Hi all,
I apologize if this has been answered elsewhere, but I couldn't find it in the Core FAQ, nor in searching this forum.
RAW, is it clear whether or not "making a full attack" and "taking a full-attack action" are the exact same thing?
Specifically, if I Charge and have Pounce, and can therefore "make a full attack" after the Charge, can I choose to fight defensively when making this full attack?
RAW states "you can choose to fight defensively when taking a full-attack action."
In other words, is "making a full attack" the same as "taking a full-attack action"?
Thank you in advance.
The Other
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You'd need specific FAQs that akin things that aren't Full Attacks to Full Attacks, which exist for things like Flurry of Blows and Spell Combat. (Even then, those FAQs aren't good enough for some people, because they think the FAQ is specific to Haste, and nothing else, so unless you have a lenient GM, you're screwed.)
So, no, it isn't.
Flurry of Blows and Spell Combat let you make full attacks with specific weapons. But they are still otherwise categorized as special Full Round Actions, and only count as Full attack Actions for the Haste (or other effects, but as I've said above, most people don't enforce it). Same goes with Charging, which is likewise a special Full Round Action (and there are FAQs that state so, such as the Vital Strike FAQ).
Even if you could prove it, I'm fairly certain most GMs wouldn't allow fighting defensively with a charge, mostly because the type of activities they are.
Charging generally means you're using your increased speed for better accuracy, at the cost of forgoing your defense. Fighting Defensively generally means you're improving your ability to defend yourself at the cost of reducing the likelihood that you can take advantage of an enemy's defenses with your offensive capabilities. To most GMs, they're mutually exclusive. To the most bone-headed and "RAW is LAW" GM, you might get away with it (though I wouldn't understand why you'd want to do that).
Even without Charging, you couldn't use Fighting Defensively with Flurry of Blows or Spell Combat because they are Full Round Actions, and not Full Attack Actions, which means Fighting Defensively (and many other things that require Full Attack Actions) doesn't apply. And that's not counting the factor that applying the Fighting Defensively penalties on their own, a Standard or Full Round Action, based on RAW. But, I'd rather adhere to the obvious intent in that it's a modifier (akin to Power Attack and Combat Expertise) that Charging and company doesn't qualify to receive the effects.
|
It is a bit confusing. A full Attack is a Full Round Action, the former is listed under the later. When you perform the Full Attack, you can choose to fight defensively, taking the to-hit penalty when you do.
When you charge, you are already taking a -2 to AC. I would think this would exclude the character/eidolon/monster from being able to fight defensively, even with the Pounce ability.
The normal Charge uses a Full Round Action to perform, though a character restricted to a Standard can still charge (to his normal movement) with that standard action. (Zombies is the best example of this, as they are staggered and can still charge) It is a special action not listed in the Full Round Actions section, but is explained just before the section involving Combat Maneuvers, with it's own particulars. Pounce only allows a full attack instead of the single attack at the end of the charge. I don't believe it is the same as the Full Attack taken as a Full Round Action, what is referred to as a "full attack action" in other parts of the ruleset.
So, my overall sense is no, one can not fight defensively when the character charges, with or without the pounce ability.
Sorry, ninja'd.
I think me and Darksol are saying basically the same thing.
@Darksol and @thaX,
I really appreciate the detailed replies.
Perhaps the easiest way to read RAW is that as soon as Charge (or any other Full-Round Action) is taken, no more actions can be taken that turn.
In other words, "making a full attack" is a function of an Extraordinary Ability (Pounce) used as part of the Full-Round Action Charge, while "taking a full-attack action" is a type of Full-Round Action.
Or, simply put, "making a full attack" and "taking a full-attack action" are distinct.
They're the exact same thing.
@BigNorseWolf,
Would you mind elaborating on that? Not at all trying to be snarky, just am curious of your reasoning and want to get to the bottom of this.
It's probably difficult to be defensive when you're a raging barbarian leaping through the air screaming. Same with charging.
They're the exact same thing.
Then how do you explain Spell Combat and Flurry of Blows being Full Round Actions while not being called (or requiring) Full Attack Actions, a specific type of Full Round Action, and requiring a FAQ to allow those abilities to benefit from Haste (and apparently nothing else that functions on Full Attack Actions)?
@BigNorseWolf,
Would you mind elaborating on that? Not at all trying to be snarky, just am curious of your reasoning and want to get to the bottom of this.
Nothing I say could say it any clearer or plainer than the rules. I don't know what raw minutia rabbit hole your're trying to go down but 99% of the time it just leads to insanity. Or cleaveland.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
pretty sure fighting defensively is supposed to cover any attack routine possible.
