Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Spineshank 03-03-07, 02:09 PM	Good Afternoon All.... I am a rookie Dungeon Master looking for advice. I have a player that wants to combing a charge and a trip. I know there are two distinct rules for each but I dont see anywhere in the players handbook where you can't do it. Anyone ever have to do this or have any advice for me before I go ahead and make up a rule? Thanks for your help. -Spine-
primemover003 03-03-07, 02:12 PM	What's the problem? Charge may be a special full round action but it ends in an attack. You can substitute a Trip for a normal attack. His Touch attack to begin the Trip would get +2 to hit. The opposed check would not get any bonus unless you wanted to apply a circumstance bonus, but that's merely DM's descretion.
Kouk 03-03-07, 04:29 PM	Charge + Trip seems alright to me as well. +2 attack on his touch attack to start the Trip. Things to remember though, he provokes an AoO if not using a weapon designated as being able to trip (he also gets a -2 AC for charging) unless he takes the Improved Trip feat. To get Improved Trip you have to take Combat Expertise as a pre-requisite or else be a level 6 Monk. The opponent gets to try and trip him back if he fails, which will either make him prone or force him to drop his weapon (if using a trip weapon). The back-and-forth tripping doesn't extend beyond the first ( I would say at least) because they aren't attacks of opportunity that are triggering the trip attempts, just a consequence of the Trip action. If you're worried about abuse, remember you can't trip something more than one size category larger. There is also +4 bonus to the combatant that is larger so tripping an ogre would be tough (if not impossible if the PC is small). Having 4 or more legs gives a defender a +4 bonus to resist being tripped for being more stable than a 2-legged creature. Dwarves also get the +4 bonus to resist being tripped. If you want to house rule, you could say that the charging character has an extra -2 penalty on his roll to resist a reactive trip (if he failed to trip his target) because of his inertia. Oh, and charging an enemy with a reach weapon would also provoke an attack of opportunity. If he survives the initial AoO, and starts the Trip he provokes another AoO, assuming that his target can make more than one a round. Just having a reach weapon doesn't mean you can't make the AoO once the target gets past your reach weapon, if you have natural attack or Improved Unarmed.
Spineshank 03-04-07, 10:43 AM	Awesome...thanks for the help guys :)
SALDAR 03-04-07, 02:48 PM	Footnote 7 on the Actions Table in the PHB Combat chapter specifically states that you can do this.
Micah 03-04-07, 02:57 PM	Even if the rules allow it, make the player describe it thematically, and if he cannot then I would not allow it. The rules make a good guide for these things, but it's much more exciting if there is a role-played description of the events, not just rules quoting. Note: As it is allowed by the rules, I would be very lax about the description requirement. As long as the description offered is not wildly ridiculous, then I would accept it.
Kursk 03-04-07, 03:19 PM	Charging and tripping at the end would be like sliding into home plate and taking down the catcher? I just don't see it visually...
Thubby 03-04-07, 03:33 PM	Charging and tripping at the end would be like sliding into home plate and taking down the catcher? I just don't see it visually... tripping doesnt have to be fancy, it could be as simple s running up to someone, and throwing an easily blockable punch, then just forcing the enemy down. knock them off their feet.
Kradlo 03-04-07, 03:59 PM	Even if the rules allow it, make the player describe it thematically, and if he cannot then I would not allow it. The rules make a good guide for these things, but it's much more exciting if there is a role-played description of the events, not just rules quoting. Note: As it is allowed by the rules, I would be very lax about the description requirement. As long as the description offered is not wildly ridiculous, then I would accept it. Just curious, do you make your players "thematically" describe their every action? Do you disallow those actions unless they're described to your satisfaction? I'm all for more roleplaying than "roll" playing, but I do wonder if your requirements aren't a bit prohibitive. Some players are more given to dramatic license than others. If your player were one of the less descriptive types, would you prevent him from taking his actions?
