ok... so I think I know the answer to this and I am pretty sure its one of those situations where the RAW makes no sense when compared to real world logic, but here goes.
I am standing 30 feet from an opponent, I ready an action to brace for a charge. The opponent instead just moves 30 and makes an attack.
do I get to attack him?
By Raw I think the answer is NO, which is RAW that defies logic but no worries.
expanding on this scenario...
instead of readying to brace for charge, Can I ready an action to attack if the opponent attacks me, and if that attack is a charge can I then use my attack action to brace against the incoming charge?
or can you ONLY brace as a specific readied action against a charge that may not come.
NOTE: this is the 3rd round of combat flat footed does not apply.
By RAW your readied brace attack only occurs when the enemy charges. You cannot ready to attack and turn that into a brace since bracing is a specific action.
If you want to try to understand it via fluff:
When I brace I have to plant my weapon in such a way that it is reinforced against something (ground, wall, etc). If the person does not charge they are not being careless and thus I dont have a chance to attack them with the extra damage. This is where the fluff breaks down a bit compared to the RAW of a readied action, I would houserule that if the target does not charge you may make the readied attack anyhow, but without brace.
- Gauss
By Raw I think the answer is NO, which is RAW that defies logic but no worries.
By game logic it makes perfect sense. You ready an action for a specific event and that event doesn't happen. There are much more illogical game elements than this one (:
In terms of real life, the action here is not a readied action for an attack. It's a readied action to brace the weapon for a charge. Against a monster simply walking up to you, a braced weapon is fairly ineffective. But it's pretty crappy GMing if a creature that would normally charge (like a troll, for instance) suddenly doesn't simply because you braced a weapon against it.
In the equipment section it states
Brace: If you use a readied action to set a brace weapon against a charge, you deal double damage on a successful hit against a charging character
(emphasis mine.)
I would read that as saying you have to ready and action against the charge, not an attack.
BBT: No you do not. Bracing is a specific action that you can only use with a weapon that has the brace property. IF you ready an attack that is not the same thing as bracing. If you brace then you are readying an attack against a charge attack only (screwy but there it is). In my games I houserule it so that when you brace and the enemy does not charge you may still make a readied attack.
- Gauss
Don't most things vary by GM mood? Anything can be houseruled.
- Gauss
Pretty much.
Does the GM want all control in this situation; the GM (who knows the PC is bracing against a charge) wants the enemy to charge and get hit for double damage or have the enemy move and attack, thus wasting the PC's action.
Or
Does the GM give the PCs all control in this situation; the player can ready an action to brace against a charge... unless there is no charge and the player can attack anyways.
|
Yeah they should faq this so brace reads: "Brace: Readied attack actions deal double damage on a successful hit against a charging character"
Otherwise, especially in PFS play, GM's are obnoxious and won't charge you. Also, "setting" against a charge has different meaning for different weapons. For instance, setting a long spear mimight look obvious but a No-Dachi would have no difference between a normal readied action.
excactly my point Kaisc006.
I my second favorite character to play (after spirit ranger) is a No-Daichi weapons master.
I am planning to play him in a new game where I will play him as a reluctant warrior. as in he will never strike first (except to save a life) so his first action in combat when he wins the innitiative will almost always be some version of take a total defense stance OR ready an action to set against a charge which made me wonder if setting against a charge would basically negate any attack of opportunity.
his first action in combat when he wins the innitiative will almost always be some version of take a total defense stance OR ready an action to set against a charge which made me wonder if setting against a charge would basically negate any attack of opportunity.
Total Defense means you can't take an AoO. Ready does not.
If your Nodachi is readied against a charge, and no charge happens, your readied action doesn't trigger. If the opponent provokes, you can still take an attack of opportunity.
If you have a weapon with reach and brace, and you ready against a charge, and someone without reach charges you, you'll (usually) get two attacks. One when he enters your first threatened square (readied action) and the other when he attempts to leave that threatened square (AoO). If the same guy didn't charge, just moved, you would only get the AoO.
There's a thread here about the brace feature, if anyone wants to flag it for FAQ.
