So looking at the Monk Archetype Maneuver Master I see that the Flurry of Maneuvers ability allows a single Combat Maneuver to be performed, even one that normally requires a Standard Action.
Now this got me wondering about the Overrun Maneuver. The maneuver mentions movement, but only requires a Standard Action.
So could a Maneuver Master Monk, Overrun an enemy as part of a full attack, simply moving to the other side of the enemy? If you are wondering about the relevance, im thinking about the Spiked Destroyer Feat, and if Overrun can be used instead of Bull Rush, it opens up some possibilities. (Overrun one guy, getting an armor spike attack, then once on the other side, continue to attack another enemy you couldnt reach before.)
And lastly, if it works, could you take a 5-foot step prior to initiating your full attack and still move through the opponent with your Overrun? This is important in maintaining some flexibility in where you end up after the Overrun.
I googled a bit prior to asking this question and found THIS thread, but only a single person answering the question seemed like a too small thing to base a ruling on...also, the 5-foot step question wasnt in there.
So those are my questions. Have at it men!!!
Cheers
|
Interesting question, it's probably a GM ruling though (You will have table variance). The part in question is that overrun is a standard action, but it's a standard action taken during a move.
As for your second question, consider these:
Move
The simplest move action is moving your speed. If you take this kind of move action during your turn, you can't also take a 5-foot step
Take 5-Foot Step
You can move 5 feet in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement. Taking this 5-foot step never provokes an attack of opportunity. You can't take more than one 5-foot step in a round, and you can't take a 5-foot step in the same round that you move any distance.
So, no, you cannot five foot step and use the overrun maneuver, since if you overrun, you'd be moving, preventing you form taking a 5-foot step.
Overrun can only be made during a move or as part of a charge, so you normally wouldn't have the full-round action left to use flurry of maneuvers. Even if you had a way to gain an extra move action, while you can use a standard action to overrun during a move, you can't make a Flurry of Maneuvers (or any other Full-Round action) during a move.
I just don't see anyway to meet the movement requirements of Overrun while Flurrying.
Over-Run does not itself allow any movement as inherent part of the CMB check. What it says is:
As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge, you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square.
"DURING YOUR MOVE" (or Charge) means the movement is coming from those actions.
In the case of a Move Action you are basically being allowed to specially use a Standard Action to Over-Run as an interrupt mid-way during the Move Action. So if you are limited to a Standard Action, i.e. Slowed or on a Surprise Round, you are not going to be able to use Over-Run effectively.So being able to use OR during a Full Attack doesn't give you any extra movement distance beyond what you would normally get.
You can 5' step, but that doesn't give you enough distance to enter a square and leave it.
A Maneuver Master is not technically prevented from using Over-Run w/ Flurry, but all they will be able to do is a 5' step into the target's square: they will not have enough movement to move beyond that... And if they are in an 'illegal square' at the end of their turn, they will be ejected to the last legal square they were in, i.e. where they started.
Still, there could be SOME narrow value in that for a Maneuver Master who is specialized in Over-Run but not Trip: Using O-R/Flurry in that manner could basically achieve the same thing as a Trip (->Prone, Possible AoO) while benefitting from O-R specific Feats/bonuses.
Also, I BELIEVE there are some Feats or other options (???) that let you use a Full-Round Action: Full Attack while moving more than 5',
IF you are using those, then you could use Maneuver Master to use Over-Run with that combo.
Trying to rule that O-R "has it's own movement" would mean that you DON'T need other movement besides it (which is contrary to how it's written), and in fact results in a potentially vastly variable amount of free movement: it depends on the attacker's Reach, Size, and the opponent's Size, and all of that would be independent of whether these squares are Difficult Terrain/etc or the attacker's Move Speed (which might even be Zero). Over-Run in fact has no limitations as to which direction it is in, so if you ignore those factors, it mean non-flyers could in fact move a very significant amount of vertical distance. To the contrary, by RAW, you need either a Fly Speed or sufficient Jump check AND sufficient move distance in your Move Action or Charge to allow the total movement.
Regardless, as far as 5' step goes, you can only do that if you didn't perform any other movement,
and that rule doesn't care about what type of action contained that movement.
So even if you ruled that Over-Run contained it's own movement, you couldn't combine that with the 5' step.
Overrun essentially replaces the standard attack at the end of a charge and allows you to keep moving.
