Can you jump and then 'Charge' on your way down?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

If you had a high enough jump score? Say you were a 4th level Ninja and took Acrobatic master ( +20 to Acrobatics for 1 Ki point) and High Jumper ( Half Acrobatics DC when High jumping) Could you high jump for 10+ ft ( DC 0 if using the KI point if I'm reading the ninja skills right?) and then charge attack on your way down?

I want to make a sort of final fantasy Dragoon type class spear/lance and all but don't want to read the rules wrong. Thanks for the help in advance.


I'm envisioning the final fight between Po and Tai Lung here...

Given that the requirement to charge is 10' of movement and falling is, I suppose technically movement, I don't see a problem with what you are doing. I would say that the jump movement, if you are attempting to use it when in a threatened square would draw AoOs, however.


My first reaction was "What? No!" but then I thought about it and I don't hate it. It would be situational, though--you'd have to talk to your GM.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like it! Points for creativity!

Sovereign Court

Charging is a full round action that has be "directly toward the designated opponent." So no you couldn't perform this kind of action and call it a charge. Your upward movement isn't towards your opponent so your no good.


Kugu wrote:
I want to make a sort of final fantasy Dragoon type class spear/lance and all but don't want to read the rules wrong.

You did. You ignored the "directly toward" part of a charge. Going up and then down isn't directly toward someone.

"move up to double your speed directly toward the designated opponent."


yeah, jumping per se isn't a problem, but the 'directly toward opponent' part must be followed,
meaning the charge movement must be in a straight line (assuming they don't ready an action to move mid-way),
which can be a diagonal line, but it must be a straight line still...

if you have the rhino charge feat from sargava, you can ready a partial charge and still use another move action,
so you could ready an action to charge toward the opponent, use your move action to jump up,
and have the partial charge trigger at the peak of the jump, or from wherever you designate.
with or without jumping, that can let you maneuver around charge-blocking obstacles to get a free 'lane' to charge.


I have a character that charges by jumping off of objects, but I don't think you could jump up-down charge.

You COULD long-jump charge, just flavor it right.

The Exchange

I reckon you're trying to get a skill to do what a feat is meant to do.

However, it still sounds like a great concept. Maybe talk to your GM to see what you can wrangle. I'd possibly allow someone with that much agility to make a charge over five feet rather than just ten feet using a parabolic jump, which satisfies the towards your opponent idea.

Don't let one reading of a rule destroy such creative thinking. Just make sure your GM is good with it. Ther was a scene in one of the old dungeon magazine modules where a group of crazed monkey creatures charge down a corridor at the group. They were described as swarming all over the place, up the walls, over the roof, leaping on to blocks of fallen ruin and leaping onto foes. They were pretty much doing exactly what you are suggesting. It's all about the feel of the game youre after.

Mind you, I wouldn't try it in a PFS game hehe.

Cheers


First off, thank you for all of the replies and encouragement. Our DM is brand new, and being a forever DM I don't want to overwhelm my chance to play by throwing a bunch of reflavoring of the rules at him so early. So maybe I'll try to after I'm done with another character I've thought up.

Second, what if I was standing RIGHT next to my target? It would provoke attacks of opportunity for sure, but the shortest distance is Straight up, and then straight back down ( If falling down even part of your movement? It's kind of just gravity?) is it not? Or is this just my early brain working poorly.

and lastly, while it's not really a rules question, is there feats like the one Quandary listed to help me out with making this Chracter or if sticking to the official rules and feats is this character doomed?


yea i dont see a problem dropping off things that are higher (like ladders)

and depending on how far you can jump I dont see a problem.

a problem you would have with "being in someone's face" and then trying the jump charge is:

1) what has been mentioned above

and

2) you would be triggering an attack of opportunity from your intended target, because by jumping 10 feet straight up, you would be leaving a threatened square.

