| 16 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thread title really describes the question, but just to clarify, if a character charges at a creature, provoking AoOs from the attacked creature (because it has reach) and other creatures (from moving through their squares), does the -2 AC penalty apply?
For reference, in the PRD, the penalty is listed in the Attacking on a Charge section (which should come after the charge's movement)
Movement During a Charge: You must move before your attack, not after
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.
That implies (to me) that the penalty doesn't apply until after the charge attack is made, but I'd like clarification.
Thanks in advance.
As I interpret it: Charging is a reckless action, and leaves you open to attack from the moment you begin the charge. More than one attempted hero has been slain trying to charge at a big bad - and usually before they even reach him.
When you declare a charge, you accept the penalty immediately in exchange for the bonus when you reach the end of the charge.
The charging penalty starts when you start charging.
I don't know for sure if that's actually true but it was fun to type :-)
It could just as easily mean the movement was guarded and precise (normal movement), while the strike was reckless and left you open after the attack was made.
FAQ'd.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It could just as easily mean the movement was guarded and precise (normal movement), while the strike was reckless and left you open after the attack was made.
FAQ'd.
Of It was as you say, there wouldn't need to move in straight line, without changing direction.If the movement make you pass through threatened sqsquares you can't avoid it with movement. You're going through any peril to reach your target. As well you can't charge in difficult terrain. These two things are the very opposite of a "guarded and precise", or normal of you like, movement. Charge has its own rules for movement. That said, I'd do one of two: allow bonus and penalties from the start, or from the attack of the charge.
There are places in the rules where the use of paragraph breaks aren't the best. Some of these are inherited from 3.5.
I understand the -2 AC to apply once the charge action is initiated.
Just looking at RAW, it would seem to indicate that the AC penalty is after the attack; however from a "gleaning rules as intended" standpoint (and the way i play it) is that it and the bonus apply at the same time, just like fighting defensively.
Looking at it another way, you're effectively running at the target (covering half the distance of a run in your turn) so your defenses while charging are going to be lower, similar to the way your defenses are lower during a run action.
Of It was as you say, there wouldn't need to move in straight line, without changing direction.If the movement make you pass through threatened sqsquares you can't avoid it with movement. You're going through any peril to reach your target. As well you can't charge in difficult terrain. These two things are the very opposite of a "guarded and precise", or normal of you like, movement. Charge has its own rules for movement. That said, I'd do one of two: allow bonus and penalties from the start, or from the attack of the charge.It could just as easily mean the movement was guarded and precise (normal movement), while the strike was reckless and left you open after the attack was made.
FAQ'd.
Actually there would be a need to, because the rules say it needs to be done. Any movement through threatened areas provokes (with few exceptions), charge isn't any different, so it provokes like normal movement. "Normal" movement would be considered guarded and precise because it doesn't provoke more than typical or impose additional penalty during its execution.
The words on the page say you need to move before attacking (with additional stipulations on how you moved) and then it says after the attack you take a penalty to AC.
It is VERY clear what RAW says, even though you may not believe it to be the intent.
Here's the benefit of cosplay/LARP, and what-not.
When you've actually performed a charge you realize that you cannot concentrate on powerfully rushing a single target and still expect to be light on your feet versus the people in the way, and vice-versa.
Likewise, it actually makes LESS sense to have the -2 AC apply after your attack since the move has ended and the dangerous part is over.
I know the wording is weird and needs to be fixed. But we've always played that the -2 AC begins at the beginning of the charge, and I'd wager 90 - 99% of the players out there are doing the same, since it's one of those things where you pretty much intuitively know what's going on.
But mice will hunt cheese, I guess.
|
-2 When you start the Charge..
The Charge is what lowers your Armor Class as your not trying to avoid any attacks as well as would normally do..
The Charge is a Direct Straight approach..at least in my Game
You can't charge 1 Square right, 1 Square forward and 1 Square Left in my game
Glandis...Lets use your Trap as a Example
Player Announces "I am Gonna Charge the Mage starting to Cast Spell"..(Mage 4 Squares Directly Ahead)...Charge has Initiated..Players Moves Mini 1 square..Move mini 1 More Square..DM Makes Roll to see if Fighter Avoided the Trap in 2nd Square...(Is Player Charging or Not, I would say Yes..)..Player Moves mini into 3rd Square and attacks...where did the Charge originate Square 1 or Square 3...
your -2 when the Charge Begins with movement not when you Attack
You take the -2 penalty to your AC when you charge.
Charging isn't two separate move-and-then-attack-actions, it's a full-round action. Think of it as its own action. You're either charging or you're not. Pretty simple.
You take the -2 penalty to your AC when you charge.
Charging isn't two separate move-and-then-attack-actions, it's a full-round action. Think of it as its own action. You're either charging or you're not. Pretty simple.
It is pretty simple, the problem being the RAW (Rules As Written) say you are incorrect.
The words on the [insert medium here] say you need to move before a charge attack, then when you make the attack you gain a bonus and a penalty. WHEN YOU MAKE THE ATTACK is the trigger for the adjustments, pure and simple, in writing on the 'page' (whether that is the supposed intent, which you and I cannot know as we aren't the devs).
If it said 'when you start a charge' or 'when you perform a charge' or 'during a charge' it would be as you say. It doesn't say that... It says the condition is making an attack.
Where this becomes interesting (to me) is if you initiate the charge but something (getting tripped by an AoO on your way, for e.g.) keeps you from actually making the attack. Do you really need to take the AC penalty when you didn't even get to attack? I'm inclined to say yes, but also could understand the "penalty starts after attack" logic to avoid any endless circle of "if you're hit by a trip, your AC is 2 better 'cause you never got to actually charge, but if that means you'd be missed, you can finish the charge and attack, so your AC is 2 less, which means you ARE hit, but since that'd mean you're not charging, you're missed, except ...".
