Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Centauri Nov 29, 2009 9:31:58	I believe my DM is impacting the effectiveness of our paladin and therefore of our entire party. I argued this with him for a few moments in game, then ceded to his ruling, but I plan to talk to him about it later and I want to have my position laid out. I understand there's some question about how Divine Challenge works. The two schools of thought seem to be: 1) the radiant damage can occur once per round, at most, and "refreshes" at some point after it goes off; and 2) the radiant damage occurs only once (though the target remains marked) and the paladin must re-challenge the target on a subsequent turn with another minor action, in order for the damage to be reset. In any case, my assumption is that there's some way for the paladin to impose the threat of radiant damage at least once a turn, assuming that the paladin can take actions, and engages the target. This puts the paladin in line with the other defenders, each of whom can effect the extra benefits of their marks at least (and generally at most) once per round, if the enemy makes certain choices. My DM doesn't feel this way. He feels that the damage from the mark fires off once per mark (which is fine by me) but that the mark can't simply be reapplied to refresh the damage (which isn't fine by me). First of all he doesn't think the paladin can mark someone it has already marked. I've pointed out that fighters do that, and he has responded that the paladin's mark is not the fighter's mark. I've also pointed out that this makes the paladin weaker, but I guess he doesn't see that. He seems to think that getting the damage every round is overly powerful, even though he gets to decide whether the target takes the damage. Until I manage to convince him, the paladin may be able to get around this simply by rechallenging a different target after the radiant damage has gone off. Our DM is very wary of the paladin's 7 points of radiant damage, and in fact only provoked it once in our last game, so this work around will generally be adequate. However, in a tougher fight against one or a few creatures, the paladin's marks may lack the extra incentive of that 7 radiant damage to keep her allies safe, especially since the DM has it in mind to bring down our warlord quickly to shut down his healing. How do I convince our DM that either the damage can go off every round, or the damage can be reset? Please note: appealing to the way the other marks work probably won't convince him. He's probably going to need the exact wording. Also, please bear in mind that this guy feels very put upon, and that his monsters don't seem to be able to challenge us - despite the fact that he knocks out the rogue in every fight. Wish me luck.
#2 salla Nov 29, 2009 10:21:49	Well, firstly, the Paladin can most certainly Challenge a target who is already Challenged.  A new mark simply overrides a new mark.  He could Challenge the same target 3 times a round if he felt like it. Secondly, by strict RAW reading, the DM is right; the radiant damage goes off once, then he'd need to re-challenge.  Most people, however, realize that the power is supposed to trigger once per round, so long as the Paladin continues to engage the target.
#3 Centauri Nov 29, 2009 10:30:17	Well, firstly, the Paladin can most certainly Challenge a target who is already Challenged.  A new mark simply overrides a new mark.  He could Challenge the same target 3 times a round if he felt like it. Well, Divine Challenge states that it can only be used oncer per turn, but I see your point. The trick may be convincing my DM of it. Secondly, by strict RAW reading, the DM is right; the radiant damage goes off once, then he'd need to re-challenge.  Most people, however, realize that the power is supposed to trigger once per round, so long as the Paladin continues to engage the target. No, we all agree at our table that the damage goes off once per mark. I don't feel that spending an occassional minor action to set up some automatic damage is unreasonable. However, our DM doesn't believe that the mark can be reapplied to a target that is already marked, which is where he and I disagree.
#4 kuonji Nov 29, 2009 10:47:44	Well, firstly, the Paladin can most certainly Challenge a target who is already Challenged. A new mark simply overrides a new mark. He could Challenge the same target 3 times a round if he felt like it. Secondly, by strict RAW reading, the DM is right; the radiant damage goes off once, then he'd need to re-challenge. Most people, however, realize that the power is supposed to trigger once per round, so long as the Paladin continues to engage the target. The way the power reads, you can either engage the current target of DC or challenge a different target. You can also fail to engage, so I suppose you have three options. You also can only use it once per round. This isn't the first time this issue has come up (see this thread: link) and the general agreement seems to be that the damage should be able to be applied once per round rather than once period. It seems like a hot topic that could use some eratta, but until that happens it's up to your DM to make the call on how it works. It strikes me somewhat that your DM may be developing a DM vs. Player mentality. Your wording implies that he may be having some trouble coming up with appropriate challenges for your party, and that this limiting of DC is a way for him to make things a little easier for himself. Perhaps you should have a chat with your DM about this and point out that you aren't trying to squeeze out some rule breaking advantage nor are you trying to make his job harder then it already is and that you don't want issues like this to turn the game into a power contest of him vs. you/the other players. In the end, if he won't budge, you will probably have to live with the decision.  If it's too much of a blow to your paladin concept, you might ask to reroll a different class.