I'm also sure you can use fighting defensively with charge+pounce. Don't know why would you want to (net -2 attack and +0 AC (+1 if you have 3 ranks in Acrobatics).
Making a full attack is the same as a full attack. Basically you are getting all of your possible attacks vs taking one attack.
This is covered in the combat chapter.
Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks.
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.
Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.
Fighting Defensively as a Full-Round Action: You can choose to fight defensively when taking a full-attack action. If you do so, you take a –4 penalty on all attacks in a round to gain a +2 dodge bonus to AC for until the start your next turn.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will also add that full the reason why a magus needed the FAQ was because it needs a "full round action" which is an exact action type much like a move action is.
Full round attacks also use full round actions. Since the magus ability uses a full round action, but it is not a full round attack it needed an FAQ to be legal for haste.
Flurry of blows is also a full round attack so it is already legal for haste. If the FAQ mentions FoB then it could be to clear up confusion or maybe FoB was once a full round action, and not a full round attack.
|
|
The normal Charge only uses a single attack, and my overall feeling is that adding a Pounce ability would not change how Charge works or allow for Fighting Defensively, even with a full attack after moving. The Charge is an offensive strike that already has the advantage and penalties associated with it as the result of it's use.
The Other, we have had another thread about Free and Swift actions, which can be taken before and after the charge. What abilities can be used is dependent on what the character declares for the full round action. Charging is a specific action that likely precludes the ability to Fight Defensively, independent on if the character can or can not pounce.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can fight defensively when using a full attack action. Pounce modifies charge to allow a full attack action. I don't know where feelings enter into the equation.
I'm also sure you can use fighting defensively with charge+pounce. Don't know why would you want to (net -2 attack and +0 AC (+1 if you have 3 ranks in Acrobatics).
The desire to move full speed in addition to making all attacks.
A -2 attached and +1 AC are a negligible price to pay...|
|
I only point out that the Charge is not a Full Attack action and Pounce adding a full attack in place of the single attack would not change the aspect of a charge. I think our disagreement is on whether or not that added full attack at the end of a charge would be enough to be able to use Fight Defensively.
At this point, I will let others weigh in and see what they think about this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The full attack would allow it, even at the end of a charge. There is no rule saying that a full attack can't come at the end of a pounce.
No. You are charging recklessly into battle and taking -2 to your ac, there is nothing defensive about it. Your action is the charge action, but you get all of your attacks anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just sticking to what the text actually says...
You can't fight defensively on a charge, simply because a charge isn't a valid action for it. Fighting defensively only applies to standard attacks and full attacks, and charge is a special full-round action that includes a special melee attack. Following this properly, you also can't fight defensively with things like Spring Attack for the same reason.
As far as pounce goes, pounce modifies the charge action to grant a full attack at the end of the movement part of charge. Your action during a pounce is charge -> full attack, because the rules for pounce spell it out as exactly that. According to the rules, you may fight defensively as part of a full attack. Therefore, while a normal charge doesn't contain an action that's a valid action for fighting defensively, pounce introduces such an action into a charge.
Even if someone wants to go outside the actual text and argue that a rule works a certain way because it *should*, the argument here ends up being "yeah, pounce modifies charge so dramatically that you're able to tack a full-round action onto another full round action... but it's crazy to think it modifies charge so much you could fight defensively!" But of course, going down the road of how rules *should* work from a subjective standpoint is how you get massive, subjective debates with no possible resolution.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing I say could say it any clearer or plainer than the rules. I don't know what raw minutia rabbit hole your're trying to go down but 99% of the time it just leads to insanity. Or cleaveland.@BigNorseWolf,
Would you mind elaborating on that? Not at all trying to be snarky, just am curious of your reasoning and want to get to the bottom of this.
I used to go to Cleaveland more often before it became "try to hit two things standing next to each other". :P
I used to go to Cleaveland more often before it became "try to hit two things standing next to each other". :PNothing I say could say it any clearer or plainer than the rules. I don't know what raw minutia rabbit hole your're trying to go down but 99% of the time it just leads to insanity. Or cleaveland.@BigNorseWolf,
Would you mind elaborating on that? Not at all trying to be snarky, just am curious of your reasoning and want to get to the bottom of this.
and aligning them with magnetic north so that they're not on an angle
Really appreciate all of these replies!
Just for full disclosure, I'm curious about Fighting Defensively with Pounce because of a possible build combining Wildshape with Master of Many Styles, Dragon Style, Crane Style, and Combat Style Master, among other things.