So: -2 AC only staring AFTER the attack is a bit weird, but perhaps simpler when dealing with an interrupted charge. I don't play it that way, but wouldn't freak out too much if someone did.
Even if you get tripped (unless it's a reach weapon) you'll be in position to attack still. Granted you'll have the -4 from being prone, offset by the charge bonus gives you a -2 to the attack roll, but at least you didn't lose the attack in full you still got the attempt.
Even if you get tripped (unless it's a reach weapon) you'll be in position to attack still. Granted you'll have the -4 from being prone, offset by the charge bonus gives you a -2 to the attack roll, but at least you didn't lose the attack in full you still got the attempt.Where this becomes interesting (to me) is if you initiate the charge but something (getting tripped by an AoO on your way, for e.g.) keeps you from actually making the attack. Do you really need to take the AC penalty when you didn't even get to attack? I'm inclined to say yes, but also could understand the "penalty starts after attack" logic to avoid any endless circle of "if you're hit by a trip, your AC is 2 better 'cause you never got to actually charge, but if that means you'd be missed, you can finish the charge and attack, so your AC is 2 less, which means you ARE hit, but since that'd mean you're not charging, you're missed, except ...".
So: -2 AC only staring AFTER the attack is a bit weird, but perhaps simpler when dealing with an interrupted charge. I don't play it that way, but wouldn't freak out too much if someone did.
That isn't true unless you are strictly speaking about the target. During a charge (or any movement) there is the possibility that an outside creature could trip you while on the way to your target.
What the RAW in effect does is maintain the risk vs reward of the move. By making the condition trigger on the attack, if you don't make the attack, you don't take the penalty. You aren't penalized for not doing something. If you make the attack, you gain a bonus on it and suffer the appropriate penalty.
You take the -2 penalty to your AC when you charge.
Charging isn't two separate move-and-then-attack-actions, it's a full-round action. Think of it as its own action. You're either charging or you're not. Pretty simple.
It is pretty simple, the problem being the RAW (Rules As Written) say you are incorrect.
The words on the [insert medium here] say you need to move before a charge attack, then when you make the attack you gain a bonus and a penalty. WHEN YOU MAKE THE ATTACK is the trigger for the adjustments, pure and simple, in writing on the 'page' (whether that is the supposed intent, which you and I cannot know as we aren't the devs).
If it said 'when you start a charge' or 'when you perform a charge' or 'during a charge' it would be as you say. It doesn't say that... It says the condition is making an attack.
Well look at that. It's a full round action that's actually a move-action-then-attack-like-action-not-to-be-confused-with-an-"attack"-act ion action. It looks like, according to the wording, the bonus and penalty are triggered when you make the attack.
Someday we'll have a streamlined-cut-the-fat built-from-the-ground-up ruleset in PF that doesn't spawn quite as many RAW/RAI/RWTF FAQ threads.
I'll just continue to pretend that a full-round action is a full-round action so as to not have 200 pages of IF/AND/BUT.
You take the -2 penalty to your AC when you charge.
Charging isn't two separate move-and-then-attack-actions, it's a full-round action. Think of it as its own action. You're either charging or you're not. Pretty simple.
It is pretty simple, the problem being the RAW (Rules As Written) say you are incorrect.
The words on the [insert medium here] say you need to move before a charge attack, then when you make the attack you gain a bonus and a penalty. WHEN YOU MAKE THE ATTACK is the trigger for the adjustments, pure and simple, in writing on the 'page' (whether that is the supposed intent, which you and I cannot know as we aren't the devs).
If it said 'when you start a charge' or 'when you perform a charge' or 'during a charge' it would be as you say. It doesn't say that... It says the condition is making an attack.
Well look at that. It's a full round action that's actually a move-action-then-attack-like-action-not-to-be-confused-with-an-"attack"-act ion action. It looks like, according to the wording, the bonus and penalty are triggered when you make the attack.
Someday we'll have a streamlined-cut-the-fat built-from-the-ground-up ruleset in PF that doesn't spawn quite as many RAW/RAI/RWTF FAQ threads.
I'll just continue to pretend that a full-round action is a full-round action so as to not have 200 pages of IF/AND/BUT.
Have at, that is what house rules are for.
Here's the benefit of cosplay/LARP, and what-not.
When you've actually performed a charge you realize that you cannot concentrate on powerfully rushing a single target and still expect to be light on your feet versus the people in the way, and vice-versa.
Likewise, it actually makes LESS sense to have the -2 AC apply after your attack since the move has ended and the dangerous part is over.
I know the wording is weird and needs to be fixed. But we've always played that the -2 AC begins at the beginning of the charge, and I'd wager 90 - 99% of the players out there are doing the same, since it's one of those things where you pretty much intuitively know what's going on.
But mice will hunt cheese, I guess.
We've always been in the 90-99% as well; the question never came up before that game session (or perhaps maybe such a situation just never came up). We played it out with the penalty happening from the start of the action, but between the organization of the paragraphs in the Charge action and the question of whether it's reckless movement that triggers the penalty or a loss of balance from the momentum after the attack, I wasn't able to parse out a clear and definitive answer.
I suppose I should take some time next weekend to charge at people, not having the LARP experience myself. :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I suppose I should take some time next weekend to charge at people, not having the LARP experience myself. :-)
Accurate scientific measurements can only be obtained if you do so while wielding a melee weapon of some kind. I look forward to hearing back on the results of your test.
Perhaps the character is left off-balance after the charge?
Perhaps the character is left off-balance after the charge?
No, apparently they are leaning over looking for cheese after making the attack, and that is why they only take the penalty then...