#5 s-marrow Nov 29, 2009 10:59:02	Judging by what's been said by you and your DM, I agree with kuoji's assesment. The day when 7 radiant damage is enough to deter me from attacking a squishy... ...anyway, I feel that your best bet would be to try and convince him that the line "A new mark supersedes a mark that was already in place" is meant to allow for the challenge to be replaced on the same target. If he is the type who adheres strictly to RAW, there really is no arguing with it. If he is going to ignore RAW and persist with his own interpretation, I fear your only chance is to convince him that Divine Challenge is underpowered. I'd need to know your party's level before I could do any numbers on how much damage potential an extra 7 points per round is, but it's pretty terrible as it isn't even an interrupt. If nothing works, I'd at least try to convince your DM to let your Paladin retrain an at-will to "Ardent Strike" from Divine Power so you can get the extra mark from divine sanction. This still doesn't solve the problem if your DM isn't being bold enough to risk the defender's wrath. You're going to have to work around that no matter what.
#6 Centauri Nov 29, 2009 11:25:46	It strikes me somewhat that your DM may be developing a DM vs. Player mentality. Your wording implies that he may be having some trouble coming up with appropriate challenges for your party, and that this limiting of DC is a way for him to make things a little easier for himself. Perhaps you should have a chat with your DM about this and point out that you aren't trying to squeeze out some rule breaking advantage nor are you trying to make his job harder then it already is and that you don't want issues like this to turn the game into a power contest of him vs. you/the other players. In the end, if he won't budge, you will probably have to live with the decision.  If it's too much of a blow to your paladin concept, you might ask to reroll a different class. Well, it's not my class, it's that of another player. The other player isn't really at a level to know whether or not the character is being run incorrectly, so I'm trying to help the player and the group out. The other thread you linked to reminded me of the "Special" wording of Divine Challenge which states that "You can’t place a divine challenge on a creature that is already affected by your or another character’s divine challenge." In that case, I'll have to take the position that the challenge can't be reapplied, but that the damage is "recharged" everytime the paladin "engages," (i.e. either attacks or ends its turn next to the target) If he is going to ignore RAW and persist with his own interpretation, I fear your only chance is to convince him that Divine Challenge is underpowered. I'd need to know your party's level before I could do any numbers on how much damage potential an extra 7 points per round is, but it's pretty terrible as it isn't even an interrupt. We just turned 5th level, so the paladin's DC damage is what it has ever been for this character. I think it will go up to 8 damage if the character ever sees 8th level. And far from being terrible, I think it's pretty good, especially because it's not an immediate interrupt. If the paladin had some other immediate action to use, it could do so and still be able to deal the damage. Also, this means that the damage can occur on the Paladin's turn. Plus, it's automatic damage. That's big. This still doesn't solve the problem if your DM isn't being bold enough to risk the defender's wrath. You're going to have to work around that no matter what. Oh, I don't care if the mark never goes off. I feel that a defender is doing its job whether it's taking the attacks or whether it's doing damage (or other good things beyond the -2) through it's mark. But I think that it's important for the damage to be there as a threat, so the enemy doesn't, say, just take an opportunity attack for the heck of it, even with the -2. There has to be a consequence. Thanks for the feedback. Hopefully this will see some errata soon. If nothing else, in a few levels I'll be the DM and can rule it how I want.
