-1
\$\begingroup\$

Whenever a creature is confused...

If a confused creature is attacked, it attacks the creature that last attacked it until that creature is dead or out of sight.

At the same time...

Roll on the following table at the beginning of each confused subject’s turn each round to see what the subject does in that round.

The instructions are conflicting. Should I only roll if the creature has never been attacked since the confusion effect started, or if all creatures that attacked the already-confused target are dead or out of sight?

\$\endgroup\$
4
\$\begingroup\$

If a creature that possesses the condition confused is attacked, on its turn it attacks its last attacker unless the attacker is dead or out of sight. If the creature is not attacked or if that last attacker is dead or out of sight, the GM rolls on the chart for the creature's behavior.

To be clear, the confused creature cares only about the last attacker ("If a confused creature is attacked, it attacks the creature that last attacked it until that creature is dead or out of sight"—emphasis mine). Attackers other than the last attacker are unimportant to the creature suffering from the confused condition.

|improve this answer|||||
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ This is the answer I expected to find, but has it been clarified anywhere? As it stands, the text I see on the SRD says that a creature that's been attacked both attacks the offender and that you roll at the beginning of the turn to determine your character's actions. Or did I miss something? \$\endgroup\$ – Zachiel Sep 14 '19 at 8:33
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Zachiel You missed nothing, but it is a specific trumps general thing… or, if you prefer, an IF/THEN thing. That is, usually the GM rolls for a confused critter on its turn. However, if the confused creature's specifically been attacked, the confused critter attacks its attacker instead. I agree that the text should probably be rearranged so as to put the if attacked language first; current phrasing makes it sound like the chart is more important when, in fact, the chart is totally ignored if the confused critter's attacked. That's bad phrasing, but it doesn't change anything. \$\endgroup\$ – Hey I Can Chan Sep 14 '19 at 13:59

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.