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.
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.
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 If the HotFL one is of this form, then the PHB one is out of date.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.
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
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.
"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
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
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?
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.
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.
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...
An Elven Accuracy's reroll is always a second roll to the triggering dice roll.
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.
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.
Yes, you can use this ability at any point during the resolution of the power."
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.
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.
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.
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".
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?
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.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.