Micah 03-04-07, 04:33 PM	If your player were one of the less descriptive types, would you prevent him from taking his actions? No, I'm very lax about this. I can't remember ever telling a player that they cannot do something because they couldn't describe it. Still, when they are trying to do something somewhat exotic, I push them kind of hard to come up with a thematic explanation. Usually, they only have to do it once, so in the charge/trip example, I would ask what it looks like and what they're doing, but not for every time they used it. Also, I do consider it a somewhat acceptable answer for a player to say that they cannot describe it because they don't know how it works. For example: Me: "How are you opening the lock? You don't have your thieves tools." Player: "I scrounge up some improvised tools and take the minus to the roll." Me: "What sort of tools? How are you doing it?" Player: "Honestly, I don't know. I've never picked a lock. I assume my character knows what to look for." Me: "Ok, make the roll."
bob_the_great 03-04-07, 05:55 PM	i don't see tripping at the end of a charge as being exotic at all. if a character can charge and swing to attack why would they have any problem charging and swinging at someone's legs? and accounting for inertia is unnecessary unless you do so for a normal charge.
yrogerg 03-04-07, 10:32 PM	Charging and tripping at the end would be like sliding into home plate and taking down the catcher? I just don't see it visually... Visually, it's a *tackle*. I suppose a slide-tackle (as you're describing) works fairly well, too. What's hard to visualize about it?
Kursk 03-05-07, 10:46 AM	Visually, it's a *tackle*. I suppose a slide-tackle (as you're describing) works fairly well, too. What's hard to visualize about it? Because in the end I see a grapple situation not a stand up situation.
gorckat 03-05-07, 11:36 AM	I don't see how it has to be a tackle at all- guy runs hard at his foe, pulls the sword/axe back and golf swings at the target's feet. Tripped. I'm pretty sure movies like LotR and Braveheart have scenes featuring such attacks.
Cthulhu-LQ 03-05-07, 11:39 AM	can you charge-bullrush-trip?
Kursk 03-05-07, 11:40 AM	I don't see how it has to be a tackle at all- guy runs hard at his foe, pulls the sword/axe back and golf swings at the target's feet. Tripped. I'm pretty sure movies like LotR and Braveheart have scenes featuring such attacks. And his momentum sends him crashing into the foe. Can't get around simple physics. No, I wouldn't allow it.
Downtym 03-05-07, 11:59 AM	Charging and tripping at the end would be like sliding into home plate and taking down the catcher? I just don't see it visually... I charge the guy and smash my shield into his chest, knocking (tripping) him to the ground. I charge the guy and crouch low as I knock my shoulder into his center of gravity, knocking (tripping) him to the ground. Or, I charge the guy and attempt a trip. These are all functionally the same things in my mind.
Kursk 03-05-07, 12:05 PM	I charge the guy and smash my shield into his chest, knocking (tripping) him to the ground. I charge the guy and crouch low as I knock my shoulder into his center of gravity, knocking (tripping) him to the ground. No. That's an overrun not a trip. This stuff is already accounted for in the combat rules.
Cthulhu-LQ 03-05-07, 12:06 PM	And his momentum sends him crashing into the foe. Can't get around simple physics. No, I wouldn't allow it. And the huge dragon is just too big for it's wings to make it fly. Can't get around simple physics. No, I wouldn't allow it.
Kursk 03-05-07, 12:09 PM	And the huge dragon is just too big for it's wings to make it fly. Can't get around simple physics. No, I wouldn't allow it. It's called an OVERRUN attack. Reread the combat section. It is already accounted for by the game designers. Gee, I wonder why they made it an overrun attack and not a "charge, stop, trip attack"?
Kursk 03-05-07, 12:34 PM	E.O.T.
Frugal 03-05-07, 12:46 PM	Run at opponent dropping into a leg sweep or knee strike Run at opponent and swing whip or chain around their leg Run at opponent and sweep your weapon low across their legs and so on, I really don't see the visualisation problems and it's allowed by RAW.
Kursk 03-05-07, 12:56 PM	Run at opponent dropping into a leg sweep or knee strike Run at opponent and swing whip or chain around their leg Run at opponent and sweep your weapon low across their legs and so on, I really don't see the visualisation problems and it's allowed by RAW. I reread those sections of the combat chapter. While it's not "disallowed" by RAW it is clear that the mechanism that was designed for this was Overrun. A lot of things aren't disallowed by RAW but it doesn't imply "allowing" it. By the RAW I'm not "disallowed" from growing a second head and hurl it at an opponent.
Cthulhu-LQ 03-05-07, 01:06 PM	No, Overrun is to move through an opponent's square. With an overrun, the opponent can fall but only if he decides to try to block you. Otherwise he can simply let you pass. In the case we are discussing, the idea is to charge an opponent with the intent of tripping him. In this case, he can't simply let you pass to avoid falling.
