Marked

Marked
When a creature marks a target, the target takes a -2 penalty to attack rolls for any attack that doesn’t include the marking creature as a target. A creature can be subjected to only one mark at a time, and a new mark supersedes an old one. A mark ends immediately when its creator dies or falls unconscious.

Just wanted to be sure...
If a monster has Twin Strike and is marked by a fighter. If he targets the fighter with one attack and a wizard with the other attack, then he's violating the mark. Correct?

Twin Strike says "two attacks", there are other powers that lets you shift and attack or make multiple attacks. Which I believe is different thatn a blast/burst which is a single attack (one damage roll).

Now if the NPC uses an area attack and both are in the radius, then the mark is not violated.

This would affect NPC monks since a flurry is a separate attack from the initial hit.

Hmmm...so, is twin strike, a single attack power that gets two separate attack rolls against the same, or different targets, OR is twin strike two idependant separate attacks?

As a related question, the various powers that allow an initial attack against Target A, then a shift and a new attack against Target B, then a second shift and a third attack against Target C, are these types of powers different than Twin Strike?

Hmmm...I'll answer the easiest question first. Blasts, Bursts, and other attacks that affect an area clearly do not violate the mark if the marker is within the affected area of the attack.

So if the targets all must be within a specific burst or blast area, even though there are individual attack rolls, there's still just one damage roll; right? I'd say in this case of melee attacks, although the attacker is making a separate attack roll against an (unmarked) target, that separate attack roll is part of an entire pre-established "Attack Routine", or series of attack moves that are always done as a combination. In a few of my martial arts forms, there is a combination that appears quite regularly: Twin Forearm Block - High Knife Hand Attack (back hand) - Straight Punch (leading hand). They are separate moves (attacks - even the initial block can be an attack against an opponent's attacking limb) that are part of a set "Attack Routine".

Carrying this a bit further, I'm going to take the position that Twin Strike, is an attack routine, with two separate moves (both swift attacks), but it is just one "attack" for purposes of a Mark. The fact that both attack rolls are activated by the same power, there are always two rolls (unless there is only one enemy and he is killed by the first attack) and that both attack rolls (if they hit) have the same reduced damage compared to a basic attack - leads me to conclude that a Ranger (or Monk) using Twin Strike could be Marked and not suffer any ill affects from the Mark as long as one of the Twin Strike attack rolls was directed at the Marker.

Discuss...

They don't have "attack routine" in 4.0...

From the Compendium:

Melee Attack
Targeted: Melee attacks target individuals. A melee attack against multiple enemies consists of separate attacks, each with its own attack roll and damage roll. Melee attacks don’t create areas of effect.

Range: A melee attack’s range usually equals your melee reach. (Sometimes a power specifies that it affects only adjacent targets, though, so even if you’re using a reach weapon, you can’t attack more distant targets with that power.)

Reach: Most characters have a reach of 1 square. Certain powers, feats, and weapons can increase your reach.

Ranged Attack:

Since attacks against multiple opponents are "separate attacks", I believe the mark would be violated (-2 to hit and possible retribution).

Is it too simple to say if an Attack Power includes the Markee then it's satisfied?

Yeah, Ross says what I meant in like 5% of the words.

Is it too simple to say "If you don't attack the marker you're violating the mark".

It goes both ways...

At higher levels most monsters have multiple artacks which could make marking useless.

Okay, so yes it's too simple to say attack power.

Let's look at it a different way. What is the purpose of marking a creature. To reduce the chance your allies would be attacked, right. So I guess if we say any Attack Power that hits multiple targets the marks aren't really serving their purpose.

Here's something that may make more sense. A power like Twin Strike gives you a choice of who you want to attack, right? You can attack 2 different people or you can attack 1 person twice. So if you attack 2 targets and 1 is marked the other attack is at -2 because the power gave you the option to attack just the marked target.
Now if you have a attack power that lets you attack 2 times but says they must be different targets then the -2 doesn't kick in because the attack routine doesn't allow the marked target to be hit again.

Just something I'm throwing out there and seems to keep the spirit of marking alive.

Not quite following what you're getting at...

For Twin Strike, if one attack was on the fighter and the other on the wizard, then the one on the wizard would be at -2 and possible punishment. As long as the attacker knows this, they more than likely attack the fighter with both attacks (no use letting the fighter get a free swing).

The other case is a bit more difficult or "unfair" to the monsters. If they have a multi-attack power that must be on two different targets, then they'll be violating the mark when not attacking the fighter. But they'll know this ahead of time and could possibly select a different (possibly sub-optimal) power.

Either way, I believe this is what is spelled out in the rules governing Marked, Melee Attack, and Ranged Attack.

And therefore the mark is is doing its job