This one from Facebook posts, an argument on whether moving 0' is moving. Here is Fleet Charge's description:
"As a swift action, you can expend one use of mythic power to move up to your speed. At any point during this movement, you can make a single melee or ranged attack at your highest attack bonus, adding your tier to the attack roll. This is in addition to any other attacks you make this round. Damage from this attack bypasses all damage reduction."
So, if I expend my mythic power can I attack with these benefits if I don't move from my current melee? Is 0' a "move up to your movement rate" or does 0' disallow this feat because your attack did not occur "at any point during this movement"?
no, moving 0 is not moving and all movement less than 5ft to a different square rounds down to 0ft of movement. So you're welcome to active the ability and not move, just you can't make an attack if you don't move.
I disagree with Chess Pwn.
Certainly, I will agree that moving 0' isn't movement and wouldn't trigger anything that required movement or happened based on movement. However, I don't believe that the wording actually requires any movement.
One of the points during 'movement' is the origination point. You could attack, and then move, for example.
If you can attack and then move, legally, then you can also choose not to move after your attack, similar to the way you can abandon a full attack action if the first attack takes down your opponent.
I can even see times when legitimately you would be planing to move, after a full round of attacks the bad guy is nearly dead, so you activate Fleet Charge, planning to hit him, take him down, and then move to threaten the next guy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is the AoO loop situation. If you're attacking at the start of your move then you must move, because if you don't move then there isn't a start of the move that you attacked from.
So I don't disagree that you could hit from the square you start your movement in, but that you must move if you're getting an attack off from this.
This is similar to how rapid shot locks you into a full attack action. The attack is conditional on movement, so you must move to get the attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to agree with Chess Pwn here. You have to move at least 5 feet for it; 0 feet is not movement.
I was going to say it's Mythic, it's ok to break rules because it's Mythic, but after seeing a logical chain of thought I'm sticking with you have to do at least 5 feet of movement to do it.
This is similar to how rapid shot locks you into a full attack action. The attack is conditional on movement, so you must move to get the attack.
Actually it is Manyshot that locks you into a full attack action, and even that doesn't require you to shot more than one time (albeit with 2 arrows.) You can take the rapid penalty for the potential to make an extra attack, and take one shot and then abandon your full attack and move just like you can with a melee full attack (even when you take a two weapon fighting penalty.)
In this case, the action that has to be spent is the swift action, but spending an action do to something in Pathfinder never 'forces' you to do it, although that doesn't mean you can spend the action for something else.
If Fleet Charge had a clause like 'if you move' or something you would be correct, but that doesn't exist here. Fleet charge does 2 things. It lets you move and it lets you attack with some special benefits. Neither is conditional on the other taking place.
This is similar to how rapid shot locks you into a full attack action. The attack is conditional on movement, so you must move to get the attack.Actually it is Manyshot that locks you into a full attack action, and even that doesn't require you to shot more than one time (albeit with 2 arrows.) You can take the rapid penalty for the potential to make an extra attack, and take one shot and then abandon your full attack and move just like you can with a melee full attack (even when you take a two weapon fighting penalty.)
In this case, the action that has to be spent is the swift action, but spending an action do to something in Pathfinder never 'forces' you to do it, although that doesn't mean you can spend the action for something else.
If Fleet Charge had a clause like 'if you move' or something you would be correct, but that doesn't exist here. Fleet charge does 2 things. It lets you move and it lets you attack with some special benefits. Neither is conditional on the other taking place.
Yes, the attack is conditional on the movement since the attack can only be made "during the movement". If you don't make any movement then there's no movement to have been during. You can't stop the move if you haven't moved yet.
Yes, the attack is conditional on the movement since the attack can only be made "during the movement". If you don't make any movement then there's no movement to have been during. You can't stop the move if you haven't moved yet.
Are you now saying you no longer believe you can attack before moving?
If you can attack before moving, then attack is not conditional on moving, rather it is allowed during it. If it isn't conditional, then you don't have to move at all.
