Seeker, I suppose this rule is just for fun:
Lances and Charge Attacks: A lance deals double damage if employed by a mounted character in a charge.
How does that change anything I said? When the mount charges you gain the benefits and penlites of its charge. This si spelled out under mounted combat. The line above is also spelled out in the same section.
Mount charge/ charge not the same thing by the rules.
I disagree, the rules for mounted charge are done differently and it is spelled out.
It is utterly useless to argue with seeker. He will never change his stance, ever. Never has.That is true, i remember a qinggong thread where for 2 or 3 pages everyone was trying to explain to seeker how a qinggong works but he just couldn't change his stance.If you go back and read the end of that thread, he did actually admit the possibility of being wrong.
Yes, I was frightened too.
What? How did i missed that? I have to find that thread.
Leo it was at the end ol the thread. It didn't keep going much after that. Its not the only time I admitted I was wrong however. I am just like most the folks in this thread and do not admit I am wrong if I do not believe I am.
@Door, I am still gonna disagree, charge and mounted charge by the rules are not the same thing. It is kinda like saying you full moved while mounted. You didn't move,unless ya ran beside the mount.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Seeker,
Like I pointed out above (and apparently was ignored) You can be moved by another force and be counted as moving. If someone was bull rushed through threatened squares, they're moving, and would draw AoO without Bull Rush's exeption.
If you ride your horse through a threatened square, does the threatening character get an AoO on you?
It could, But that has nothing to do with you not being able to charge. Can you charge from a chair? In a bed? While swinging in a tree? Mounted combat is clear you are not charging, but do count as you are in some ways. And it details these ways.
Charge is clear in that you must be the one doing the moving, mounted charge also is clear in who is doing the charging and how this effects the PC riding the mount.
Can you charge while falling? You're not moving, your falling.
No but, ya can however charge with a leap.
Can you not use TWF with two lances? While mounted, can't lances be used one handed?
No, if ya jump meaning to charge ya can. Ifya slip an do not mean to jump in a energy drink inspired act of...umm dareing then ya cant
Can you not use TWF with two lances? While mounted, can't lances use be used one handed?
That one for sure is in therealm if ask the Gm.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Im sorry but from my perspective this seems like a nonsense argument. to me it just seems like people not wanting this to be used because of how powerful it is so they are reading way too much into the wording just to keep it from happening. this game was not written for lawyars it was written for everyday people. the rules are simple and clear. everything that doesnt stack says it doesnt stack and everything else stacks. they go out of their way to point out what cant be used together in the game. as long as pounce does not say it cant be used while mounted or cant be used with a weapon (like a lance) then it can be used in combonation. if you dont want it to work than house rule it.
eh that is how I read the rules. You guys just leave parts out you don't like. The only way it works as you say it does is if you ignore a few lines out of charge.
Other then this thread I have never talked with or played with anyone that allowed a double charge. Which is what you are talking about.
Sigh if you charge( which you can not) and the mount charges ( which you get the benefits from) it is a double charge it would be -4 Ac, +4 attack x4 with the lance and take two full action( one for you, one for the mount). It would also limit you by rules you ignore.
You simply can't charge while mounted and charging. Mounted combat covers this. I have read, reread and quoted it. Charge is not the same as mounted charge and by the rules requires you to be the one doing the moving for you to charge.
You can not take a charge action. You do however gain the benefits of a charge action if your mount charges. The lance is stated to work in a mounted charge. Which is not a charge you take yourself. Mounted combat limits you to how many actions you may take and as you are not the one doing the charging pounce does not work. which is the whole point of the thread.
So you can take a double charge or you can not. The rules read to me as you can not.
Sigh, man run it however ya like. Me rereading is not gonna change the words nor how I use em. If ya wish to allow it to be used that way, more power to ya.
None taken man. I have no Issue saying No you can't do that. I really do not care if you can show me where it says you can. This Is just how I read it, it had nothing to do with allowing it or not. I lump it up there with two lances, two shield or caster punpun sillyness.
Anyhow Hands out Rum
Oh my giddy aunt. What is wrong with you people?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is what RLP looks like.
LOL
Why wouldn't you be able to charge vertically with a good enough acrobatics check to make the jump? Technically, jumping is part of movement, there is nothing impeding your movement, and you are moving in a straight line.
