| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
SO, we need a parallel rule:
"Attempting to cast a spell within an opponent's threatened area provokes an attack of opportunity. If that attack hits, you take damage normally, and also take a penalty to your Concentration check to cast defensively equal to the damage dealt."
Then we make a line of feats:
Improved Combat Casting (Abjuration)
Benefit: You do not provoke attacks of opportunity when casting Abjuration spells of up to 5th level defensively. You must still succeed at a Concentration check to cast defensively, however.
Greater Combat Casting (Abjuration)
Benefit: You do not provoke attacks of opportunity when casting Abjuration spells of up to 9th level defensively. You must still succeed at a Concentration check to cast defensively, however.
There would of course be a different pair of feats for each school of magic.
|
SO, we need a parallel rule:
"Attempting to cast a spell within an opponent's threatened area provokes an attack of opportunity. If that attack hits, you take damage normally, and also take a penalty to your Concentration check to cast defensively equal to the damage dealt."
Then we make a line of feats:
Improved Combat Casting (Abjuration)
Benefit: You do not provoke attacks of opportunity when casting Abjuration spells of up to 5th level defensively. You must still succeed at a Concentration check to cast defensively, however.Greater Combat Casting (Abjuration)
Benefit: You do not provoke attacks of opportunity when casting Abjuration spells of up to 9th level defensively. You must still succeed at a Concentration check to cast defensively, however.There would of course be a different pair of feats for each school of magic.
You are serious?
That rule already exist, but it work in the opposite way:- you can make a concentration check to avoid generating a attack of opportunity (note that there is no way to avoid it automatically, as allowed by the feat). If you fail it you lose the spell and the action.
When trying a maneuver you never lose your action. you can have a massive penalty but you can still do it.
- you can decide not to tray the concentration check. At that point you provoke an AoO and, if hit, you have to make a concentration cehckl to cast the spell.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
His point was that the casters get a handily built in option for dealing with AoOs that automatically scales with their class and applies to all of their spells. Martial classes have to dump feats into each individual maneuver to get benefits similar to what a wizard can do inherently and shore up with just one or two feats that apply to every single spell instead of just one branch.
He's commenting on how small the cost is for a wizard to cast a spell that may be superior in every way, to the cost for a maneuver, which already has the odds set against it as levels rise.
The line about applying the penalty to an attack roll for a special maneuver that provokes is AN IMPROVEMENT over 3.5.
If you tried a feint maneuver in 3E without the feat, if they hit on the AoO, you FAILED. Period.
The Close Quarters Fighting feat was Anti-Improved Grab. It still allowed you the AoO, but the creature still got to attempt the grapple. But it took a penalty equal to the damage you did to start/maintain the grapple.
==Aelryinth
If it reduces your movement, then it's a "obstacle". if there was a painted line on the dungeon floor, 1/16 of a inch think, would that be a obstacle? No. If you have to use climb, then your movement is reduced, thus it's a obstacle. If it slows your movement, it hinders your movement, thus obstacle.Hindering in this case is a somewhat broader statement than you're indicating. I'll quote from the rules:
So, said wall I mentioned? You can't pass through it, so you need to go around it (i.e. jump over it). Ergo, it counts as an obstacle. We can split hairs all day long to get down to the precise fraction-of-a-foot-high wall that would constitute an obstacle, but it seems pretty clear that any sufficiently solid and large object in the path of a charge is gonna count as an obstacle.Obstacles
Like difficult terrain, obstacles can hamper movement. If an obstacle hampers movement but doesn't completely block it, each obstructed square or obstacle between squares counts as 2 squares of movement. You must pay this cost to cross the obstacle, in addition to the cost to move into the square on the other side. If you don't have sufficient movement to cross the obstacle and move into the square on the other side, you can't cross it. Some obstacles may also require a skill check to cross.
On the other hand, some obstacles block movement entirely. A character can't move through a blocking obstacle.
If you can jump over it, it does;t block movement, since jump is part of movement.
you can make a concentration check to avoid generating a attack of opportunity (note that there is no way to avoid it automatically, as allowed by the feat).
Not true. Past median level, you pretty much always automatically succeed, because your bonus scales much faster than the DC, and there's no auto-failure on a 1. And this applies to all your spells, not just a sub-set of them, and does not require a feat on your part.
