Bride of the FAQ Attack!

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

She’s ready to pounce!

If I have the pounce ability and I charge with a lance, do my iterative lance attacks get the extra damage multiplier from charging?

No, for two reasons.

One, because a lance only deals extra damage when you’re riding a charging mount—not when you are charging.

Two, even if you have an unusual combination of rules that allows you to ignore the above limitation, it doesn’t makes sense that those iterative attacks gain the damage bonus. To make that second attack, you have to pull the lance back and stab forward again, and that stab doesn’t have the benefit of the charge’s momentum. (The Core Rulebook doesn’t state that you only get the damage multiplier on the first attack with a lance because there is no rule in the Core Rulebook that allows a PC to charge and take multiple attacks with a weapon, so that combination didn’t need to be addressed.)

If I drink a potion, do I automatically forgo my save against that potion?

No. Nothing in the potion rules says it changes whether or not you get a saving throw against the spell stored in the potion. Even if someone hands you a potion of poison and tells you it’s a potion of cure serious wounds, you still get a save.

Does the dodge bonus from the “offensive defensive” rogue talent (Advanced Player’s Guide, page 131) stack with itself? Does it apply to everyone, or just to the target I’m attacking?

There are two issues relating to this rogue talent.

One, in the first printing it provided a +1 circumstance bonus against the attacked target, which was a very weak ability. The second printing update changed it from a circumstance bonus to a dodge bonus, but accidentally omitted the “against that creature” text, which made it a very strong ability.

Two, it doesn’t specify whether the dodge bonus stacks with itself, and because this creates a strange place in the rules where bonuses don’t stack from the same source but dodge bonuses always stack. While we haven’t reached a final decision on what to do about this talent, we are leaning toward this solution: the dodge bonus only applies against the creature you sneak attacked, and the dodge bonus does not stack with itself. This prevents you from getting a dodge bonus to AC against a strong creature by sneak attacking a weak creature, and prevents you from reaching an absurdly high AC by sneak attacking multiple times in the same round.

Sean K Reynolds
Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Frequently Asked Questions Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
51 to 100 of 229 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

No, we're asking for clarification of the rules based on an entire class, as well as feats and abilities, and a desire for logical consistency.


But its all clear. Its clear that the mount charges and its clear those abilities apply only when performing mounted charge...and how that works is explained clearly under the mounted combat section in the core rules.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Assuming that's true, then Spirited Charge and Erratic Charge need to be clarified, as well as making it explicit that the rider's attacks after a mount's charge are charge attacks. As it stands, those attacks are not charge attacks since the rules clearly do not say they are, so abilities that key off of charge attacks do not work.

I don't care *what* the clarification is. There just needs to be one.

I'm very surprised at the resistance to this.


It seems all clear to me. The original question was

"If I have the pounce ability and I charge with a lance, do my iterative lance attacks get the extra damage multiplier from charging?"

It does not say charging using a mount this is why SKR Make the clarification that

"One, because a lance only deals extra damage when you’re riding a charging mount—not when you are charging."

I Think he is speaking about general charges, He seems to be saying that you get the double damage when you do a mounted charge, and if you are just running then you do not get the double damage.

Liberty's Edge

I'm not exactly sure what the answer to the first faq means, but I think it is saying that:

1. You don't get get your itterative attacks at the end of a charge if you have pounce and are mounted, because you aren't charging.

2. Even if you could get your itterativ attacks at the end of a charge while mounted, only the first of these would get extra damage.

A corner case that comes to mind is the case where you mange to get itterative attacks and are TWF... Would you get extra damage on your first off hand attack?

Contributor

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Guys, you're trying to read to much into this.

1. A lance only gets its x2 damage when used from the back of a charging mount. That's the rule right there in the lance weapon description.

2. That means if Bob the Unmounted Barbarian is wielding a lance and charges at a target, Bob doesn't get the x2 damage because he is on foot and therefore not on a mount.

3. Therefore, it doesn't matter if Bob has pounce or not, because he's not on a mount, and the lance extra damage only triggers when the wielder is on a mount, so he's not getting the x2.

4. Likewise, it doesn't matter if Bob has iterative attacks or not, because he's not on a mount, and the lance extra damage only triggers when the wielder is on a mount, so he's not getting the x2.