Yes, the attack is conditional on the movement since the attack can only be made "during the movement". If you don't make any movement then there's no movement to have been during. You can't stop the move if you haven't moved yet.Are you now saying you no longer believe you can attack before moving?
If you can attack before moving, then attack is not conditional on moving, rather it is allowed during it. If it isn't conditional, then you don't have to move at all.
You can't attack before being locked into the movement. You can attack before you've moved any movement. The attack needs to be DURING movement, thus you must have movement for the attack. If I don't move then there was no movement to have made my attack during.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What would you say would happen if, after the attack, something prevented you from moving? Does the attack retroactively not happen?
If the attack would still happen, how is that different than the thing preventing you from movement being the choice of not to move?
Pathfinder doesn't have a declaration step. Each thing that happens happens on its own (with a few weirdness from readied actions and similar.) If something is legal to do now, it can't require something to happen later in order to be legal (it can require you to spend actions now, which is a different thing entirely).
What would you say would happen if, after the attack, something prevented you from moving? Does the attack retroactively not happen?
If the attack would still happen, how is that different than the thing preventing you from movement being the choice of not to move?
Pathfinder doesn't have a declaration step. Each thing that happens happens on its own (with a few weirdness from readied actions and similar.) If something is legal to do now, it can't require something to happen later in order to be legal (it can require you to spend actions now, which is a different thing entirely).
You've already started moving when your attack goes off, thus it's impossible for them to make it so you can't move since you've already started movement. Since you've started your movement you've already triggered anything conditional on you moving.
This is like a full action charge that stops when you're tripped. You don't get the actions back, and you can't stop the movement you've already started, but sure, you can miss out on actually going anywhere from an outside force.
Same with this, you've started movement which triggers movement related stuff, then before you've left your square as part of that movement you attack them, then finish your move as able. So sure, if they trip you cause your attack provoked from them then you're not able to actually leave your square, but you already started the movement to leave the square and thus you moved.
The main point is that you must have started your movement and thus triggered anything related to that before you're able to make an attack.
So your contention would be that the movement 'event' must happen before the attack. So I want to activate the power, swing at my opponent, and then go somewhere, the first thing that will happen would be I would provoke an attack of opportunity for moving, then I could attack, and then the actual movement would take place?
It seems to me that you are inventing a movement trigger before moving out of whole cloth here. There isn't any such thing as movement until you have actually gone from one square into another (yes, aoo and readied actions can retroactively prevent that, but they actually trigger by attempting to leave a square.)
We have agreed consistently that any actions are spent. I don't think it is necessary to bring that up any further.
For me, the statement "at any point during this movement" requires movement, not just a Move Action, but actual movement, and Pathfinder has a tactical minimum movement of 5'. So you must move, and when you move you get the effects of the feat. Since the attack granted is "in ADDITION to your other attacks" you could start your round with an attack (your normal attack) then move to gain the Fleet Charge, but without movement, it cannot be conducted.
no, moving 0 is not moving and all movement less than 5ft to a different square rounds down to 0ft of movement. So you're welcome to active the ability and not move, just you can't make an attack if you don't move.then what would this ability be like on a tiny or smaller creature if they were to go from one corner of their square to a different corner they still haven't moved out of their square and thus moves "0 feet"
They can't move from corner to corner any more than a larger creature can. Either they leave the square or they don't move.
Do we really need an FAQ that says you need to move at least 5 feet when you use movement?
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Do we really need an FAQ that says you need to move at least 5 feet when you use movement?
I agree.
I kinda don't understand the reasoning. OP and others, care to enlighten me on how "moving" but not leaving the square you are in is "moving"?
The game is abstracted. You don't have facing. You haven't moved unless you leave the 5 ft square you are in. That is kinda how the game works.
Do we really need an FAQ that says you need to move at least 5 feet when you use movement?I agree.
I kinda don't understand the reasoning. OP and others, care to enlighten me on how "moving" but not leaving the square you are in is "moving"?