When trying a maneuver you never lose your action. you can have a massive penalty but you can still do it.
Call it whatever you want, but a failed maneuver is a lost action. There are no "partial" effects on any failed maneuver, unlike most spells.
Wait, you're saying AOs and iterative attacks are a bad thing? Why? Haven't those been an item since at least 2nd Edition?
There was some kludgy optional rule for what became AoO, but basically, no, there were none in AD&D.
Which in turn brings my mind directly to mage's disjunction (as it's now called.) I haven't seen it in use in PF yet, but I recall the 3.5 version very well: talk about traumatic and game-stopping. "Everybody take a 25-minute break while we re-stat!"
That is exactly why I have never used this spell.
1000
That aside:
Wow, that's really bad. I had no idea that was even a rule. I can't imagine WHY it would be a rule.none of us remembered that there was a line that said "If you are hit by the target, you take the damage normally and apply that amount as a penalty to the attack roll to perform the maneuver". I don't think I've ever seen that rule enforced once in several years of playing Pathfinder, including at PFS.
That's just terrible.
"Oh ho, try to disarm me will you? Take that! Enjoy the -24 on your roll..."
Nothing like getting stabbed and failing colossally at the thing you got stabbed for to convince you to never do that thing again.
In my gaming circle we use it extensively instead.
Think about it: you attack someone with a special maneuver that require extensive training (a feat) without that training. You provoke an AoO.
You don't think that being wounded while you try you grapple/disarm etc. will make you recoil and hinder you?
Except that Manuevers are just horridly bad to start with... I think the best manuever builds I have seen so far is the Lore Warden Fighter trip master and a Flowing Monk Reposition/trip master with the Old Crane wing. The problem with both is that trip fail to work later in the game due to:
1) Creatures without legs2) Flying creatures
AND they require a rediculous amount of feats to work... so yeah..
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you can jump over it, it does;t block movement, since jump is part of movement.If it reduces your movement, then it's a "obstacle". if there was a painted line on the dungeon floor, 1/16 of a inch think, would that be a obstacle? No. If you have to use climb, then your movement is reduced, thus it's a obstacle. If it slows your movement, it hinders your movement, thus obstacle.Hindering in this case is a somewhat broader statement than you're indicating. I'll quote from the rules:
So, said wall I mentioned? You can't pass through it, so you need to go around it (i.e. jump over it). Ergo, it counts as an obstacle. We can split hairs all day long to get down to the precise fraction-of-a-foot-high wall that would constitute an obstacle, but it seems pretty clear that any sufficiently solid and large object in the path of a charge is gonna count as an obstacle.Obstacles
Like difficult terrain, obstacles can hamper movement. If an obstacle hampers movement but doesn't completely block it, each obstructed square or obstacle between squares counts as 2 squares of movement. You must pay this cost to cross the obstacle, in addition to the cost to move into the square on the other side. If you don't have sufficient movement to cross the obstacle and move into the square on the other side, you can't cross it. Some obstacles may also require a skill check to cross.
On the other hand, some obstacles block movement entirely. A character can't move through a blocking obstacle.
Do you know just what a charge IS?
Here, try charging forward 60 ft, jump over an object, and still maintan your momentum and power from the charge...
It is not really feasible without focused training in things like Parkour (i.e. being something like a Duelist who is all about being agile). The charge is you running at full spritn at a target and pretty much cleaving into the guy with all your strength and backed by your momentum... which is hard to do when you are jumping over a table half way there...
If you can jump over it, it does;t block movement, since jump is part of movement.If it reduces your movement, then it's a "obstacle". if there was a painted line on the dungeon floor, 1/16 of a inch think, would that be a obstacle? No. If you have to use climb, then your movement is reduced, thus it's a obstacle. If it slows your movement, it hinders your movement, thus obstacle.Hindering in this case is a somewhat broader statement than you're indicating. I'll quote from the rules:
So, said wall I mentioned? You can't pass through it, so you need to go around it (i.e. jump over it). Ergo, it counts as an obstacle. We can split hairs all day long to get down to the precise fraction-of-a-foot-high wall that would constitute an obstacle, but it seems pretty clear that any sufficiently solid and large object in the path of a charge is gonna count as an obstacle.Obstacles
Like difficult terrain, obstacles can hamper movement. If an obstacle hampers movement but doesn't completely block it, each obstructed square or obstacle between squares counts as 2 squares of movement. You must pay this cost to cross the obstacle, in addition to the cost to move into the square on the other side. If you don't have sufficient movement to cross the obstacle and move into the square on the other side, you can't cross it. Some obstacles may also require a skill check to cross.
