Wingover + Charge : Legal?

[Arthedain]

Hi

After a rather heated discussion with one of my players I would appreciate some input from you folks. The subject in question :

Is it possible for a flying creature to use the Wingover feat (turn 180 degrees, free action but costs 10 ft movement) and then charge?

The situation that sparked the discussion was this :
My player's character, a 12.level druid, was airborne approx. 30-40 ft behind a young red dragon (size large) with a githyanki rider (with Spirited Charge, and a heavy lance). The player was confident that the dragon couldn't catch him, since dragons are large, lumbering creatures with low manouverability. When it was the githyanki's turn I had the dragon do a 180 degree turn, thus using 10 ft of its 150 ft movement, and then charging. One bite attack from the dragon, and one solid hit with the lance later, and the druid is below -10.

The player is of the opinion that wingover shouldn't be available to creatures with low manouverability, and he also feels that I'm exploiting loopholes in the rules. After all, the charge-action states that you can't take a 5-foot step, so why should it be allowed to do a wingover, which "costs" 10 ft of movement. In my opinion, I'm using Wingover as written in the MM (3.5), and since it is a free action, the dragon/githyanki rider is free to make a charge. This, of course, enables the githyanki (a Ftr4/Wiz3/Dragonrider3 [Draconomicon], by the way) to use his Spirited Charge feat to potentially devestating effect.

Any comments or critisism are appreciated. Thanks in advance!

 

[Majere]

No you cant
Charge = full round action
It specifically requires you to move in a straight line without turning.

The creatures maneuverability has nothing to do with wether or not it can do this, you simply cannot turn during a charge.
Im also not sure you can charge while flying.

Majere

 

[Arthedain]

Agree. You can't turn while charging. However, the dragon in question used Wingover (a free action) *before* charging. Thus, it did not turn *during* the charge.

With regards to charging while flying : I believe there is nothing against it in the rules. From the DMG, p.20, Moving in Three Dimensions : "Use the movement rules to apply to any sort of movement, not just when traveling across a flat surface."

 

[irdeggman]

Yes in order to charge it must be a straight line to the target.

Even the ride-by-attack feat (move and charge) and then move again requires the movement to be "(continuing the straight line of the charge)". (PHB pg 99)

Also did the bite and lance attack occur at the same time? They should have since a mount goes at the rider's initiative. If the bite occured and then subsequently the lance was used as a charge - couldn't happen. Charge is the result of movement (requiring at least 10' of movement and a full round action), if movement is halted by say a dragon performing a bite then the benefits of a charge are lost.

 

[Arthedain]

Also did the bite and lance attack occur at the same time? They should have since a mount goes at the rider's initiative. If the bite occured and then subsequently the lance was used as a charge - couldn't happen. Charge is the result of movement (requiring at least 10' of movement and a full round action), if movement is halted by say a dragon performing a bite then the benefits of a charge are lost.

Let's see. For completeness, the relevant feats, as far as I can recall, for githyanki rider and dragon:

Dragon : Hover, Wingover, Improved Maneuverability, Flyby attack... + 1 other

Rider : Ride-By attack, Spirited Charge

The rider and the mount had the same initiative. The actions during the rider's turn were :

* Dragon performs Wingover (free action, -10 ft movement)
* Dragon charges in straight line, approx 40 ft, towards druid
* Dragon, with 10 ft reach, bites druid, +2 bonus to attack due to charge
* Rider, with heavy lance, hits druid, +2 bonus to attack due to charge, Spirited Charge applies
* Druid is now below -10
* Dragon flies some additional distance, 30+ feet or so...

Due to flyby attack for the dragon, and ride-by attack for the rider, I must admit I don't agree that the rider should lose the benefits of the charge for his attack, but then again, I'm not 100% sure I ran it correctly....

 

[UniversalMonster]

I would have ruled exactly as Arthedain did.

Wingover definitely applies to dragons- I tend to think of it as a 'dragon feat'. If the dragon had the movement rate to spare (and he did) then he can use it to charge after busting the 180.

It's a deadly combo attack.

Sometimes PCs die in D&D, we shrug this off in my campaign, especially at the levels where you are jousting dragons on horseback! Geez, at least it didn't come down to a saving throw vs death.

 

[smetzger]

1. Only Prerequisite for wingover is Fly Speed. In fact its made for low maneuverable creatures. High Manueverable creatures don't need the feat.

2. Aerial combat unlike ground combat forces us to keep track of the direction of movement. This feat allows for a free action to change the direction of movement, this results in the consumption of 10 ft of movement. The dragon did not in fact move when it turned, it simple reversed its direction of movement.

All sounds perfectly legal to me.

 

[Sejs]

It was fully legal.


Sounds like the druid's player was just bellyaching because he got his butt kicked. Against a dragon and his trained dragon cavalryman rider in aerial melee combat what did he really expect?

 

[Henrix]

I don't think it was correct by the rules. When charging your movement may not be hindered in any way, and I'd say that the 10' reduction from wingover was an inhibition.

I think that the spirit of the rules means that charge bonuses are only to be given when the charger spends all his effort to gain speed toward the target.

 

[Rugger]

I don't think it was correct by the rules. When charging your movement may not be hindered in any way, and I'd say that the 10' reduction from wingover was an inhibition.

I think that the spirit of the rules means that charge bonuses are only to be given when the charger spends all his effort to gain speed toward the target.

I'm with Henrix on this one: he did a maneuver (free action or not) that reduced his movement...therefore no charge.


-Rugger