5. And, even if Bob somehow found a rule that says "when you charge, it's like you're on a charging mount," he still doesn't get the x2 on the iterative lance attacks because it doesn't make sense that he'd be able to apply that extra momentum to the weapon after he's hit, pulled the weapon out of/away from the target, and then attacked again just using the strength of his arm (because he hasn't re-charged). He'd get the x2 damage on the first lance attack, yes, but iterative attacks with that lance wouldn't get the x2 because the extra energy from that charge is gone the instant he starts to pull the lance backward away from his target.

Silver Crusade

Unless you have pounce a PC is only allowed one attack at the end of a charge and one attack while mounted and charging.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh. So this says nothing about the legality of pounce when mounted?

I had considered that idea (same one Nicos said), but disregarded it for some reason.

Thanks Sean.

RPG Superstar 2014 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

Thank you for the FAQ Attack! It's like a good movie. It makes you laugh, it makes you cry, and at the end you are mostly satisfied... but you still want more...


Notice how Sean only says on a charging mount. You have to charge to pounce. Not ride on a charging mount. He's not saying it outright on purpose.


Poor AM. The FAQ giveth and the FAQ taketh away.


Gururamalamaswami wrote:

Poor AM. The FAQ giveth and the FAQ taketh away.

funny enough, it just becomes ragelancemountedskirmisher. Sure, iteratives don't get it, but they're hardly necessary.


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

FAQ'T Tuesday! FAQ Mardi Gras!

I love it! Good work Sean.. Thanks for giving the Rules community something to look forward to!

If you need another topic might I ask if a Spell like Acid Splash functions like Ray of Frost? Whats the difference between a Ray and a non-ray in this regard?

Is Acid Splash subject to Firing Into Melee and can it benefit from feats like Point Blank Shot eventhough it is not a Ray? Are Rays the only spells that are treated as if they are Ranged Weapons?

I think it can be done, and I know you do too!

The power is yours!

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

ATron9000 wrote:
Notice how Sean only says on a charging mount. You have to charge to pounce. Not ride on a charging mount. He's not saying it outright on purpose.

Welll.... he does say you do get iterative attacks with a lance from pouncing while on a charging mount, and that only the first attack you make gets the extra damage, but that the other iteratives do normal damage:

He'd get the x2 damage on the first lance attack, yes, but iterative attacks with that lance wouldn't get the x2 because the extra energy from that charge is gone the instant he starts to pull the lance backward away from his target.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.

But Jason... what if the charge is in a straight THREE-DIMENSIONAL line?


Jason Nelson wrote:
ATron9000 wrote:
Notice how Sean only says on a charging mount. You have to charge to pounce. Not ride on a charging mount. He's not saying it outright on purpose.

Welll.... he does say you do get iterative attacks with a lance from pouncing while on a charging mount, and that only the first attack you make gets the extra damage, but that the other iteratives do normal damage:

He'd get the x2 damage on the first lance attack, yes, but iterative attacks with that lance wouldn't get the x2 because the extra energy from that charge is gone the instant he starts to pull the lance backward away from his target.

Wouldn't your mount still have mount-mentum?! Why not just dual wield lances on a horse? TWF!

James Jacobs wrote:
But Jason... what if the charge is in a straight THREE-DIMENSIONAL line?

James! Yes! What about Pathfinder in 3d?! Let's talk about it! So many questions! 3d Flanking? 3d Cover calculations?

A 7ft tall medium Player character only occupies a 5'x5'x5' cube? It's bananas! *Although I agree with it*


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Jason Nelson wrote:
ATron9000 wrote:
Notice how Sean only says on a charging mount. You have to charge to pounce. Not ride on a charging mount. He's not saying it outright on purpose.

Welll.... he does say you do get iterative attacks with a lance from pouncing while on a charging mount, and that only the first attack you make gets the extra damage, but that the other iteratives do normal damage:

He'd get the x2 damage on the first lance attack, yes, but iterative attacks with that lance wouldn't get the x2 because the extra energy from that charge is gone the instant he starts to pull the lance backward away from his target.

hypothetically

"One, because a lance only deals extra damage when you’re riding a charging mount—not when you are charging."

He have to charge to pounce, it says so. I will read pounce again, but I doubt it'll say while riding a charging mount.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Is it safe to assume that this also applies to the Rhino Hide armor from the core book?