On the other hand, some obstacles block movement entirely. A character can't move through a blocking obstacle.
An obstacle is an obstacle whether you can overcome it or not, and the rules don't say obstacles you can overcome don't count. They just say if it is in your path or not, is a factor as to whether or not you can charge.
So you ask, is it in my path?
yes = no charge.
no = charge.
PS: Now you can argue the intent is not matching RAW, but it seem to be intentional, even if some dont think it makes sense.
A new one ... class skill lists.
Just let skills be skills. If someone wants to cling to stereotypes, then they can assign their skill points appropriately, but the idea that my wizard can never be as acrobatic as someone else solely because he's a wizard is inane.
If you can jump over it, it does;t block movement, since jump is part of movement.If it reduces your movement, then it's a "obstacle". if there was a painted line on the dungeon floor, 1/16 of a inch think, would that be a obstacle? No. If you have to use climb, then your movement is reduced, thus it's a obstacle. If it slows your movement, it hinders your movement, thus obstacle.Hindering in this case is a somewhat broader statement than you're indicating. I'll quote from the rules:
So, said wall I mentioned? You can't pass through it, so you need to go around it (i.e. jump over it). Ergo, it counts as an obstacle. We can split hairs all day long to get down to the precise fraction-of-a-foot-high wall that would constitute an obstacle, but it seems pretty clear that any sufficiently solid and large object in the path of a charge is gonna count as an obstacle.Obstacles
Like difficult terrain, obstacles can hamper movement. If an obstacle hampers movement but doesn't completely block it, each obstructed square or obstacle between squares counts as 2 squares of movement. You must pay this cost to cross the obstacle, in addition to the cost to move into the square on the other side. If you don't have sufficient movement to cross the obstacle and move into the square on the other side, you can't cross it. Some obstacles may also require a skill check to cross.
On the other hand, some obstacles block movement entirely. A character can't move through a blocking obstacle.
An obstacle is an obstacle whether you can overcome it or not, and the rules don't say obstacles you can overcome don't count. They just say if it is in your path or not, is a factor as to whether or not you can charge.
So you ask, is it in my path?
yes = no charge.
no = charge.
PS: Now you can argue the intent is not matching RAW, but it seem to be intentional, even if some dont...
What is an "obstacle"? It's something that hampers or blocks movement, If it does neither, it's not a "obstacle". Is a painted line on the dungeon floor a "obstacle"?
|
|
you can make a concentration check to avoid generating a attack of opportunity (note that there is no way to avoid it automatically, as allowed by the feat).Not true. Past median level, you pretty much always automatically succeed, because your bonus scales much faster than the DC, and there's no auto-failure on a 1. And this applies to all your spells, not just a sub-set of them, and does not require a feat on your part.
When trying a maneuver you never lose your action. you can have a massive penalty but you can still do it.Call it whatever you want, but a failed maneuver is a lost action. There are no "partial" effects on any failed maneuver, unlike most spells.
1) No failed spell has a partial effect. Spell against which people has saved can have a partial effect, but that is a different thing.
2) "ast median level, you pretty much always automatically succeed, because your bonus scales much faster than the DC, "
The DC is: "Cast defensively 15 + double spell level"
The check bonus scale by 1 point for each caster level + your casting stat.
So, with the exclusion of the casting stat, they scale at the same speed if the caster is using his higher level of spells.
Guess what? A character with a full BAB CMB scale practically the same way. 1 point each level + strength (or dexterity) bonus. But then he get a further bonus based equal to all the bonuses he get on an attack.
Sure, a high level spellcaster can easily cast defensively his low level spells, the same way as a high BAB character with an high strength can soak some hp of damage from a low level mook and still do whatever maneuver he want.
Hey guys, what if you took your single-topic rules debate to the Rules forum and gave it its own thread?
Which one of MANY "single-topic rules debates" are you talking about? This thread has 1000 posts.
More posts on alignment than any other, so is that what you're talking about?
