Jumping While Charging - Long v. High Jump; also, Charging on Stairs Question

[RangerWickett]

Here's my comment. It does not concern the rules, but it concerns logic.

If last round you were standing still, and an enemy is 10 ft. due east from you, on this round you can run 10 ft. and attack him, gaining the charge bonus.

If last round you ran 120 ft. due south, and an enemy is 10 ft. due east from you, on this round you can run 10 ft. and attack him, gaining the charging bonus.

However, if you you try to move 10 ft. south and then turn a corner and move 10 ft. east toward an enemy in the span of one round, you cannot gain the charging bonus.

Does that make sense?

Why not change the charging rules so that you just have to move 10 ft. in a straight line at the end of your movement in order to gain the bonus (and attendant penalty)?

 

[javcs]

The no-changing direction while charging rule is intended to prevent turning while charging.
Moot point with fleet of foot (one of the 3.5e versions anyways).

If you accept that, as part of a charge one may jump over difficult terrain (thus gaining altitude in the process) without changing direction, then what is the difference movement wise when, as part of a charge one jumps over normal terrain (thus gaining altitude in the process), other than the fact that you have ended your movement mid-jump?

 

[TheGogmagog]

To make things slightly trickier:

If you perform a jump that moves you further than your max move for the round, are you not considered to "hang" in the air" until your next action.

If all the conditions were thus meant, could you still jump-charge?

You could reach the end of your movement 'mid air' but that means you don't have a standard action to attack. You also must start your next round completing your movement. So by RAW there is no mid-air jumps unless you can attack mid-movement somehow. Flyby attack or maybe spring attack.
As mentioned with charge, you must end your movement at the end of a charge, and you can't end mid air so that's not an option either.
I also agree you can't change direction in a charge so a 'straight' line away and turn around and come back doesn't work for a charge either.

 

[hong]

You could reach the end of your movement 'mid air' but that means you don't have a standard action to attack.

Why not?

 

[Christian]

You could reach the end of your movement 'mid air' but that means you don't have a standard action to attack.

If you were trying to make a single move and then an attack action, this would be correct. But a charge is a single full-round action that includes up to a double move and a single attack at the end of the movement. I'd allow it--in fact, I'd say that a jumping charge is the only way to attack a flying creature that's out of the reach of a ground-based attacker.

 

[frankthedm]

I read this to be a hustle (normal movement), rather than using the Run full-round action, but I wouldn't mind some other opinions to be sure.

That gets addressed here enworld.org/showthread.php?t=143616. You, Hype and me agree that it is not the "run" action.

RAW allows charging on stairs.

Gradual Stairs
Stairs that rise less than 5 feet for every 5 feet of horizontal distance they cover don’t affect movement, but characters who attack a foe below them gain a +1 bonus on attack rolls from being on higher ground. Most stairs in dungeons are gradual, except for spiral stairs (see below).

Steep Stairs
Characters moving up steep stairs (which rise at a 45-degree angle or steeper) must spend 2 squares of movement to enter each square of stairs. Characters running or charging down steep stairs must succeed on a DC 10 Balance check upon entering the first steep stairs square. Characters who fail stumble and must end their movement 1d2×5 feet later. Characters who fail by 5 or more take 1d6 points of damage and fall prone in the square where they end their movement. Steep stairs increase the DC of Tumble checks by 5.

 

[frankthedm]

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/6918/stairsjk6.gif

 

[Stalker0]

We also have to keep in mind that the "straight-line" charge is not really a straight line when you consider how big a 5 foot square is. I can literrally move 4.99 feet to the side and still be in the same square. So my straight line path on a charge could be a drunken guy swaying 4.99 feet back and forth over the course of 60 feet. I don't think allowing a jump on a charge really violates any straight line motion.

 

[frankthedm]

For example, a beholder is hovering at an altitude of 10 ft. (i.e. two empty 5-ft. squares between him and the ground). The fighter, stuck on the ground, wants to charge the beholder. He wants to run toward the beholder, jumping at the right moment so that, as a side effect of his long jump, he attains an altitude of 5 ft. right next to the beholder, at which point he will attack the beholder with his charge attack.

Can the fighter do that? My argument is no, he cannot, because he is effectively changing direction from a 3-D perspective to make such an attack, and one cannot normally change direction during a charge. My players argue otherwise, though, so I wanted some other opinions.

[IMaGel]http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/7550/bounceballnj8.gif[/IMaGel]The rules are mostly on your side. The rules themselves seem to be written from a “looking down at the field” where in up and down distances are mostly ignored. The only time they come into play is the flight rules which still leave a good deal to be desired. It even seems vertical leaps don’t count against distance moved, so it might be possible to high jump on a charge, but long jumping for height would only work with spring attacking.

A: Minimum Charge Distance
B: 20’ ‘running start’
C: Closest space from which you can attack the opponent.
D: The attack
E: Possible AoO for leaving threatened area
F: Violation of “You must move before your attack, not after.”

 

[Legildur]

That gets addressed here enworld.org/showthread.php?t=143616. You, Hype and me agree that it is not the "run" action.

I was thinking to myself 'I don't recall contributing before on a thread on jumping?' Sure enough, I hadn't! But an interesting thread, and nice to see that my opinion of the rules is validated in this instance.