Another Spring Attack Question

[Otterscrubber]

So what are the combat requirements for "Using" this feat? Do you have to move, attack and move again? Can you simply move and attack without moving again? Can you attack and then move without provoking an AOO? That kinda makes it more of a spring retreat instead of a spring attack but can be done with current wording depending on your interpretation. Thanks for any responses.

 

[Artoomis]

Excellent questions. The answer depends upon who you ask. I'll give you qualified answers:

By the exact wording, many think you need to move/attack/move - but the Sage does not agree with this (though I do).

So:

If you are conservative, you'd allow only a move/attack/move.

If you are more liberal, you'd allow any sort of single attack with a move - before or after.

To me, the first method more closely follows the language and apparent intent of the feat, but opther will disagree, so you'll have to decide for yourself.

Search for "Spring Attack" and you should find the previous lengthy discussion on this topic.

 

[kreynolds]

Do you have to move, attack and move again?

Yes.

Can you simply move and attack without moving again?

No.

EDIT: I forgot that the Sage says you can (thanks for reminding me Artoomis) but that's just odd.

Can you attack and then move without provoking an AOO?

No. Spring Attack only functions on a move-attack-move basis.

That kinda makes it more of a spring retreat instead of a spring attack

Exactly, which is why it's called Spring Attack and not Spring Retreat.

but can be done with current wording depending on your interpretation.

True. Although, wording doesn't make it right. In fact, most often, it's wrong (rule 0 being the exception, of course).

 

[Artoomis]

Re: Re: Another Spring Attack Question

Cool - kreynolds and I agree on this one. Who'd've thought?

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Another Spring Attack Question

Cool - kreynolds and I agree on this one. Who've thought?

You make it sound like I'm a difficult person. It's all part and parcel of having free will.

 

[Otterscrubber]

Good feedback

Good feedback, i have to agree with the sage on this one. It feels right to allow someone to charge up quickly to make use of this feat and stay in melee but not to allow them to run away if they began the round in melee. I don't know why but sometimes you just gotta go with your gut.

Although that doesn't mean this topic is dead, i would love to get more input from other or even links to any other threads dealing with this issue.

 

[Dr. Zoom]

The text of this feat in the PH says you can move before and after you make a melee attack (instead of either before or after). It then says that when you move in this manner, you do not provoke an AoO from your target. The "moving in this manner" I take as moving both before and after, not either before or after. That is why I require movement both before and after the attack to take advantage of the feat in my games.

 

[kreynolds]

That is why I require movement both before and after the attack to take advantage of the feat in my games.

Yup. It's the whole "stick and move" tactic.

 

[Marauder]

Can you use Spring Attack while charging? For example, could you charge 20', attack and opponent, and then retreat 40' (if you had a base 30' move)?

I am inclined to rule against, but since you can use Spring Attack as part of an Attack (under which is Charge), I can see the argument for both sides.

Anybody with any clarification?

Thanks!

 

[Dr. Zoom]

No.

The charge action specifically says that you have to make all your movement before the attack, and then it gives the parameters of that movement (up to double your speed, 10 foot minimum, all in a straight line, must stop as soon as you threaten the target).