If you had pounce you could full-attack at the end of a charge. If one of those attacks were an overrun, that should allow you to keep moving. I don't know where the other attacks would have to come in, though. You'd probably have to make them all when you make the overrun.
I'm honestly kind of dubious on the Charge aspect. It doesn't actually say it replaces the attack at the end of the Charge, or change the limitation of Charge that the movement stops at the first square you can attack the target from, and you can't move after that attack.
So I'm not really sure why I shouldn't read O-R as something that can basically be 'added on' to a Charge for free. Although that would be rarely used since the Charge path is supposed to be clear before you start, so that would only be useful if some creature Readied to move into your Charge path...
A similar thing also applies to Bullrush Charges, although the difference there is just that YOU can't "move with" the target after you made the Charge Attack (unless you somehow have an additional Move Action). The only normal way to "move with" the target of a Bullrush seems to be if you start out threatening them, first make the Bullrush, and then use your Move Action to move along with them.
Honestly, I don't really think that's the intent, but that's how the RAW reads to me.
If we start diverging from RAW, then we're basically making up rules, since you're no longer relying on the exact specifics of RAW,
and there's realistically a fairly broad range of functionalities that are plausible.
Even this RAW as I explained is "functional", even if slightly unexpected.
I'm honestly kind of dubious on the Charge aspect. It doesn't actually say it replaces the attack at the end of the Charge, or change the limitation of Charge that the movement stops at the first square you can attack the target from, and you can't move after that attack.
True, but these are problems inherent to overrun. RAW states you can overrun as a standard action as part of a charge (that's really the only way to parse the parenthetical). You don't have Standard Action while charging, but you do get to make a Standard Attack (itself a Standard Action) so either you can't overrun as part of a charge or the overrun attempt replaces the Standard Attack. I really don't understand how some read overrun as magically becoming a free action when charging, it's not suggested in the text and contradicts the Standard Action usage of the maneuver.
As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge, you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square. You can only overrun an opponent who is no more than one size category larger than you. If you do not have the Improved Overrun feat, or a similar ability, initiating an overrun provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver. If your overrun attempt fails, you stop in the space directly in front of the opponent, or the nearest open space in front of the creature if there are other creatures occupying that space.
When you attempt to overrun a target, it can choose to avoid you, allowing you to pass through its square without requiring an attack. If your target does not avoid you, make a combat maneuver check as normal. If your maneuver is successful, you move through the target's space. If your attack exceeds your opponent's CMD by 5 or more, you move through the target's space and the target is knocked prone. If the target has more than two legs, add +2 to the DC of the combat maneuver attack roll for each additional leg it has.
A Maneuver Master is not technically prevented from using Over-Run w/ Flurry, but all they will be able to do is a 5' step into the target's square: they will not have enough movement to move beyond that... And if they are in an 'illegal square' at the end of their turn, they will be ejected to the last legal square they were in, i.e. where they started.
Is this actually a thing? Can a character wilfully step into a space occupied by another creature, spend its turn there, then get ejected back to the square it started in?
If its possible, I really like the mental image of how this characters attack routine would go. Overrun into their square, knock them down with the overrun, proceed to full attack them (i.e jump up and down on their head), then casually step off.
Also, another question. Assuming this 5-foot step Overrun is possible, would there ever be a reason to want to Bullrush instead? Seems once you strip away the need to spend a move action, Overrun is just better all the time. Am I missing an aspect? Reason I ask is, a 2 level Monk dip gets me two monk feats. The second one would either be a second maneuver feat or something like Deflect arrows, and I need to know if I will need Improved Bullrush as a backup.
Is this actually a thing? Can a character wilfully step into a space occupied by another creature, spend its turn there, then get ejected back to the square it started in?No. You might accidentally end in an illegal square, if so you get ejected, but you can't willfully step into another creature's square.
Indeed :-)I'm honestly kind of dubious on the Charge aspect. It doesn't actually say it replaces the attack at the end of the Charge, or change the limitation of Charge that the movement stops at the first square you can attack the target from, and you can't move after that attack.True, but these are problems inherent to overrun.
RAW states you can overrun as a standard action as part of a charge (that's really the only way to parse the parenthetical). You don't have Standard Action while charging, but you do get to make a Standard Attack (itself a Standard Action) so either you can't overrun as part of a charge or the overrun attempt replaces the Standard Attack.