However if you were 20 feet from your target and you can jump that distance and the arc would carry you to the right position, I don't see why it couldnt be a "jump charge"

Lantern Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16

Heh, I allowed that in a couple of PFS games in

Spoiler:
Temple if Empyreal Enlightenment. The BBEG spider climbed to the ceiling, so in two different groups, a monk and a barbarian climbed/jumped on top od a tall dresser to reach with a melee. Good times had by all except for the BBEG,


yeah, not to burst your bubble, but if you are 'right next to a target', using jump movement to move up and down is not the most direct route to threaten them, staying where you are is the most direct 'route'. if you are already adjacent to a target you can't charge period, because charges must move at least 10' and any movement you take is more than is necessary to be at an adjacent square. you're not supposed to charge in that situation, that is 110% clear intent. of course, that you can full attack from that position (probably) is the other side of the coin.

the Rhino Charge feat I mentioned is in the Sargava Companion, and requires Improved Bullrush, Power Attack, and BAB+5.
EDIT: and with Rhino Charge, you CAN just move action away from them, and ready an action to partial charge them when you say the word 'banzai'. (etc)
it's really an amazingly powerful feat IMHO. and you should be able to move to 'interrupt' actions which would provoke an AoO as well.


Alright thanks Quandary, I needed my bubble busted. Haha, I suppose if I want to do this character I'll have to propose a feat to the DM once he gets more comfortable with the game. Thank you all, if anyone has suggestions I'd like to hear them still.

Grand Lodge

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

This would be akin to moving 10' away from a target, then moving 10' back adjacent to them and calling that a "charge."

-Skeld


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would not allow someone to charge by jumping down from above because I hate having anything visually interesting or cinematic occur in my games if it's being done by a fighter. Maybe if you spend one of your limited feats on an obscure corner case move that won't be useful with anything resembling regularity I'll consider it, but I think a four-feat chain of which the first three feats are worthless taxes would be more appropriate.


Roberta Yang wrote:


I would not allow any of it because I hate having anything visually interesting or cinematic occur in my games if it's being done by a fighter.

There are plenty of "visually interesting or cinematic" things that can occur in a game without violating the rules. Honest.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

at best, you would get +2 from attacking from higher ground


R_Chance wrote:
Roberta Yang wrote:


I would not allow any of it because I hate having anything visually interesting or cinematic occur in my games if it's being done by a fighter.
There are plenty of "visually interesting or cinematic" things that can occur in a game without violating the rules. Honest.

To Roberta: Besides, the question was not whether simply jumping down from height could be considered a charge (I allow it in my games, and the Death From Above feat practically relies on it). The question was whether a character could jump up from standing, then attack on his way down and call it a charge. Quite a different thing altogether.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Short answer tothe OP, No.

Actually, the 'up and down' part of jumping is generally ignored for purposes of movement direction.

Can you charge someone on the other side of a 20' pit?

Yes, if you can leap the pit. If you are 10' in the air when you clear the pit, it makes no difference...the 'extra movement' of height is ignored.

Can you charge someone on the other side of difficult terrain (a mess of junk, a tipped over wagon, caltrops, etc).

yes, if you can jump over the difficult terrain.

Jumping is a part of 'normal movement'. The up and down part of it is 'gravy'.

So the rule here is not whether you can jump up and come down 10' and it forms a charge. The rule is whether there's 10' of distance between you and the BBEG, and you charge him on the shortest distance between the two of you.

If you are 5' away, you can't charge...you're not far enough away.

If you are 10' away, then you can charge him. Making it a big running leap that is higher then his head is mere flavor and doesn't provide an extra benefit.

If you are 10' above him and jump down, shortest path, you can charge.

If he's 10' above you, and you jump up to him, that's also a charge if you want it to be.

Going up and coming down doesn't normally count against movement. But shortest distance between two points means you can't count the height of the jump as distance for a charge if he's right in front of you. In the same way such a jump wouldn't provoke AoO normally, it won't constitute a charge.

If the jump height DOES constitute movement, provoke AoO's, and the like, such as jumping up AT something in a charge, then yes, you can count up and down as distance and follow all the other rules for a charge and normal movement...shortest distance to the enemy applying.

==Aelryinth


Ah, sarcasm on the internet....

