D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 Charge - How to Fix it, and why it's important.

Artoomis

First Post
First, please be civil so this thread does not get closed by a moderator.

Second, please help me draft up a note to send to the errata folks at WotC customer service.

There are a couple of issues with the Charge action.

1. As published in the 3.5 PHB, an enemy could avoid your charge if you used the Overrun action, but an ally could not. Errata was published to "fix" this by disallowing the Overrun action when charging.

This ruling severly handicaps Charge as a legitimate tactic. The Trample feat becomes useless if you cannot overrun as part of a Charge. If you could Overrun as part of a Charge, then you have the problem of why can't allies move when opponents can?

2. Ride-By Attack is also nearly impossible. The Ride-By Attack feat needs to allow one to actually ride-by your opponent instead of charging up to the nearest square, which would, in most cases, prevent the Ride-By Attack from happening.

3. You do not seem to be able to Ready a Charge any more. This is too severe a restriction on a legitimate tactic form 3.0e.

4. The four changes that are actually needed to fix the Charge action are:

1. Restore Overrun to the way it is written in the PHB.
2. Change the Charge action so that you CAN charge through allies as with any other movement.
3. Change Ride-By Attack so that you may ignore the normal Charge rule that forces you to go to the closest space to your opponent, while preserving the "straight-line" rule and the restricted terrain rule.
4. Specifically allow a "Readied" Charge action, but make it clear that the single move action allowed with that Charge would be the total movement allowed in the round.

Why is it important to be able to use the Charge action without the "allies-in-the-way" or "closest space" rules? Because some character concepts are designed around being able to conduct a mounted charge. Generally, one can get triple damage with the Spirited Charge feat with a lance, true, but that is balanced by having to take three feats to make it a viable tactic and the "hit-or-miss" nature of making a single attack. Most of the gain is a way to help overcome DR by getting all your damage in one blow instead of multiple attacks. The above changes make this a viable tactic, but the restricted terrain rule goes a long way to keep this from being abusive.

It may be that some feel that mounted charges were too effective and thus unbalancing, but several years of experience with a paladin who always has his flying mount (a small paladin with a half-celestial war dog) makes it clear that such a character still does not do better in combat than a straight fighter or a barbarian. In certain situations he does better in melee, in others he does worse. Strictly following the published errata (no Overrrun) together with the "closest space" rule makes this type of character nowhere near as good in melee as any other PC designed for melee.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

As long as you're discussing potential changes to 3.5 Charge, you may as well throw the "No Readied Charges unless you're a Zombie" effect into the ring for discussion...

-Hyp.
 

Hypersmurf said:
As long as you're discussing potential changes to 3.5 Charge, you may as well throw the "No Readied Charges unless you're a Zombie" effect into the ring for discussion...

-Hyp.

Good point.

Readying a Charge should be possible - it's the best way to attempt to interrupt a spellcaster that's, say, 20 feet away. Perhaps the solution is a special rule that would state that a Charge action uses up all your movement for the round. If you did that, one could not Move-Ready-Charge to charge around a corner. Of course, you'd still only get a charge with one move action, not two. Essentially, in exchange for being able to Ready a Charge, you'd give up one Move action.

Would that work? Let me know what you think and I'll edit my first post to include this proposed change.
 

I have no problem with people moving and readying a charge - I've allowed it and it doesn't seem to be a problem.

In any case, characters need to be able to "charge" to any square which they could attack the enemy from, not just the closest square. This would go a long way towards fixing Ride By Attack - as characters would be able to draw charge lines that go by enemies thus allowing them to ride by.

I mean, with the current rules, if you have three characters standing next to each other they can all charge an enemy direct in front of them if they are moving like rooks to do so. If they are moving like bishops, only one character can charge - and that's just dumb.

See, when characters are set up like this:

XXX

the following squares are available to be charged into:

XXX
_T_
___

But if they are diagonal to the enemy, only one square is available, and thus only character can charge:

X__
_T_
___

The target should not be able to "hide behind the grid" - which means that characters need to be able to declare their charge into any of these squares:

XX_
XT_
___

That also helps fix Ride By Attack - but it's essentially needed for sanity in any case.

-Frank
 

Fair point, Trollman.

If anyone would like to take a shot at re-writing charge so that it would address 3.0e complaints without nerfing to the degree that 3.5e did, have at it. I'll then put something together for customer service.
 

The problem with readied charges is that it doesn't always make sense. Like, can you ready a charge against a charge? Can you ready a charge against someone fleeing? Being able to ready an action that involves movement takes the game further from reality. Not that that's a bad thing, mind you :D
 

Just to clarify what I meant...

Creatures A and B are 60 feet away from each other. Creature A readies a charge action against B if B charges. B charges, so A's ready action takes effect. A charges 60 feet into B. B does not move at all.

Creatures A and B are 60 feet away from each other. Creature A readies a charge action against B if B runs full speed away. B starts to run full speed away, so A's ready action takes effect. A charges 60 feet into B. B does not move at all.

Seems a little wierd.
 

FrankTrollman said:
I mean, with the current rules...

Well, huh.

A. First, you must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent.
B. (If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge.)

A, I don't have a problem with... if it weren't for B.

If B didn't appear in the Charge rules, the diagonal situation would work fine. The occupied square (Keypad position 7) is not "the closest space from which I can attack the opponent", since there's someone already there. The closest space is either Keypad 8 or Keypad 4. No problem.

But as soon as B is added... that logic falls apart. Suddenly, A can only refer to Keypad 7.

I agree - the current rules are weird. Remove statement B, and I don't actually have much of a problem with them.

-Hyp.
 

Hypersmurf said:
A. First, you must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent.
B. (If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge.)

I don't understand. It seems like you are interpreting it differently in the two cases? If you interpret 'A' to mean the closest space to the target, which is what seems to be happening in Frank's second example, then Frank's first example wouldn't work either, since the closest space to the target is keyboard position 8. So only one pawn would be able to attack.

If you interpret it to mean the first space where you can threaten the target, then Frank's first example is valid, and in the second example all three bishops can attack.

Am I misunderstanding?
 

silentspace said:
I don't understand. It seems like you are interpreting it differently in the two cases?

Yup.

I'm saying that in the absence of B, there's a reading for A that works and makes sense.

But as soon as you then go on to read B, you realise "Whoa! They did actually mean the other way, that makes no sense at all!"

If B is removed, you're free to read A in the sensible way. With B, that option isn't there.

-Hyp.
 

Remove ads

Top