Quote:
This +2 hide armor is made from rhinoceros hide. In addition to granting a +2 enhancement bonus to AC, it has a –1 armor check penalty and deals an additional 2d6 points of damage on any successful charge attack made by the wearer, including a mounted charge.


You know, Paizo could really use a good technical writer (not just for this example, but in general).

Sczarni RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Caedwyr wrote:
You know, Paizo could really use a good technical writer (not just for this example, but in general).

With an eidetic memory who has read every Pathfinder book, has mastered statistical math, and is polymath...


0gre wrote:

Is it safe to assume that this also applies to the Rhino Hide armor from the core book?

Quote:
This +2 hide armor is made from rhinoceros hide. In addition to granting a +2 enhancement bonus to AC, it has a –1 armor check penalty and deals an additional 2d6 points of damage on any successful charge attack made by the wearer, including a mounted charge.

I'd go with yes, given that Sean said: (The Core Rulebook doesn’t state that you only get the damage multiplier on the first attack with a lance because there is no rule in the Core Rulebook that allows a PC to charge and take multiple attacks with a weapon, so that combination didn’t need to be addressed.)

So it's likely the same story on the Rhino Hide.


Sean K Reynolds wrote:


The existence of the "harmless" modifier for saves indicates that the target of such an effect can somehow recognize that the incoming effect is not harmful, and choose to automatically fail the save against it. Thus, you drink a potion of cure light wounds, you realize "ah, delicious healing, I willingly fail my save." If you drink a potion of poison or an instantaneous nonmagical poison, you realize "something is wrong, I'm going to try to resist it."

And if you eat something poisonous with an onset time, you don't make the save until the poison activates, and while you can choose to automatically fail, your mind or your body recognizes it as harmful and tries to reject (save) against it.

Oh man, missed that one! That is nicely specific. Haha, that's like when I misread a spell's casting time as 10 minutes instead of a standard.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wait, Sean made the same ruling I did? I'm not sure how to feel about this...


Caedwyr wrote:
You know, Paizo could really use a good technical writer (not just for this example, but in general).

Not necessarily. I think they just need someone to look are rule expansions before they hit the printer. Pounce should really have been limited to natural weapons. Then this whole issue never occurs. Think of all the stuff Sean could have been doing instead.

Really fun discussion though. The blog is SO much more interesting now!

Sczarni RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

James Jacobs wrote:
But Jason... what if the charge is in a straight THREE-DIMENSIONAL line?

Aren't lines, by definition, one-dimensional?


Again- Sean & co, thank you very much, keep ‘em coming!

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

Tamago wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
But Jason... what if the charge is in a straight THREE-DIMENSIONAL line?
Aren't lines, by definition, one-dimensional?

It's a running joke from an old campaign when some cheating bastard monster charged somebody by running on the ground, then up the wall, and when called out for it not being a straight line, I replied, "It IS a straight line... in 3 dimensions."

Apoplexy and laughter ensued. That line is the gift that keeps on giving... :)


Maybe we are not thinking fourth dimensionally? ;)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Wake me when we go fifth dimensional.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Jason Nelson wrote:
ATron9000 wrote:
Notice how Sean only says on a charging mount. You have to charge to pounce. Not ride on a charging mount. He's not saying it outright on purpose.

Welll.... he does say you do get iterative attacks with a lance from pouncing while on a charging mount, and that only the first attack you make gets the extra damage, but that the other iteratives do normal damage:

He'd get the x2 damage on the first lance attack, yes, but iterative attacks with that lance wouldn't get the x2 because the extra energy from that charge is gone the instant he starts to pull the lance backward away from his target.

You conveniently left out the first few words of Sean's quote.

" 5. And, even if Bob somehow found a rule that says "when you charge, it's like you're on a charging mount,"

He's talking about charging on foot with an ability that let's you charge like you were on a charging mount. He has not once confirmed the mounted pounce, but has consistently used the language that myself and many others have pointed out as to why pouncing while mounted is illegal. Maybe Sean is saving this for this Tuesday. You can tell he is avoiding it on purpose.

And James, we always charge in the 3rd dimension. ;)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Wake me when we go fifth dimensional.

We've already been there.


Tamago wrote:
Aren't lines, by definition, one-dimensional?

First: I approve of your name!

Second: No, if it was one dimensional we'd never be able to see it since it would look like a period or pixel, but so flat it'd be invisible. So at the minimum it'd be two dimensional if you wanted to be able to see it.