@grick
his first action in combat when he wins the innitiative will almost always be some version of take a total defense stance OR ready an action to set against a charge which made me wonder if setting against a charge would basically negate any attack of opportunity.
The rest is irrelevant, Reach was never a part of the equation.
NOTE i should have said it made me REALIZE that if I set against a charge it would basically negate my attack of opportunity. I understand the rule and was mostly ranting against the RAW. The only question I really had was if I ready to attack could I then change that triggered ready into a 'set against the charge' which I cant... which is dumb.
|
|
I my second favorite character to play (after spirit ranger) is a No-Daichi weapons master.
My idea for my first samurai was similar. He'd ready to quick draw his No-Dachi and chop apart the first opponent to charge him. Unfortunately many GM's are peculiar about readying against a charge. Even with a longspear, I envision the readied action to be covert until the last second. Take the movie Braveheart, where they readied their spears against the cavalry charge at the last second. Yet many GM's see it as your character braces immediately, revealing his motive.
NOTE i should have said it made me REALIZE that if I set against a charge it would basically negate my attack of opportunity.
Readying, against a charge or not, does not negate any attack of opportunity.
Your right Grick. i worded that part incorrectly.
I am saying that readying for charge would negate my chance to attack with a ready action if the attack is NOT a charge.
a big part of this comes down, as noted above, to what actual action is taken when readying.
if, "I ready action to brace for a charge" means that I blatantly set my weapon in an obvious stance and wait for the opponent to run into my weapon, then that's one thing.
If it means that I stand there in a generally ready stance ready to use the most effective counter attack when the enemy runs up and attacks me but not obviously telegraphing my bracing action then that is something else entirely.
Seems like there ought to be a Spirited Charge for brace weapons, sort of like, if you have the feat and you brace, you could get x3 damage instead of x2.
This fellow is bracing against a charge. It looks rather obvious to me.
@Prawn I think Reflexive Brace is a pretty cool feat, but its a 3rd party thing, not Paizo.
if its not perfect its a start.
|
Phalanx Soldier Fighter can, once per day, ready a weapon with the brace property as an immediate action, gaining a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls. For every four levels beyond 5th, this bonus increases by +1, and he can use the ability one additional time per day. He cannot use this ability when flat-footed.
I hate when the only way to get an ability is by taking several levels of a specific and relatively poor archetype.
This thread has made me seriously consider expanding the Brace function to automatically apply to any Charge, Bull Rush, Overrun, Trample, and any other violent attempt to rush into a readying character's space (I wouldn't have it apply to trying to tumble through, as that is more evasive than offensive).
Houserule territory, obviously, but this thread somewhat showcases how rarely the opportunity to use it will both come up and actually be rewarded for taking it.
Most often, such bracing was done to oppose cavalry, which were often over-runing the first rank. As such, the widening of its application makes sense to me.
reasonably intelligent opponents are going to see the combatant "brace" and react accordingly.
That's a whole different question.
Can a character tell the difference between a readied action and a delay? Can they tell if you readied to receive a charge, or readied to move away?
I think allowing the AOO is fair in these circumstances. Obviously not at double damage.
An AoO doesn't deal double damage, even if it's against a charging foe. Only the readied attack gets double damage from brace. (Unless you can somehow resolve the AoO before the readied attack triggers)
Please stop going into several years old threads. This is at least the 3rd thread that is multiple years old that I've seen you bump. If you really do have questions about how something is understood it's better to start a new thread, link to old threads on the topic and explain your question/position. This is mostly due to the fact that rules are errata'd/changed/modified etc and what was true years ago is not necessarily true anymore.
Also the fact that the original poster probably wont look at this.
Also, characters declare their actions right before they take them. This isn't like the Mistborn RPG where you do actually declare your action (based on Wisdom I think) and then resolve your actions based on who had the biggest dice pool to that action. You don't know what your opponent is doing in Pathfinder until they are actually about to do it. The character being charged ha to guess that they will be charged in order to use brace, which is what makes it such a terrible option 99% of the time.
Edit: Nevermind, I misread your post. You're suggesting that D&D should use a system like Mistborn. And I can't say I disagree, I did like that system much better and would make reactive actions much easier/better to perform.