Frugal 03-05-07, 01:13 PM	I reread those sections of the combat chapter. While it's not "disallowed" by RAW it is clear that the mechanism that was designed for this was Overrun. A lot of things aren't disallowed by RAW but it doesn't imply "allowing" it. By the RAW I'm not "disallowed" from growing a second head and hurl it at an opponent. No, I see overrun as doing something completely different, that's plowing straight through an opponent. That's different from running up to an opponent and then attempting to knock him over. For instance, suppose the BBEG wants to make his getaway and leaves a goon behind to block your path, running past/through the goon to reach the BBEG (presumably so that he'll provoke an AoO when as he tries to run away) is an overrun. That's very different from running up to an opponent and tripping him. As for RAW, well let's see trip is a special attack that I can use anytime I'm granted an attack so I wouldn't say that not only is it not explicitly disallowed, it's explicitly allowed by the rules the same as how I can charge and disarm or charge and sunder. That's very different from saying that something that's not explicitly disallowed by the rules is allowed (as your example suggests).
Kursk 03-05-07, 01:24 PM	No, I see overrun as doing something completely different, that's plowing straight through an opponent. That's different from running up to an opponent and then attempting to knock him over. For instance, suppose the BBEG wants to make his getaway and leaves a goon behind to block your path, running past/through the goon to reach the BBEG (presumably so that he'll provoke an AoO when as he tries to run away) is an overrun. That's very different from running up to an opponent and tripping him. As for RAW, well let's see trip is a special attack that I can use anytime I'm granted an attack so I wouldn't say that not only is it not explicitly disallowed, it's explicitly allowed by the rules the same as how I can charge and disarm or charge and sunder. That's very different from saying that something that's not explicitly disallowed by the rules is allowed (as your example suggests). I would allow it if you moved normal speed but not double as you're allowed to on a charge. Otherwise, your going to end up doing an overrun. Try it sometime. RUN up to someone, stop on a dime and then try to trip them. Sorry, you won't be able to.
Kradlo 03-05-07, 01:41 PM	Kursk, you're clearly houseruling here, to which any GM is entitled to do. But the RAW are clear that any attack may be used as a trip attempt, including a charge.
Kursk 03-05-07, 01:49 PM	Kursk, you're clearly houseruling here, to which any GM is entitled to do. But the RAW are clear that any attack may be used as a trip attempt, including a charge. Yes, what I stated in my last post would be a house rule. I do that whenever something that makes no sense pops up. Another example: An orc is 60' away from a 10th level fighter (the fighter clearly sees the orc standing there with sword.) 1st round of combat (if the orc won init) the orc moves to the fighter and attacks. The 10th level fighter watched him charge towards him can't use his dex to AC. Lame and unreal = gone from my game.
Frugal 03-05-07, 02:09 PM	I would allow it if you moved normal speed but not double as you're allowed to on a charge. Otherwise, your going to end up doing an overrun. Try it sometime. RUN up to someone, stop on a dime and then try to trip them. Sorry, you won't be able to. You're not stopping on a dime, I was assuming that you're using some of your momentum with the attack (hence the attack bonus). If you can't grasp that type of abstraction with the charge action then the whole charge action doesn't make sense; I mean how do I run up to somebody and stop on a dime and then swing a sword at them? Obviously you don't, you run up and bring your sword down as you close, or you level your blade against the enemy and run at him. Or you run and make a great swing, etc, etc.
bob_the_great 03-05-07, 02:23 PM	And his momentum sends him crashing into the foe. Can't get around simple physics. No, I wouldn't allow it. do you allow your players to attack at the end of a charge without their momentum sending them crashing into a foe? why not account for simple physics in that scenario? the momentum is the same. it makes no sense to adjudicate it differently for an attack vs. a trip.
Cthulhu-LQ 03-05-07, 02:33 PM	Another example: An orc is 60' away from a 10th level fighter (the fighter clearly sees the orc standing there with sword.) 1st round of combat (if the orc won init) the orc moves to the fighter and attacks. The 10th level fighter watched him charge towards him can't use his dex to AC. Lame and unreal = gone from my game. This is something that is really not clear to me how it's supposed to work by RAW. In your example, if the fighter saw the orc, then he is not surprised and he would have his dex bonus to AC, right? The fighter would lose his dex bonus only he has failed his spot check to see the orc. So the orc would have a surprise round with 1 action, which is not enough to cover the 60' between him and the fighter. Next round, if the orc wins init, the fighter is still flat footed when the orc attacks him.