Horse? What horse? All I can find is this cloud of pink mist...Also, forum goers beat horse to death and beyond.
That's why I said beyond. Also, this horse used to be a very special one and now it's dead ;_;.
Okay, now that I seem to have everyone's attention, my basic problem is not RAGELANCEPOUNCE. I'm willing to grant that it may be possible (I still think it's not, but I can understand your argument). I think the basic issue in the entire multi-thread discussion is that many, if not most, of the proponents of RAGELANCEPOUNCE will not give the same consideration to the other side as they insist on for theirs. They require a liberal reading of the rules for their side, and a restrictive reading for the caster side. This is inherently unjust. We need to be working from the same set of rules, or we may as well not even have the discussion. Examples? How about the interpretation of mind blank that says it doesn't cover the caster's spells and items, because it doesn't specifically say it does?
Well now, it's called Mind Blank, and not Mind and Gear blank. Mind Blank + Nondetection, however...
Trinam has that argument right by RAW...Mind Blank doesn't mention items. Thematically, however, this is the most powerful anti-scrying magic in the game. Saying that a God can't find him, but a level 5 mage can just scry the mage's ring instead, is a cop-out.
I personally presume it to cover all worn and carried items. Otherwise, it's useless vs scrying. Just scribe something you know the target is wearing/holding, and you'll find him, even if the wearer is invisible.
Check that, also makes no sense. You couldn't see the Mind Blanked person, but you could see ALL HIS CLOTHES AND GEAR. Invisible to scrying, riiiight.
So, by the text of the spell, him being in the area of the spell but unseen, seems to indicate that everything worn/carried is covered, too.
==Aelryinth
I still giggle every time I think of:
RAGE!
*charge of the Light Brigade*
Horse almost reaches foe...
"GRAWWWW!" Barbarian leaps off of horse and body slams bad guy.
Other than that, as a GM, anyone tried the any other interpretation of the the ragelancepounce move I'd just laugh at them and move on.
Ive looked at this as the devils advocate.
As you can see from mounted combat (highlight mine) ‘Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move.’ is the only time in says anything about you and your mount working together. But if we also look at the feats (highlights mine) It uses the term ‘when you are mounted and using the charge action’ now the rules for mounted combat don’t cover ‘who’s charge action’ but we have to assume it means the rider directing the mount to charge, or else as others have said the feats do nothing. Or to put it another way going from the above rules the rider just uses the mounts movement in place of his own.
These rules cover being mounted on a horse in combat but can also be applied to more unusual steeds, such as a griffon or dragon.
Mounts in Combat: Horses, ponies, and riding dogs can serve readily as combat steeds. Mounts that do not possess combat training (see the Handle Animal skill) are frightened by combat. If you don't dismount, you must make a DC 20 Ride check each round as a move action to control such a mount. If you succeed, you can perform a standard action after the move action. If you fail, the move action becomes a full-round action, and you can't do anything else until your next turn.
Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move.
A horse (not a pony) is a Large creature and thus takes up a space 10 feet (2 squares) across. For simplicity, assume that you share your mount's space during combat.
Combat while Mounted: With a DC 5 Ride check, you can guide your mount with your knees so as to use both hands to attack or defend yourself. This is a free action.
When you attack a creature smaller than your mount that is on foot, you get the +1 bonus on melee attacks for being on higher ground. If your mount moves more than 5 feet, you can only make a single melee attack. Essentially, you have to wait until the mount gets to your enemy before attacking, so you can't make a full attack. Even at your mount's full speed, you don't take any penalty on melee attacks while mounted.
If your mount charges, you also take the AC penalty associated with a charge. If you make an attack at the end of the charge, you receive the bonus gained from the charge. When charging on horseback, you deal double damage with a lance (see Charge).
You can use ranged weapons while your mount is taking a double move, but at a –4 penalty on the attack roll. You can use ranged weapons while your mount is running (quadruple speed) at a –8 penalty. In either case, you make the attack roll when your mount has completed half its movement. You can make a full attack with a ranged weapon while your mount is moving. Likewise, you can take move actions normally.
While mounted and charging, you can move, strike at a foe, and then continue moving.