So, the consensus seems to be that one can Fight Defensively as part of a Pounce, and distinguishing between "making a full attack" and "taking a full-attack action" is pointless/fruitless/baseless?
Build is here if anyone is interested:
1(Urban/Id Bloodrager 1): Improved Initiative
1(Urban/Id Bloodrager 1): Toughness
2:(Druid 1) BAB 1
3:(Druid 2) Extra Rage BAB 2
4:(Druid 3) BAB 3
5:(Druid 4) Shaping Focus BAB 4
6:(MoMS 1): Improved Unarmed Strike, Stunning Fist, Dragon Style BAB 4
7:(Mutation Warrior 1) Weapon Focus: Claw, Feral Combat Training: Claw BAB 5
8:(MoMS 2) Dragon Ferocity BAB 6
9:(Mutation Warrior 2) Planar Wild Shape, Combat Style Master BAB 7
10:(Mutation Warrior 3) BAB 8
11: (Mutation Warrior 4) Dodge, Crane Style BAB 9
12: (Mutation Warrior 5) BAB 10
ask your dm
(looks at 12 levels) If its for PFS avoid it. You're going to hit signifigant table variation and thats not the kind of headache someone wants in a game.
Despite what I said above I don't think RAI is for this to work, but if you have "strictly by the book" GM, he might allow it, and like BNW said I would not try this at all in PFS.
Just to note, you can only take a base Style feat with a MoMS bonus feat. Other feats in the style chains don't carry the 'Style' label. MoMS was nerfed specifically to stop bonus chain grabs.
You might run into an issue with using a mutagen and then using wildshape, as mutagens are described as growing your form, while Wildshape changes your form to something else. One of those odd polymorph grey areas.
Either way, you could consider going deeper into Lion Shaman Druid with the Nobility Domain, rather than going into Mutation Warrior. With a strong Druid level and Nobility, you can cast Divine Favor and Frostbite for a major power-up; by Druid 7 you could be using Quickened Frostbite and Divine Favor in one round to add +3 attack, +3 damage, +1d6+7 non-lethal cold damage and fatigue to every attack. You can prepare Divine Favor in every Domain slot and/or use Pearls of Power for more. You don't really need Shaping Focus when at level 6 you count as having Wildshape 8 in tiger/lion form anyways.
Edit: oh and Druid gets Airwalk for 10min/level at 7, which is just fantastic.
@BadBird, thank you. If you have it handy, could you please point me to the errata/FAQ/clarification about the MoMS bonus style feats? I couldn't find it in either of the Core or UC FAQs.
@BadBird, thank you. If you have it handy, could you please point me to the errata/FAQ/clarification about the MoMS bonus style feats? I couldn't find it in either of the Core or UC FAQs.
Well, there's this - ***LINK*** - where they talk about it.
The general thing is that, by the rules, a (Style) feat is a specific thing, just like how feats will say (Combat). If you look at any feat chain, (Style) only appears beside the first feat that actually lets you enter a style. When MoMS says you may take a (Style) feat, this is what they mean; only a feat with (Style), which is only ever the first in the chain.
Also, @BadBird, that build sounds awesome. Full disclosure, this is a homebrew campaign that's already at level 4. I put it in PFS form because I thought that's what people would prefer.
Am looking forward to the Weapon Training, though. A mutagen isn't a polymorph effect, and the ability to use a mutagen isn't dependent on form, as far as I can tell, so it should be OK if I have a party member dump it down my throat.
But of course I will need to consult with my DM on this.
Technically, a mutagen becomes inert when not in an Alchemist's possession. I have no idea what that means for having someone else pour it into a wildshaped Druid, but whatever; asking a GM solves any issues with uncertainty.
Myself, I would probably still go with Druid levels to be able to cast Quickened Frostbite and Airwalk at Druid 7 and cast Quickened Rime Frostbite (to cause entangled as well as fatigued) with 5th level slots. But I like spellcasting, and I find the whole Frostbite thing where you add 1d6+level damage with each claw and also inflict fatigue and entangle in frost is really cool conceptually. I've been thinking of trying some kind of celesial frost-tiger Druid thing for a while.
I'm also sure you can use fighting defensively with charge+pounce. Don't know why would you want to (net -2 attack and +0 AC (+1 if you have 3 ranks in Acrobatics).The desire to move full speed in addition to making all attacks.
A -2 attached and +1 AC are a negligible price to pay...
You don't have to fight defensively to pull a charge+pounce. Your modifiers are +2 attack -2 AC for a normal charge.
Yes, this brings in another rules question! When is the mutagen "in the Alchemist's possession"?