#7 kouk Nov 29, 2009 14:01:47	RAW is not always Right. Otherwise there would never be a need for errata for anything. And before mentioning that there's been no errata for the Paladin's challenge since release, they just now released some fixes for the Hospitaler and other PHB1 stuff this month, so time isn't really a good determinant. The Paladin's damage absolutely has to recharge each round. Seeing as this is a game where balance and fun is important, the other classes are very relevant. Sneak Attack, Hunter's Quarry, Warlock's Curse, Combat Challenge, Oath of Enmity, Nature's Wrath, Swordmage's Aegis all are auto-refreshing or easily applied in subsequent rounds. More specifically looking at the other Defenders: Combat Challenge can mark everybody the Fighter swings at, and once per round he can make an actual attack when his Combat Challenge is violated. Is that 7 radiant damage really so bad compared to say, a melee basic with a bastard sword's 1d10+4? On average, the Divine Challenge damage is less. Even using a Longsword for the fighter is still more damage. What's more, the fighter's weapon keeps getting better over time (enhancement bonuses), increasing the damage further. It takes no action to refresh the Combat Challenge, because it's just part of any attack. Nature's Wrath does expire every round much like a Fighter's, but it's a Free action every round. A Warden is capable of about the same damage of a Fighter, so their Warden's Fury does more damage than the Divine Challenge also, but forces Combat Advantage as well. Swordmage Aegis: Aegis of Assault is also an attack, and also more damage. If the DM thinks 7 damage potentially is frustrating, what about Aegis of Shielding reducing damage by 9+? Even Aegis of Ensnarement auto refreshes. <>If you absolutely must change something, why not simply make the Paladin's Divine Challenge power an Immediate Interrupt or Reaction?<> If your DM can't challenge you, either your group is optimized and using some overpowered combinations, or he's extremely new and doesn't understand the system well. Even-level fights are not really supposed to "challenge" you, though it sounds that way from the DMG. You are supposed to roll through them with minimal surge and resource use. You go above level for fights to get harder. +1 or +2 is actually something that makes you think. +3 is tough and you feel in danger. +4 has to be handled correctly or someone will die. But of course, the PCs are supposed to win after all.
#8 darkspartan Nov 29, 2009 15:32:03	You go above level for fights to get harder. +1 or +2 is actually something that makes you think. +3 is tough and you feel in danger. +4 has to be handled correctly or someone will die. But of course, the PCs are supposed to win after all. This statement tends to really get to me. How can you challenge someone if they're supposed to win? On the other hand, I used DC like CC, in that it was an immediate interrupt. If the critter went south from radiant damage, then the last target just didn't get hit. Sounds to me like your DM needs to put it back the way it was, and give the Paladin a special BB for herself so he can has monster go beat up the Warlord. (yes, that last bit sounds somewhat childish, and I did it by intent.) The power of (insert name of fave Deity here) smites the creature for 'x' damage. Gawds being what they are, they don't miss. -Sarena
#9 Chimerasame Nov 29, 2009 15:45:41	This statement tends to really get to me. How can you challenge someone if they're supposed to win? I'm gonna define non-renewable resources (NRRs) as anything that you don't get back during a short rest. Healing surges, daily powers, daily magic item uses, action points, and consumables are all non-renewable for the purposes of evaluating a single encounter. Hit points sometimes are, depending on what abilities the party has. Not a challenge -- players don't have to use any NRRs. They can get through it all unscathed and only have to use encounter powers and at-wills. The encounter doesn't diminish the party's ability to fight the rest of the encounters of the day in the slightest. (This doesn't actually happen too often since someone almost always takes a little bit of damage, and--unless you can get surgeless healing from a Pacifist Cleric or something--that's an NRR to heal.) Players could do these combats all day long and not break a sweat. Barely a challenge -- players have to use a couple NRRs; perhaps one person uses an action point, one utility or magic item daily, and a few healing surges across the party, and/or a few people just decide to stay at non-full-HP, something like that. Players could do several encounters like this in a row, but eventually would run out of NRRs and then would find themselves wanting for an extended rest. Moderate challenge -- a fair number of NRRs get used. Possibly everyone pops an action point and at least one daily power, and a good chunk of the party's healing surges get used. A party can only take two or three of these in a day, and that's if they don't have a string of bad luck. Significant challenge -- requires the expenditure of almost all NRRs in the day. This would be a typical level+4 encounter. A party would be hard-pressed to manage to get through anything else in a day where they pull out of one of these. These are somewhat dangerous as a DM because if the players do have bad luck, like, say, someone gets stunned (save ends) and fails to save for eight turns in a row, it can turn it into an overwhelming challenge. Hmm, let me define that: Overwhelming challenge -- party can't win even by expending all their NRRs. TPK, or, a couple people die and the rest run away. Challenge isn't about whether the party is "supposed to lose." The party is pretty much always supposed to win combat encounters, unless you've got a very specific plot idea for a non-lethal 'loss.' It's mostly about exacting these NRRs from the party. Any encounter where the party is "supposed to die" is kind of contrary to fun, unless all your players really like dying. Alternately, you could make the "lose" condition something other than death. If the party's objective is to save an NPC or to prevent an NPC from escaping or something, then it's possible for them to lose without dying, which would be a setback, but wouldn't be nearly as un-fun as a TPK. Edit: Wow, that was really off-topic! I think I forgot I was on the player board and not the DM board.
