Swallowing (and defenders)

[Epinephrine]

I know that the swallowed rules are a little strange, they seem to vary from creature to creature. Some say that occupy the swallower's square, some say you are removed from the board. Others don't make any reference to position.

Can a swallowed defender mark the swallower?
Should one allow a swallowed defender to mark the swallower?
Do swallowers trigger opportunity actions from their swallowed foes (for example, can a swallowed fighter make an opportunity attack against a swalloer that makes a ranged attack?)
If you allow marking, can a swallowed creature actually punish the swallower for breaking his mark if he doesn't have line of sight/effect to the subject of the attack (for example, the knight's ability to punish triggers based on the enemy attacking an ally; you don't have line of sight or effect to the ally).

If a swallower is teleported, does it free the swallowed creature? If you push the swallower (which normally would end a grab if you move beyond the reach) does it free a swallowed character, and how?
What powers can affect a swallower?

For a weird example, a Young Adult Behir can Devour with reach 3. The swallowed creature is grabbed and restrained (escape ends both) and has line of sight and line of effect only to the Behir, and no creature has line of sight or effect to it.

The power doesn't remove the PC from play, nor does it force movement or place the PC anywhere, so presumably you occupy the same square (by RAW), and can't actually reach the behir to attack it with melee weapons if you are at range 3. Despite logically being 'inside' the behir, you can't count it as adjacent, nor can you hit it with a close burst 1 or 2. Oddly, you can't even target yourself with a healing power, as no creature has line of effect or line of sight to you (one assumes this includes oneself). By the same token, the behir's 's Devouring Damage probably can't actually damage the swallowed character, as the behir doesn't have line of effect to you either. The behir can move around normally while it has the swallowed creature grabbed this way (I assume that this doesn't end the grab, as it would be a case of the specific overriding the general), but it doesn't say that the PC moves - so the behir could in theory get 400 squares away, well out of range of any effects of the swallowed creature?

I did a search for "swallowed" and didn't find much on the forum; what house rules would you apply to swallowing to make it work consistently? Would you advocate a "swallowed" condition that has a consistent set of effects, and what would those be?

[Kurald Galain]

Can a swallowed defender mark the swallower?
Certainly. The rules on swallowing do not state that they prohibit marking, and therefore they don't.


Do swallowers trigger opportunity actions from their swallowed foes
Yes, assuming the swallowed creature is in an adjacent square, or the power used to swallow explicitly says so.


If you allow marking, can a swallowed creature actually punish the swallower for breaking his mark if he doesn't have line of sight/effect to the subject of the attack
That depends on how his mark ability works. Some mark retaliation abilites require line of sight, others don't.


If a swallower is teleported, does it free the swallowed creature?
No, unless the power used to swallow explicitly says so.


What powers can affect a swallower?
All of them.


For a weird example, a Young Adult Behir can Devour with reach 3. The swallowed creature is grabbed and restrained (escape ends both) and has line of sight and line of effect only to the Behir, and no creature has line of sight or effect to it.
Yeah, that's pretty weird. In that case, you would remain in the square you were in, and if that's still adjacent to the Behir, you can OA it. You are correct that you (technically) no longer have line of effect to yourself, and neither does the Behir. But that's sloppy writing, and I would assume any decent DM to rule it differently.

The bottom line is that swallowing works differently depending on what creature swallows you.

[artstsym]

I usually rule that a swallowed creature is restrained, has line of sight and effect only to itself and the swallower (likewise, nobody else except the swallower has line of sight or effect to the swallowed creature), is pulled into the nearest square the creature occupies and is dazed (escape ends all, depositing the creature in a square adjacent to the swallower). If the swallower moves, the swallowed creature moves with it. This tends to solve all of the wacky scenarios you've described below, except that it still allows marks, which I'm fine with. Worst case of heartburn ever, I should think.

[Epinephrine]

But that's sloppy writing, and I would assume any decent DM to rule it differently.