To address this, the grammar is weird here, but it's not quite how you lay out:
Parsing: ...Doesn't make sense as you do it either, although ultimately how the commas are being used in RAW don't really make sense.
"": OK that part works fine enough...
If you want to connect the standard action and "as part of a Charge" (i.e. in line with comma's indication),
that runs into major problems because it is never giving you an extra Standard Action to spend
(not a problem with a Move Action, but a major one with Charge).
Your explanation is conflating a Standard Action with this idea of "Standard Attack", when the RAW is clear about Standard Action and never mentions "Standard Attack".
You are not making any "Standard Attack" (itself a Standard Action) when Charging (or Over-Run + Move Action), it is a "unique" Over-Run Standard Action.
The closest thing to what you refer would be the Attack Action (a Standard Action), and Charge does not do that.
Vital Strike applies to the Attack Action, but not the attack allowed by Charge.
Charge allows one attack, which itself isn't an "Action", akin to an attack via AoO, or Spring Attack.
I think you're also overlooking another grammatical aspect, it doesn't read:
"As a standard action taken during your move or [part of a] charge" (which would be more in line with your reading lumping the latter two together),
it reads "".
The second "as" connected to the charge here is congruent with the sentence changing focus to specify a new type of action the CMB can be initiated by, with each possible action introduced with an "as", i.e. ~"As (...) or as (...), you can Over-Run...".
Regardless, it never specifies any specific part of the charge, much less that it is REPLACING or counting as any specific part of the Charge...
Connecting the Standard Action directly to the Charge aspect seems non-functional if you insist on conneting them,
if they are not, then the rules are simply stating we can Over-Run as part of a Charge, not replacing or counting as any one specific part of the Charge...
So if we are doing a Charge, we should be able to do an Over-Run as part of it, with no other limitation,
i.e. we should be able to mix it into the content of a Charge just like a 5' Step can be mixed into a Full-Attack Action.
I'm hardly going to insist that is the definite intent there, but that seems the closest reading you can get from RAW.
In any possible scenario, there is certainly problems with the grammar of this rule, and I welcome those to be fixed.
Not fixating on the placement of commas seems the LEAST or most minor deviaton from RAW, and the one most attributable to a type-o.
The only solid thing you can say about the rule is that it needs Errata.
For me, I tend to defer to the "most conservative"/least divergent from RAW approach in cases like these,
and not being fixated on the comma, but instead applying the actual WORDS being used ('as'...) seems in line with that.
The alternative would be ignoring/changing MORE parts of the sentence, parts which are actually more substantive than commas.
Is this actually a thing? Can a character wilfully step into a space occupied by another creature, spend its turn there, then get ejected back to the square it started in?No. You might accidentally end in an illegal square, if so you get ejected, but you can't willfully step into another creature's square.
Or to put it in another way, the normal actions available to you don't allow you to step into EDIT: an ENEMY'S square.
(you can enter ally's square, you just can't REMAIN there past the end of your action, if your movement ended there you will be ejected)*IF* some special action or set of circumstances means that you were allowed to enter an enemy's square (such as Over-Run, or Tumble)
then if you end your turn in that square, you are instantly ejected to the last legally valid square...
That would function the same as if you ended your action in an ally's square.
I believe there is a FAQ or developer comment directly speaking to Spring Attack and scenarios where your own allies are surrounding the enemy:
They rule that because you can move THRU your allies, if not END YOUR ACTION there,
you can move thru allies, attack an enemy FROM the square shared with your ally,
and if you yourself don't move back to a valid square, you will be ejected to the last/nearest legally valid square.
(which in essence is free movement, but no different than 5' stepping off a cliff after full attacking, and then falling)
So just to be clear then. I CAN take a 5-foot step into the opponents square as part of an overrun, perform whatever other actions I have available to me while sharing the square with him, then get ejected at the end of my turn?
As a Flurrying Maneuver Master, I believe "Yes", you can.
The Class Ability changes/bypasses the action requirements for the maneuver, although it doesn't change WHAT THE MANEUVER ACTUALLY DOES.
So you will be ejected to where you started from and thus not achieve the primary goal of Over-Run...
