The 1-square charge

[OnlineDM]

Also not to be a noodge, but how can you charge if you don't have a move action?

Based on this and later comments, I think there's some confusion about the rules here. From the Compendium:

Charge
A creature uses the charge action when it wants to dash forward and launch an attack with a single action. Such an attack is sometimes referred to as a charge attack.

CHARGE A TARGET

Action: Standard action. When a creature takes this action, it chooses a target. Determine the distance between the creature and the target, even counting through squares of blocking terrain, and then follow these steps.
1. Move: The creature moves up to its speed toward the target. Each square of movement must bring the creature closer to the target, and the creature must end the move at least 2 squares away from its start-ing position.
2. Attack: The creature either makes a melee basic attack against the target or uses bull rush against it. The creature gains a +1 bonus to the attack roll.
3. No Further Actions: The creature can’t take any further actions during this turn, except free actions.

A creature’s turn usually ends after it charges. However, it can extend its turn by taking certain free actions, such as spending an action point (which grants the creature an extra action).
Published in Player's Handbook, page(s) 287.

So, a Charge is a Standard Action that lets you move two or more squares toward the target and then make a melee basic attack (or a bull rush) - all for just the one standard action, no move action required.

 

[Tymophil]

I'm not sure whether to take your words seriously. I want to imagine you smirking with glee at the practical forum joke you just made, but this is the 'net so I can't know how sincere you are.

If you're sincere, please read post #7.

I feel like being sincere... I have already read all messages in the thread and still, I firmly believe that the no charge at 1 square is a good rule.

I was not convinced by your analogy because it is an entirely different matter to fire at an enemy and move into its threat zone to engage him in hand-to-hand combat. I don't want to seem pedantic, but it is a well recorded fact in military treatise of pre-industrial wars (Napoleonic era comes to mind). In a nutshell, it is question of moral, momentum, élan, etc. One may think that such intrusion of historical background has no place in D&D, and I would admit it, but still, it makes your analogy far from sound from MY point of view.
Now, here what I have to say on a houserule that would allow a “move 1 square/basic melee attack/end of turn”.

1. If you want to move then charge, and can do this as you wish, then the houserule is unnecessary, as you can move just so that the second move (the charge) is possible.
2. If you cannot move conveniently in your move action because of terrain features then the rule forbidding you to achieve a subsequent charge, is still a good one, because it reflects a tactical problem. Now the houserule is still unnecessary, but it also makes tactical decisions less interesting, and terrain features less significant.
3. If you cannot charge because you suffer from an adverse effect, as dazed, then it makes plain sense to me that such a condition would impede your tactical ability and reduce your choices. Once again, it would make a condition have less impact of the tactical decisions of the players.

 

[keterys]

The one square gap isn't a very focused decision by the rules to replicate historical tactics. It's an artifact of rules combination. It's not necessarily something that needs to be fixed, but I would suggest against trying to mine "realism" to argue against it Next someone will start citing lunge and fleche statistics and ranges, and seriously, none of that matters.

Consider the effect on the game, for and against, and then move on. For example, is it a good thing that a push 5 and prone power is often most optimally used to push a single square? Or that the best way to "pin an enemy down" is to knock them prone, then shift back a square (not threatening them at all) so they can't attack you nor easily get past you.

The primary reason not to do anything is purely that it's a house rule, and so there's a serious cost to do it.

The second is that you find that the tactical goal of establishing the one square gap adds to the game.

In most games, people won't overly exploit it, so there's insufficient imperative to do so. In some games, it might get exploited to a near offensive level. For example, one PC I DM for has a tendency to slow and prone and slide up to 6 on all of her attacks. She tends to do fun and interesting stuff with that, and I'm good with it. If instead she focused on putting enemies 1 square out of ability to attack anything, then I'd probably feel obligated to use tactics against them that I don't normally like 2-square grabs where you can't counterattack and daze/prone/push 1s... all those tactics I avoid using because they sap fun from the game and feel downright unfair when done to a PC

Or I'd offer them the use of the house rule.

 

[the Jester]

Rule: If there is a square between me and the opponent, and I have only a standard action, then I cannot attack the opponent with a melee weapon of reach 1 (assuming a basic attack or an at-will that does not give me some reach). I can charge if I was two squares away, or simply attack if I was in the adjacent square, but I'm in no man's land.

Minor action: Draw a missile weapon.

Standard action: Attack.

OR:

Move action: Shift up to the enemy.

Standard action: Attack.

Easy. No house rules needed.

If you want a way to do a melee attack, though, you're right that you need a house rule. I don't like charging one square- there's not enough room to build charging momentum. The "one square charge" doesn't sit well with me; if I allowed it at all I would certainly slap some kind of penalty on the attack roll or the creature's defenses.

If you're dazed and you are one square away from an enemy, you should be screwed, imho. I think the real solution here is not to have a pc who is too foolish to pack a bow, throwing dagger or sling.

