Charge - To nearest square? Huh?

Ohhh man... when I heard you were in the hospital I came directly here without delay!

All those buildings, women, children, cars, busses and street signs he ran over in order to go "directly" to the hospital are certainly not happy that he came "directly" to the hospital.
The exact meaning of 'directly' isn't defined in the rules (I think). Imho, one valid interpretation would be to use the definitions used in the description of 'Pull, Push, and Slide'. I.e. you are moving directly towards a target if each of your steps move you one square closer to the target.

Note, that I'm not saying that it should be interpreted that way - just that I would say it is a valid interpretation based on the 4E PHB rules alone.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I think the 4E charging rules are less clear than they could/should be. I prefer the definition from the DDM 2.0 rules which are supposed to match the 4E rules as much as possible. Here's the additional restrictions they spell out:

This addition immediately ends the discussion if charging around a corner will work:
It doesn't, since you do not have line of sight to your target at the beginning of the charge.

You also cannot charge if all of the closest spaces are occupied or not legal (e.g. walls). This will also prevent charging around obstacles/walls most of the time.

The DDM rules must be more precise than the RPG rules since there's no DM to adjudicate 'corner' cases (pun intended).

Imho, if a rule can be interpreted in several ways, it makes sense to use the interpretation that matches common sense most closely, i.e. in this case that charging around corners is not possible.

My post "directly above" the one I just quoted illustrates a "common sense" interpretation of going somewhere "directly".

As for DDM - the Miniatures Game rules are not the same as the Core Game rules.

One can easily argue that since they were clear in the DDM rules about line of sight, it was no oversight that they didn't specify it in the Core rules.
 

This addition immediately ends the discussion if charging around a corner will work:
It doesn't, since you do not have line of sight to your target at the beginning of the charge.

Unless it's a corner that doesn't block line of sight. For example, if you're standing near the north wall of a house, and I'm standing along the east wall of a house, the house blocks line of effect between us... but I have line of sight to you through the living room windows.

The exact meaning of 'directly' isn't defined in the rules (I think). Imho, one valid interpretation would be to use the definitions used in the description of 'Pull, Push, and Slide'. I.e. you are moving directly towards a target if each of your steps move you one square closer to the target.

That's what I've gone with, personally. It means zig-zag charges are legal, but that doesn't bother me.

-Hyp.
 

The exact meaning of 'directly' isn't defined in the rules (I think). Imho, one valid interpretation would be to use the definitions used in the description of 'Pull, Push, and Slide'. I.e. you are moving directly towards a target if each of your steps move you one square closer to the target.

Note, that I'm not saying that it should be interpreted that way - just that I would say it is a valid interpretation based on the 4E PHB rules alone.

Each step moves you one step closer in the corner case. No step was lateral - each reduced the total remaining step count by one.
 

Each step moves you one step closer in the corner case. No step was lateral - each reduced the total remaining step count by one.

In the case of the square corner, remember that you can't move diagonally around the corner... so your path goes 3 squares away, 2 squares away, 2 squares away, 1 square away.

Code:
-------
----B--
---####
---####
--M####

-------
--21B--
--2####
--3####
--M####

And even that is assuming that your final square in this example is 'the nearest square from which you can attack the enemy', which requires us to rule that a square occupied by a wall is excluded from consideration for determining the nearest.

-Hyp.
 

In the case of the square corner, remember that you can't move diagonally around the corner... so your path goes 3 squares away, 2 squares away, 2 squares away, 1 square away.

Code:
-------
----B--
---####
---####
--M####

-------
--21B--
--2####
--3####
--M####

And even that is assuming that your final square in this example is 'the nearest square from which you can attack the enemy', which requires us to rule that a square occupied by a wall is excluded from consideration for determining the nearest.

-Hyp.

It is assuming as you describe, but you count the squares wrong.

With the same diagram and starting from the same spot, numbers to indicate the number of squares away...

Code:
-------
--21B--
--3####
--4####
--M####

You'd have to count them this way. A path inside the wall would be wrong. It's the same way that rangers designate the "nearest" enemy as the one in the doorway, not the one on the oposite side of the wall from them.

Moving laterally (and incorrectly) would have looked like:

Code:
-------
--21B--
-3-####
-44####
--M####
 

With the same diagram and starting from the same spot, numbers to indicate the number of squares away...

You'd have to count them this way. A path inside the wall would be wrong.

The square before the corner is two squares away from the banana. The square on the corner is two squares away from the banana. Just because I can't move directly across the corner on a diagonal doesn't alter those distances.

Moving from one square that's two squares away from the target to another square that's two squares away from the target is not moving towards the target.

Code:
-------
----B--
--M####
---####
---####

Let's say the banana has a Pull-2 power. He cannot pull the monkey around the corner; he can't move the monkey diagonally across the corner (since forced movement can only move you somewhere you can walk to), and he cannot pull the monkey north-then-east, because the first square of movement is not moving the monkey closer to him.

If we are using the forced movement model of one-square-closer to adjudicate 'directly towards' for a charge, the monkey cannot charge north-then-east around the corner, because the north movement does not bring him one square closer to the banana.

For another example, let's say the Banana King is protected by several banana bodyguards. The monkey wishes to charge the Banana King.

Would you say this is a valid charge?

Code:
--------
---K----
--------
--BBB---
---M----

--------
---K----
--1-----
-2BBB---
--3M----

Three squares is the minimum amount of movement required for the monkey to reach the 'nearest square from which he can attack his target'. But that square is only two squares away from his starting position.

I'd call this an invalid charge... but it's an identical situation to the corner above (which I'd also call an invalid charge).

-Hyp.
 
Last edited:

4 is incomplete; it should read "Can you legally move directly to that/one of those square/squares?"... which is, of course, what this whole thread has been debating.

Right but if I want to go directly to the loo from my office I go out of the door, turn right, then left and left again, down a flight of stairs and the left and right and finally left.

That is the most direct route, and it goes round a number of corners and down a whole flight of stairs.

I can give you several indirect routes as well.

Direct route does not automatically mean a straight line, it means the shortest available route. Which in open terrain is a straight line, but in a maze could mean all sorts of twists and turns.
 

Right but if I want to go directly to the loo from my office I go out of the door, turn right, then left and left again, down a flight of stairs and the left and right and finally left.

That is the most direct route, and it goes round a number of corners and down a whole flight of stairs.

I can give you several indirect routes as well.

Direct route does not automatically mean a straight line, it means the shortest available route. Which in open terrain is a straight line, but in a maze could mean all sorts of twists and turns.

I would disagree with that definition of direct. Once again, I think it overly complicates things. But I'm really not in the mood to debate defintions and semantics, so I will leave it at that.

I've stated what definition I use, it allows me to rule in a clear and consistent fashion, and prevents players from spending an inordinate amount of time mapping out all possible "charge" routes to their target and debating with me over each one. As such, it is the best possible definition for my purposes. :)
 
Last edited:


Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top