#10 darkspartan Nov 29, 2009 16:17:12	Challenge isn't about whether the party is "supposed to lose." The party is pretty much always supposed to win combat encounters, unless you've got a very specific plot idea for a non-lethal 'loss.' It's mostly about exacting these NRRs from the party. Any encounter where the party is "supposed to die" is kind of contrary to fun, unless all your players really like dying. Alternately, you could make the "lose" condition something other than death. If the party's objective is to save an NPC or to prevent an NPC from escaping or something, then it's possible for them to lose without dying, which would be a setback, but wouldn't be nearly as un-fun as a TPK. Edit: Wow, that was really off-topic! I think I forgot I was on the player board and not the DM board. True, but I get that way sometimes too. Now, in my mind, the purpose of a challenge is to provide a decision-point, and what mode the game continues in is dependant on their success or failure in the challenge, or what they did when they got there. My players aren't supposed to win or lose. They're expected to deal with the challenge as best they're able. Treasure/XP/the ability to do as they please are the consequences of winning. Fighting where they should run will likely kill characters, and it shouldn't take long for bright players to realize they're overmatched. If they die there, that's on them. The BBEG gets to animate corpses, eat those left behind, whatever. The consequences of losing may be having to escape from confinement, work to get most of their gear back or somesuch. I come prepared for win/lose/run. Telling people that the PCs are supposed to win just gives them a sense of entitlement, and a bad attitude when their egos start writing Promissary Notes their corpses can't cash. Losing should *always* be a possibility. So far as your rating system for NRRs, I like it. I may have to start using it as part of the balancing equation. The world doesn't work in Binary, and there is more than two possible outcomes to every situation. Don't stuff words in my mouth because I disagree with a statement. My disagreement with something doesn't mean I agree with the exact opposite. Just because the statement that the PCs are supposed to win grates on my nerves doesn't mean I think they should lose constantly either. -Sarena
#11 calronmoonflower Nov 29, 2009 16:53:14	I really think the damage renews, which would fix the problem. the first time [...] before the start of your next turn. Each time the paladin's turn comes up a new first time before the start of your next turn is possible as the old time frame has lapsed and another has stared. If anyone has a link to the playtest where the Divine Challenge dropped a dragon that lead to the third paragraph of the challenge, it should show how it was intended to be used. Of course the text of the power used in that playtest will need to be included as well. Other than this the only possible solutions that works by RAW to constantly get the damage is to stitch targets each turn and/or to use Divine Sanction powers.
#12 galkasaur Nov 29, 2009 19:14:13	I still maintain that the actual RAW of Divine Challenge is plenty up for debate because maintaining that the damage only fires off once per mark, independent of reapplying it with a minor challenge, completely negates a lot of the text of the power and forces you to read some of the text out of the context of the rest of the text. If you couple that RAW interpretation with RAI lending itself far more to the 'damage refreshes with engagement' side of things then that, at least from my perspective, tips the scale to reading it from the far more logical side. But yeah, the power is horribly written and should be errata'd so there's no longer any need for these debates. Regardless, I'd say your DM is really screwing you and I don't believe he is following either interpretation of RAW which severely undermines Paladin's mark, even more so than simply following the school of thought which would require you to spend a minor action every round to refresh the ability to deal damage with the mark.
#13 jacxis Nov 30, 2009 4:19:36	If you absolutely must change something, why not simply make the Paladin's Divine Challenge power an Immediate Interrupt or Reaction? I would disagree with making Divine Challenge an Immediate Interrupt or Reaction because it prevents you from using your Immediate Interrupts. Paladins do have a decent number of powers that are Immedtate Actions that protect your allies, like Martyr's Blessing. In addition, the paladin is the only defender that must engage its target to sustain its mark. Unless you want to use Ardent Strike every turn, you are more or less forced to use Divine Challenge. If your DM insists on not recharging Divine Challenge's damage, and your friend still wishes to play as a paladin, your friend might want to consider alternating between Divine Sanction (using Ardent Strike) and Divine Challenge.
#14 bageljay Nov 30, 2009 13:57:28	"On your turn, you must engage the target you challenged or challenge a different target. To engage the target, you must either attack it or end your turn adjacent to it. If none of these events occur by the end of your turn, the marked condition ends and you can’t use divine challenge on your next turn." it specifically says "engage the target.. or challege a different target". so RAW I interpret that as you cannot reapply the challenge to the same target. If you want the radiant damage penalty to be reapplied you must engage the target (saving your minor action). RAI I don't know, I'd treat it where you can reapply to the same target if I was dm. I can see where that quoted statement allows you to not have to use your minor action every turn. "While a target is marked, it takes a –2 penalty to attack rolls for any attack that doesn't include you as a target. Also, it takes radiant damage equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier the first time it makes an attack that doesn’t include you as a target before the start of your next turn." the radiant damage is part of "while a target is marked", so if you persist your mark by engaging, you persist the radiant damage. it ends "before the start of your next turn" and refreshes "on your turn" i suppose if a monster could attack on your turn before you engage (via immediate) then this would not trigger the radiant damage, but when could that happen?