Kursk 03-05-07, 02:41 PM	This is something that is really not clear to me how it's supposed to work by RAW. In your example, if the fighter saw the orc, then he is not surprised and he would have his dex bonus to AC, right? The fighter would lose his dex bonus only he has failed his spot check to see the orc. So the orc would have a surprise round with 1 action, which is not enough to cover the 60' between him and the fighter. Next round, if the orc wins init, the fighter is still flat footed when the orc attacks him. No. Flatfooted doesn't mean you have to miss your spot check. Flatfooted happens when you haven't taken an action. "Each combatant starts out flat-footed. Once a combatant acts, he or she is no longer flat-footed." It isn't required that you are surprised. The example I gave is per the RAW. It is very stupid and unrealistic. That's why I house ruled it gone.
Dragonteuthis 03-05-07, 02:46 PM	Kursk, you're being a lot more stubborn than you need to. First off, you're hung up on the "stop, then trip" Maybe the tripping is what stops the charger? Transferal of inertia and all that, like those annoying desk ornaments with the steel ball bearings that go click-click-click-click... I really don't see why a character can't slam into another with, say, his shoulder, or maybe a shield, using the momentum he built up in his charge to violently knock his foe to the ground. And, that momentum having been imparted, he steps back, readying himself against his (now possibly prone) foe. Try thinking of it as Charge, trip, stop. And again. People are casting fireballs, riding dragons, and summoning demons. If you have a hang-up about someone body-checking a foe, you probably have more serious issues with the rules to deal with.
Frugal 03-05-07, 02:48 PM	all flat-footed means is that while you're not surprised (a full surprise round) the other person did catch you off guard enough to get "the drop" on you. We're talking about a 6 second round here which is also going to include your counter attack. Yes, some of the action is supposed to be simultaneous but obviously a certain amount of that 6s time is going to be taken up with the orc charging 60' toward you. You're caught off guard just enough that you can't dodge as well as you normally could.
Kursk 03-05-07, 02:54 PM	Kursk, you're being a lot more stubborn than you need to. First off, you're hung up on the "stop, then trip" Maybe the tripping is what stops the charger? Transferal of inertia and all that, like those annoying desk ornaments with the steel ball bearings that go click-click-click-click... I really don't see why a character can't slam into another with, say, his shoulder, or maybe a shield, using the momentum he built up in his charge to violently knock his foe to the ground. And, that momentum having been imparted, he steps back, readying himself against his (now possibly prone) foe. Try thinking of it as Charge, trip, stop. And again. People are casting fireballs, riding dragons, and summoning demons. If you have a hang-up about someone body-checking a foe, you probably have more serious issues with the rules to deal with. Yeah, after looking again at the weapons that can be used to trip I can see that.
Kursk 03-05-07, 02:56 PM	all flat-footed means is that while you're not surprised (a full surprise round) the other person did catch you off guard enough to get "the drop" on you. We're talking about a 6 second round here which is also going to include your counter attack. Yes, some of the action is supposed to be simultaneous but obviously a certain amount of that 6s time is going to be taken up with the orc charging 60' toward you. You're caught off guard just enough that you can't dodge as well as you normally could. Per RAW, it is the fact that you haven't taken an action yet. I make it so that you have to be surprised to loose your dex to AC bonus. The way it originally worked makes more sense, not that it just isn't your turn in the initiative order yet.
JerBar 03-05-07, 03:01 PM	Gawd, I hope my player who uses enlarge/spiked chain/improved trip does not read this post. I'd have to start putting spiked chains in the hands of the ogres and giving them combat reflexes, well... maybe I'll do that anyway. hehe
Kursk 03-05-07, 03:12 PM	Gawd, I hope my player who uses enlarge/spiked chain/improved trip does not read this post. I'd have to start putting spiked chains in the hands of the ogres and giving them combat reflexes, well... maybe I'll do that anyway. hehe There's a reason why a lot of DM's I know don't have spiked chain as a weapon in their games...
Frugal 03-05-07, 03:14 PM	Per RAW, it is the fact that you haven't taken an action yet. Yes, my point being that I can see how in the 1st round of combat (with no surprise) you're not surprised (they get a surprise round before you even get to initiative) but you're reacting just a bit slower, enough that you're not at your full AC.
