Quick question...
Do you allow Spring Attack on a target you cannot view from your starting position?
For example: Monster is around a corner and out of view from your starting position, can you Spring Attack the monster?
That's a good question that I haven't seen before; it's never come up in my game.
As for me, I would rule that it is an attack, just like any other attack. And just like any other attack, the target is selected before the attack begins, not halfway through the attack.
So all the rules of attacking apply.
Which means, if you have no line of sight to your enemy (darkness, invisibility, fog, around a corner, whatever) you must target the enemy's square rather than targeting the enemy directly, and therefore you should get a 50% miss chance.
So that's what I would do. Impose the 50% miss chance.
That is assuming the character knows which square the enemy is in.
Unfortunately, it's almost 100% certain the player knows which square, because you're probably using a battlemat or a flipmat or some other method of drawing it on th table, and if you're not, if your game is totally verbal without figures or table maps, you probably have verbal ways of representing it, like simply asking the DM and getting a straight answer.
So it gets a bit wierd. Really, the character wouldn't know if that foe moved or not. Maybe he took a 5' move sideways, or back. Maybe the area was so narrow that no movement was even possible.
What I might consider, just in this situation, is putting a screen on the mat where the other players could see around the corner, but anyone who couldn't see around that corner must sit where the screen blocks their view of the battlemat. Then I would instruct the player to pick a square (that the player cannot see) that he wants to attack. Then he can spring attack and either:
a) attack the right target with a 50% miss chance (because his target really was in the square he chose)
b) attack some other target with a 50% miss chance (because something else was in the square he chose)
c) attack an empty space (because nothing is in that square)
d) attack an ally (if an ally is in the space he chose - I would allow him to halt his attack and run no risk of hurting the ally)
Which is all really strange.
Maybe it's just eaiser to disallow it.
Just curious, how is a Spring Attack in this situation different from an attack with the feat?
For example, the character in question moves around the corner and runs into an enemy that was previously unseen...do they not have the option to attack that enemy as long as they have only moved up to there base movement?
Just curious, how is a Spring Attack in this situation different from an attack with the feat?
For example, the character in question moves around the corner and runs into an enemy that was previously unseen...do they not have the option to attack that enemy as long as they have only moved up to there base movement?
It is a bit different.
With using a movement action to move, then a standard action to attack, the game makes no difference as regards to whether you moved your full movement, or part of your movement, or whether you suddenly found a situation that forces you to stop moving. None of that matters. When you stop moving, for any reason at all, your movement action ends and your standard action begins.
But Spring Attack combines moving and striking into one standard action.
This means it all happens at once. Your character decides on a course of action, then springs to his foe, hits him, and then springs away (well, springing isn't really necessary; he might just dash/trot/run to and from the enemy).
Now, maybe what you mean is that the character might decide, after coming face to face with the enemy, that he will convert his spring attack to a normal attack (and then not move away after attacking).
This seems like a fair ruling, but it has a big flaw.
While the character was still around the corner, without line of sight to the enemy, he decided to use his standard action to spring attack. Once he gets around the corner, even if he wants to stop his movement and just stand there and swing his weapon, he has no standard actions left to swing his weapon this round. He may still have a movement action, depending on what he did before spring attacking, but his standard action is gone.
Maybe a lenient DM might say "OK, you can stop moving here and we'll call that your movement action, which leaves you a standard action to hit the enemy."
But then a savvy player would say "Cool. I stop moving here. Then I use spring attack to hit my enemy and spring back to where I was."
Which, when I think about it, is what the player should do anyway.
Of course, that assumes that the player can move to a spot where he can see the enemy from 10' away - if that enemy is so close to the corner that the only way to see him is to be within 10', then this trick won't work.
Just curious, how is a Spring Attack in this situation different from an attack with the feat?
For example, the character in question moves around the corner and runs into an enemy that was previously unseen...do they not have the option to attack that enemy as long as they have only moved up to there base movement?
It's not the attacking the enemy that's the question, it's the running away after the attack that's in doubt.
I would treat it like charge which states:
"If you don’t have line of sight to the opponent at the
start of your turn, you can’t charge that opponent."
You have to prepare before you start moving to avoid any AoO's, especially since there are some AoO's that occur before the attack (with reach for instance).
Just curious, how is a Spring Attack in this situation different from an attack with the feat?
For example, the character in question moves around the corner and runs into an enemy that was previously unseen...do they not have the option to attack that enemy as long as they have only moved up to there base movement?