Anyhow, by the rules, no, this can not be done without a specific feat or ability that explicitly lets it be done. That is pretty cut and dried.

As a DM, I would personally allow it. Its flavorful, requires terrain considerations of its own, and is almost always going to provoke an attack of opportunity for dropping down next to the target, and you get a single attack. Doing it optimally would require skill investment and a class ability. Does anyone get upset at the rogue who can disable magic traps with ease? No, he invested ranks and has a class ability, that allows him to reach a new tier of performance on a basic ability (finding non-magical traps) which ANYONE can do (much like charge).

Works for me. But I'm lucky, my players like doing interesting and cinematic things, and are less concerned with exploiting the rules for maximum mathematical advantage.


Wrath wrote:

I reckon you're trying to get a skill to do what a feat is meant to do.

However, it still sounds like a great concept. Maybe talk to your GM to see what you can wrangle. I'd possibly allow someone with that much agility to make a charge over five feet rather than just ten feet using a parabolic jump, which satisfies the towards your opponent idea.

Don't let one reading of a rule destroy such creative thinking. Just make sure your GM is good with it. Ther was a scene in one of the old dungeon magazine modules where a group of crazed monkey creatures charge down a corridor at the group. They were described as swarming all over the place, up the walls, over the roof, leaping on to blocks of fallen ruin and leaping onto foes. They were pretty much doing exactly what you are suggesting. It's all about the feel of the game youre after.

Mind you, I wouldn't try it in a PFS game hehe.

Cheers

If it was a feat, it would be WAY to situational... something the designers need to steer clear of.

If they expanded upon the mechanics presented in the old equipment book (tricks) this would fall right in.


If I was using a longspear wouldn't that let me stay out of range for AoO though?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Exactly how are you going to stop yourself from falling to the ground right next to an enemy if you are jumping?

You're going to stick them with a charge and then be right next to them with a longspear, inside their reach. You have NO CHOICE but to fall into their reach.

==Aelryinth


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's not quite what you ask, but this is from the Jade Regent AP, describing one of the "loony" tactics the goblins might employ:

Spoiler:
A goblin might try a particularly impressive but illadvised
acrobatic tactic, such as [...] trying to climb
up onto a roof to jump down from above (DC 10 Climb check
on the first round to get up on the roof, followed by a DC 15
Acrobatics check to leap down onto
a PC—if this Acrobatics check is
successful, treat it as a charge attack
that leaves the goblin prone at the
end of the round)


Derp, you are correct at least in the regards of if I was right next to them and jumped. I don't see why If I was far away and charged I wouldn't be inside of their area due to my 10ft reach or am I reading charge wrong and you HAVE to end right next to an enemy?


Quatar wrote:

It's not quite what you ask, but this is from the Jade Regent AP, describing one of the "loony" tactics the goblins might employ:

Now I just want to be a goblin/kobold where the jumps are more or less pitiful climbs and falling at something. Haha

Liberty's Edge

Depends on how often you try to rules lawyer your GM.


Basically, if you start your round above your target, jump down on them with a Charge.

If you are below your target, and can make it to Adjacent with a jump, you can also charge, and then fall back down again (this one's a little goofy, but fits the "straight line" clause of a charge)

If you are on the same level as the enemy, you basically can't high-jump charge, but you could long-jump charge.


If I were to house rule this, I would say yes you can jump charge, but it would provoke an AoO if you started adjacent to him. Of course mobility would help as would some class abilities and other feats.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Kugu wrote:
Derp, you are correct at least in the regards of if I was right next to them and jumped. I don't see why If I was far away and charged I wouldn't be inside of their area due to my 10ft reach or am I reading charge wrong and you HAVE to end right next to an enemy?

that's a different question.

Certainly you can end your jump at 10' distant and poke them with a longspear if you start sufficiently far away. If you're falling on them from above, however, doesn't quite work.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:
Kugu wrote:
Derp, you are correct at least in the regards of if I was right next to them and jumped. I don't see why If I was far away and charged I wouldn't be inside of their area due to my 10ft reach or am I reading charge wrong and you HAVE to end right next to an enemy?

that's a different question.

