[3.0] Charge and Partial Action

Artoomis · Jul 22, 2003

This thread is to replace this off-topic discussion in the [3.5] charge thread.

1. When including the FAQ, it is very clear that ALL movement in the round when you charge must be in a straight line, including any extra actions that you might be granted from Haste or whatever other source.

No argument there.

2. I claim that the rules, as written, NOT including the FAQ, restrict movement only during the charge and not for the whole round (that is, not including extra partial actions).

Why? Because the restriction is NOT a restriction of activity for the round, it is for the Charge action.

It's quite similar, really, to, for example, the restriction that says you cannot move (5-foot move aside) if you take a ful-round action. However, You may in fact move if you have a partial action because it is an action in addition to your other actions(s) in the round.

Charge is written up basically the same way. You are restricted to moving in a straight line when charging. Nothing states that you could not move in some other direction with an additional action.

Nowhere in the Charge action is there any language that restricts you movement for the whole round, unlike, say, the 5-foot step which does, indeed, have language in it that restricts you for the round.

This is, of course, all academic as this issue does not come up in 3.5 at all with the change in Haste, etc.

reapersaurus · Jul 23, 2003

I'll see you and raise you, Artoomis.

The FAQ is patently lazy in that section.
They simply didn't want to come up with a rules-based reason why you couldn't do a hasted partial action move, then a normal Charge.

I'll say that again : there is NO reasonable rules basis for disallowing a move, then a charge.

The only basis for that is a ridiculously-strict interpretation of the wording that says "All movement must be in a straight line, with no backing up allowed."
This statement is obviously meant to describe the limited way in which one can move DURING a charge, not apply to ALL potential combinations of actions and abilities.

What's my proof of this OPINION?

If this unreasonably-literal interpretation of charge was true, than the lion, as written, cannot exist.
Why?
Because the very next section states the similarly-restrictive phrase: "After moving, you may make a single melee attack."
Since obviously people in the world are using a lion WITH the Pounce ability (which allows a full-attack at the end of a charge), then the text in the Charge entry is obviously meant as a guide that describes the restrictiveness of the maneuver, not a ram-rod straightjacket that takes into account all combinations.

Artoomis, you also bring up a fantastic example:
If people were anywhere close to as literal in interpreting full-attacks and haste, noone would ever be able to move (when hasted) after full-attacking. There are 2 explicit areas that state that is an impossibility: in the Full Round action section (it "consumes all your effort during a round") and in the Full Attack section ("Because of this, the only movement you can take during a full attack is a five-foot step").

So there is much more rules basis for denying someone a full attack + partial move when hasted, AND denying a lion his Pounce when charging then there is to deny someone a hasted partial action move, then a standard-action Charge.

Caliban · Jul 23, 2003

Who fricken cares anymore?

Hypersmurf · Jul 23, 2003

People who aren't planning on switching to 3.5?

-Hyp.

Caliban · Jul 23, 2003

Hypersmurf said:
People who aren't planning on switching to 3.5?

-Hyp.

And those people have most likely made up their minds about this in one of the previous endless debates.

It's not a real debate anymore. Either you accept the way the FAQ does it or you don't.

Hypersmurf · Jul 23, 2003

It's not a real debate anymore. Either you accept the way the FAQ does it or you don't.

Interestingly, it came up just yesterday in an online game, where the DM interpreted it differently to the players.

So I wouldn't call it a dead topic

-Hyp.

Artoomis · Jul 23, 2003

Caliban said:
And those people have most likely made up their minds about this in one of the previous endless debates.

It's not a real debate anymore. Either you accept the way the FAQ does it or you don't.

This discussion is only taking place now because my [3.5] charge thread was hijacked by this discussion.

reapersaurus · Jul 23, 2003

Caliban said:
Either you accept the way the FAQ does it or you don't.

I don't accept the way the FAQ does it, since it is not based on a standartd application of the rules detailed in the 3E rulebooks.

If someone could point out in the rulebooks how it states that you CAN'T use a hasted partial action to move, then charge, while simultaneously supporting the ruling that lions CAN pounce at the end of the charge, I'm all ears.

Caliban · Jul 23, 2003

reapersaurus said:
I don't accept the way the FAQ does it,

As I said. Debate over.

Pax · Jul 23, 2003

Caliban said:
As I said. Debate over.

Shall we all now bow at your feet, and proclaim our undying thansk for your pronouncement-from-on-high?

Here's some advice: if you don't want to take part in a discussion, well .... don't. But just because you don't want to discuss something should not oblige everyone ELSE to not discuss it.