Sidewind Charging, driving me nuts.

[Stalker0]

The problem is, you're allowing the shift first. You cannot shift in the same round that you move. The rules are the same as 3e in this instance.

Sure about that one? As far as I know you can shift and move in the same turn, but unless you spend an action point thats your whole turn (shift is move action, move is move action).

 

[bganon]

Or did I miss something?

The Scalegloom rules don't mention that a charge has to be in a straight line.

Personally, I think it's such an obvious rule that it was left out by mistake. Otherwise, yeah, it's silly.

 

[VannATLC]

No.. it was confirmed elswhere that a charge doesn't have to be in a straight line, I believe. (I should use the search function I just purchased. But lazy.)

I don't think there is any real reason it should, either.

 

[Mouseferatu]

The problem is, you're allowing the shift first. You cannot shift in the same round that you move. The rules are the same as 3e in this instance.

Where on earth are you getting that?

 

[FadedC]

Hmm.....I have to agree that does seem a bit silly. If the designers don't catch it before release, it may be my first house rule.

The question then becomes what to house rule. I'm thinking that restricting shift from being used in the same round as charge might be the easiest way.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

can charge on the following line
. . .S . .
. . .C . .
. .C . . .
.C . . . .
.C .B . .
.C . . . .
. .P . . .

I don't see a problem with it. I do it in larp all the time. but then again I am probably one of the quickest players in my group.

I find though that I need to jump and swing my sword at the guy i'm running past or he will simply attack my flank. So i guess that means it should inspire an attack of opportunity some how?

 

[small pumpkin man]

I don't see a problem with it. I do it in larp all the time. but then again I am probably one of the quickest players in my group.

I find thought that I need to jump and swing my sword at the guy i'm running past or he will simply attack my flank. So i guess that means it should inspire an attack of opportunity some how?

Nah. I think it's fine as is. You can either do the shift/charge thing (which simulates taking the swing), or move up and use a better ability, which is actually a power (which simulates concentrating on the target not the guy who's attacking you.

Of course a Solder/Defender (someone who's trained to stop people from doing this, or who's just good a it) will make it harder for you to do, and a striker or skirmisher will find it easier to do.

I was just pointing out that it's possible, not trying to say it's bad.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I find thought that I need to jump and swing my sword at the guy i'm running past or he will simply attack my flank. So i guess that means it should inspire an attack of opportunity some how?

Well, the guy you just ran around in the example will probably move up behind you and flank with the other guy, so I think that's taken into account already.

I find this thread interesting on how many rules people seem to be reading that aren't there.

One that hasn't been mentioned is people keep talking about how shifting and then moving use up your actions. The movement the OP is talking about is the movement that the charge itself gives you:

Shift (Move Action) Move 1 square without provoking
Charge (Standard Action) Move your Speed and make a Basic Attack

It's only two actions. No action point needed.

As far as how "realistic" it is goes, you move away cautiously with the shift, fake out the guy you were in melee with, and then run around him. Moves like this occur in every game of basketball, among many other sports.

Fitz

 

[Stalker0]

One that hasn't been mentioned is people keep talking about how shifting and then moving use up your actions. The movement the OP is talking about is the movement that the charge itself gives you:

The reason this is being debated is the OP is mentioning how the person is shifting and then moving around an enemy to attack someone else. This sounds like regular movement, because many believe a charge has to be in a straight line (this is apparently under contestation right now). If a charge has to be in a straight line, then the OP point is invalid. Without an action point, the best you can do is shift from your opponent, and then charge at another in a straight line.

If charging does not need to be in a straight line, then the OP's point is valid.

 

[frankthedm]

Charge SHOULD be a straight line, but the rules do not require it. Rubs my inner wargamer the wrong way.

Wonkiest part about it IMO is that while you have to wind up in the closest square from your original position, you can get to that square in any roundabout way you feel like. :\

I'd much rather require the last two squares moved be in a straight line ala WFRP.