The game is abstracted. You don't have facing. You haven't moved unless you leave the 5 ft square you are in. That is kinda how the game works.
I agree, yet there those that insist "move up to your speed" includes not moving.
I haven't seen any FB post, and no player I have every played with, would ever make that claim. To be clear I was asking those people in this thread do we need an FAQ. If they say yes I will take it as them being serious and create one.
My guess is that they know its not the intent, but I don't think the rules specifically say that "you have to leave your square". It's one of those things that is just assumed to be understood so it was never mentioned.
Since the book doesn't say it they are saying you can, even if the PDT would say no if they stepped into this thread.
However I could be wrong, and they could believe that the PDT intended for them to use movement while not changing their square.
Ah, 'moving'... I've seen that one before. I've always taken it to mean 'moving to a different square'.
The rules say, for example, that you can take a 5-foot step "in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement".
Would a move of zero feet (if that was allowed) stop you taking a 5-foot step? And if so, can you ever take a 5-foot step?
Yes, the attack is conditional on the movement since the attack can only be made "during the movement". If you don't make any movement then there's no movement to have been during. You can't stop the move if you haven't moved yet.Are you now saying you no longer believe you can attack before moving?
If you can attack before moving, then attack is not conditional on moving, rather it is allowed during it. If it isn't conditional, then you don't have to move at all.
You can attack at the start of your movement, but the movement must be declared prior to making the attack.
I.e. you declare your character is moving from Point A to Point B. As part of that movement you may make an attack at any point, including the initial location; your character must complete the entire move action.
You can attack at the start of your movement, but the movement must be declared prior to making the attack.
That's were I think this concept falls apart. There isn't a declaration step in Pathfinder.
Do you think you also have to have a particular destination declared before making the attack, or could you change where you were going depending on the results? If we are using 'declared movement' then it would seem to be the former.
Lets use a more concrete example. I think I'm going to use this power, go 2 squares forward, hit the bad guy and then I will be able to full attack him. If though he dies on my initial attack, am I somehow 'locked' into my planned movement based on the interpretation that the power is only valid during a 'declared movement' or can I use the rest of my movement to continue on, perhaps full attacking someone else?
Most of the other precedents in the game seem to point toward the later.
And that is the crux of the situation in my opinion. If I can abandon my plan to stop after 10 feet, then why can't I abandon my plan to move at all?
That's were I think this concept falls apart. There isn't a declaration step in Pathfinder.
No?
Example: you charge. Leaving your first square triggers an AoO. At this point you have declared your intention to move and (by my interpretation) can no longer retract your action, even if you get tripped and don't leave your first square. If you can continue the charge after the AoO, you must, because you've declared it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Movement is done in 5ft increments, you don't need to decide your route and then travel it. You decide which 5ft you're moving in. After that 5ft you decide if you keep moving or not and if so which 5ft you're moving.
the "Declaration step" is what we're calling for doing something that triggers stuff. Once you're doing a ranged attack to provoke you're stuck into that since you've "declared" your action by starting it. Same with movement, once you've decided and started to move your 5ft you've "declared" your movement because you've started your movement out of your square, this "declaration" aka having started and decided on your action forces you to be locked in per the words "and then continue the action if able" meaning you must have an action "declared" for you to be able to continue it.
Once you have spent actions, they are spent. If you spend your actions to make a charge, the actions are spent and you can't get them back.
You can declare a ranged attack all you want. You can say, either in character or out of character 'I'm going to make a ranged attack' but that has no mechanical effect on the system at all. Actually doing the ranged attack, spending the action to do so, is what triggers things like AoO.
Their are only two ways that a 'declaration' requirement would work with this ability that I can see. One is if the attack requires some movement to have happened first, which locks out the origination square as being valid for making at attack from, which I don't think anyone thinks is the case.
The other is if the attack during movement happens retroactively. In other words, you have to make your complete movement and then, when it is done, you can retroactively make an attack. This means, among other things, you can't change where you want to go based on the outcome of the attack (the movement already being done before the attack is rolled.) It also raised questions about what happens if this movement is interrupted.
