's treated, which is consistent with RAW...

The main thing I can think of that differentiates OoE from the reroll abilities is that it appears to have two pieces -- (1) you roll twice in Step 3, and (2) you select which "result" you want.  The rerolls otoh (at least Wand of Accuracy) have been ruled not to have to interrupt during step 3, despite very similar verbage to OoE.

It'd be nice to get a third or fourth RAW opinion...  do you/Alcestis have any further thoughts?

I often find it is the Rule Q&A that is extremely picky on minutea and that the majority of tables out there don't necessarly run with such exactitude (referring especially about the Making Attack Process, the broken Opportunity Attack power and Threatening Reach etc..) even if some stuff may be RAW.

If i can burrow a term from CharOp, if TheoryOp is the realm of theory where it may differ in practice, there is a sorta TheoryRule sometimes as well. 

Sep 25, 2012 -- 6:37PM, Dzance wrote:

Sep 25, 2012 -- 6:21PM, Alcestis wrote:

And EE involves rerolling, not rolling and picking. Again, not the same thing. OoE does only what it says it does. You are inventing things for OoE to do that it does not do.

Agreed.  You reroll twice due to EA, and pick either of the rerolls due to OoE.

The second roll does nothing because you did not pick it. This is not a difficult concept.

But you still 'missed' on one of the rerolls when you compared defenses per step 4.  So you didn't pick that reroll.

Making Attacks (RC p 214): "4. Compare the attack roll's result to the target's defense.  The attack specifies what defense to check.  If the result is equal to the specified result or higher, the attack hits the target.  Otherwise, it misses."  It is at this point with the missed reroll, that you pick the reroll that hits. 

Or does OoE require you to pick the (re)roll before reaching Step 4?  (If that's the case than I concede you're right.)

OoE tells you to roll 2d20, and pick 1.  Presumably, you are going to pick the higher d20 result.  Once you have chosen which d20 you want to use, then you compare it to your target's defenses.

After some introspection I think you/Plaguescarred are probably right (certainly with RAI).  I don't see anywhere in OoE that states you can choose after resolving the attack rolls (step 4)... Although I don't see that in Elven Accuracy or Wand of Accuracy verbage, either.

The difference is that OoE tells you specifically, "when you make an attack roll, roll twice and use either"..  instead of rolling 1d20, you roll 2d20, and you pick one.  You aren't rolling one, and then rerolling it.  

Technically speaking, with EA you roll the d20, dislike what the d20 shows, and decide to use EA to reroll the die.  Like Alcestis says, if you wait to determine if it's a hit or miss, then you've technically missed your trigger.  But most people have houseruled this (or simply overlooked the trigger phase) to allow it's use after it is known whether the attack hits or misses.  Or they play on a medium which doesn't separate the two steps, see below.

Sep 25, 2012 -- 6:54PM, Alcestis wrote:

Wand of Accuracy isn't even strictly speaking a power, but it functions as an Interrupt so you can add the bonus after you've compared. There can't be any debate about that, becaus of the FAQ. But again, adding a bonus and picking a roll are not the same thing, so the comparison is null.

WoA was made into a Power with Essentials I guess.  If you look at the Wizard Class in the Compendium, it now says "Wand of Accuracy: Once per encounter, you can use your Wand of Accuracy power." and it lists WoA as a power.  Since the Devs have answered that you can use this after you know if you hit or not, then you can.  But as Written, you should be deciding to use this after you roll your attack, not after you compare defenses.  Unlike the Human Racial Heroic Effort, that specifies "Trigger: You miss with an attack or fail a saving throw."

Obviously, They have decided that WoA works in the same manner as HE, though they never deemed it important enough to re-write the trigger of WoA.  

As for how it all works out.  When playing on the VT, certain things are overlooked, because with automation, the rolling process automatically includes the comparing process.  Unless you turn off the Automation, there is no way to roll an attack and not know if it hit's or misses.. so a little leeway is granted by basis of the medium in which one plays the game.

Sep 27, 2012 -- 7:10AM, Agonar wrote:

 
WoA was made into a Power with Essentials I guess.  If you look at the Wizard Class in the Compendium, it now says "Wand of Accuracy: Once per encounter, you can use your Wand of Accuracy power." and it lists WoA as a power.

Nah it wasn't updated with Essential since Mages in Heroes of the Fallen Land don't gave Arcane Implement Mastery and so don't have access to Wand of Accuracy. They have Apprentice Mage instead. 

It look like its another instance where the DDi Compendium and Character Builder has made a feature into a power format without any RAW support, much like Battle Awareness or Combat Challenge.