This is actually pretty important to the build! How do I get the mutagen back in my possession when in wildshape?
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
+1 to style feats are only the first in series (yes there is one or two style chains where they misprinted [style] on every feat in series).
MoMS new errata helps if you stick to level 6.
Mutagen don't necessarily work when poured down others throats so Ask your GM. I'd say it makes them sick.
|
|
They're the exact same thing.Then how do you explain Spell Combat and Flurry of Blows being Full Round Actions while not being called (or requiring) Full Attack Actions, a specific type of Full Round Action, and requiring a FAQ to allow those abilities to benefit from Haste (and apparently nothing else that functions on Full Attack Actions)?
All instances of "making a full attack" and "taking a full-attack action" are full round actions.
Not all full round actions are full attacks.
They're the exact same thing.Then how do you explain Spell Combat and Flurry of Blows being Full Round Actions while not being called (or requiring) Full Attack Actions, a specific type of Full Round Action, and requiring a FAQ to allow those abilities to benefit from Haste (and apparently nothing else that functions on Full Attack Actions)?All instances of "making a full attack" and "taking a full-attack action" are full round actions.
Not all full round actions are full attacks.
Staggered Pouncing Charge says hi, so that's not right.
And the latter demonstrates why a FAQ for Spell Combat and Flurry of Blows was needed.
|
Fighting Defensively as a Full-Round Action: You can choose to fight defensively when taking a full-attack action. If you do so, you take a –4 penalty on all attacks in a round to gain a +2 dodge bonus to AC for until the start your next turn.
Is pounce really a full attack action?
Let's see this FAQ about Spell Combat.
Magus, Spell Combat: Does spell combat count as making a full attack action for the purpose of haste and other effects?
Yes.
Edit 9/9/13: This is a revised ruling about how haste interacts with effects that are essentially a full attack, even though the creature isn't specifically using the full attack action (as required by haste). The earlier ruling did not allow the extra attack from haste when using spell combat.
There's three ways you could read that:
A) It's spell combat that counts as a full attack action for all the things things that need it. You could therefore Spell Combat Defensively.
OR:
B) It's about haste with abilities (like spell combat) that are full attacks but not strictly full attack actions. You could therefore Hastepounce.
OR:
C) Both of the above things. You can Pounce Defensively.
I'm not really sure which of these I'd pick. My gut is saying that pounce and defensive fighting shouldn't be possible together. But Haste-Spell Combat and Defensive Spell Combat both make sense to me...
No, you cannot fight defensively and charge/pounce.
Fighting defensively is it's own discrete full attack/full round action or it's own standard action.
Charging is also it's own full round action (or standard action in the surprise round).
You cannot combine vital strike and spring attack for the same reason. They are their own discrete actions.
Yes, this brings in another rules question! When is the mutagen "in the Alchemist's possession"?
This is actually pretty important to the build! How do I get the mutagen back in my possession when in wildshape?
The mutagen is only inactive "until an alchemist picks it up again." You could also use a Polymorphic Pouch, if you want.
Fighting defensively is it's own discrete full attack/full round action (...)
No it isn't. You can apply fighting defensively to any full-attack action, kinda like Power Attack.
Melee Tactics Toolbox says "A few combat options are full-round actions (such as Spring Attack and the full-attack action) or modify specific full-round actions (such as the extra attack from the haste spell).", the wording "You can choose to fight defensively when taking a full-attack action." emphasis mine means it's the latter. To be it's own action, it would need to say 'as a full-round action'.The attack action rules are a complete nightmare anyway*, so we have to patch the rules together ourselves. The full-attack action is decribed under "full attack" - no hyphen, no "action".
That bolded part is really important, because it means that the rules use "full-attack action" and "full attack" interchangeably. Which thus means that the "it can make a full attack" (the term used in the description of pounce) is synonymous with "it can make a full-attack action".
That, in turn, means that the full attack at the end of the charge can be modified like any other full-attack action (e.g. haste works with it), and that it is indeed possible to fight defensively on a pounce.
*) The standard 'attack action' is never called that in the "actions in combat" section. Indeed, the words "attack action" (outside of "full-attack action") don't appear at all in that section. The next mention of that term is seventeen (in letters: 17) pages later! Under "special attacks", four sections after "actions in combat".
The only time those words do appear is in the term "full-attack action", which is not the attack action. And because that's not confusing enough, the word attack is used in the magic section as any directly offensive action in combat.
So, we got actions that are attack but not the attack actions. Then we have an action that has 'attack and 'action' in it's name but is still not the attack action. And then we have the actual 'attack action', except it's not called that. Whew.
|
|
Derklord.
