D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Charge problems (Do NOT post here, please. Use [3.5] and [3.0] topics)

[Pielorinho]

It does not need to. It says "all", it means "all". It doesn't say "all charging movement". it says "all". Any other interpretation is torturing words to mean things they don't actually mean. I'll drop it at that.

Huh? So if a character has ever not moved in a straight line, then they may not charge, since ALL of their movement isn't in a straight line? Or can nobody charge, since not all movement in the cosmos is in a straight line?

Let's not torture words, after all.

Daniel

 

[reapersaurus]

It does not need to. It says "all", it means "all". It doesn't say "all charging movement". it says "all". Any other interpretation is torturing words to mean things they don't actually mean. I'll drop it at that.

This is one of the silliest limitations I've heard.

Lemme think:
Hasted PC #1) Pulls out a potion and drinks it with his partial action, then charges with his normal action.

Hasted PC #2) Walks 15 ft with his partial action, then charges with his normal action in a different direction.

You're saying that PC #2 wouldn't be able to do that?

That is so ridiculous, it's not funny.

 

[Storm Raven]

Hasted PC #2) Walks 15 ft with his partial action, then charges with his normal action in a different direction.

You're saying that PC #2 wouldn't be able to do that?

That is so ridiculous, it's not funny.

Yes, I am saying PC #2 would not be able to do that. Because that is what the 3.0 description of the charge action says (and the 3.5 description too). And, in point of fact, the 3.0 FAQ backs up this interpretation.

If you want to charge, you can't take any other directional movement. Sorry.

 

[Caliban]

This is one of the silliest limitations I've heard.

Lemme think:
Hasted PC #1) Pulls out a potion and drinks it with his partial action, then charges with his normal action.

Hasted PC #2) Walks 15 ft with his partial action, then charges with his normal action in a different direction.

You're saying that PC #2 wouldn't be able to do that?

That is so ridiculous, it's not funny.

It's not ridiculous, and it's not funny.

That's exactly the way it works under the 3.0/FAQ, and in 3.5.

Make sure you know what you are talking about before making judgements like that.

 

[RigaMortus]

So using 3.0 rules, you are suggesting that you can't move (hasted partial) and then charge (full round) in a straight line, in a different direction than you used with your partial?

So then could you first charge (full round) your opponent in a straight line, then use your hasted partial to move away from them?

Also, wouldn't it work the same way with all full-attack actions? If I want to attack an opponent with 3 attacks (full attack action) could I not then use my partial action (from haste) to move away? Why would this be any different than charge/move-with-partial?

 

[Storm Raven]

So using 3.0 rules, you are suggesting that you can't move (hasted partial) and then charge (full round) in a straight line, in a different direction than you used with your partial?

Not suggesting. Telling.

This is the way the 3.0 rules work (and the 3.5 rules for that matter).

So then could you first charge (full round) your opponent in a straight line, then use your hasted partial to move away from them?

No. The portion of the text that says "the character must move before attacking, not after" prevents this. If you read the description it is clear.

Also, wouldn't it work the same way with all full-attack actions? If I want to attack an opponent with 3 attacks (full attack action) could I not then use my partial action (from haste) to move away?

No, it doesn't work the same way, because the full-attack action is defined differently from the charge action. (Note, if you do full attack and then partial move away, you draw an AoO from your opponent).

Why would this be any different than charge/move-with-partial?

Because the actions are defined differently.

 

[Conaill]

Just to shortcut further discussion of the way charge works in 3.0, here is the relevant quote from the official FAQ:

Is it possible to prepare a partial charge, move, turn, and then execute the charge? Do I get a 5-foot step in between my move and my charge? Can I squeeze an extra 5 feet of movement out of each round by moving as a partial action, then taking a 5-foot step and attacking as a partial action?
No in all cases. When you charge, all your movement must be in a straight line (and in the same direction); any movement you make before a partial charge counts against you. You don't get a move-equivalent action plus a partial action as your turn. You get either a standard action (which does not allow a 5-foot step), a full-move action (which allows a 5-foot step if the action itself doesn t include movement), or a partial action (which also allows a 5-foot step if the action doesn't include movement).

Edit: Here's some more...

If a character receives a haste spell, she gets an extra partial action on her turn. Do movement options that are limited "per turn" apply over the whole turn, or should they be interpreted to be on a per-action basis? For example, can a hasted person do the following: * Make a standard move, and then take a partial attack action with normal 5-foot step (as per Table 8-3)?
* Make a double move, and then a partial attack, without suffering an attack of opportunity in the initial square of movement?
* Make a standard charge and then partial move in a different direction?
No to all. Haste gives you an extra partial action each round. It doesn't let you break the rules otherwise, and it does not give you an extra round during your turn. If you move during your turn, you cannot also take a 5-foot step, haste notwithstanding. If you start your turn in a threatened space and you leave that space, you provoke an attack of opportunity when you leave unless you do nothing else during the rest of your turn except move, haste notwithstanding. When you charge, all your movement during the round must be in a straight line and in the same direction, haste notwithstanding.

 

[Artoomis]

DO NOT POST HERE

Please take the [3.5] discussion to

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57893

and the [3.0] discussion to

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57887

Thanks

 

[reapersaurus]

It's not ridiculous, and it's not funny.

That's exactly the way it works under the 3.0/FAQ, and in 3.5.

Make sure you know what you are talking about before making judgements like that.

It's not a judgment, Cal - it's an opinion.
I didn't say that 3.0 works or doesn't work that way - I said it's silly.
And it is. (big obvious caveat, Cal - IMO)

And I have a right to think and say that that's absolute S%^.
In fact, if any DM I played with would used this FAQ limitation to charge, I'd have some serious problems with it, if I was playing a character that liked to charge strategically.