Certainly you can end your jump at 10' distant and poke them with a longspear if you start sufficiently far away. If you're falling on them from above, however, doesn't quite work.

==Aelryinth

If you're falling straight down the sequence might go like this-

Movement (falling)
Attack at 10 feet from target.
continue movement (still falling)
Make Acro check to avoid AoOs from passing (falling) through threatened square.
Make second acro check to avoid potential falling damage.
Land on/in square inhabited by enemy. (squeezing)
Get bumped out to an adjacent square. GM may ask you to make a balance check or reflex save to avoid falling from unintended movement.


I don't know how jumping straight down on an enemy could ever be a charge.

You must move to the closest space from which you can attack your opponent. And, from above, that's in one of the squares above your opponent 10 feet in the air. So, unless you can stop in midair and hover... or are dangling from a rope, measured out ahead of time.

You can't attack with a charge and continue moving to the floor. It even says so in the charge rule, "You must before your attack, not after." Did you just charge AND THEN continue falling to the floor? How dare you!

So, if you can't hover or aren't tied to a well measured rope, you continue falling to the floor. Attack of opportunity, you just left a threatening square. (This is the point where you tell your GM that your opponent gets no AoO because it never saw you. No one EVER sees what's above them unless they specifically say they look up.) Anyways, you hit the ground. Did you make your Acrobatics check? Are you prone? Was this a good idea?

...oh, and you have -2 to AC for charging. Wheee!


GM Jeff wrote:

I don't know how jumping straight down on an enemy could ever be a charge.

You must move to the closest space from which you can attack your opponent. And, from above, that's in one of the squares above your opponent 10 feet in the air. So, unless you can stop in midair and hover... or are dangling from a rope, measured out ahead of time.

You can't attack with a charge and continue moving to the floor. It even says so in the charge rule, "You must before your attack, not after." Did you just charge AND THEN continue falling to the floor? How dare you!

So, if you can't hover or aren't tied to a well measured rope, you continue falling to the floor. Attack of opportunity, you just left a threatening square. (This is the point where you tell your GM that your opponent gets no AoO because it never saw you. No one EVER sees what's above them unless they specifically say they look up.) Anyways, you hit the ground. Did you make your Acrobatics check? Are you prone? Was this a good idea?

...oh, and you have -2 to AC for charging. Wheee!

"You tried to do something slightly interesting and cinematic? Screw you, you don't get to attack, you provoke an attack of opportunity, you take an AC penalty, you fall prone, and you take falling damage. That will teach you a lesson."

*next session*

"Why is everyone running really boring builds that just stand in one place pressing the full-attack button and have no function other than optimizing DPR? Don't any of you have any imagination? Why are my players so boring?"

(Actual next session: "Why is everyone playing a wizard?")


Roberta Yang wrote:

"You tried to do something slightly interesting and cinematic? Screw you, you don't get to attack, you provoke an attack of opportunity, you take an AC penalty, you fall prone, and you take falling damage. That will teach you a lesson."

*next session*

"Why is everyone running really boring builds that just stand in one place pressing the full-attack button and have no function other than optimizing DPR? Don't any of you have any imagination? Why are my players so boring?"

(Actual next session: "Why is everyone playing a wizard?")

Ha! ;)

Put the shoe on the other foot.

GM: Okay, 3 hobgoblins jump down on you from above, each one charging. They hit!

Players: What?!? Foul! How is that possible?

GM: It's cinematic, so I allowed it.

*Next session*

GM: Where is everyone?


GM Jeff wrote:

Ha! ;)

Put the shoe on the other foot.

GM: Okay, 3 hobgoblins jump down on you from above, each one charging. They hit!

Players: What?!? Foul! How is that possible?

GM: It's cinematic, so I allowed it.

Seems no different to me than "three hobgoblins charge across the field toward you and hit". Or "three hobgoblin rogues (whose stealth beat your perception) sneak attack you". Or... pretty much anything else that could possibly happen.