But it lets you not bother investing in Trip Feats. Other than that, the only real advantage I can see would be that while in the enemy's square you can threaten additional squares you couldn't from your original square, but just 5' further. That last part is actually a coherent benefit, actually.
As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge, you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square.
"taken during your move or as part of a charge" is a parenthetical separated from the rest of the sentence by commas. None of the other uses for a comma fits given the context. As a parenthetical, it can be removed with chaging the essential meaning of the statement.
As a standard action you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square.
This is the essential meaning of the statement.
"taken during your move" and "as part of a charge" are both prepositional phases both of which modify the object preceding the parenthetical, in this case "standard action".
Parsing this we have two related ideas being communicated: "As a standard action taken during your move you can attempt to overrun your target" and "As a standard action [taken] as part of a charge you can attempt to overrun your target"
If "as part of a charge" were not intended to modify "standard action", but, rather, "you" it would have been separated by another comma.
As a standard action, taken during your move, or as part of a charge, you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square.
Parsing this we have: "As a standard action taken during your move you can attempt to overrun your target" and "As part of a charge you can attempt to overrun your target"
Yeah... commas matter and English is dumb.
So Quantum Steve, are you agreeing or disagreeing with the 5-foot overrun? I honestly cant tell to an extent where im sure...
.
But it lets you not bother investing in Trip Feats. Other than that, the only real advantage I can see would be that while in the enemy's square you can threaten additional squares you couldn't from your original square, but just 5' further. That last part is actually a coherent benefit, actually.
It also lets me proc Spiked Destroyer without knocking my opponent out of reach (since anything more than 5 feet would put him out of melee range, even following with a 5-foot step.)
Its a nice combo really. Full Attack, starting with the Overrun. If you manage to knock the opponent down, perform a Vicious Stomp, then Swift Action to hit him with armor spikes, then the rest of your attacks. It really evokes the mental image of a brawler who fights dirty, body slamming enemies to the ground before stomping on their nads and following up with a barrage of fist pummels...and its effective to boot...
...assuming it works ofc.
FOR REFERENCE:
As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge, you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square.
OK, I can ALMOST see the Comma Strict reading WORKING in the following way, but still no dice:
When Charging it is essentially allowing you spend an additional Standard Action for FREE (only to Over-Run).Never mind that it is ultra-bizarro to invoke a 'free' Standard Action for that purpose instead of just allowing the maneuver.
(the other reading there is that you don't get that for free, and can only do this if you have a bonus Standard Action)
The normal attack and restrictions of Charge are not changed (must make normal Charge attack from first square, cannot move after that).
The Over-Run is not replacing the Charge's attack,
but you can choose to use the free Standard Action to Over-Run before making the Charge attack.
(basically with this Over-Run as an Interrupt)
Now, if Over-Run actually included it's own movement, then you could use that to effect an Over-Run,
which would then invalidate the Charge attack, for similar outcome to if that attack was "replaced" (which it wasn't).
Only problem is that Over-Run DOESN'T include it's own movement,
and Charge's own movement cannot take you further than the closest square to the opponent.
So like I wrote before, there is problems with all readings, applying RAW to the hilt doesn't yield ANY valid function. But the Comma Strict readings all have MORE problems, or MORE parts of the RAW that you have to either ignore or pretend that text is there which really isn't.
I think something more akin to what you're claiming WOULD be the better function, but there is just so many issues in RAW against that, that I can't call it the "conservative reading of RAW". The least divergent application of RAW is to consider that one comma character doesn't have it's full grammatic function, and a very minor type-o like that seems most likely to occur, in general.
I think I've previously tried to bring this to Paizo's attention for Errata, to no avail. I really hope they do Errata this, and from their position there isn't any problem making a more extensive Errata change, adding more words for clarity, to yield something like your reading.
So Quantum Steve, are you agreeing or disagreeing with the 5-foot overrun? I honestly cant tell to an extent where im sure...
I can't speak for him, but I feel like I understand his perspective fairly well, and it doesn't seem to present a problem to doing that. Maneuver Master is changing the required action for the maneuver, which is all that this discussion about Over-Run and Charge pertains to, so Maneuver Master is bypassing that.
The only reason why that would be disallowed would be the fact that you don't have enough movement to complete the FULL functionality of Over-Run. IMHO, that is not a reason to stop you from beginning the action... Not having the movement to complete the full allotment of the action seems similar to entering a square that is 'illegal' to remain in without movement sufficient to leave (which triggers automatic ejection), or indeed beginning some movement like a Charge with some invisible rope that would prevent you from finishing it (which you discover half way thru, it doesn't prevent you from starting).