But I think I have raised all the points I have to make. Personally, I doubt we will see any sort of official answer since Mythic doesn't seem terribly popular, is often heavily houseruled anyway when used, and is not part of PFS, so I doubt that Paizo will have any particular urgency in addressing this.
|
To be clear, there is a moment of declaration in this instance: Spending a swift action and spending a Mythic Power as a part of the Fleet Charge ability. As far as I'm reading, when you've activated this ability, you've committed to two things:
1) You will move.
2) You MAY attack once, bonuses, etc.
That's part of what the Fleet Charge ability is, and it's part of the swift action and point expenditure entail. Now, you may choose your movement after attacking, or before, but by activating this ability as a swift action, you've already committed to the above. Even if you attack before your movement, you're still committed to the movement.
I can't think of another situation where a player is forced to move after resolving an attack, especially when the movement itself is tangential to the effect ("charge" or not, you can move any direction or even right back to where you started--how does that matter in the slightest to the attack?). I'm inclined to allow the player to cancel the movement, same as if a player decided not to finish a full-attack sequence or to stop moving in the middle of a regular move action. To do otherwise encourages dissociated silliness like moving five feet and then back again just to get around the verbiage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can't think of another situation where a player is forced to move after resolving an attack, especially when the movement itself is tangential to the effect ("charge" or not, you can move any direction or even right back to where you started--how does that matter in the slightest to the attack?). I'm inclined to allow the player to cancel the movement, same as if a player decided not to finish a full-attack sequence or to stop moving in the middle of a regular move action. To do otherwise encourages dissociated silliness like moving five feet and then back again just to get around the verbiage.
What about flyby attack? If your standard action is to attack, that attack occurs during the move only. The feat sates: "Without this feat, the creature takes a standard action either before or after its move."
Once you announce a flyby attack, your attack has to be in a flyby.
You can attack at the start of your movement, but the movement must be declared prior to making the attack.
That's were I think this concept falls apart. There isn't a declaration step in Pathfinder.
Do you think you also have to have a particular destination declared before making the attack, or could you change where you were going depending on the results? If we are using 'declared movement' then it would seem to be the former.
Lets use a more concrete example. I think I'm going to use this power, go 2 squares forward, hit the bad guy and then I will be able to full attack him. If though he dies on my initial attack, am I somehow 'locked' into my planned movement based on the interpretation that the power is only valid during a 'declared movement' or can I use the rest of my movement to continue on, perhaps full attacking someone else?
Most of the other precedents in the game seem to point toward the later.
And that is the crux of the situation in my opinion. If I can abandon my plan to stop after 10 feet, then why can't I abandon my plan to move at all?
Because the option to do ___ calls for Y(certain required action). If ___ is based on Y, then you have to do Y. Otherwise you aren't even following the requirement of the feat. If you aren't even following the feat then not let everyone do what you are doing since neither of you are following the feat anyway?
That is why Manyshot locks you into a full attack after the first shot. Otherwise you are getting benefits out of Manyshot without actually having to deal with the intended payment(taking a full round attack).
Once you have spent actions, they are spent. If you spend your actions to make a charge, the actions are spent and you can't get them back.
You can declare a ranged attack all you want. You can say, either in character or out of character 'I'm going to make a ranged attack' but that has no mechanical effect on the system at all. Actually doing the ranged attack, spending the action to do so, is what triggers things like AoO.
The declaration that you are making a ranged attack is what triggers the AoA, which takes place prior to the ranged attack's resolution.
The same thing applies to declaring a charge and your path of movement. If you are in a threatened square at the time of declaration, an opponent may make their AoO prior to your first square of movement.
Both are mechanical effects resulting from your declaration that are resolved prior to action on the character's part.
Point of fact: much like a Charge, a character using Fleet Charge is subject to AoOs prior to leaving his starting square. This may include combat maneuvers/spells/abilities that render the declaring character incapable of movement and/or attacking. Since the attack is done as part of movement, anything that prevents the character from executing that movement also prevents the character from attacking.