Silver Crusade

Coriat wrote:

Wait, this is implying that a mounted character basically cannot charge, since he doesn't count as charging when his mount charges.

This screws up a whole host of things, doesn't it?

That's not what is being applied because the PC was never counted as the one doing the charging. Just read the rules on Mounted Combat.


Stynkk wrote:
Tamago wrote:
Aren't lines, by definition, one-dimensional?

First: I approve of your name!

Second: No, if it was one dimensional we'd never be able to see it since it would look like a period or pixel, but so flat it'd be invisible. So at the minimum it'd be two dimensional if you wanted to be able to see it.

A line is never visible: by definition, it has no thickness. A two dimensional line would be a plane.


Lobolusk wrote:

I 100% love FAQ Tuesdays keep em Coming

+ 1000 000


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I about had a heart attack when I saw that they were going to change how Offesive Defense worked. Then I relaized that I played it the way they ruled anyways. Dodged a bullet on that one.

Honestly, the thought never occured to me to stack it with itself after multiple attacks, or to apply it against anyone I wasn't attacking.

Some days the cheese is with me and some days it isn't.


Ravingdork wrote:

I about had a heart attack when I saw that they were going to change how Offesive Defense worked. Then I relaized that I played it the way they ruled anyways. Dodged a bullet on that one.

Honestly, the thought never occured to me to stack it with itself after multiple attacks, or to apply it against anyone I wasn't attacking.

Some days the cheese is with me and some days it isn't.

Don't sell yourself short - the Cheese is strong in you, young padawan.


Quote:
To make that second attack, you have to pull the lance back and stab forward again, and that stab doesn’t have the benefit of the charge’s momentum.

Presumably the correct way to do it, then, is to match the number of attacks per round a character has with the number of swings/stabs/clubs/punches he is able to throw per 6 seconds?

I was not aware Pathfinder had adopted such a rule, since it has always been customary in my games (as player and DM) to be able to freely describe an abstract attack roll. For example, a greatsword fighter who connects with two attack rolls in-game might, for example, have stabbed and then twisted. Or made a single mighty chop that decapitated his opponent, if the second damage roll killed. A brawler might have unleashed a barrage of quick punches with one attack roll. Etc...


Coriat wrote:
Quote:
To make that second attack, you have to pull the lance back and stab forward again, and that stab doesn’t have the benefit of the charge’s momentum.

Presumably the correct way to do it, then, is to match the number of attacks per round a character has with the number of swings/stabs/clubs/punches he is able to throw per 6 seconds?

I was not aware Pathfinder had adopted such a rule, since it has always been customary in my games (as player and DM) to be able to freely describe an abstract attack roll. For example, a greatsword fighter who connects with two attack rolls in-game might, for example, have stabbed and then twisted. Or made a single mighty chop that decapitated his opponent, if the second damage roll killed. A brawler might have unleashed a barrage of quick punches with one attack roll. Etc...

its pounce. That means multiple attacks at the end of a charge. Only the initial is a charge. Describe the rest as you like.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Sean K. Reynolds, i think the questions left are different.

1. If a character that has the pounce ability (like some "my little wild raging ponies*1" or Kitsune with their racial feat) is charging on a mount, does the character then get the pounce attack?
It is a question if actually the character himself is charging or the mount somehow, or how the characters feats work with the mount.

2. If you charge and pounce, get all of that attacks the charge bonus?

*1 barbarians


Thanks for the FAQ on Offensive Defense, love the clarification. Curious while you're still undecided on the final result? What might change still?


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
ATron9000 wrote:
Coriat wrote:
Quote:
To make that second attack, you have to pull the lance back and stab forward again, and that stab doesn’t have the benefit of the charge’s momentum.

Presumably the correct way to do it, then, is to match the number of attacks per round a character has with the number of swings/stabs/clubs/punches he is able to throw per 6 seconds?

I was not aware Pathfinder had adopted such a rule, since it has always been customary in my games (as player and DM) to be able to freely describe an abstract attack roll. For example, a greatsword fighter who connects with two attack rolls in-game might, for example, have stabbed and then twisted. Or made a single mighty chop that decapitated his opponent, if the second damage roll killed. A brawler might have unleashed a barrage of quick punches with one attack roll. Etc...

its pounce. That means multiple attacks at the end of a charge. Only the initial is a charge. Describe the rest as you like.