Yes, you just can't follow up with their movement more than 5', unless you have some special way to Full Attack while moving more than that.
Maneuver Master still works with Bull Rush, right?
Bullrush doesn't have any conflict at all, since it can be done as a Standard action, or as part of a charge. You dont have to move to perform it, which is the trouble with Overrun and the debate about 5-foot stepping into peoples square.
(which you discover half way thru, it doesn't prevent you from starting).
This then begs the question if you can start an action that you already know you cannot finish.
From my perspective, I don't see how KNOWING you can't matters, e.g. whether you know there is a rope tied around you, or there is an invisible Force cord which you don't know exists but would impede you exactly the same. In the latter case, would you be magically disllowed from beginning a Charge, even though you aren't aware of any reason you shouldn't be able to? How do you roleplay that? ;-)
(Charge wording is weird, technically you WOULD be prevented if there was an Illusion covering a pit in the floor that impedes the Charge path, but a rope/cord that limits your location/movement doesn't technically run afoul of Charge's wording AFAIK.)
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I'd recommend staying away from all builds involving Overrun until it is better understood.
Practically every GM runs Overrun differently and the interaction of various Overrun feats (Charge Through, Elephant Stomp, etc.)
So save some headache, and don't try a build like this unless you are in a home game and work out with the GM before hand.
That being said, you can't perform a Maneuver Master Flurry of Maneuvers with Overrun because Overrun requires movement and you only have a 4 ft step.
What about that barbarian rage power that allows you to overrun multiple targets? (I call it the bowling ball rage power)
It tends to support the OP's inquiry in the sense that there is a precedent that allows you to do more than things than ONE overrun per round...
Actually it supports the exact opposite. It supports that without a special ability, you can only make a single over-run attempt in a turn.
That being said, you can't perform a Maneuver Master Flurry of Maneuvers with Overrun because Overrun requires movement and you only have a 4 ft step.
A 5-foot step is still movement, even if it isnt a Move Action.
im going to try and keep this simple. maneuver masters get the ability to do their extra maneuver with anexcrption to the rules that changes it so that they are allowed to try normalky standard actaction maneuvers as part of their flurry of maneuvers. fom however does not change the mechanics of how any maneuvers work.
this means that not all maneuvers or feats for maneuvers are compatable with fom.
over run is an action that takes place during two types of movement specifically a move action or a charge. if you are not doing either you cannot overrun.
for a longer explanation on over run if someone with better search skills can find it i explained over run in detail in a post by james risner about elephant stomp.
hopefully that will give a better idea on how overrun works.
FoM is an exception to the action requirement of a CMB, i.e. the conditions it can be made under.
Fom is saying you CAN attempt a CMB as an attack during Flurry, regardless of the norm.
It doesn't change what the CMB /does/, but it changes the requirements to initiate it.
"As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge, you can..." is a requirement of the action,
with the latter parts being special qualifies/enablers of the action type, but still pertaining to the action requirements,
and thus FoM can bypass that entire section to instead use a 'Flurry attack roll' to trigger the CMB, because it says you CAN make any CMB.
Given that, 5' step still counts as movement (which O-R still needs to do anything, as the Knocking Prone only happens when moving into/thru their square)), so should still work with Over-Run. Of course, the Knocking Prone thing only happens if you beat the DC by 5, so using Trip will normally be a better idea.
I believe you can also gain an additional 5' step as free action by some means(Ranger Trick?), which would allow you to also step out of their square to the other side DURING the Flurry Full Attack.
I believe if you couldn't do so before the end of the Flurry Full Round Action, you would be immediately ejected to your original square,
so you couldn't ever move to their opposite side.
"As a standard action, taken during your move, or as part of a charge,..."
Nowhere does it say you can only do it during a Move Action, just during your move.
i think your misunderstanding something. fom changes the action required for a maneuver. the action required for overrun is a standard action.
the mechanics of overrun has requirements unconnected to the standard action.
general rule is overrun is a standard action. the specific rule for fom over rides this. there is no wording in fom removing or changing any other rules about overrun.
lastly a five foot step is movement it is *not* a move action.
lastly a five foot step is movement it is *not* a move action
Good thing Overrun doesn't require a Move Action then?