I can't think of another situation where a player is forced to move after resolving an attack, especially when the movement itself is tangential to the effect ("charge" or not, you can move any direction or even right back to where you started--how does that matter in the slightest to the attack?). I'm inclined to allow the player to cancel the movement, same as if a player decided not to finish a full-attack sequence or to stop moving in the middle of a regular move action. To do otherwise encourages dissociated silliness like moving five feet and then back again just to get around the verbiage.What about flyby attack? If your standard action is to attack, that attack occurs during the move only. The feat sates: "Without this feat, the creature takes a standard action either before or after its move."
Once you announce a flyby attack, your attack has to be in a flyby.
Nah, not the same thing. All Flyby Attack does is let you declare your standard action during your move action. You can move 10 feet, do a standard attack (or other standard action), then decide not to attack. You can also move 10 feet then decide not to do your standard at all. You're never locked into taking a specific action, though you may lock yourself out of other actions.
You can attack at the start of your movement, but the movement must be declared prior to making the attack.
That's were I think this concept falls apart. There isn't a declaration step in Pathfinder.
Do you think you also have to have a particular destination declared before making the attack, or could you change where you were going depending on the results? If we are using 'declared movement' then it would seem to be the former.
Lets use a more concrete example. I think I'm going to use this power, go 2 squares forward, hit the bad guy and then I will be able to full attack him. If though he dies on my initial attack, am I somehow 'locked' into my planned movement based on the interpretation that the power is only valid during a 'declared movement' or can I use the rest of my movement to continue on, perhaps full attacking someone else?
Most of the other precedents in the game seem to point toward the later.
And that is the crux of the situation in my opinion. If I can abandon my plan to stop after 10 feet, then why can't I abandon my plan to move at all?
Because the option to do ___ calls for Y(certain required action). If ___ is based on Y, then you have to do Y. Otherwise you aren't even following the requirement of the feat. If you aren't even following the feat then not let everyone do what you are doing since neither of you are following the feat anyway?
That is why Manyshot locks you into a full attack after the first shot. Otherwise you are getting benefits out of Manyshot without actually having to deal with the intended payment(taking a full round attack).
Sure, but with Manyshot you can still choose to not finish your full attack, forfeiting the extra attacks.
nothing in the movement rules states you have to move in groups of 5 feet especially since smaller creatures take up less space and have reduced movementMovement is done in 5ft increments, you don't need to decide your route and then travel it. You decide which 5ft you're moving in. After that 5ft you decide if you keep moving or not and if so which 5ft you're moving.
the "Declaration step" is what we're calling for doing something that triggers stuff. Once you're doing a ranged attack to provoke you're stuck into that since you've "declared" your action by starting it. Same with movement, once you've decided and started to move your 5ft you've "declared" your movement because you've started your movement out of your square, this "declaration" aka having started and decided on your action forces you to be locked in per the words "and then continue the action if able" meaning you must have an action "declared" for you to be able to continue it.
Movement is done in 5' increments, and you have to demonstrate the path taken for each of those 5' increments.
It matters, mechanically. The specific path of movement determines AoOs, triggering of traps, how distance is counted, etc.
Tactical movement and move speeds in Pathfinder are defined in squares, with each square equaling 5 feet.
Tactical, for combat, measured in feet (or 5-foot squares) per round.
There is no partial-square movement.
The tactical movement mechanics fall apart completely without the implicit assumption that movement and space is at the grid square level. It's unfortunate that this isn't explicitly stated, but then again it leaves room for GM leeway in weird situations.
Sure, but with Manyshot you can still choose to not finish your full attack, forfeiting the extra attacks.You can attack at the start of your movement, but the movement must be declared prior to making the attack.
That's were I think this concept falls apart. There isn't a declaration step in Pathfinder.
Do you think you also have to have a particular destination declared before making the attack, or could you change where you were going depending on the results? If we are using 'declared movement' then it would seem to be the former.