Lava Effects? Cause we debated that for a while.
Armor? Archery?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, with the exclusion of the casting stat, they scale at the same speed if the caster is using his higher level of spells.
Casting stat is the real rub, and you don't always cast only your highest level spells. An 18th level wizard is likely to have an Int of 30-35 (starting 20 + 4 for leveling + 6 headband, possibly up to +5 inherent). Call it 33 as a median, for a +11 modifier. You also get +18 for being 18th level, for +29 total Concentration.
0-level: DC 15: Auto-success.
1st level: DC 17: Auto-success.
2nd level: DC 19: Auto-success.
3rd level: DC 21: Auto-success.
4th level: DC 23: Auto-success.
5th level: DC 25: Auto-success.
6th level: DC 27: Auto-success.
7th level: DC 29: Auto-success.
8th level: DC 31: Need a 2. 95% chance of success.
9th level: DC 33: Need a 4. 85% chance of success.
So he has any chance of failing at all only for his highest two levels of spells, and even then the chance is pretty remote.
And, again, this requires no feats at all. And does not provoke an attack of opportunity no matter what he does, unless for some reason he completely takes leave of his senses and chooses to take one, which seems more than somewhat unlikely unless the DM is using some bizarre variant confusion spell.
There's also this one spell...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
***
So, with the exclusion of the casting stat, they scale at the same speed if the caster is using his higher level of spells.Guess what? A character with a full BAB CMB scale practically the same way. 1 point each level + strength (or dexterity) bonus. But then he get a further bonus based equal to all the bonuses he get on an attack.
Sure, a high level spellcaster can easily cast defensively his low level spells, the same way as a high BAB character with an high strength can soak some hp of damage from a low level mook and still do whatever maneuver he want.
They're not even remotely the same.
You don't "exclude the casting stat" as that's a much bigger bonus for the caster than single stat boosts are for a martial character. Remember that CMD is scaling off of two stats while CMB is only scaling off of one. In addition, monsters fairly consistently get larger on average, while barring fairly specific circumstances your character is staying the same size. The scaling for Concentration checks is easily two or three times more favorable to the caster than CMD scaling is to martial characters. You're not spending feats for Concentration, unless you really want to to move from "very likely to succeed" to "guaranteed to succeed", you've got nice set DC's to target instead of variable defenses with gobs of bonuses, and Concentration applies to all spells, you aren't having to spend resources per spell school or something similar. The martial characters meanwhile are having to burn feats for each individual maneuver, and they have to be up in the enemies face to use them. You can't choose to make your maneuver check from a nice safe distance (other than reach weapons during the first few levels of play when enemy reach is relatively uncommon).
Maneuvers are best used against helpless bipedal mooks of low stats and smaller sizes?
Or, because they're so resource-intensive (2 feats each, now), and have such a high chance of not working against most opponents even if you have the feats, maneuvers are most often best ignored in favor of simply full-attacking.
QED.
The sad fact is that combat maneuvers are best used against targets that don't threaten you.
Grapple and trip are very good against casters. Grapple stops most spellcasting, trip stops the 5 foot step shuffle.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
An obstacle is an obstacle whether you can overcome it or not, and the rules don't say obstacles you can overcome don't count.
Air resistance is an obstacle we all have to fight every single day.
|
|
Grapple and trip are very good against casters.Again, against those who don't threaten you. Unless they are smart enough to hold a dagger. (Which wizards should be, but hey.)
Given the very narrow margin by which most maneuvers succeed, a single poke from an enchanted dagger could be all it takes for a caster to shut down a grapple attempt (particularly since we're talking about a character "dipping a toe" into these maneuvers).
Which touches another issue. Feats are generally a life-long investment, or at least a "next 4 levels" investment, and you want to know that that feat is going to do something for you. If a new player never sees any success from attempting those maneuvers pre-investment, he's not going to see any value in investing in the first place. An experienced player is going to see that the curve is turning against him in later levels as well, and the whole system basically makes itself unappealing and inaccessible to players of all system mastery.
(This was actually one of the reasons I was really excited about Dreamscarred Press' Path of War project, it got my players to actually use combat maneuvers, because the investment was for more reasonable, as was the return).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1000
That aside:
Wow, that's really bad. I had no idea that was even a rule. I can't imagine WHY it would be a rule.none of us remembered that there was a line that said "If you are hit by the target, you take the damage normally and apply that amount as a penalty to the attack roll to perform the maneuver". I don't think I've ever seen that rule enforced once in several years of playing Pathfinder, including at PFS.
