Enemy Mine

[Adoendithas]

This is a little question that's been bothering me.

As far as the rules go, NPCs in 4e seem to be divided into two groups: "allies" and "enemies." Who determines which is which: the DM or the player? And does the enemy of your enemy count as your ally?

I'm writing up an encounter with three mutually-opposed parties and am planning for the players to ally with one against the other (although I have no idea which they'll choose), and I'm not sure how to handle effects that target "allies only" or "enemies only."

[Arkhosia]

I would designate enemies as the people they are fighting against mainly: if you're helping the evil guard captain to destroy a lich, then the attack shouldn't hit your ally.

[NecroRebel]

I generally rule it as "if they're trying to hurt you or prevent you from accomplishing your goals, they're an enemy, otherwise they're an ally." So, in the case of a battle with three sides, if the party were to form a truce with one side, that side would become allies, but if they didn't make a truce, both of the other sides would be their enemies.

The enemy of an enemy is an enemy's enemy, nothing more. The system is entirely capable of handling three-way combat.

[neonchameleon]

This is a little question that's been bothering me.

As far as the rules go, NPCs in 4e seem to be divided into two groups: "allies" and "enemies." Who determines which is which: the DM or the player? And does the enemy of your enemy count as your ally?

I'm writing up an encounter with three mutually-opposed parties and am planning for the players to ally with one against the other (although I have no idea which they'll choose), and I'm not sure how to handle effects that target "allies only" or "enemies only."

Effects that target "Enemies only" are meant for controllable effects. The attacker decides who is affected (for instance they might not want to take out the tank from team b who is messing up team c, instead prefering that he remains a distraction for a bit longer). "Enemies only" is the default assumption but if you want to not hit a specific enemy that's fine (I've done it with not starting triggered effects).

Effects that target allies normally rely on there being some positive relationship between the people in question. Being part of the same group is definitely one. But so is two halfling rogues looking at each other across an ogre and saying "Kill him first, settle our differences later?" (or more probably "Truce?" as it's faster) At that point they could flank with each other.

And an exception is that almost any effect that makes the target grant a free basic attack, the attack can be granted to any enemy of the target. It's disrupting the enemy so their enemies can exploit. In this case "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Of course if the PCs are allied to one side and opposing the other, it's simple. The side they are allied to are friends, the side they are opposing are enemies.

[Adoendithas]

Okay, that makes sense. Thanks!

[BlckDv]

We've had enough highly complex politics to invent a house rule for this in my campaign (lots of complex betrayals, covert spies, etc.)

Every NPC and PC on the board is a Creature (barring a specific thing that expressly is not a creature). When initiative is rolled, all PCs are assumed to be allies of each other and NPCs that are obviously a team (Boss and his guards, city watch patrol, etc.) are enemies of the PCs; any other NPCs are still just creatures, neither enemy nor ally (Workers in a warehouse, merchants in a bazaar, etc.).

On your turn, during the "Start of turn" effects, you may freely declare any creature an ally or enemy, this state lasts until you change it again, and is visible in game the way Marks and other status effects are. Flanking requires both creatures to consider each other allies to work. If a creature attacks you or an ally for the first time in an encounter, you may immediately change it to an enemy, but do not have to (like an Im. Interrupt, but free).

This level of detail is probably more than most campaigns need, but in a story with Vecna as the main villain, and Kas, Glasya and Asmodeus all as recurring Characters that were sometimes for and sometimes against the party, being wrong about who was on what side became a very common issue.

[Adoendithas]

That sounds good, but I'd change the "flanking" rule to only require that both flankers are considered enemies by the target. Even if the two flankers aren't allied they still split the enemy's concentration.

[Epinephrine]

I think it's very important that allies can choose whether to have an effect; you can't just declare that your enemy is your ally so you can slide him into position with an attack that lets you slide an ally within 5. The enemy of your enemy is not necessarily willing to let you use him. Likewise, they may not want to grant you a flanking bonus, so they choose whether to count as your ally for it. After all, if the big mutual enemy is concentrating on you, your would-be-flanker may be happy to have him alive a little longer, since you'll be an easier target once the big guy is down.

[Adoendithas]

That's sensible, but for some effects it doesn't seem like it would have to be consentual. For example, a helpless or unconscious PC should still be an ally.

[NecroRebel]

That's sensible, but for some effects it doesn't seem like it would have to be consentual. For example, a helpless or unconscious PC should still be an ally.

The way BlckDv defined the means of determining allies and enemies, a helpless or unconscious PC wouldn't change who is an ally or enemy when knocked unconscious, so it wouldn't be a problem. If you say that ally-only powers work only on creatures you consider an ally who consider you an ally, someone who considers their Leader to be an ally will still be a valid target for the Leader's healing powers after being knocked unconscious.

[Adoendithas]

Okay, I think I've got a pretty good system worked out now.

The ally of your ally isn't necessarily your ally, and the enemy of your enemy isn't necessarily your ally either (but can choose to flank that enemy with you). Each character can declare any other character to be their ally or enemy at any time for the purposes of spell targeting, but Allies Only powers (except for things like Hammer and Anvil than grant MBAs) require that they reciprocate the feeling. Enemies Only powers do not, and helpless creatures consider everyone else to be their allies for this purpose.

Does that sound workable? I'm trying to combine ideas from the different systems suggested here.