Lets use a more concrete example. I think I'm going to use this power, go 2 squares forward, hit the bad guy and then I will be able to full attack him. If though he dies on my initial attack, am I somehow 'locked' into my planned movement based on the interpretation that the power is only valid during a 'declared movement' or can I use the rest of my movement to continue on, perhaps full attacking someone else?
Most of the other precedents in the game seem to point toward the later.
And that is the crux of the situation in my opinion. If I can abandon my plan to stop after 10 feet, then why can't I abandon my plan to move at all?
Because the option to do ___ calls for Y(certain required action). If ___ is based on Y, then you have to do Y. Otherwise you aren't even following the requirement of the feat. If you aren't even following the feat then not let everyone do what you are doing since neither of you are following the feat anyway?
That is why Manyshot locks you into a full attack after the first shot. Otherwise you are getting benefits out of Manyshot without actually having to deal with the intended payment(taking a full round attack).
No, you can't.
The FAQ says "No. Though the rules for "Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack (Core Rulebook 187) give you the option to move after your first attack instead of making your remaining attacks, Manyshot locks you into using a full attack action as soon as you use it to shoot two arrows"
It specifically says that you are locked into a full attack. If it just locked you into a full round action, which is what is used to make a full attacks, and other things such as charges then you would be correct.
Full attacks are described in the combat chapter as follows.
Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
A full attack only happens when you take those additional attacks. A GM can be nice and say you don't have to take those additional attacks, but by the FAQ you are committed to the full attack, and a full attack is when you take several attacks.
Now if you have something that says a full attack can consist of only attack then cite the source and quote.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Correct me if I'm wrong but, it says in the player manual about movement rules that Movement is measured in feet(or 5-foot squares) per round. So wouldn't that mean anythibg less than feet(5-foot square) does not count as movment.
It's easy to tell that is the intent because the game references being only able to move 5 feet in several situations, but because it never says "you must move at least 5 feet" they are using that to say you don't have to.
It's similar to the fact that the dead condition doesn't say you can no longer move so technically you can still move even if you are dead.
The difference is that the dead condition and being able to move is often said as a joke, but these people are dead serious about being able to use movement without actually moving 5 feet.
Why they think the developers see this as the intent is beyond me. I was going to start an FAQ, but I don't want to take up the space in the book with errata for something so obvious.
Sure, but with Manyshot you can still choose to not finish your full attack, forfeiting the extra attacks.You can attack at the start of your movement, but the movement must be declared prior to making the attack.
That's were I think this concept falls apart. There isn't a declaration step in Pathfinder.
Do you think you also have to have a particular destination declared before making the attack, or could you change where you were going depending on the results? If we are using 'declared movement' then it would seem to be the former.
Lets use a more concrete example. I think I'm going to use this power, go 2 squares forward, hit the bad guy and then I will be able to full attack him. If though he dies on my initial attack, am I somehow 'locked' into my planned movement based on the interpretation that the power is only valid during a 'declared movement' or can I use the rest of my movement to continue on, perhaps full attacking someone else?
Most of the other precedents in the game seem to point toward the later.
And that is the crux of the situation in my opinion. If I can abandon my plan to stop after 10 feet, then why can't I abandon my plan to move at all?
Because the option to do ___ calls for Y(certain required action). If ___ is based on Y, then you have to do Y. Otherwise you aren't even following the requirement of the feat. If you aren't even following the feat then not let everyone do what you are doing since neither of you are following the feat anyway?
That is why Manyshot locks you into a full attack after the first shot. Otherwise you are getting benefits out of Manyshot without actually having to deal with the intended payment(taking a full round attack).
No, you can't.
The FAQ says "No. Though the rules for "Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack (Core Rulebook 187) give you the option to move after your first attack...
I think what he meant was to simply forfeit them not to get anything out of it. You don't have to take every attack your attack string allows on a full attack but if your using something like manyshot once you start you can't do something different.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To me its just painful that I have to try and convince people not moving is actually not moving.
Oh hell no.