That's just terrible.
"Oh ho, try to disarm me will you? Take that! Enjoy the -24 on your roll..."
Nothing like getting stabbed and failing colossally at the thing you got stabbed for to convince you to never do that thing again.
In my gaming circle we use it extensively instead.
Think about it: you attack someone with a special maneuver that require extensive training (a feat) without that training. You provoke an AoO.
You don't think that being wounded while you try you grapple/disarm etc. will make you recoil and hinder you?
"Special Maneuver that requires extensive training"
Damn grabbing someone is really hard. Knocking someone over is the epitome of martial skill. Knocking a weapon out of someone's hand? Looks like we're dealing with the Grand Blademaster of Brevoy here!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Parkour has another name in the game. It's called a Tumble Check. ANd yes, Jumping is a part of normal movement, so you can totally jump over things on a charge without skipping a beat. The duelist can go through it all without making a tumble or jumping check, however.
==Aelryinth
Damn grabbing someone is really hard. Knocking someone over is the epitome of martial skill. Knocking a weapon out of someone's hand? Looks like we're dealing with the Grand Blademaster of Brevoy here!
While anyone CAN do any of those things, doing so to an armed opponent without leaving yourself open to being gutted yourself is a bit tricky.
Damn grabbing someone is really hard. Knocking someone over is the epitome of martial skill. Knocking a weapon out of someone's hand? Looks like we're dealing with the Grand Blademaster of Brevoy here!While anyone CAN do any of those things, doing so to an armed opponent without leaving yourself open to being gutted yourself is a bit tricky.
It's a lot easier since you have a weapon too.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The sad fact is that combat maneuvers are best used against targets that don't threaten you.Which, last I heard, was the system working as intended.
This stinks of an 12th level caster picking up feats that let them blow up 1 HD kobolds in more spectacular ways. "Spectacular Bang: any creature that this spell instantly kills is thrown about, possibly injuring other creatures. [metamagic +0] (Now with ragdoll physics!)"
I.e. "not something they should be doing."
If combat maneuvers are intended for fights below the challenge-level of the party, then wtf are the feats for? Why are we encouraging fighters to become utter masters of beating up unarmed children?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The sad fact is that combat maneuvers are best used against targets that don't threaten you.Which, last I heard, was the system working as intended.
I feel as though that assigns a lot more value to combat maneuvers than they're generally able to deliver...
If anything, pulling one off successfully is one of the few ways to compensate for losing your effectiveness due to movement by making it up in reducing the enemy's action economy or squeezing an extra AoO in when they stand up (or whatever).
Any benefit they have over a normal attack is already reflected in the fact that it eats up 3 of your feats to be able to do effectively. By making them extremely difficult and situational on top of that, you've gone from creating a high opportunity cost to punishing people for trying to do something other than exchanging blows.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a lot easier since you have a weapon too.Damn grabbing someone is really hard. Knocking someone over is the epitome of martial skill. Knocking a weapon out of someone's hand? Looks like we're dealing with the Grand Blademaster of Brevoy here!While anyone CAN do any of those things, doing so to an armed opponent without leaving yourself open to being gutted yourself is a bit tricky.
Looks like we're dealing with the Grand Blademaster of Brevoy here!
Heh. Not as easy as you seem to think.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Damn grabbing someone is really hard. Knocking someone over is the epitome of martial skill. Knocking a weapon out of someone's hand? Looks like we're dealing with the Grand Blademaster of Brevoy here!While anyone CAN do any of those things, doing so to an armed opponent without leaving yourself open to being gutted yourself is a bit tricky.
Sorry, but that is ridiculous. Disarm or sunder attempts can be done in place of a normal attack, or even on an AoO. Why does attempting to bash someone in their head when they have their sword raised to guard position not provoke an AoO when attempting a shorter range strike to go after the guarding blade itself does? For comparison's sake, performance combat and called shots don't provoke AoOs in any ways whatsoever. There is no good reason why attempting to disarm someone of a dagger with your flail should provoke an AoO when making a performance check to show off to the crowd in the middle of heated combat doesn't.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a lot easier since you have a weapon too.Damn grabbing someone is really hard. Knocking someone over is the epitome of martial skill. Knocking a weapon out of someone's hand? Looks like we're dealing with the Grand Blademaster of Brevoy here!While anyone CAN do any of those things, doing so to an armed opponent without leaving yourself open to being gutted yourself is a bit tricky.Looks like we're dealing with the Grand Blademaster of Brevoy here!
