Disruptive Strike Question

[JesperKT]

When using Disruptive Strike (Ranger Attack 3) to disrupt an area or close attack, does the penalty apply to only one attack roll or to all attack rolls of the attack.

The texts states "... takes a penalty to its attack roll for the triggered attack...", which could mean either thing.

The use of "attack roll" (singular) suggest the penalty only applies to a single attack roll, but the text also assumes that the attack only has a single attack roll, which suggest the author didn't take area/close attack into consideration.

Any thoughts?

 

[Dan'L]

Since the power triggers off of an attack to a single target, there should only be a single attack roll to receive the penalty. Remember that each target within an area/close attack gets a separate attack roll. If they wanted it to apply to all targets of such an attack, I would think it would be worded "Trigger: a creature makes an attack that includes you or an ally"

-Dan'L

 

[Trebor62]

I agree with Dan'l. It makes no mention of burst or close or blast attacks, and the trigger is "you or an ally is attacked". I think the penalty is to the one triggering attack and others attacks would be uneffected, unless of course Disrupstive Strike should kill the attacker. Then there would be no other attacks.

 

[JesperKT]

I agree with Dan'l. It makes no mention of burst or close or blast attacks, and the trigger is "you or an ally is attacked". I think the penalty is to the one triggering attack and others attacks would be uneffected, unless of course Disrupstive Strike should kill the attacker. Then there would be no other attacks.

Even though you make multiple attack rolls, I assume an area attack that hits multiple creatures is still only ONE attack?

So if the penalty is (and i quote) "to the one triggered attack", it would apply to all attack rolls of this attack, right?

If the penalty instead is to one attack roll of the triggered attack, it would apply to only a single roll.

 

[the Jester]

I've ruled that it only applies to the single triggering attack roll. Even so, it's a bad-ass power- it needs no enhancement, especially in the hands of a clever multiclassed fighter using it when someone attacks an ally ("Hey, you're marked on top of the penalty that disruptive strike gives! That's another -2!")

 

[Dan'L]

Well, as you yourself noted:

The use of "attack roll" (singular) suggest the penalty only applies to a single attack roll...

Which correctly points out that there is only one attack roll to penalize

However, to address your next:

...but the text also assumes that the attack only has a single attack roll, which suggest the author didn't take area/close attack into consideration.

This is where I pointed out that the text does not assume a single attack roll, so much as a single attack *target* that triggers & concerns Disruptive Strike. Therefore, it would only apply the penalty to the attack roll vs. that single target.

If you can convince your DM to rule it otherwise, that it applies to all attack rolls of the triggering attack, then more power to you; it could probably be defended through the fluff of the power fairly easily. But through the mechanics of the power, as written it seems to apply only to the one attack roll.

-Dan'L

 

[JesperKT]

If you can convince your DM to rule it otherwise, that it applies to all attack rolls of the triggering attack, then more power to you; it could probably be defended through the fluff of the power fairly easily. But through the mechanics of the power, as written it seems to apply only to the one attack roll.-Dan'L

Actually I'm asking the question as a DM. I didn't want to cheat the player by nerfing the power, but it seems like you guyes agree that it only applies to a single attack roll.

I'm playing a ranger in another group, but he hasn't Disruptive Strike atm. and based on this information, he will just stick to Thundertusk Boar Strike: Disruptive strike does more damage (when paired with a twin strike), but my ranger needs flexibility instead of only raw damage, and i value the push back effects of TBS higher than the 1 in 8 change of thwarting a single attack that Disruptive Strike offers. The odds are just too bad.

 

[Iron Sky]

Based on 13 levels of experience, I would say Disruptive Strike is the most useful Ranger power outside of Twin-Strike.

Aside from an odd couple sessions where practically every time I used it, the monster rolled a crit anyway, it's been awesome.

It's especially useful on elites/solos when they are about to drop a big encounter or recharge power, especially when combined with the Fighter MC, as mentioned. The extra damage is a nice side-effect(and occasionally has killed the monster before it gets its attack off), but the -4+ to the attack can make a big difference.

Now at Paragon, elites and solos are locked down (dazed/stunned/weakened/etc) long enough that they usually only get one or two attacks off period before we destroy them. Disruptive Strike makes one of those few attacks far more likely to miss.

 

[JesperKT]

As I understand the trigger, you have to announce the usage of the power before you know the result of the attack roll (see the When to declare immediate actions? thread).

For a ranger with a +2 wis modifier (-5 penalty), this means, that there is a 5 in 20 (or 1 in 4) chance that your Disruptive Strike will have any effect on the the attack.

Assuming the ranger hits with half his attacks, we are down to a 1 in 8 chance of the Disruptive Strike affecting the triggered attack. Thats very bad odds in my book.

When only one attack roll is affected, this becomes a rather useless gesture.

 

[the Jester]

I'm just going from the experience of having a couple pcs imc with it, but I have to say, Disruptive Strike is awesome.