#15 calronmoonflower Dec 01, 2009 2:27:31	You can’t place a divine challenge on a creature that is already affected by your or another character’s divine challenge. You do not get to reapply the challenge.
#16 lysiander Dec 01, 2009 3:10:11	lets quote this in full so we are all on the same page. I'll also emphasize some: Effect: You mark the target. The target remains marked until you use this power against another target, or if you fail to engage the target (see below). A creature can be subject to only one mark at a time. A new mark supersedes a mark that was already in place. While a target is marked, it takes a –2 penalty to attack rolls for any attack that doesn’t include you as a target. Also, it takes radiant damage equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier the first time it makes an attack that doesn’t include you as a target before the start of your next turn. The damage increases to 6 + your Charisma modifier at 11th level, and to 9 + your Charisma modifier at 21st level. On your turn, you must engage the target you challenged or challenge a different target. To engage the target, you must either attack it or end your turn adjacent to it. If none of these events occur by the end of your turn, the marked condition ends and you can’t use divine challenge on your next turn. You can use divine challenge once per turn. Personally, I can't understand why people seem to have trouble reading this. I'll do this point by point: 1. You cannot re-challenge a target, however, a target remains marked until the paladin fails to engage it before the end of his turn, or when he uses it to challenge someone else. (First bolded passage, note that unlike other powers there is no duration given, not even end of your next turn, except the engage condition.) 2. The damage occurs once per round, if the monster attacks someone else then the paladin. The wording is key here. First of all, the damage is tied to the marked condition by the word 'also'. Secondly, the important parts are (paraphrase) "takes damage ... the first time ... before the start of your [Paladins] next turn. What this means is the following. The mark will cause damage when triggered once. When its the paladins next turn, he decides wether to engage the current subject of his DC or to challenge a different target. If the engages his target, the condition resets because after the end of the paladins turn, it is before the start of your next turn again. Normally this wouldn't fly, but it does because the damage is tied directly to the marked condition, which remains firmly in place when the target remains enganged. 3. Finally, the last bolded passage stipulates the fallout condition of what happens when the player fails to engange. 4. The final sentence, you can use DC once per round, does not refer to the damage, it refers to the ability, which means you can spend one and only one minor action per turn for your DC. You cannot substitute other actions to challenge multiple targets. That is why divine sanction was introduces and why it's duration is the normal 'end of next turn' without the engage clause. This huge linguistic mess above, is nothing more than a fancy way of saying, Substain: Engange. This is how I run it as a DM. The paladin cannot challenge the same target, but as long as he engages a DC target, the damage occurs once per round and recharges on his turn. This is the only logical way too, because otherwise Paladins would have an incentive to challenge a different target every round instead of sticking to the biggest threat. He would also be utterly screwed by solos. Finally to my fellow DMs: But of course, the PCs are supposed to win after all. No, nada, njet, never. The players are supposed to be able to win. If they play their cards right, they should get through. But they are not supposed to win irregardless of how they play. Big big difference.
#17 cheeze21084 Dec 09, 2009 0:02:35	I loved that last post until i read this "irregardless "
#18 LFK Dec 09, 2009 0:33:30	I really think the damage renews, which would fix the problem. the first time [...] before the start of your next turn. Each time the paladin's turn comes up a new first time before the start of your next turn is possible as the old time frame has lapsed and another has stared. If anyone has a link to the playtest where the Divine Challenge dropped a dragon that lead to the third paragraph of the challenge, it should show how it was intended to be used. Of course the text of the power used in that playtest will need to be included as well. Other than this the only possible solutions that works by RAW to constantly get the damage is to stitch targets each turn and/or to use Divine Sanction powers. From DDXP pre gen character Divine Challenge Paladin Feature You boldly confront a nearby enemy, searing it with divine light if it ignores your challenge. At-Will Divine Radiant Minor Action Close burst 5 Effect: you mark the target. The target remains marked until you use this power against another target. If you mark other creatures using other powers, the target is still marked. A creature can be subject to only one mark at a time. A new mark supersedes a mark that was already in place. If the target makes an attack that doesn't include you as a target, it takes a -2 penalty to attack rolls and takes 8 radiant damage. The target takes this damage only once per turn.