No, they would not. They would be flat-footed at that point, initiative for the surprise round for whomever was aware of the other, then general combat.
As for if they are all aware and already in combat? Sure. Spring Attack feat allows you to move both before and after your attack, so long as your movement is not more than your speed.
Blake.. you may wish to read the feat again. Spring Attack is not a standard action that includes a move. Good points about planning for the attacks though.
Obviously this situation has come up in one of my groups. I ruled that the character needed line of sight to Spring Attack.
Although happy with my ruling, I wanted to know what others have ruled.
Thanks for the input.
Quick question...
Do you allow Spring Attack on a target you cannot view from your starting position?
For example: Monster is around a corner and out of view from your starting position, can you Spring Attack the monster?
Quick answer: Yes.
First of all, you could still hear or smell the guy. Or be told he's there. Or just walk three feet, see him, and then decide to spring attack him - you haven't provoked an AoO so far, and once you go into spring attack mode, you won't provoke one at all.
This is not DDM or something like that. The rules are supposed to make sense, to allow actions that make sense, not to be rules. That must always come second in a roleplaying game. (Boardgames are a different matter).
Blake.. you may wish to read the feat again. Spring Attack is not a standard action that includes a move. Good points about planning for the attacks though.I am reading the feat.
Both in Beta and the SRD.
No mention at all of what kind of action is used.
I suppose you could argue that we're talking about a full-round action with moving/attacking all mixed together, but that would make this a fairly weak feat. You couldn't move into position, then execute a spring attack. You could't stand from prone and execute a spring attack. You couldn't draw a weapon and execute a spring attack. Etc.
I have always taken this to work like a charge, bullrush, or overrun: a standard action that includes one attack against one target.
Maybe there is some errata, or FAQ, but I sure don't see a contradiction in the SRD or Beta.
From what I read in the d20 FAQ (this specific question is not covered), the attack you get during a spring attack uses the "attack action" which is different than a standard action and different than a full-round action. It is a limited form of standard action that only allows you to make a single attack. This "attack action" occurs during your movement.
That's all the FAQ says about Spring Attack (at least, that's all it says that is relevent to this discussion).
Normally, you can never use an "attack action" during a movement action. It must be used during a standard action. Also, full-round actions allow you to attack, but often you can make more than one attack, so the "attack action" is not always applicable to attacking in a full round.
You can, however, always choose to move your normal alotted movement rate during a standard action.
Since you can move during a standard action, and since you can use an "attack action" during a standard action, and since Spring Attack blends these two activities into one action, it seems to me it blends them into a standard action.
This is not stated clearly. In fact, it's quite unclear from the rules presented.
But since I am unaware of any official contradictions to my line of reasoning, this is how I've always assumed it to work.
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Since you can move during a standard action, and since you can use an "attack action" during a standard action, and since Spring Attack blends these two activities into one action, it seems to me it blends them into a standard action.
So, with that line of thought, would the PC get a move action after the Spring Attack since the Spring Attack is only a standard action?
Based on your statement, the PC would be able to move, attack, move (the Spring Attack Standard Action) and then move again (move action).
This doesn't seem correct to me.
FYI, my group has always used Spring Attack as the equivalent of a Full Attack action, where you are sacrificing your extra attacks for the ability to move in and out of combat.
Since you can move during a standard action, and since you can use an "attack action" during a standard action, and since Spring Attack blends these two activities into one action, it seems to me it blends them into a standard action.So, with that line of thought, would the PC get a move action after the Spring Attack since the Spring Attack is only a standard action?
Based on your statement, the PC would be able to move, attack, move (the Spring Attack Standard Action) and then move again (move action).
This doesn't seem correct to me.
FYI, my group has always used Spring Attack as the equivalent of a Full Attack action, where you are sacrificing your extra attacks for the ability to move in and out of combat.
Remember, the Spring Attack only lets you move a total of your normal movement anyway.
So if you move at 30', you can, for example, spring 20', attack, then move at most 10' more feet after your attack.
Except for the attack part, you can already do this in combat.
You can move twice in any round.
Spring Attack still only lets you move twice in any round, but during one of those moves, you can make one attack, and that particular move (not the other one this round) is prevented from provoking an AoO from the one target you are attacking.
That's all it does - insert an attack during a move you make, and make you safe from that move provoking an AoO from that one target.
I believe this is fine for a standard action, especially since Spring Attack is the third feat in a feat chain and has other prerequisites to boot.
What you do with your remaining move action is up to you. Move before you start your spring attack, move after you finish the spring attack, or do something else, like stand from prone, draw a weapon, get a potion out of a beltpouch, or whatever.
