Charge Bonus to CMB

[Thanatokleos]

So this may be a silly question, but I noticed a few things in the rules that have got me a little bit confused. To my understanding, a CMB is used as a special type of attack roll, one to which your weapon bonuses may apply (if they involve a weapon), and other types of bonuses all apply if they give you a bonus to the attack roll involving your maneuver.

My specific confusion is arising from the text of the Charge combat action. It says:

Quote:

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 (See Bull Rush on page 199).

According to my reading, it either (redundantly) gives you a +2 bonus to your combat maneuver attack roll while bull rushing (redundant because the +2 attack bonus already did that) or it gives you an overall +4 on bull rush maneuver attack rolls. It may also be specifically calling out a bull rush as an alternative to taking an attack on a charge, though the text of bull rush specifies that option already, and other alternative maneuvers are also possible with a charge and not specifically enumerated (disarm, sunder, trip -- anything replacing a melee attack action).

Anyway, I'm just a bit confused about the specific meaning indicated there. Any help (or even official rulings) would be much appreciated!

[KainPen]

I believe it is redundant. But looking at it now it maybe giving you another +2 to bull rush on top the charge +2 = +4 total. Because you can charge and do other maneuvers you would get the +2 from charge.

[ErrantPursuit]

Your Combat Maneuver Bonus is calculated as: Strength Modifier + Base Attack Bonus + Size Bonus.
Base Attack Bonus is separate from Attack Bonus.

This means that the +2 bonus to attack from Charge does not apply to your CMB. If you're charging and choose to make a Bullrush as your attack, then you add +2 from Charge in that specific instance.

[Thanatokleos]

That's more or less what I thought earlier today. Not long ago, though, I stumbled across the following in the rules for performing a combat maneuver, it says the following (emphasis mine):

Core Rulebook p.199 wrote:

When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver. The DC of this maneuver is your target's Combat Maneuver Defense. Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that you would normally apply to an attack roll.

According to that, it seems to me that all modifiers to a general attack roll also apply to a combat maneuver attack roll, except that your melee attack bonus (or potentially -- in rarer cases -- ranged attack bonus) is replaced by your CMB.

[Finlanderboy]

You still get bonuses from combat situations, flanking, higher ground, and the following since it is an attack, and those are atack bonuses(as well as penalties). Even the wordin on a bul rush calls it an attack.

FROM PRD wrote:

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.

These are both untyped bonuses. So making a bull rush attack roll you would get the +2 from attacking on a charge, and a +2 with the other option.

RAW I would say you get a +4

IF they added +2 charge bonus to both of them then no.

[Komoda]

The statement says a charging character gets a +2 bonus for a single melee attack and a +2 bonus for combat maneuvers attack rolls for bull rush. It doesn't say you get both. Combat Maneuvers are not Melee Attacks. They can sometimes be used in place of melee attacks, but they are still not Melee Attacks. You do not get a +4 bonus.

[Dekalinder]

Komoda wrote:

The statement says a charging character gets a +2 bonus for a single melee attack and a +2 bonus for combat maneuvers attack rolls for bull rush. It doesn't say you get both. Combat Maneuvers are not Melee Attacks. They can sometimes be used in place of melee attacks, but they are still not Melee Attacks. You do not get a +4 bonus.

YOu must have reading comprension issues. just 2 post above you

Core Rulebook p.199 wrote wrote:

When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver. The DC of this maneuver is your target's Combat Maneuver Defense. Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that you would normally apply to an attack roll.

[Malag]

I believe it's a typo. It should be +2 on CMB checks flat, but who knows. This is one of those when it's really hard to guess what the writer meant.

[Komoda]

I didn't say they were not attack rolls. I said they are not melee attacks. While all melee attacks are attack rolls, not all attack rolls are melee attacks.

Therefore, you get the +2 for charging, you do not get the, +2 bonus on the attack roll that is awarded to the single melee attack.

Charge: wrote:

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.

If there was a +4 bonus, it would just say so.

And I comprehend things wonderfully. I can add all untyped bonuses, as per the post you reference, correct? So therefore I can add an +2 bonus to my AC and a +2 bonus to my attacks and get +4 to AC and my Attacks, right?

That is what you are trying to do here. My point isn't about the type of bonus, it is about what they are being applied to. Any bonus added to attacks would apply to combat maneuvers, melee attacks and ranged attacks. That doesn't mean that all of them are interchangeable.

Also, when a rule gives its separate effects based on the possible actions, you can't add all the effects together just because you are taking one of the possible actions.

But I like the way you try to insult my reading comprehension with your wonderful use of grammar. It is so refreshing to see this type of correspondence on the internet.

[Kazaan]

"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 (See Bull Rush on page 199)."

There are three pertinent clauses here:

1) After moving, you may make a single melee attack.

2) You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll...

3) A charging character gets a +2 bonus on combat maneuver attack rolls made to bull rush an opponent.