The whole of swallowing seems like sloppy writing. I don't think it's fair to say 'any decent DM' about that bit of it, if playing by RAW with other parts of it, why rewrite that specific bit? (I mean why *only* that bit - I can see why to rewrite it, it's silly)

For example, since you don't move from the square in which you were swallowed, nobody can occupy that square - which could result in a 5' passage being blocked by a swallowed creature that you can't affect in any way, as you lack line of effect to it.

By RAW (as you point out) the swallowed PC can make OAs against the swallower; so the swallower should avoid the area where he swallowed the PC. Other enemies can safely move around that area, but for some reason, the swallower can move around safely unless it passes near where it swallowed the PC, at which point the PC can attack it. It's just weird, by RAW.

I guess I kinda knew many of the answers by RAW, it just strikes me as strange that they use a specific word ("swallowed") that doesn't seem to have any definition, and apparently despite several text referring to being "inside' a creature, doesn't specifically move you, remove you from play, or anything of the sort. Heck, if a Feymire crocodile swallows you you can only make basic attacks, but there's no restriction on who you can attack (no change to line of sight and effect), so a swallowed ranger can still make bow attacks with his bow against targets outside of the crocodile. That's not very "swallowed". I was hoping that maybe other DMs had some feedback on how they run this type of power. I apologise, I shouldn't have asked so much about the RAW, but I was still thinking it through as I typed.


I usually rule that a swallowed creature is restrained, has line of sight and effect only to itself and the swallower (likewise, nobody else except the swallower has line of sight or effect to the swallowed creature), is pulled into the nearest square the creature occupies and is dazed (escape ends all, depositing the creature in a square adjacent to the swallower). If the swallower moves, the swallowed creature moves with it. This tends to solve all of the wacky scenarios you've described below, except that it still allows marks, which I'm fine with. Worst case of heartburn ever, I should think.

Thanks artstsym - I'm still not sure about marking, it seems weird that you can tell what's going on, and doing punish the creature for violating the mark. And if you are adjacent, can you make OAs when the creature does something like move, or use an area/ranged power? I think from a game perspective I really don't want the ideal strategy for a defender to be "get self swallowed". After all, you get to continually punish and you're about as sticky as you can be. Still, stripping a character of his main way to influence a fight (marks) while every other character gets to go to town (hello rogues, you're invisible to the creature, you get CA automatically!) while swallowed doesn't seem fair either.

[artstsym]

Thanks artstsym - I'm still not sure about marking, it seems weird that you can tell what's going on, and doing punish the creature for violating the mark. And if you are adjacent, can you make OAs when the creature does something like move, or use an area/ranged power? If you're dazed you can only take one action a turn (which hopefully is either escaping or attacking) and cannot take immediate or opportunity actions, conveniently shutting down defenders. I only allow the -2 (or whatever) mark penalty because I think it's kind of hard to attack when someone is gutting you from the inside (and because nobody loses as much as defenders by getting swallowed otherwise), but that's more of a flavor thing. If you feel it's too absurd, by all means pitch it.


I think from a game perspective I really don't want the ideal strategy for a defender to be "get self swallowed". It really isn't, as practically every swallow effect I've seen has some sort of ongoing(esque) damage and the leader can't help them.

[Garwain]

Thanks artstsym - I'm still not sure about marking, it seems weird that you can tell what's going on, and doing punish the creature for violating the mark.
I always figured that a mark is not a physical, but more psychological effect. As in 'your presence makes the attacker feel insecure when they don't focus on you' or 'your taunting glare distrubs them', etc. In that way, I would not let the swallowed PC make a mark. They are just in no position to do that.

Dazed with only LoE/LoS to the swallower makes sense. I do agree that a -2 to attack could reflect the extra difficulties from attacking while trying to digest a PC, but that -2 would not come from a mark, but be more of a general houserule.

[Epinephrine]

I always figured that a mark is not a physical, but more psychological effect. As in 'your presence makes the attacker feel insecure when they don't focus on you' or 'your taunting glare distrubs them', etc. In that way, I would not let the swallowed PC make a mark. They are just in no position to do that.

Dazed with only LoE/LoS to the swallower makes sense. I do agree that a -2 to attack could reflect the extra difficulties from attacking while trying to digest a PC, but that -2 would not come from a mark, but be more of a general houserule.