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Since you can move during a standard action, and since you can use an "attack action" during a standard action, and since Spring Attack blends these two activities into one action, it seems to me it blends them into a standard action.So, with that line of thought, would the PC get a move action after the Spring Attack since the Spring Attack is only a standard action?
Based on your statement, the PC would be able to move, attack, move (the Spring Attack Standard Action) and then move again (move action).
This doesn't seem correct to me.
FYI, my group has always used Spring Attack as the equivalent of a Full Attack action, where you are sacrificing your extra attacks for the ability to move in and out of combat.
Remember, the Spring Attack only lets you move a total of your normal movement anyway.
So if you move at 30', you can, for example, spring 20', attack, then move at most 10' more feet after your attack.
Except for the attack part, you can already do this in combat.
You can move twice in any round.
Spring Attack still only lets you move twice in any round, but during one of those moves, you can make one attack, and that particular move (not the other one this round) is prevented from provoking an AoO from the one target you are attacking.
That's all it does - insert an attack during a move you make, and make you safe from that move provoking an AoO from that one target.
I believe this is fine for a standard action, especially since Spring Attack is the third feat in a feat chain and has other prerequisites to boot.
What you do with your remaining move action is up to you. Move before you start your spring attack, move after you finish the spring attack, or do something else, like stand from prone, draw a weapon, get a potion out of a beltpouch, or whatever.
Actually, your explanation lets the PC move 3 times in a round. Once before the attack, once after the attack, and one more time either before or after the attack. I'm not sure that is the intent, but if that's the case, Spring Attack just got deadlier, as the PC can now:
Move 30", then move again, attack, and move again. That's 60" of movement PLUS an attack in one round. A Rogue really benefits now, as they can move up to 30" to set up a sneak attack on an opponent across the battlefield. In essence, a Spring Attack standard action is granting you a double move and an attack. I'm not sure this is the intent of the feat.
This may work in your games, but I believe the full attack action suits the feat better, and will continue treating it as such in my games until we get an official ruling that states otherwise.
Actually, your explanation lets the PC move 3 times in a round. Once before the attack, once after the attack, and one more time either before or after the attack. I'm not sure that is the intent, but if that's the case, Spring Attack just got deadlier, as the PC can now:
Move 30", then move again, attack, and move again. That's 60" of movement PLUS an attack in one round. A Rogue really benefits now, as they can move up to 30" to set up a sneak attack on an opponent across the battlefield. In essence, a Spring Attack standard action is granting you a double move and an attack. I'm not sure this is the intent of the feat.
This may work in your games, but I believe the full attack action suits the feat better, and will continue treating it as such in my games until we get an official ruling that states otherwise.
The alternative, making it a full-round action, means that a character burns up three feats for the privilege of being able to move once in a round and attack once in a round.
They can already do that.
All they gain for that is using part of their one move before the attack and part of it after, and immunity to one AoO from only one enemy if their movement would provoke that AoO.
That's an awfully tiny advantage for the third feat in a feat chain.
This may work in your games, but I believe a player should get a respectable benefit for taking a third feat in a feat chain, and I will continue treating it as such in my games until we get an official ruling that states otherwise.
:)
The alternative, making it a full-round action, means that a character burns up three feats for the privilege of being able to move once in a round and attack once in a round.
They can already do that.
All they gain for that is using part of their one move before the attack and part of it after, and immunity to one AoO from only one enemy if their movement would provoke that AoO.
That capability is hugely important to avoid a full-attack on the spring-attacker by the target. This can be immensely beneficial if the target gets more primary (or simply more) attacks than the springer. Spring attacking a dragon for instance...
Thanks for responding, I see your point on the wording now.
That said, I think this line in the feat clarifies it fairly well.
"Normal: You cannot move both before and after an attack."
Here's the exact wording of the feat in case it wasn't posted before.
Benefit: You can move up to your speed and make a single
melee attack without provoking any attacks of opportunity
from the target of your attack. You can move both before and
after the attack, but you must move at least 10 feet before the
attack and the total distance that you move cannot be greater
than your speed. You cannot use this ability to attack a foe
that is adjacent to you at the start of your turn.
Normal: You cannot move both before and after an attack.
hrm even better...found the paizo beta version
It doesn't seem to specify that your move action is used in the use of this feat. It would seem to me that they would write it in as "as a full round action, make a move, attack, and move again". It does not seem to say this. However it's easy to see how it could be construed this way.