Seriously, what part of this is meant to make me cry foul?


Roberta Yang wrote:


Seems no different to me than "three hobgoblins charge across the field toward you and hit". Or "three hobgoblin rogues (whose stealth beat your perception) sneak attack you". Or... pretty much anything else that could possibly happen.

Seriously, what part of this is meant to make me cry foul?

Congratulations! You're not a whiny player! You can play at my table anyday.

I have a few players who cry foul at the most simplistic and clear rules in the book. Then when I show them the actual rule, it then becomes "BS". Sorry, if you thought the previous post was a way I enjoy screwing the players, I thought it was funny showing everything that could go wrong for the player's side. I would never do that to a player and say "Gotcha!" Just the opposite, I let them do what they want and explain how the rules apply to what they're gonna do. Then they decide if they want to do it anyways.


I still dont see why you can't just use "long jump" to charge.. The parabolic would still be downward before you hit, so flavor it up like you want.


why would jumping let you move away from your target and then towards them doing a charge attack,
but any other form of movement doesn't let you do that because Charge specifically doesn't work like that,
and the RAW is utterly obvious that this movement is entirely opposite of that specified and inherent to a Charge?
the idea of not merely jumping up and down during a long job on the way to charge, as a means of getting to your target,
but thinking that jumping uniquely would let you charge a target from an adjacent square, is beyond me.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

And if you wanted to use the vertical space as meeting the terms of a charge, you should probably also consider it for AoO and have the jumping character provoke an AoO when his jump causes him to leave the 5x5x5 cube he was in adjacent to the target.

There were a number of special maneuvers that appeared in one of the green campaign setting handbooks for 2nd edition. The Celts book had a few of these feat precursors and one of them was the Salmon Leap. The character would leap right in front of his target in order to improve his ability to get around/over the target's shield. I'm sure that was inspired by Celts vs Roman shield wall tactics. A reasonable feat would probably entail the jump not provoking an AoO and enabling the PC to get the higher ground bonus. But I'm not really sure it would be worth it.


Quandary wrote:

why would jumping let you move away from your target and then towards them doing a charge attack,

but any other form of movement doesn't let you do that because Charge specifically doesn't work like that,
and the RAW is utterly obvious that this movement is entirely opposite of that specified and inherent to a Charge?
the idea of not merely jumping up and down during a long job on the way to charge, as a means of getting to your target,
but thinking that jumping uniquely would let you charge a target from an adjacent square, is beyond me.

This has been covered.

We're talking about jumping down onto someone from a raised area and whether that could qualify as a charge.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Doomed Hero wrote:


We're talking about jumping down onto someone from a raised area and whether that could qualify as a charge.

Jumping or flying, dropping down on somebody with at least 10' of movement could reasonably be a charge.


I'm surprised this is still going! =D Isn't the Death from above feat Specifically for the jumping down on someone? I assumed the issue was more in that it wasn't the shortest distance to the enemy I want to 'charge' at due to the vertical feet I would be traveling both up and then down.

I'm completely for this provoking AoO even if I couldn't avoid it on my way down by tumbling, I love to flavor of it, not so much the min/maxing of the character. If I wanted to do a ton of damage I'd use a lance rather then a spear with the jump charge.

When everything is said and done the official rules say that I couldn't do this, I however would allow it when I was DMing, I just don't think I should be confusing my friend who's new at DMing by tweaking rule he has hardly had a chance to read. I'm sure I'll get to play it sooner or later, I've got plenty of characters to play in the mean time.


Death from Above is giving you bigger bonuses, it doesn't let you do anything that you couldn't otherwise do. That's really obvious from it's text. I really don't know why anybody would question Charging by jumping from above. Charge doesn't reference any walking-specific terminology, it's just "move". Jumping down counts as movement for AoO's, along with all other purposes.


Quandary wrote:
Death from Above is giving you bigger bonuses, it doesn't let you do anything that you couldn't otherwise do. That's really obvious from it's text. I really don't know why anybody would question Charging by jumping from above. Charge doesn't reference any walking-specific terminology, it's just "move". Jumping down counts as movement for AoO's, along with all other purposes.