Prerequisites: Ride 1 rank, Mounted Combat.
Benefit: When you are mounted and use the charge action, you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the charge). Your total movement for the round can't exceed double your mounted speed. You and your mount do not provoke an attack of opportunity from the opponent that you attack.
Spirited Charge (Combat)
Your mounted charge attacks deal a tremendous amount of damage.
Prerequisites: Ride 1 rank, Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack.
Benefit: When mounted and using the charge action, you deal double damage with a melee weapon (or triple damage with a lance).
Now I know people are going to say as they have it doesn’t say that but does say ‘when your mount charges’ and ‘you gain the bonuses and penalties of the charge’ but as we can see these things ‘you’ ‘your mount’ aren’t constant. You have to use some sort of sense to work this through and the only logical sense I can see are that they both mean you both working as one as the mount does what you direct it to do.
If we agree on this then we must from reading pounce from the Brb
that at the end of a charge you can now make a full attack action. So AM can use this tactic. Yes I know I have used the term sense but when the rules don’t mess with terms they use we have to do that, yes I can see where the ‘it doesn’t work’ guys are coming from as the rules don’t specifically state some things as its says ‘your mount’ and ‘you’ but that’s where people’s opinions come in.
On a side note as someone pointed out if you read here
Hope this is a clear as it sounds in my head.
they are not constant because no developer ever thought that some crazy nerds would start such an argument! I would say this is totally gm decision because according to the rules you can interpret it in 2 different ways (reading this I can't say Seeker is wrong or it is so clear how it is wrote)...
I personally see it kinda as cheating, or forcing rules. Which I would not like to do, but in occasional games you see also players cheating dices so everyone has a different approach, as long as it satisfies you as ridiculous as it can be it's always ok.
UH OH
Sounds really cool actually.
Like a cav unit with maximum charge in Total War.
Its weakness is the mount (I am sure the barb will want to replace that), which you could shoot or destroy, or attack with reach. Then the barb gets up and is not happy, and still raging, lol.
I like to see more cav in the game, they can be great threats to strong parties.
Raglanunce the barbarian conceived.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh god, not this again.
If you refer back to the miles long thread on this it was proven not to work. What it boils down to is the mount is doing the charging for you while certain feats open up the opportunity for you to benefit from that charging even though it's not your legs that are touching the ground.
Please don't continue to spread rumors about this working when it's already been debunked.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Oh god, not this again.
If you refer back to the miles long thread on this it was proven not to work. What it boils down to is the mount is doing the charging for you while certain feats open up the opportunity for you to benefit from that charging even though it's not your legs that are touching the ground.
Please don't continue to spread rumors about this working when it's already been debunked.
Where was it debunked exactly?
So has this ever been settled?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
EDIT: Tac adds stuff, this time with more dead horse beating!
So, I just read the first page and stopped. Not my normal style, but meh. I've got a baby who takes up most of my time. Sorry, guys. Seven pages is six pages too many right now.
Just so we're clear, I have no horse in this race. () I don't particularly enjoy barbarians, no one who's ever played at my table (save one guy four years ago) has every enjoyed playing a barbarian, and while we tend to be power gamers, to a point, we're not all about the combat.
First, a few points of clarification.
Pounce does not require natural attacks, it simply includes them.
The Beast Totem (Greater) rage ability gives a modified variant of the Pounce ability (specifically, it's modified so that it only works while the Barbarian is raging).
I'd just like to point out a phrase, if I may.
While raging, the barbarian gains the pounce special ability, allowing her to make a full attack at the end of a charge. In addition, the damage from her claws increases to 1d8 (1d6 if Small) and the claws deal ×3 damage on a critical hit. A barbarian must have the beast totem rage power to select this rage power. A barbarian must be at least 10th level to select this rage power.
That's the ability. The phrase? Comes from the sentence, "While raging, the barbarian gains the pounce special ability, allowing her to make a full attack at the end of a charge."
See if you can spot it. I was surprised when I found it!
"... at the end of a charge."