First, the attack at the end of a charge is a melee attack. Trip, Sunder, and Disarm can replace a melee attack. Bull Rush and Overrun can be done either as a Standard action or can replace the melee attack at the end of a charge. So any of these can replace the melee attack at the end of a Charge. Second, You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll; not on the melee attack roll, but on the attack roll (full-stop). Combat Maneuver rolls are attack rolls. If you have an ability that says you get +2 to all attack rolls, that includes both rolls to hit with a weapon and rolls to determine success of a combat maneuver (and rolls to hit with a spell, for that matter). So the +2 to the attack at the end of the charge covers both melee attacks as well as applicable combat maneuvers. Lastly, as a completely new statement, you get +2 if this melee attack is replaced by a Bull Rush. That's a separate bonus from the +2 to attack rolls during the charge and both are untyped bonuses so, by default rules, they stack.

Therefore:
If you charge and end with a melee attack, trip, sunder, disarm, or overrun, you net +2 to the roll. If you end the charge with Bull Rush, you net +4 to the roll.

[Alexander Augunas]

I agree with others in that you gain a +4 bonus to use Bull Rush while charging. It could have been worded better, however. For example:

You gain a +2 bonus on attack rolls while charging. This bonus increases to +4 when using your charge attack to make a bull rush attempt.

[Komoda]

If you replace the melee attack, you can't add the bonus in that you just replaced. If you replace that attack, you replace that paragraph (the one telling you about the normal attack) with the next paragraph (the one that tells you what you gain with Bull Rush).

And I see your line of reasoning. I just think it is incorrect. It is my belief that it would just state +4 if that is what they were looking to add.

As evidence, and clearly not proof, this would be the single case in the core rule book where an option (not feat/item/spell etc.) grants you a higher bonus to attack than the penalty associated with it.

[Kazaan]

@Komoda: The bonus isn't to the "melee attack", it's to the "attack roll". That covers both the attack roll for a melee attack and the attack roll for a combat maneuver. Moreover, if you have Weapon Focus (Longsword) and you make a Trip attempt with your longsword, you apply the +1 from Weapon Focus to your CM roll for the trip, even though you "replaced" the melee attack with a combat maneuver. The argument that "they could have phrased it better if they meant that, therefore it's wrong" holds no water. For it to work as you claim, it would mean that if you replaced the melee attack with a trip, disarm, sunder, or overrun, you wouldn't get any bonus to attack.

[Thanatokleos]

Is this something that's worth FAQ-ing, as the rules seem to be somewhat ambiguous? (I'm not too familiar with the protocol regarding FAQs)

[Quantum Steve]

Kaazan wrote:

You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll; not on the melee attack roll, but on the attack roll (full-stop).

That's not how English grammar works. "The attack roll" refers to the "melee attack roll" mentioned earlier in the same sentence. Both are referring to exactly the same thing.

[Mark Hoover]

Let me throw in a wrinkle: a charging riding dog. My PC rides a dog that gets a Trip with a successful bite attack, which is a melee attack. If the trip is part of the melee attack that gets the +2, then does my Trip maneuver get a +2 to CMB?

[Crash_00]

Quantum Steve wrote:

Kaazan wrote:

You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll; not on the melee attack roll, but on the attack roll (full-stop).

That's not how English grammar works. "The attack roll" refers to the "melee attack roll" mentioned earlier in the same sentence. Both are referring to exactly the same thing.

Uhm....

"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."
That bolded bit is a period. There are two separate sentences at play here. Attack roll does not refer to melee attack roll, it refers to the melee attack, which requires an attack roll.

Bull rush, which also requires an attack roll, can replace the melee attack. Literally, that would make it read, "After moving, you can make a single bull rush. You gain a +2 bonus on the attack roll.

That said, I don't think that these stack. I think that the second mention of the bonus to bull rush is clarification. Otherwise it would state that the bonus increases by +2 (or increases to +4). Instead it just reiterates that the character gets a +2 bonus in that case as well.

[Margrave]

Malag wrote:

I believe it's a typo. It should be +2 on CMB checks flat, but who knows. This is one of those when it's really hard to guess what the writer meant.

I agree. I don't think the rules were intended to work like that.

And as Komoda already stated:

"If there was a +4 bonus, it would just say so."

[Thanatokleos]

Mark Hoover wrote:

Let me throw in a wrinkle: a charging riding dog. My PC rides a dog that gets a Trip with a successful bite attack, which is a melee attack. If the trip is part of the melee attack that gets the +2, then does my Trip maneuver get a +2 to CMB?

Mark Hoover, per my understanding of the rules, the riding dog wouldn't get the bonus to the Trip maneuver, because the +2 bonus only applies to a single attack roll, and the Trip maneuver involves the use a separate attack roll. If, on the other hand, it had tripped instead of attacking, I believe it would have gotten the +2 bonus to the combat maneuver attack roll.