JerBar 03-05-07, 03:24 PM	There's a reason why a lot of DM's I know don't have spiked chain as a weapon in their games... Ya, I know. I did something even worse, I didn't have them as common weapons but let him have one anyway. Now he is pretty much the only one in the area that has a spiked chain, oh, and he's a weapon maker so he makes them himself. I take one away and he draws the back up. It has not been a big problem yet, but the potential is there. Back on topic, I'm not sure if I would stop him from doing a charge trip, even with the spiked chain. I can see an argument for both sides. If I were to ban it, it would be because it would push the balance scale way out the window.
Kursk 03-05-07, 03:26 PM	Yes, my point being that I can see how in the 1st round of combat (with no surprise) you're not surprised (they get a surprise round before you even get to initiative) but you're reacting just a bit slower, enough that you're not at your full AC. Yeah, I just couldn't justify it with my players (see my example above) and their battle hardened characters. It was a bit over the top.
Kursk 03-05-07, 03:28 PM	Ya, I know. I did something even worse, I didn't have them as common weapons but let him have one anyway. Now he is pretty much the only one in the area that has a spiked chain, oh, and he's a weapon maker so he makes them himself. I take one away and he draws the back up. It has not been a big problem yet, but the potential is there. Back on topic, I'm not sure if I would stop him from doing a charge trip, even with the spiked chain. I can see an argument for both sides. If I were to ban it, it would be because it would push the balance scale way out the window. I didn't take it out originally because of abuse. I took it out because it would never work as an effective weapon. The stupidity of it just grated . Later I started seeing DMs complain about various balance issues. I guess I was ahead of the curve on it.
Frugal 03-05-07, 03:51 PM	Yeah, I just couldn't justify it with my players (see my example above) and their battle hardened characters. It was a bit over the top. It applies in their favour just as often, if not more, than it does against them. You must not have a rogue in the party, or at least not one who's realised that flat-footed before they act means a free sneak attack against an opponent (pretty easy to get within 30' to do a ranged sneak attack, if not a melee one).
Ash the blackcowl 03-05-07, 04:07 PM	tripping doesnt have to be fancy, it could be as simple s running up to someone, and throwing an easily blockable punch, then just forcing the enemy down. knock them off their feet. It could also be a close line, or sweep with a weapon really anything that gets the opponent on the ground.
Kursk 03-05-07, 04:39 PM	It applies in their favour just as often, if not more, than it does against them. You must not have a rogue in the party, or at least not one who's realised that flat-footed before they act means a free sneak attack against an opponent (pretty easy to get within 30' to do a ranged sneak attack, if not a melee one). We have a rogue but my players will want something thrown out that's stupid even if they could use it if it was left in. I'm lucky that my players are as concerned about stuff and don't try to nerf things. The rogue does most of his sneak attacks using the flanking rules or he will surprise an enemy.
Kimokeo 03-05-07, 05:24 PM	I don't care if a character in my game has a spiked chain. Anything that is broken is anything I can't challenge as a DM. I challenge the spiked chain wielder so no problems. Kouk said, "Things to remember though, he provokes an AoO if not using a weapon designated as being able to trip (he also gets a -2 AC for charging) unless he takes the Improved Trip feat." That's not true in my opinion. The Improved Trip feat removes the AoO for any weapon you use for a trip. If you don't have the feat, any weapon you use provokes the AoO. As for weapons used for trip, it states under TRIP: "Some weapons, including the spiked chain, dire flail..." Those listed in the PHB specifically, like the flails, are included in the list. But, the definition of 'some weapons' does not exist. I allow players to use any weapon that reasonably could be used to trip someone. A staff, club, sword, pole, rug. Any of these could cause someone to trip...even a foot or hand (if your lying on the ground). As for the issue of running up and tripping and what happens to your momentum? The charge allows you to move double. For most that is 60' unemcumbered. Characters move 60' in a round just to close the gap between opponents. The charge just allows you the 60' move that many use their standard and move actions to complete but you still get to attack. This speed isn't a real momentum issue to me. Now, if you run and your movement was x3 or x4, then I could see some issue about momentum. But, unlike flying, is there any fast rules on turn ratio for land movement? Can you hover on land?