The Pounce ability changes a normal single attack into a Full Attack, normally with Natural weapons as it is used mostly by animals and druids. I believe the nature of doing a Charge would not change because of the Pounce ability, and the Character may not be able to declare that he is Fighting Defensively with a charge because he is already committed to the offensive action that normally results in a single attack.
I believe that is RAI and the RAW would need the introspection you have looked at.
I'm not sure how you can draw any sort of conclusion from that section in Melee Tactics Toolbox. It's a clarification that makes things less clear for me.
I'm not really drawing any conclusions from the MTT text - that there are things that modify an "existing" full-attack action should be obvious (cf. Haste). The description in the CRB is the important part, the word "when" connotes a temporal relation and it thus can't possibly be a full-attack action on it's own.
(...) committed to the offensive action that normally results in a single attack.
Normally being the operative word. If what you say was true, than nothing could modify the full attack at the end of the charge, and Haste would not work. Yet the FAQ says it does!
Here is the dev quote on haste from a few years back. Thanks @Calth.
Of particular note is:
Specifically for this conversation, we're talking about the term "full attack." Some rule elements such as haste say "when making a full attack action." Other rule elements such as pounce say "it can make a full attack." And in some cases it's even less specific, such as the magus spell combat ability which says "he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon," which was later clarified in an FAQ to mean "as many weapon attacks as you would normally be able to make with a full attack."
We on the design team aren't sure that treating those three terms differently helps the game or makes it easier to learn or play.
As this is case by case, we can't necessarily extrapolate, but this at least provides a context for equating "making a full attack" with "taking/using a full-attack action."
|
|
I'm not sure how you can draw any sort of conclusion from that section in Melee Tactics Toolbox. It's a clarification that makes things less clear for me.I'm not really drawing any conclusions from the MTT text - that there are things that modify an "existing" full-attack action should be obvious (cf. Haste). The description in the CRB is the important part, the word "when" connotes a temporal relation and it thus can't possibly be a full-attack action on it's own.
(...) committed to the offensive action that normally results in a single attack.Normally being the operative word. If what you say was true, than nothing could modify the full attack at the end of the charge, and Haste would not work. Yet the FAQ says it does!
I would say it would come down if taking penalties from the charge might be allowed to be offset by Fighting Defensively. I will simply say that I disagree about being able to when pounce is used.
I would say it would come down if taking penalties from the charge might be allowed to be offset by Fighting Defensively.
What, are characters not allowed to have bonuses and penalties on the same stat/roll?
I will simply say that I disagree about being able to when pounce is used.
You're free to have that opinion, I'm not trying to make you play the game in a certain way, but your argument seems to be 100% flavor and 0% rules.
When a creature pounces, what would you consider that it is doing with its full round action? Perhaps it is charging as its action and then making a full attack for free. This would not be a case that allows fighting defensively.
For me it boils down to what is actually being assigned to the "full round action" portion of a character's turn. There is a RAW (not just flavor) side to this argument.
Perhaps it is charging as its action and then making a full attack for free. This would not be a case that allows fighting defensively.
Than explain how Haste works with Pounce, please.
Perhaps it is charging as its action and then making a full attack for free. This would not be a case that allows fighting defensively.Than explain how Haste works with Pounce, please.
If the PFSRD is correct, then there has been an FAQ stating that haste works with pounce.
Also, the quote by SKR which has already been linked by The Other supports this.
Quote from SKR: "if an ability implies that you're making a full attack (whether or not you're specifically using the full attack action), then haste should work with that ability"
Yeah, I'm personally inclined to allow fighting defensively on a pounce-charge.
1: The rules seem to allow it since you can do it whenever you make a full attack.
2: I agree with SKR that having "Making a Full Attack" and "Taking a Full-Attack Action" be separate things with different rules leads to confusion. Especially since the rules don't seem to have been written with such a distinction in mind.
3: Allowing it doesn't seem to hurt the game in any serious way. Sans investment, it effectively just turns charging's AC penalty into a to-hit penalty. It's only worthwhile if you're invested in making defensive fighting good, and if you're putting feats and skill ranks into the trick then it's supposed to be good.
If the PFSRD is correct, then there has been an FAQ stating that haste works with pounce.
Yes, I linked that FAQ three posts ago. I want you to explain how Haste, which says "when making a full attack action", works with Pounce, but fighting defensively, which says "when taking a full-attack action", does not.
Your "the full-attack action is not the turn's main action" argument would also disallow Haste.