I think you would need to move to run over somebody.
FoM does not narrowly state 'replace the standard action requirement with 'in place of a flurry attack'.
That is just conflating a 'synopsis' that works 99% of the time, with an actual rule.
It says you CAN MAKE THE MANEUVER. Any impediment to that is negated by FoM specifically saying that you CAN do it.
Most maneuvers ONLY have action requirement, so that is the only thing changed,
but FoM is over-riding ANY requirement which determines when you can make the CMB,
there is no qualification or limitation given to the statement that you CAN make the CMB.
It doesn't change what the maneuver does, which still depends on simultaneous movement, but 5' step can still fulfill that,
even if the limited distance means you cannot reach the other side of a square, but only entering that square.
Regardless, Over-Run needs grammar errata because it's poorly written by any interpretation or intent you perceive.
Do you disagree with using 5' step per se, or just because you can't even theoretically "complete the entire over-run" with only 5' of movement?
So having two 5' steps by some special ability (Skirmisher Surprise Shift), would allow 10' total movement during the Flurry and be OK?
|
Actually it supports the exact opposite. It supports that without a special ability, you can only make a single over-run attempt in a turn.What about that barbarian rage power that allows you to overrun multiple targets? (I call it the bowling ball rage power)
It tends to support the OP's inquiry in the sense that there is a precedent that allows you to do more than things than ONE overrun per round...
Just playing the devil's advocate here, but Maneuver Master sounds like a special ability... whole archetype dedicated to Maneuvers in fact.
But I do agree with the general thread opinion that Overrun is weird and doesn't really work like other Maneuvers...
I can see Maneuver Master being mostly useful for a grapple monkey...
If Maneuver Master FoM doesn't actually work with one maneuver (even theoretically, independent of whether that maneuver would normally be USEFUL during a FoM), it should say so.
|
|
If Maneuver Master FoM doesn't actually work with one maneuver (even theoretically, independent of whether that maneuver would normally be USEFUL during a FoM), it should say so.
Agreed. Well said. That was my whole point. So by virtue of shoehorning a square peg in a round hole, as a DM i'd still allow multiple overruns with this.
Well, MULTIPLE Over-Runs runs into the usefulness issue.
Normally you only have one 5' step: Over-Run doesn't include any movement of it's own, that's just not what it DOES.
IF you had a second 5' step (via Ranger ability) I guess you could use another iterative to Over-Run an enemy adjacent to the first one, but that's about it.
(you would be ending your action/turn in this opponents' square, meaning you would be ejected to the last legal square, i.e. your starting square... OR you can spend that extra 5' step to actually step BEYOND the first opponent into an open/free square, along with doing the remainder of your iterative attacks)
You can't move into an arbitrary # of opponents' squares, and the "trip" function (if you beat CMD by 5+) only kicks in after you've entered that square... So if you did 6 Over-Run attacks in a FoM, 4-5 of them would have zero actual effect.
The use value is more in being able to combine Over-Run with other iteratives doing other attacks (normal damage, or other maneuvers like Sunder/Bullrush), and that you are able to do so while attacking FROM the opponents' own square, thus threatening more enemies.
|
|
The best multiple overrun combo I know come from the following APG barb rage powers... I don't think you could beat that with another build... not only do you overrun multiple targets, but STR 30 barbarian (incl. rage of course) gets to damage them all by 10pts. of damage. You finish your move in the middle of them after they go prone, and with a spiked armor and reach weapon, you could do a lot of AoOs if you have combat reflexes...
I would say Overbearing Onslaught is EXTREMELY vaguely written, it doesn't say how/what actions you are using to Over-Run more than target. There isn't any explicit limit to "only one Over-Run per round" by the normal rules that such wording would be bypassing, there is just the defacto function of action economy, but this doesn't say exactly what is changing. It should read more like "A Standard Action or Charge Over-Run allows you to overrun as many targets as you can move thru." I mean, there is one interpretation out there that you are getting a "free" Standard Action during a Charge, so should this be allowing MULTIPLE "free" Standard Actions? (I don't think so, but if that's how the Charge Overrun is supposed to work, that's how this should work).
But yeah, any reasonable function of it makes them by far the best Over-Run build, more than any Flurry of Maneuvers stuff.