Do you also give a pouncing dire tiger a charge bonus on only one of its four claw attacks? I admit that is never how I or any of my GMs have run monsters with pounce.

(not a question just for you, but for SKR as well).


Natural attacks aren't iterative. There is primary and secondary. I believe it's simultaneous, but I could be wrong.

Liberty's Edge

Let's be honest, a bite should never get the effects of a charge anyway, while we're on the "it doesn't make sense" train. I'm running toward you! Therefore the force exerted by my jaws closing is...greater! Or something!


I never thought charging bonuses were really entirely about the additional force to begin with. Depending on the nature of the attack and the combatants, it potentially combines added momentum from the charge, the inability to properly guard oneself against an opponant that you didn't expect to be getting so close so fast, the weak-kneed terror of seeing something or someone barrelling down on you keeping you from taking the right actions, the surge of adrenaline that comes with being the barreller-down-onner, the ability to use your momentum from the charge to swing your attack around to a vulnerable area, using the momentum from your charge to slam the other guy, throwing him off balance to open up space for an attack, and so on. Obviously it would be crazy to try to model every single one of these effects mechanically, so the game simplifies it down to "+2 attack when you're charging".

Shadow Lodge

Bite attacks don't get a damage bonus on a charge, they get an attack bonus.


These blogs make me look forward to Tuesdays. :)

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Stynkk wrote:
Jason Nelson wrote:
ATron9000 wrote:
Notice how Sean only says on a charging mount. You have to charge to pounce. Not ride on a charging mount. He's not saying it outright on purpose.

Welll.... he does say you do get iterative attacks with a lance from pouncing while on a charging mount, and that only the first attack you make gets the extra damage, but that the other iteratives do normal damage:

He'd get the x2 damage on the first lance attack, yes, but iterative attacks with that lance wouldn't get the x2 because the extra energy from that charge is gone the instant he starts to pull the lance backward away from his target.

Wouldn't your mount still have mount-mentum?! Why not just dual wield lances on a horse? TWF!

Multiple attacks, even when using TWF are sequential, not simultaneous. You spend the mounted charge momentum with the first attack.

ATron9000 wrote:
Natural attacks aren't iterative. There is primary and secondary. I believe it's simultaneous, but I could be wrong.

Not exactly. In Pathfinder if you are making only natural attacks they are all primary unless a specific rule for that attack say differently.

Example: the horse Docile special ability:
Docile (Ex) Unless specifically trained for combat (see the Handle Animal skill), a horse's hooves are treated as secondary attacks.

And natural attacks aren't simultaneous. You resolve them in sequence and can change targets after seeing the result of each attack.


Mabven the OP healer wrote:
Stynkk wrote:
Tamago wrote:
Aren't lines, by definition, one-dimensional?

First: I approve of your name!

Second: No, if it was one dimensional we'd never be able to see it since it would look like a period or pixel, but so flat it'd be invisible. So at the minimum it'd be two dimensional if you wanted to be able to see it.
A line is never visible: by definition, it has no thickness. A two dimensional line would be a plane.

Yes. This is why 3 dimensions allows a cube, while 2 dimensions gives a square. This leaves 1 dimension as a line. A single point has no technical dimension.!

I'm personally interested in figuring charges along a tesseract... Someone fetch AlecStorm!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

*reads posts about people arguing that mounted combat feats work as intended while arguing that the player is not the one doing the charging and therefore doesn't get pounce*

*head explodes*

1. To those of you who are making these kinds of arguments: You cannot have your cake and eat it too. Or, you cannot both qualify as charging on a mount for some feats while at the same time be disqualified as charging for others.

2. This is not a mounted combat question, it's a question about the charge mechanic while mounted. Huge difference.

3. The FAQ did not "kill" RAGELANCEPOUNCE it simply brought it down from amazing to simply awesome. As someone earlier in the thread pointed out, all that has changed is that you do not get the X2 bonus from iterative attacks which simply means that less damage will be done after the first, but enough damage will be done to incapacitate most casters.

4. SKR is a cool guy and I feel sorry for him that he has to waste his time clarifying the semantics of this argument. You are a better man than I, SKR.

51 to 100 of 229 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Bride of the FAQ Attack! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.