I had ment' to type a raised area rather then jumping down on. I've got jumping on the brain sorry about that. Rules wise you are correct, as sad as it makes me.


Pendagast wrote:
If I were to house rule this, I would say yes you can jump charge, but it would provoke an AoO if you started adjacent to him. Of course mobility would help as would some class abilities and other feats.

I agree. I don't see any reason to require a feat tax to accomplish something that a feat + skill check can also accomplish with a chance of failure.

I can see a feat tax to accomplish this without the chance of going prone, however.


GM Jeff wrote:

I don't know how jumping straight down on an enemy could ever be a charge.

You must move to the closest space from which you can attack your opponent. And, from above, that's in one of the squares above your opponent 10 feet in the air. So, unless you can stop in midair and hover... or are dangling from a rope, measured out ahead of time.

You can't attack with a charge and continue moving to the floor. It even says so in the charge rule, "You must before your attack, not after." Did you just charge AND THEN continue falling to the floor? How dare you!

So, if you can't hover or aren't tied to a well measured rope, you continue falling to the floor. Attack of opportunity, you just left a threatening square. (This is the point where you tell your GM that your opponent gets no AoO because it never saw you. No one EVER sees what's above them unless they specifically say they look up.) Anyways, you hit the ground. Did you make your Acrobatics check? Are you prone? Was this a good idea?

...oh, and you have -2 to AC for charging. Wheee!

I gotta say that I would have to disagree with your conclusion of "And, from above, that's in one of the squares above your opponent 10 feet in the air."

Unless you are directly above your opponent and are dropping down onto his head, I don't see this description being accurate in most circumstances. In this circumstance, it wouldn't be a charge, but more of a bull rush, since impact with your opponent when falling on top of him would be nearly impossible to not occur. -- At least that is how I'd rule it.

In circumstances other than dropping directly from above, the nearest adjacent square is the opponent's threatened squares, and it would work just like a charge.


Quandary wrote:
I really don't know why anybody would question Charging by jumping from above. Charge doesn't reference any walking-specific terminology, it's just "move". Jumping down counts as movement for AoO's, along with all other purposes.

Actually, it's move up to double your speed (or up to your speed as a partial charge).

Jumping downward is movement, but what about falling. Is falling moving your speed? At what point does one stop jumping down and begin falling? I'm sure falling isn't a "move your speed" action that the player does, it just happens.


Quintain wrote:

I gotta say that I would have to disagree with your conclusion of "And, from above, that's in one of the squares above your opponent 10 feet in the air."

Unless you are directly above your opponent and are dropping down onto his head, I don't see this description being accurate in most circumstances. In this circumstance, it wouldn't be a charge, but more of a bull rush, since impact with your opponent when falling on top of him would be nearly impossible to not occur. -- At least that is how I'd rule it.

In circumstances other than dropping directly from above, the nearest adjacent square is the opponent's threatened squares, and it would work just like a charge.

You threaten every square in which you can make a melee attack. So, with a regular reach of 5', that's every square adjacent to you (including your own square); 9 squares in a 3x3 pattern. Add a 3D element to the board, that includes the squares above you too; 9 squares stacked on 9 squares.

Dropping from above, you have to enter one of those upper 9 squares to make a melee attack on your opponent.

The question is, can you make an attack while in midair? What about a charge attack in midair?

You want to stop moving in a square above your target to make an attack, but can you? You say, this square (in midair) is where I stop moving. But, you start falling then. Do you postpone falling so you can make an attack?

And if you fall out of a threatened square, does an attack of opportunity happen?

Now, I'm all for cool stuff happening in the game and letting certain rules slide for coolness...

But since this is a rules forum:

By RAW, can you make an attack in midair before you fall?

By RAW, does an opponent get an attack of opportunity if you fall out of their threatened square?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If it's anything but a straight run to the target, than Charge isn't an option. You can make it as a move plus attack, but that's it.

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can you jump and then 'Charge' on your way down? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.