The 1-square charge

[andy3k]

Crazy Jerome, Your above solution does include all possibilities. Instead of standing up or being dazed, I end up 1 square away because an interrupt causes me or the target to shift 1 after the move but before the attack. One of my characters had this very thing as a utility power. Granted, I believe that the entire purpose of that power was to make direct use of the 1 square safety bubble. But I have no problem with weakening powers with fleche or lunge. It is still effective in that the attacker can only use an MBA instead of whatever hell he WAS going to unleash. The difference is that damage can still be done and combat does not drag on. The side effect of not denying an attack is that it helps speed up combat.
​

 

[Mengu]

After having been in the situation many times, and reading most of this thread, I have to say, dazing or knocking prone an opponent and leaving them one square away from you is a tactic used in the system by PC's and monsters alike. Taking that tactic away, doesn't really do the system any favors.

As a PC, I see it as my job to find solutions. I pick up a reach weapon or ranged weapon/attack as backup, or maybe a burst/blast 3 attack. I can always crawl, I can pick a feat or item to stand up as a minor action, I can pick up a feat or power to get rid of daze, if I'm a leader or controller, can pick up powers that will slide/shift enemies/allies so my allies can get in position to more easily attack, as a striker or defender I might pick up attack powers that let me shift as part of the attack, or minor action mobility powers.

There are solutions galore if you build a versatile character. Even monsters end up with more solutions than might be immediately obvious. Reach and ranged attacks are not uncommon, many skirmishers have shift and attack powers. Many powers can slide enemies around. Delaying or readying are always options. Also if the dazed elite brute is having trouble getting to a target, you can always have a minion give him a bull rush to get the big oaf into position to attack.

I think this is one of those cases where tactical solutions are more fun than a rules solution to the 1-square charge.

 

[FireLance]

As a PC, I see it as my job to find solutions.

No doubt. But to me, these are solutions to an artificial problem that shouldn't even exist in the first place.

 

[TheUltramark]

OK, after re-reading my feeble argument I did an incredibly poor job of trying to make my point.

To sum it up (and I'll probably fumble this one too) I don't think you can use your move action "not moving" and still charge

You have to move to charge, and you can't take any other move action (like get up, or escape, or whatever)

again, reading my own earlier post, I kinda seem dumb, that happens once in a while, sorry

 

[OnlineDM]

[MENTION=6674520]TheUltramark[/MENTION] : I appreciate that you're trying to parse through these posts to figure it out, but you're not quite there yet.

Charge is a Standard Action that lets you walk up to your speed (as long as you walk at least two squares) and make a melee basic attack when you're done walking (with a +1 bonus to the attack roll). Doing this ends your turn.

If you have a normal turn (not dazed or anything like that), you may:
-Walk your speed as a Move Action and then Charge (walking your speed AGAIN and attacking at the end of the walk) as a Standard Action
-Stand up from being prone as a Move Action and then Charge (walking your speed and attacking at the end of the walk) as a Standard Action
-Escape from being grabbed as a Move Action and then Charge (walking your speed and attacking at the end of the walk) as a Standard Action
-Use Acrobat's Trick (if you're a Thief) as a Move Action and then Charge (walking your speed and attacking at the end of the walk) as a Standard Action
-Do nothing on your turn except Charge (walking your speed and attacking at the end of the walk) as a Standard Action, letting your Move Action go unused

The point I'm trying to make here is that yes indeed, Charge is one single Standard Action that combines an attack and a move all in one, single action. Really. I'm not kidding. Neither is anyone else on this thread. That is really how Charge works. It does NOT use up your Move Action for the turn (although you can't do anything on your turn AFTER you Charge, since Charging ends your turn unless you use an action point).

I wasn't going to give this clarification another go, but since it seems like you honestly are trying to understand the rules around Charge, I want to help. I hope this does help!

 

[TheUltramark]

[MENTION=90804]OnlineDM[/MENTION] thanks for your patience

It says "move your speed as part of your charge and make a melee basic attack or bull rush"
that is why I thought you could not take some 'other move action' that wasn't a move instead.

thanks for the knowledge

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

I think this is one of those cases where tactical solutions are more fun than a rules solution to the 1-square charge.

While I don't agree with you, I can understand the "Let's play D&D more like chess!" sentiment. So I'm rather curious what you think of the hypothetical house rule I mentioned on page 1. To slightly rephrase it:

I want my game to be more like chess, so I write a house rule that creates a 1-square no-fire zone. Ranged attacks can be made normally so long as there are 2+ squares between the attacker and the target, and ranged attacks work normally from adjacent squares, but I've decided that ranged attacks can't be made if there's exactly 1 square between attacker and target.

Why? Because it creates the opportunity to deny ranged attacks, using the right powers, and for ranged attackers to come up with creative counter-measures against this tactic.

What do you think of my rule? Do you think it'll make the game more fun like chess, or do you think my players might be justified in questioning my judgment?

 

[Mengu]

I want my game to be more like chess, so I write a house rule that creates a 1-square no-fire zone. Ranged attacks can be made normally so long as there are 2+ squares between the attacker and the target, and ranged attacks work normally from adjacent squares, but I've decided that ranged attacks can't be made if there's exactly 1 square between attacker and target.

Well, as a house rule, I would have a problem with its complexity, but conceptually, I don't mind. Much like I didn't mind the old reach where with reach 2, you couldn't hit anything within reach 1, that created a (somewhat silly) dead zone. If that's the rule, that's what I work with.

Truthfully, if there was a 1-square charge rule, I would use it, and wouldn't even think twice about it. But I'm happy working around the challenges of being dazed, prone, or otherwise unable to close a 1 square gap to make an attack.

I guess I've learned to turn a blind eye to system deficiencies, like when I'm slowed I can only move 2 squares, but there is nothing to stop me from shifting 12 squares if I have a power that allows me to do so. There are many system deficiencies that I just accept and use (or abuse).

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I like the idea of a lunge attack. But I´d like to retain at least a -2 penalty. But then again it is the same penalty as attacking from prone. You still do grant combat advantage but can use a normal at will.

So i guess allowing the lunge a move 1 + base attack at a -2 penalty will be a good houserule.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Truthfully, if there was a 1-square charge rule, I would use it, and wouldn't even think twice about it. But I'm happy working around the challenges of being dazed, prone, or otherwise unable to close a 1 square gap to make an attack.

Thank you. Honesty is refreshing.

I guess I've learned to turn a blind eye to system deficiencies, like when I'm slowed I can only move 2 squares, but there is nothing to stop me from shifting 12 squares if I have a power that allows me to do so. There are many system deficiencies that I just accept and use (or abuse).

Can't you also bypass Slow if the power says "move X squares" rather than "move your speed"? Yeah, it's weird.

I might have to start a topic about that, 'cause I'm happier with house rules than with deficiencies.