Set to Receive Charge

[Legildur]

But if he Readies to Ready his spear to receive a charge (see Braveheart - "Hold... hooo-old... now!"), it can be seen, perhaps, that he is waiting... but not what he is waiting for...

Hyp, I like the logic behind this. Unfortunately the coffee isn't doing its job today and I need it spelt out a little clearer. With your 'Ready to Ready' action, is it possible to cover off both 'set to receive charge' and attack a creature that uses a single move (or double move for that matter) to move into a square you threaten? If so, what would the language look like?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Hyp, I like the logic behind this. Unfortunately the coffee isn't doing its job today and I need it spelt out a little clearer. With your 'Ready to Ready' action, is it possible to cover off both 'set to receive charge' and attack a creature that uses a single move (or double move for that matter) to move into a square you threaten? If so, what would the language look like?

I suspect that would be highly DM-dependent.

-Hyp.

 

[Feldspar]

Running towards pointy sticks should be dangerous.

There were some weapon comparisons above, but people seemed to miss the best case study: Heavy Flail vs. Halberd. Both are Martial 2-handers doing 1d10 with equivalent threat/crit that be used to make trip attacks. The Heavy Flail gets a +2 on Disarm checks while the Halberd can be set to receive a charge. That implies an equivalence to me between those two abilities and that "set" has a value (that will be offset by reduced damage or threat/crit) the same way that trip, disarm, reach and range increment do.

Hm... I've always interpreted the "set vs. charge" text to mean that the weapon only had to be readied, and that valid targets that happened to be charging suffered the extra damage. It CAN be read that way, you know!

I can't interpret the text that way, but I wish I could. It just totally fails the common sense test for me not not to play it that way:
player: That worg rider isn't to going to charge me without impunity - I set my spear!
dm: Okay, they just walk up to you and attack.
player: Too bad I wasn't able to poke him with my spear ... which was pointed directly at him ... the whole time. Nope, couldn't bring myself to even make a little poke in his direction; if only he'd moved towards me a little quicker [sigh]

Even so, it is nearly a useless ability if the foe knows you're readying an action (which IMC they usually do... I kinda assume combatants with Int 5 or higher know when someone's preparing for this sort of thing). I haven't even had a character wield an approprate weapon for such actions, and no spear-wielding NPC has ever successfully scored a double-damage hit on anyone. In 5 years of gaming.

I can only think of one time we ever had someone set to receive charge; those weapons are rarely used.

One of my first 3.0 characters was a Monte Cook Ranger with pretty high strength who normally used a Greatsword in combat. I figured that 90% of the time his longbow would be unstrung and wrapped in oilcloth to protect it from the elements. He usually had a spear in hand - I figure he'd think that's the best thing to have in hand should you accidently come across and startle a bear or boar or some such.

I never set it for charge. Either we'd charge in or I'd just throw it at someone (might catch them flat footed) and then draw my Greatsword. The only time I ever set was when we ran across a bear we were hoping not to have to fight. Of course it charged. I actually did hit - in fact I critted! However, it wasn't enough damage and it critted me in return. I spent the (short) remainder of the fight hidding behind the mage's skirts with 1 hp

Basically, it's slightly less powerful than counterspelling, which is another thing PC's rarely spend actions to do. Perhaps there should be some feats that make the "set vs. charge" apply in more situations, like there is now for counterspelling.

Hold the Line is a good candidate; I've thought about a house rule that the AoO granted is treated as being set to recieve a charge. I came up with the same problem case HyperSmurf did where the charge path was tangential to your threatened area. I'm thinking of going with the following: "Weapons set to recieve a charge only inflict double damage on a charging opponent if the target of the charge is within your natural reach (5' for S or M, 10' for L, etc)"

If the charge is ending that close to you, well, its kind of like their vector of travel and your line of attack creating a substantial cross product of pain