Could a swallowed defender maintain a mark they had set beforehand? Like a paladin or swordmage's mark?

Yes, for me the dilemma comes down to gamism vs simulationism. For example, if a paladin had marked a creature and was swallowed, s/he could maintain the mark easily by attacking every round, and one can easily justify punishing marks, as the punishment is from an external source anyway (divine power). For a fighter it's harder to justify, but from a game perspective it's unfair to restrict one defender but not another, simply because of fluff.

Likewise, from a rules perspective, some mark would be sustained easily, others wouldn't; a warden can't mark while swallowed (not technically adjacent, unless the swallower is adjacent to the warden's space), while others can either maintain their mark easily, or deliver a mark by attacking (and they have line of sight and effect to the enemy, though one might insist that without a light source the enemy has complete concealment from them, as it's likely to be dark...)

Mark punishments vary as well, one type of swordmage can (by rules) punish with their marks; the shielding swordmage can, as they can target the creature to blunt its damage, but the other two rely on teleports, which require line of sight to the target square (although, technically, there is one swallower (the Worm of Ages) that has its stomach sections described as being 2x2 rooms, so an ensnaring swordmage could teleport the Worm of Ages into its own stomach (wooohoo, a Klein Worm of Ages!)? Well, it wouldn't fit, but the swordmage can certainly target both the worm and a destination square adjacent to him/her, and a self-swallowing worm would be weird.*)

So to be fair to all defenders, you pretty much need to either allow marking or not, and allow punishment or not, otherwise there's a bias against martial-types, and toward arcane/divine types, as the explanations don't need to make sense, they're "magic".

I think I'll probably come up with some general rule soon, and that I'll probably allow marking. I don't know whether I'll put a global restriction of weapons used (some swallowers restirct the type of weapon that can be used to basic or one-handed weapons), and I may restrict the type of action (some say only basic attacks).



{table=head]Effects|RAW|Epinephrine|artstsym|Gawain
Grabbed/Restrained|Varies|Restrained|Restrained
Where is PC|Varies|In enemy's square|In enemy's square
Moves with foe?|Varies|Yes|Yes
Allow Marking?|Varies|Yes|Yes|-2 to attack
Allow Enforcement?|Varies|?|No|No
LoE to self?|No|Yes|Yes|Yes
LoE to Swallowee?|No|No|No|Yes
CA?|Yes|?|?
Restrict Actions Types?|Varies|Melee and Close|No?
Restrict Actions?|Varies|Yes (Dazed)|Yes (Dazed)
Restict weapon used?|Varies|?|No[/table]

*I wonder if some creatures that have a basic attack that swallows (are there any?) could swallow themselves via domination. Or you could dominate one of a pair of creatures to swallow the other, and then the swallowed creature might try to free itself, attacking with its swallowing attack, and since it has line of sight and effect, it swallows the creature that swallowed it (which doesn't actually unswallow itself, so both creatures vanish from sight and line of effect, and both have swallowed the other...physics be damned!)

[artstsym]

Almost right. By nature, being dazed (and I believe restrained off the top of my head) make you grant CA, so yes they do grant it for what it's worth, which is not much.

Upon reflection, being swallowed really shouldn't grant ANYONE aside from the swallowed creature line of sight or effect to him (including the swallower), because that's just wacky and allows for things that really don't make sense (such as bite attacks, etc), so I suppose I need to change that.

Finally, they are pulled into one of the swallowers squares, so they are actually occupying the same square (or one of them, at any rate).

As for weapon restrictions, I always thought that was foolish, so no I personally don't do it.

[Epinephrine]

Almost right. By nature, being dazed (and I believe restrained off the top of my head) make you grant CA, so yes they do grant it for what it's worth, which is not much.

I actually meant in the other direction; does the swallower grant CA to the swallowed? By RAW, yes, as the swallowed creature is invisible to the swallower.

