Sidewind Charging, driving me nuts.

[Oldtimer]

Shift away, charge, enemy gets critical hit, and PC falls down dead before the charge hits. Not smart.

Why risk it?

Why would the charged enemy get to attack you before you hit (or miss) with your charge?

 

[bganon]

Scalegloom rules, page 3: "Charging provokes opportunity attacks."

Period. There is no "except from the target" restriction. Yes, it's kind of weird.

So I guess you can charge in a curve (oh noes 4e is too anime/videogamy) but provoke an OA from your target (oh noes pointless gamist nerfing). At least according to the tiny fragment of the rules we've seen.

 

[Chibbot]

It would only provoke an OA from the target of the charge of said target had Threatening Reach, or the charger was doing something really bizarre (and not likely helpful, unless the whole intention was to absorb OAs). Otherwise, it is not really possible to move in such a way that you are making a legal charge and provoking an OA from your target. (see rule about needing to charge to the closest available square)

 

[Dragonblade]

As far as we know, only two things provoke OA's. Moving out of, or through a threatened square without shifting. And making a ranged or area attack while within a threatened square.

So no OA from the foe you charge.

 

[Vaeron]

Why would he take an AOO?

"Charging provokes opportunity attacks." -Scalegloom rules appendix

So the target and any other foe encountered along the way gets a free basic attack against a charging character. In other words, a character is trading a special ability attack for a basic attack, and allowing his target a free attack against him in the process.

So using a move action to make a shift, then trading a standard action to move to charge distance, then trading an AP to do a charge for minimal damage and the risk of taking damage, would be absolutely silly.

 

[Mouseferatu]

"Charging provokes opportunity attacks." -Scalegloom rules appendix

So the target and any other foe encountered along the way gets a free basic attack against a charging character. In other words, a character is trading a special ability attack for a basic attack, and allowing his target a free attack against him in the process.

That's a poorly phrased summary (not on your part, on the abbreviated document's part). At least as I understand it, the rule is that charging provokes in the same way other movement provokes, not that it provokes automatically.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Yeah it was poorly phrased, and it was only mentioned in case someone tried to argue that since the movement was during a standard action instead of a move action, it didn't count as movement.

There's no OA from the target of the charge.

It's still not broken. And as I stated before, it's "realism" is spot-on, it's what you see in almost all organized sports, where one player is held up by a blocker, takes a short movement to one side, and then rushes in an arc past the blocker to the "goal" - in this case the new target.

It's balanced by the basic attack and the fact that the "blocker" you just passed is almost certainly chasing after you, in D&D this means FLANKING with the victim of the charge. (For Darren, yes flanking gives you combat advantage.)

I don't see the problem.

Fitz

 

[kennew142]

You should probably read the rule if you're going to complain about it instead of taking everything on hearsay.

But then we wouldn't be able to make the daily (or hourly) unsupported ant-4e rant! What fun would that be?