As for the original question, if you're in a surprise round and you've managed to locate the creature in question, I would say absolutely. If you moved out of line of sight last round, but still somehow know exactly where it is, then sure. However, if you haven't located the creature, how the hell would you know where to go to attack? Seems like the question answers itself. In D&D you don't move 5 feet at a time until you decide to stop and attack whatever is near(and then use a crazy feat), you indicate your full movement action and resolve it, then take another action if available. You cannot decide to take a Spring Attack in the middle of a move action, if that's what you're inquiring after.
Do you allow Spring Attack on a target you cannot view from your starting position?
For example: Monster is around a corner and out of view from your starting position, can you Spring Attack the monster?
My simple answer:
YES, if the monster moved there during THAT ROUND, AND didn't role a hide check.NO, if the monster STARTED there, which technically makes it hidden or unknown, so no target.
"Your character decides on a course of action, then springs to his foe, hits him, and then springs away (well, springing isn't really necessary; he might just dash/trot/run to and from the enemy).
Does this also apply to Sashaying, Skipping and Gliding(land-based)? Possibly all the above, ya know for elves and such.
Here's the exact wording of the feat in case it wasn't posted before.
Benefit: You can move up to your speed and make a single
melee attack without provoking any attacks of opportunity
from the target of your attack. You can move both before and
after the attack, but you must move at least 10 feet before the
attack and the total distance that you move cannot be greater
than your speed. You cannot use this ability to attack a foe
that is adjacent to you at the start of your turn.
Normal: You cannot move both before and after an attack.
hrm even better...found the paizo beta version
Key word here is SPEED... typically 30'(6 squares). More or less depending on size, armor, class, etc. NO mention of a move action(s)... just YOUR SPEED.
It doesn't seem to specify that your move action is used in the use of this feat. It would seem to me that they would write it in as "as a full round action, make a move, attack, and move again". It does not seem to say this. However it's easy to see how it could be construed this way.
This is an unfortunate lack of words found in quite a few places, new and old rules alike. Whether it's being "misconstrued" or whether it's just being "word-smithed"(polite term) into what someone WANTS to read is more likely.
As for me, I would rule that it is an attack, just like any other attack. And just like any other attack, the target is selected before the attack begins, not halfway through the attack.
So all the rules of attacking apply.
I disagree... see the text below. (FullAttack)
Mind you this is using SpringAttack as a FULL ATTACK/FULL ROUND ACTION, which is how my groups have always done it.-----------------------
Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, 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.
-----------------------
So unless the monster is hidden or previously unknown to the party, it's a target in my opinion. What rules of attacking are you refering to exactly?
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Actually, your explanation lets the PC move 3 times in a round. Once before the attack, once after the attack, and one more time either before or after the attack. I'm not sure that is the intent, but if that's the case, Spring Attack just got deadlier, as the PC can now:
Move 30", then move again, attack, and move again. That's 60" of movement PLUS an attack in one round. A Rogue really benefits now, as they can move up to 30" to set up a sneak attack on an opponent across the battlefield. In essence, a Spring Attack standard action is granting you a double move and an attack. I'm not sure this is the intent of the feat.
This may work in your games, but I believe the full attack action suits the feat better, and will continue treating it as such in my games until we get an official ruling that states otherwise.
The alternative, making it a full-round action, means that a character burns up three feats for the privilege of being able to move once in a round and attack once in a round.
They can already do that.
All they gain for that is using part of their one move before the attack and part of it after, and immunity to one AoO from only one enemy if their movement would provoke that AoO.
That's an awfully tiny advantage for the third feat in a feat chain.
This may work in your games, but I believe a player should get a respectable benefit for taking a third feat in a feat chain, and I will continue treating it as such in my games until we get an official ruling that states otherwise.
:)
Fair enough!
BTW, I'd love to see the "official" answer to this quandary...
This is torture...I wish I hadn't asked..., ok, not really.
So basically it depends on whether you consider Spring Attack to be a Full Round Action or not [some say yes, some say no].
Then whether you would allow "some" movement before making the choice to use Spring Attack [thus, not treating it like other attacks like Charging where line of sight is required].
Then some would also allow it if someone else could see the target but some would say that’s a 50% miss because you're guessing a target area before "knowing" the target is really there even though by the time you get there you will know if the target is there because you would be able to see it!
Well that all makes perfect sense!
FYI, the character in my game is a Monk with 50ft. movement!
It seems to me that the easiest solution would be to say it's a Full Round Action, and to add you need line of sight from your starting position to use it, but that's just me!