To attack, you have to deal with whether the swallowed has CA (+2 to hit), whether the swallower has concealment (yes, by RAW it's full concealment, - 5 to hit, unless the swallowed creature has a light source, and even then I'm not sure I'd count it*). Also, the target is restrained (-2 to hit).

Feels weird to give a -5 penalty to hit for not being able to see a foe that it literally all around you. Then again, a penalty to hit for being in a really awkward situation I have less of an issue with.

*If you are trapped between a pair of acid-soaked mattresses with a couple hundred pounds pressing on them I'm not sure how much you can see even with a light source on your belt/in your hand.


Upon reflection, being swallowed really shouldn't grant ANYONE aside from the swallowed creature line of sight or effect to him (including the swallower), because that's just wacky and allows for things that really don't make sense (such as bite attacks, etc), so I suppose I need to change that.

Yes, I think instead one has to change the text on powers like devouring damage to not target anything - if the damage for being eaten is written wrong, like "Devouring Damage (free 1/turn, ) affects target grabbed by devour only; The target takes 5 damage." then it fails without line of effect.

[tbarrie]

So to be fair to all defenders, you pretty much need to either allow marking or not, and allow punishment or not, otherwise there's a bias against martial-types, and toward arcane/divine types, as the explanations don't need to make sense, they're "magic".


There's such a thing as taking balance too far. Unless you're planning an epic-length campaign entitled "Against the Swallowing Hordes", it's not going to come up often enough to seriously affect interclass balance, so why not just rule it based on what makes sense to you?

(Though in my opinion, what makes sense is no marking, period. Punishing a swallower for "ignoring" the swallowed creature is nonsensical. The creature is not ignoring your Divine Challenge, it has already accepted the Challenge and won.)



*I wonder if some creatures that have a basic attack that swallows (are there any?) could swallow themselves via domination. Or you could dominate one of a pair of creatures to swallow the other, and then the swallowed creature might try to free itself, attacking with its swallowing attack, and since it has line of sight and effect, it swallows the creature that swallowed it (which doesn't actually unswallow itself, so both creatures vanish from sight and line of effect, and both have swallowed the other...physics be damned!)

Off topic, but in at least one build of Zork I there were two containers that could be put inside one another, placing both of them out of reach of the player forever.

[artstsym]

A quick side note: I always restat swallow effects so that the damage they would normally deal (possibly via attacks, etc) is changed to ongoing damage, whether or not it was already.


I actually meant in the other direction; does the swallower grant CA to the swallowed? By RAW, yes, as the swallowed creature is invisible to the swallower. Eh, I'm feeling no. However, no to the swallowed taking the total concealment penalty as well. I think the -2 attack (from being restrained) should suffice (though of course I am by no means the sole voice on this, and in fact this would be far too weak for someone who regularly puts his players through fourthcore or the like).

My main reasoning behind the way I've stated it the way I have is that while getting swallowed should be something that the players naturally want to avoid (and with no healing + ongoing damage I'm pretty sure it is), it shouldn't shut down all of their options once it happens (then no one has fun). Thus, while I can see a legitimate argument for restricting what types of actions a player can take while swallowed, I don't do it myself (let the wizard blast his fireball at the worm's innards, that's pretty cool in my book).


(Though in my opinion, what makes sense is no marking, period. Punishing a swallower for "ignoring" the swallowed creature is nonsensical. The creature is not ignoring your Divine Challenge, it has already accepted the Challenge and won.) I'll be honest the main reason I let the mark (-2 attack only, not the other effects) stay is because I love the idea of someone being so irritating that even after you eat them they make you regret it.

[Surrealistik]

The best solution IMHO:

The swallowed creature is removed from play (as per the Rules Compendium, page 233) but can take actions, has line of sight and effect to itself and the swallowing creature, and counts as being adjacent to the swallowing creature. The swallowing creature does not provoke opportunity attacks from the swallowed creature. When the swallow effect ends, the swallowed creature returns to play in a square adjacent to the swallowing creature of the swallowed creature's choice.


Note that because the swallowed creature counts as being 'removed from play' no creature normally has LoS or LoE to it regardless of it counting as being adjacent to the swallowing creature.