Remember too that what's good for the goose is good for the gander; if pcs can do it, so can monsters. This means allowing a "one-square charge" really disadvantages certain types of pcs, especially controllers.

 

[Tymophil]

Consider the effect on the game, for and against, and then move on. For example, is it a good thing that a push 5 and prone power is often most optimally used to push a single square? Or that the best way to "pin an enemy down" is to knock them prone, then shift back a square (not threatening them at all) so they can't attack you nor easily get past you.

I confess that I never thought of the "prone" problem and this exploit of the rules. It seems odd to me to charge right after getting on your feet, but this is allowed...

Now, it would be nice to find out whether there is a problem with the charge action or the prone condition...

 

[TheUltramark]

Based on this and later comments, I think there's some confusion about the rules here. From the Compendium:



So, a Charge is a Standard Action that lets you move two or more squares toward the target and then make a melee basic attack (or a bull rush) - all for just the one standard action, no move action required.

you gotta be kidding right?
did you not read your little rule you quoted?

1 - move
2 - attack

and yet you say no move required ???????

-or- better still, a standard action that not only requires movement, but also prohibits further moving....

 

[OnlineDM]

you gotta be kidding right?
did you not read your little rule you quoted?

1 - move
2 - attack

and yet you say no move required ???????

-or- better still, a standard action that not only requires movement, but also prohibits further moving....

As I said, I think there's some confusion about the rule here. I'm saying that there is no "Move Action" required. That's what a "Charge" is in 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons: A single Standard Action that allows a character to move up to its speed and make a melee basic attack (or bull rush) at the end.

So, for instance, if a PC with speed 6 starts their turn 12 squares from the target, they can:
-Use their Move Action to walk 6 squares toward the target
-Then use their Standard Action to Charge the target, which lets them move (without using a Move Action) adjacent to the target and make a melee basic attack (or bull rush) (with a +1 bonus to the attack from charging) against it.

It's a very useful rule to know about.

The whole point of this thread is that the original poster is suggesting a change to the Charge rule that doesn't require that the move part of the Charge action be at least 2 squares. Currently, you're not allowed to, for instance, use a Standard Action to move 1 square toward an enemy and then make a melee basic attack as a charge - that would require a Move Action to walk the one square and a Standard Action for the attack. But if the enemy were TWO squares or more away, the character could use just a single Standard Action to move up to the enemy and make a melee basic attack against it.

This could come up, for instance, if the character started its turn prone with one square between it and the target (move to stand up - no charge allowed because the distance is too short) or if the character is dazed and has one square between it and the target (only get one action - no charge allowed because the distance is too short).

Anyway, no, I'm not kidding - I'm very much saying that Charge lets you use a single standard action to both move toward a target and attack it.

 

[TheUltramark]

As I said, I think there's some confusion about the rule here. I'm saying that there is no "Move Action" required. That's what a "Charge" is in 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons: A single Standard Action that allows a character to move up to its speed and make a melee basic attack (or bull rush) at the end.

So, for instance, if a PC with speed 6 starts their turn 12 squares from the target, they can:
-Use their Move Action to walk 6 squares toward the target
-Then use their Standard Action to Charge the target, which lets them move (without using a Move Action) adjacent to the target and make a melee basic attack (or bull rush) (with a +1 bonus to the attack from charging) against it.

It's a very useful rule to know about.

The whole point of this thread is that the original poster is suggesting a change to the Charge rule that doesn't require that the move part of the Charge action be at least 2 squares. Currently, you're not allowed to, for instance, use a Standard Action to move 1 square toward an enemy and then make a melee basic attack as a charge - that would require a Move Action to walk the one square and a Standard Action for the attack. But if the enemy were TWO squares or more away, the character could use just a single Standard Action to move up to the enemy and make a melee basic attack against it.

This could come up, for instance, if the character started its turn prone with one square between it and the target (move to stand up - no charge allowed because the distance is too short) or if the character is dazed and has one square between it and the target (only get one action - no charge allowed because the distance is too short).

Anyway, no, I'm not kidding - I'm very much saying that Charge lets you use a single standard action to both move toward a target and attack it.

I disagree with your interpretation of the rule completely.
it clearly says NO OTHER ACTION MAY BE TAKEN - not after you charge you are done...no other actions! no move action other than the "6" you get.

 

[OnlineDM]

I disagree with your interpretation of the rule completely.
it clearly says NO OTHER ACTION MAY BE TAKEN - not after you charge you are done...no other actions! no move action other than the "6" you get.

Note that you don't get any other actions AFTER the charge (unless you spend an action point), but you still get your Minor Action and Move Action BEFORE it, if you wish.

I'm not sure what more I can tell you. <shrug>

 

[keterys]

I can certainly see how you would think that, but unfortunately you are mistaken. You can take no "further" actions afterwards - with the clarification given that you can do free actions, including action point and another action.

Apparently not the first time that question's come up on these boards, though.