2 PCs charge 1 NPC from same direction

[Mistwell]

We have always played that you can charge someone in a straight line as long as the space you stop is: 1) within melee range of the opponant, and 2) in the general direction that you are charging from (so the spaces in both diagnols to the opponant and the direct spot next to the opponant in the direction you are charging from).

For example:

w=Space PC attacks from
X=NPC
Y=PC1
Z=PC2

.wY........................Y
XwZ.......................Z

However, I recently saw a post that said that you must charge in a straight line from the center of your space to the center of the opponants space, such that two PCs standing next to each other could never charge the same opponant in the same round (as they would both end in the same space, thus the second PC to move would be blocked from charging). In the example above, both PCs would end in the space marked wZ under this theory.

Would anyone care to offer an opinion on this issue?

 

[Artoomis]

I just found out (from a WotC Customer Service employee) that the official interpretation of Charge is that you are considered to be following the charge rule so long as you end up in any square that is equidistant from you opponent from you. In other words, you often can charge to the square directly in front of your opponent as well as the two squares to the opponent diagonal front left and right, since you move the same distance by D&D movement rules to any of those squares.

This preserves the ability to conduct a ride-by attack, but also allow two attackers to charge the same defender - sometimes.

 

[Thanee]

However, I recently saw a post that said that you must charge in a straight line from the center of your space to the center of the opponants space, such ...

Nope, it's like you describe.

You only need to get to a space from where you can attack the opponent, and there may be no other space, from which you could also attack (occupied or not), which you could reach with a *shorter* move.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Infiniti2000]

You have to charge directly toward your opponent. This does not mean directly towards the side of your opponent, but toward the opponent. Your route, if you carried it out, would be equivalent to an overrun.

So, I disagree with Thanee's and Artoomis's idea of "directly toward."

 

[Legildur]

From the SRD:

Movement During a Charge

...you must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. (If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge.) Second, if any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you can’t charge.

So yes, Y AND Z can charge as they are both moving to the 'closest space'.

However, I understand why Cust Serv (and I think the FAQ) are trying to make Ride-by-Attack usable with their response.

 

[Infiniti2000]

So yes, Y AND Z can charge as they are both moving to the 'closest space'.

First, note that you left out the key words in the Charge description. Second, note that under that interpretation you could have Z charge to three different positions (in Y's ending square and in the square below).

Am I the only one who understands the phrase "directly towards"? How could there be three different routes to go directly towards your opponent?

 

[dcollins]

We have always played that you can charge someone in a straight line...

Of course, this is a bit of a 3.5 revision issue. In 3.0 the rules were comparatively lightweight, saying the charge itself just had to be a straight line. The 3.5 revision added the "closest space to opponent" clause which arguably creates this new restriction.

 

[Zandel]

Whoever charges first get's there. Either way the other can NOT charge under the RAW because the first one gets the CLOSEST spot.

IMHO though this is one of those times when the DM should exercise his right to rule RAW = WRONG and DM = RIGHT

 

[Artoomis]

Whoever charges first get's there. Either way the other can NOT charge under the RAW because the first one gets the CLOSEST spot.

IMHO though this is one of those times when the DM should exercise his right to rule RAW = WRONG and DM = RIGHT

Ah, but under the D&D movement rules, it's quite possible to have three "closest" spots.

 

[Mistwell]

Ah, but under the D&D movement rules, it's quite possible to have three "closest" spots.

Indeed. 30 feet is 30 feet is 30 feet. At least two of the three spots next to the NPC are exactly 30 feet away from both PCs. None of them is "closer" than any of the others, as far as measurement goes.