Heh. Not as easy as you seem to think.
Well I'm not a swordsman who frequently fights ever ascending foes of difficulty in an endless quest for a totally bongdiggity campaign ending.
Surely that guy should have an easier time with it.
You mean your fights are never easier than the previous one? Man, I feel sorry for your characters.Well I'm not a swordsman who frequently fights ever ascending foes of difficulty in an endless quest for a totally bongdiggity campaign ending.
Surely that guy should have an easier time with it.
Generally. Freebie fights are uncommon, though sometimes we win through a tactical advantage occasionally(Read: The Spellcaster dropped a really good spell). The rest are harrowing stuff.
I personally think the game works better if you tell the players, "You should have X gp worth of magic items at this point. Assign it to yourself, but tell me where major items came from" -- e.g., "Remember the gnoll king we killed? This was his spear, okay?" or "One of the torches on the wall of the family crypt was actually my great-gradfather's mace of disruption!"
I think that's just way too narrative for many people drawn to (ostensibly) simulationist systems.
P.S. You, sir, really need to look at 13th Age (assuming you haven't already).
P.S. You, sir, really need to look at 13th Age (assuming you haven't already).
I haven't -- thanks for the recommendation.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, that's really bad. I had no idea that was even a rule. I can't imagine WHY it would be a rule.none of us remembered that there was a line that said "If you are hit by the target, you take the damage normally and apply that amount as a penalty to the attack roll to perform the maneuver". I don't think I've ever seen that rule enforced once in several years of playing Pathfinder, including at PFS.
That's just terrible.
Because F++! YOU, interesting combat. If you ain't playin' with magic, stand right here under this dump truck of fecal matter.
:P
I think that's just way too narrative for many people drawn to (ostensibly) stimulationist systems.O_o
That's right...if that doesn't apply to you, you really are having badwrongfun!
I blame my reliance on my browser's spell-check...I know it flags "simulationist," so the red line doesn't attract my attention. I have now added it to my dictionary. :)
Why does attempting to bash someone in their head when they have their sword raised to guard position not provoke an AoO when attempting a shorter range strike to go after the guarding blade itself does?
Because using metal to tear through soft tender flesh is easy. Using it to cut through metal is a lot harder. Its why you generally went for your opponent, not his weapon.
Why does attempting to bash someone in their head when they have their sword raised to guard position not provoke an AoO when attempting a shorter range strike to go after the guarding blade itself does?Because using metal to tear through soft tender flesh is easy. Using it to cut through metal is a lot harder. Its why you generally went for your opponent, not his weapon.
Except that metal is often covered by nice hard metal, or even scales or hide harder than any metal.
Except that flesh is often covered by nice hard metal, or even scales or hide harder than any metal.
Fixed that for you. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If anything, I'd fix Combat Manoeuvres that you only provoke an AoO if you failed the check. The Improved XXX feats can stay the same and all would be well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
and all would be well.
Not really, but it would be better.
It still means that martials would still be spending a lot of feats to be "marginally bad" at something while the wizard still flies around AOEing everything to death from on high.
Do you know just what a charge IS?Here, try charging forward 60 ft, jump over an object, and still maintan your momentum and power from the charge...
It is not really feasible without focused training in things like Parkour (i.e. being something like a Duelist who is all about being agile). The charge is you running at full spritn at a target and pretty much cleaving into the guy with...
Sounds legit to me... except for the 60ft then jumping... My characters only get 60ft with the double move.
The rules state you only 10 feet/2 squares of movement to perform a charge. It always kind of bugs me that I need a clear straight line regardless of actual distance.
I can easily picture, Move 5' through an allies square, 15 feet of open territory, Jump a chair in the way, then Full speed for the last 10' before striking the enemy. How is that really any different then if I was only 10' away from the beginning....
As long as you got that 10' of 'charging' space then why the nit-pickinh??