So, you may be wondering, what's up with that phrase? Why does Tac care about it? Because of a single letter, the word "a". As worded, if you insist that the mount is taking the action, not the barbarian, you must (if you use consistent reading standards) accept that at the end of any charge, whether or not the barbarian is doing the charging, the barbarian can pounce. That means that even if you interpret the rules as saying that the mount is charging, not the barbarian, the barbarian still gets the benefits as if they were the ones charging with that ability (i.e. rage-lance-pounce functions).
But, you may rightly point out, the Pounce ability specifies that the creature with the Pounce ability must make a charge attack to get the benefits! This is correct! ... in general. However, the Barbarian's special ability is a specific instance of the general ability. And, remember, that specific trumps general (in the game^, as in law).
Point in fact, if you wish to get pedantic about it, the way the Greater Beast Totem ability is worded, at the end of anyone's pounce in the entire planet, a Barbarian can make a full attack. Of course that's nonsense, but that's the way it's worded... if you choose to look at it that way.
Personally it's easier (and just as RAW) to look at it with the eye that says the barbarian and the mount count as a single creature for purposes of charging. That helps avoid most of the headaches here. Or, you know, you could rule "no" at your table if you don't like it. Or throw obstacles in the terrain to prevent a charge from a large sized mount. I likely will.
^
|
|
Here's the thing.
When you are mounted everything changes.
Rage pounce is not a mount oriented feat like Spirited Charge. Would your mounts speed increase if you are wearing boots of striding and springing? No it wouldn't or would its speed increase due to the barbarians fast movement, again no.
The section on being mounted is where you need to he reading.
You charging and charging on horseback are two different things and people really need to realize this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Man I love it when my posts prove to be prophetic, as opposed to normally being pathetic.
Here's the thing.
When you are mounted everything changes.
Rage pounce is not a mount oriented feat like Spirited Charge. Would your mounts speed increase if you are wearing boots of striding and springing? No it wouldn't or would its speed increase due to the barbarians fast movement, again no.
The section on being mounted is where you need to he reading.
You charging and charging on horseback are two different things and people really need to realize this.
So, you specifically ignored the part where specific trumps general and/or the very specific wording of Greater Beast Totem? That's a thing you just did? Cool. Good to know.
Here's a thing I find very curious.
Rage Lance Pounce is a ridiculously, tremendously powerful combination. And it receives a lot - and I mean a lot - of hate because of it.
But ultimately, that's all it is. A single combination among many. GMs need to be aware that it exists, but they need to also know that it's not invulnerable, and it's not unavoidable.
Like the fun, goofiness of Pun-Pun or the Omnificer (though much, much less), it's not a "must-exist" thing. It's just a way that the rules work to create a surprisingly potent combination. And being a mounted barbarian with a lance seems kind of hokey to me anyway. Plus, as has been noted often recently, barbarians are kind of super-powerful. I've seen more complaints about barbarians super-damage and one-hit/end-combat in general recently, than most anything else (except for "fix monk" things).
But if you're going into sophistry and pedantry to make it not work... don't.
For the curious, Charge, Mounted Combat (not the feat) and the Ride skill.
Specifically, for untrained mounts (and only untrained mounts) the mounted combat section indicates that it requires a move action to control the mount, allowing you a standard action only thereafter, or, if you fail the ride check, it becomes a full round action instead.
For trained mounts, it notes that if your mount moves more than 5 feet, you can only make a single melee attack. Exactly like not being mounted.
Also,
If your mount charges, you also take the AC penalty associated with a charge. If you make an attack at the end of the charge, you receive the bonus gained from the charge. When charging on horseback, you deal double damage with a lance (see Charge).
... and,
Attacking on a Charge
After moving, you may make a single melee attack. You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll and take a –2 penalty to your AC until the start of your next turn.
A charging character gets a +2 bonus on combat maneuver attack rolls made to bull rush an opponent.
Even if you have extra attacks, such as from having a high enough base attack bonus or from using multiple weapons, you only get to make one attack during a charge.
Lances and Charge Attacks: A lance deals double damage if employed by a mounted character in a charge.
So, you know, while charging you're only supposed to get a single melee attack, exactly like what happens when your mount charges (which the mounted combat rules section tells us to refer to). Ergo, that's the general rule.
Since pounce modifies charge, and mounted and unmounted charging work identically (except for the addition of extra lance damage for mounted characters)...
But rule in your own games as you will. I know I will.