A few questions regarding Charging (Pounce) and multiple attacks

[kjenks]

I'm pretty sure they meant to have just a full attack at the end of a charge, not a single melee attack AND a full attack at the end of the charge. Take a look at how the Pounce ability is described for all of the SRD monsters:

SRD
===
Pounce (Ex): If a hellcat charges, it can make a full attack, including two rake attacks.
Pounce (Ex): If a deinonychus charges, it can make a full attack.
Pounce (Ex): If a megaraptor charges, it can make a full attack.
Pounce (Ex): If a dire lion charges, it can make a full attack, including two rake attacks.
Pounce (Ex): If a dire tiger charges, it can make a full attack, including two rake attacks.
Pounce (Ex): If a dragonne charges, it can make a full attack in the same round.
Pounce (Ex): If a griffon dives upon or charges a foe, it can make a full attack, including two rake attacks.
Pounce (Ex): If a lammasu charges a foe, it can make a full attack, including two rake attacks.
Pounce (Ex): If a leonal charges a foe, it can make a full attack, including two rake attacks.
Pounce (Ex): If a weretiger in tiger form charges an opponent, it can make a full attack, including two rake attacks.
Pounce (Ex): If a sphinx charges a foe, it can make a full attack, including two rake attacks.
Pounce (Ex): If a leopard charges a foe, it can make a full attack, including two rake attacks.
Pounce (Ex): If a lion charges a foe, it can make a full attack, including two rake attacks.
Pounce (Ex): If a tiger charges a foe, it can make a full attack, including two rake attacks.
===

Every one of them says basically the same thing, contradicting the idea that pounce = single attack + full attack.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Hmm, I'm not sure the RAW backs up this interpretation...

Exactly, thus the "clever interpretation of an oversight in the rules" comment.

 

[javcs]

Strictly RAW, it's not entirely clear, I'm looking at my copy of PHB, where the charge ends and whether the standard single attack is considered part of the charge itself or not.

It comes down to a DM decision of rule interpretation, the almighty rule 0.

Myself, I go with you don't get an extra attack on top of the full attack, and get the +2 bonus on the first attack. Reason being, is that after the first swing/stab/hack/whatever or so, you're kinda messed up on the 'using the momentum' for your attacks, I mean, after taking the first attack you've gotta stop, unless you're bull-rushing or overrunning in which case it doesn't matter, which means you've expended all of your momentum and can't use your momentum from the charge ('cause you've stopped) to up your attacks.

 

[kjenks]

And I think that all of the attacks get the +2. Further, if you are doing a Spirited Charge, all of them inflict double damage.

 

[brehobit]

Strictly RAW, it's not entirely clear, I'm looking at my copy of PHB, where the charge ends and whether the standard single attack is considered part of the charge itself or not.

It comes down to a DM decision of rule interpretation, the almighty rule 0.

Myself, I go with you don't get an extra attack on top of the full attack, and get the +2 bonus on the first attack.

Agreed. I don't think the rationalization you propose is needed. I merely think this is what was intended and provides reasonable balance.

 

[billd91]

Like:
When a creature with this special attack makes a charge, it can make a full attack—including rake attacks if the creature also has the rake ability.

Cheers, Evil DM

I think a real clear way to phrase it would be:

When a creature with t his special attack makes a charge, it can make a full attack in place of the single attack at the end of the charge - including rake attacks if the creature also has the rake ability.

That way you get rid of the ambiguity we currently have in which it doesn't say that the full attack is in place of or in addition to the single attack at the end of the charge.

 

[pawsplay]

This one definitely needs to be mailed into customer service.

 

[Pielorinho]

But again, I'm more concerned about the overpowered nature of an ability that allows a full attack that is considered part of a charge than an ability that allows a full attack action separate to a charge... given the abilities out there that give boosts to charge attacks.

-Hyp.

Set aside the pounce feat for a moment, and just look at the name: "pounce" implies that you run toward a creature and then, well, pounce it. You're able to attack with all your natural weapons because you're doing so midair, simultaneously, before you hit the ground. Watch how a cat pounces a victim to get an idea of what using the feat should look like. Note that the cat doesn't bite (make a single attack) prior to its pounce onto the victim.

As such, I've got no problem at all allowing the +2 to the charge to apply to all the attacks: the +2 comes from the charge's forward movement, and the entire cat is moving forward at the same rate. If that cat somehow benefits from spirited charge, in which the charger moves forward even more powerfully, I'd have no problem allowing spirited charge to apply to all the attacks either.

Now look at the pounce feat again. Apparently, it allows the user to take iterative attacks at the end of a charge. I'm not sure what that would look like, but it certainly wouldn't look anything like a pounce.

My suggestion? Rename the feat and divorce it from the charge ability. Keep the pounce ability as a charge that ends with a full attack instead of a single attack.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Set aside the pounce feat for a moment, and just look at the name:

You mean like when someone uses 'Cleave' with a rapier, or avoids a javelin with 'Deflect Arrows'?

-Hyp.

 

[Pielorinho]

You mean like when someone uses 'Cleave' with a rapier, or avoids a javelin with 'Deflect Arrows'?

-Hyp.

No, actually. I meant to look at the name of "pounce," not to make some grand statement about the appropriateness of the names of feats.

Daniel