directly or downwards? yes. upward? no .
(as impaired movement block charge).
I'm unsure on the fact that you say you can't charge upwards.
You move at "half speed" while flying upwards because you're gaining height at the same time (flying means moving in a 3D space, if part of a movement involves switching height - moving "diagonally" upwards - then you clearly can't move your full movement "forward" but you're still moving at your full speed); so rising up to a 45º angle doesn't necessarily mean you're under impaired movement or move through "difficult terrain" (high winds or a sleetstorm might count for this).
I'd say that you should be able to make a flying charge anywhere you want as long as clearly there's nothing between you and the target and you're not required to make a fly check to reach the destination square (which means a complex maneuver would be involved).
It's depends on your interpretation, but I agree with 666bender.
I've always treated flying up as impeding movement and preventing a charge.
It's depends on your interpretation, but I agree with 666bender.
I've always treated flying up as impeding movement and preventing a charge.
Well, yeah, that's the point. Flying never says raising height counts as impeding movement, so it's left at the GM's choice.
The point that lends me to think you're not impaired is how much movement you actually take while raising because of how the wording is made:
... can rise at half speed at an angle of 45 degrees...
Essentially, when ascending, for each square you move forward you can also move one "square" upwards (gaining 5' of height). Since you can only ascend at a maximum 45º angle (without rolling the fly check), you at least have to make that horizontal movement to be eligible for the height gain.
So, if you have a 40ft flight speed you can essentially move 4 scuares (20ft) forward and up to (I'd say you are not forced to rise at 45º angle, you could rise at a smaller angle if you want, gaining less height) 4 squares upwards (another 20ft), for an actual total of 8 squares or 40 ft worth of movement. You'd be moving at full speed, so there would be no impairement there.
Still, that's a personal opinion since I also consider height in "tactical mode" as a square, same as floor movement
You're measuring the change in height and the change in position, which does equate to 8 squares worth of movement which would be full movement.
But the character doesn't move that far at all.
The move along a line, which is less than 40ft long during their turn. Technically you would have to use the Pythagorean theorem to calculate what the distance moved was, but ultimately no, you don't move 40 ft.
|
I think we're missing something here... the rules for ascending at half speed have to do with removing the need for counting diagonal squares. Just as charging diagonally does not hinder your movement but does effectively slow you down(as you can move less diagonal squares than you can straight squares) flying up should not hinder your movement. Notice the FAQ says instead of counting diagonals it includes a speed reduction. You move at normal speed going down... my assumption is that is to represent double speed going down.
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9o76
I think we're missing something here... the rules for ascending at half speed have to do with removing the need for counting diagonal squares. Just as charging diagonally does not hinder your movement but does effectively slow you down(as you can move less diagonal squares than you can straight squares) flying up should not hinder your movement. Notice the FAQ says instead of counting diagonals it includes a speed reduction. You move at normal speed going down... my assumption is that is to represent double speed going down.
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9o76
Good catch there.
So, there would be no hindrance then and you can perfectly charge upwards. Still, I'd say that to be eligible for charging you'd still be limited on using maneuvers that do not require a check.
Actually, there are almost nonexistent rules for 3D movement, you just control average height just to roll damage in case you plummet... and that's practically it.
|
|
I think we're missing something here... the rules for ascending at half speed have to do with removing the need for counting diagonal squares. Just as charging diagonally does not hinder your movement but does effectively slow you down(as you can move less diagonal squares than you can straight squares) flying up should not hinder your movement. Notice the FAQ says instead of counting diagonals it includes a speed reduction. You move at normal speed going down... my assumption is that is to represent double speed going down.
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9o76Good catch there.
So, there would be no hindrance then and you can perfectly charge upwards. Still, I'd say that to be eligible for charging you'd still be limited on using maneuvers that do not require a check.
Actually, there are almost nonexistent rules for 3D movement, you just control average height just to roll damage in case you plummet... and that's practically it.
I'm for allowing charging with skill checks... so long as you succeed at the check. Otherwise you end up with a failed charge. As what would be a hindrance for someone may not be if they succeed on a check that is part of the movement.
This includes acrobatics checks(that do not include hindrance) and I'd say fly checks should be included.If you can charge while swinging from a rope(rules found in People of the River) I don't think this is going too far.
I'm for allowing charging with skill checks... so long as you succeed at the check. Otherwise you end up with a failed charge. As what would be a hindrance for someone may not be if they succeed on a check that is part of the movement.
This includes acrobatics checks(that do not include hindrance) and I'd say fly checks should be included.
If you can charge while swinging from a rope(rules found in People of the River) I don't think this is going too far.
Well, It's GM's choice, but my point is that skill checks either take a "toll on the movement or require some specific dedication to perform the maneuver itself. Probably some still maneuvers are still viable but others clearly not, so I'd say hou'd have to decide on a maneuver per maneuver basis.
My opinions on the current written maneuvers would be:
- Move less than half speed and remain flying: Sure, as long as at least the flying creature moves the required 10ft for the charge (in some scenarios, this roll may actually be required).
- Hover: Clearly no
- Turn greater than 45° by spending 5 feet of movement: I'd say yes as long as you have enough movement left for the charge.
- Turn 180° by spending 10 feet of movement: I'd say no, since you'd essentially be "charging backwards" (While flying you have a vector - and momentum - placed towards a specific direction, you'd be making an U-turn as part of the charge. Still, you can freely change that vector at the begining of your turn)
- Fly up at greater than 45° angle: I'd say this would take a high enough effort to not be allowed
|
|
I'm for allowing charging with skill checks... so long as you succeed at the check. Otherwise you end up with a failed charge. As what would be a hindrance for someone may not be if they succeed on a check that is part of the movement.
This includes acrobatics checks(that do not include hindrance) and I'd say fly checks should be included.
If you can charge while swinging from a rope(rules found in People of the River) I don't think this is going too far.Well, It's GM's choice, but my point is that skill checks either take a "toll on the movement or require some specific dedication to perform the maneuver itself. Probably some still maneuvers are still viable but others clearly not, so I'd say hou'd have to decide on a maneuver per maneuver basis.
My opinions on the current written maneuvers would be:
- Move less than half speed and remain flying: Sure, as long as at least the flying creature moves the required 10ft for the charge (in some scenarios, this roll may actually be required).
- Hover: Clearly no
- Turn greater than 45° by spending 5 feet of movement: I'd say yes as long as you have enough movement left for the charge.
- Turn 180° by spending 10 feet of movement: I'd say no, since you'd essentially be "charging backwards" (While flying you have a vector - and momentum - placed towards a specific direction, you'd be making an U-turn as part of the charge. Still, you can freely change that vector at the begining of your turn)
- Fly up at greater than 45° angle: I'd say this would take a high enough effort to not be allowed
I'd probably rule that a turn greater than 45° is a hindrance due to the movement cost. This makes Wheeling Charge less useful mid-air but I'm okay with that.
Nothing I know of would allow a 180° turn on a charge though.
But if a skill check would prevent you from slowing down or allowed you to perform a new action which did not slow you down then I think it should work on a charge. So I'd all upward angles of more than 45°. Since charge is only limited by minimum distance, straight line and hindered movement. Let those skill ranks do their job. They still have to make the check. This is why I allow jump checks as part of a charge as well.