Kursk 03-05-07, 05:31 PM	But, the definition of 'some weapons' does not exist. Yes it does. It is in the description of the weapons themselves.
Frugal 03-05-07, 05:45 PM	We have a rogue but my players will want something thrown out that's stupid even if they could use it if it was left in. I'm lucky that my players are as concerned about stuff and don't try to nerf things. The rogue does most of his sneak attacks using the flanking rules or he will surprise an enemy. Meh, personally I don't think it's stupid, and it gives you a small advantage in the 1st round for winning initiative.
Thubby 03-05-07, 07:25 PM	Kursk. when you charge, you are not running full speed, running (as in 4X speed) is running full speed. someone charging is running 1/2 speed. as to a valid description: runs up, takes a small hop landing directly in front the enemy (which can be done rather easily) in a low stance. his 10+lb. blade, still carrying the momentum, sweeps through the enemy's legs, sending him crashing to the ground.
Downtym 03-05-07, 07:53 PM	No. That's an overrun not a trip. This stuff is already accounted for in the combat rules. No, an overrun would be "I charge my opponent, trying to drive past him." An overrun is an attempt to plow past or over your opponent (and move through his square) as you move. The fact that your opponent stands in your way when you try to run past him and gets knocked to the ground is incidental to your attempt to run past him - by moving through his space. In the above examples of a Charge + Trip, the intent is specifically to drive the individual to the ground - which an overrun has no guarentee of doing.
Downtym 03-05-07, 08:01 PM	I don't care if a character in my game has a spiked chain. Anything that is broken is anything I can't challenge as a DM. I challenge the spiked chain wielder so no problems. Kouk said, "Things to remember though, he provokes an AoO if not using a weapon designated as being able to trip (he also gets a -2 AC for charging) unless he takes the Improved Trip feat." That's not true in my opinion. The Improved Trip feat removes the AoO for any weapon you use for a trip. If you don't have the feat, any weapon you use provokes the AoO. As for weapons used for trip, it states under TRIP: "Some weapons, including the spiked chain, dire flail..." Those listed in the PHB specifically, like the flails, are included in the list. But, the definition of 'some weapons' does not exist. I allow players to use any weapon that reasonably could be used to trip someone. A staff, club, sword, pole, rug. Any of these could cause someone to trip...even a foot or hand (if your lying on the ground). A trip attempt is normally initiated by a unarmed melee touch - this is the provoking action. Some weapons allow the user to make a trip attempt with the weapon and do not provoke an AOO (Some weapons can be used to make trip attacks. In this case, you make a melee touch attack with the weapon instead of an unarmed melee touch attack, and you don’t provoke an attack of opportunity. - from the SRD). By the rules, you cannot make a trip attempt with a weapon that does not allow you to make a trip attempt. You can, logically, always make a trip attempt with an unarmed melee attack - such as using your leg to trip or a shoulder or elbow, etc. This begs the question as to whether or not improved unarmed strike would allow you to negate the AOO, but that's not germaine for the current discussion. This is, of course, by the RAW, so your mileage will vary from GM to GM. As for the issue of running up and tripping and what happens to your momentum? It's translated into a +2 to attack? Can you hover on land? This statement makes no sense. "Hovering on land" would be the same as standing still.
Kursk 03-05-07, 08:53 PM	Kursk. when you charge, you are not running full speed, running (as in 4X speed) is running full speed. someone charging is running 1/2 speed. as to a valid description: runs up, takes a small hop landing directly in front the enemy (which can be done rather easily) in a low stance. his 10+lb. blade, still carrying the momentum, sweeps through the enemy's legs, sending him crashing to the ground. As you can see earlier in this thread I was shown the "error of my ways". Thanks though. One thing , you can only make a trip attack with a weapon that specifically allows it. Don't think a sword does.
Kouk 03-06-07, 07:45 AM	Ok, I didn't want to have to do this but.... Rules of the Game: All About Trip Attacks, Part 1 http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060307a Rules of the Game: All About Trip Attacks, Part 2 http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060321a By the way, when I was talking about the inertia throwing the charger off, I was just suggesting a way you could houserule if you thought that the charge+trip was overpowered. I do not use that in my games.
Kursk 03-06-07, 09:37 AM	Ok, I didn't want to have to do this but.... Rules of the Game: All About Trip Attacks, Part 1 http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060307a Rules of the Game: All About Trip Attacks, Part 2 http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060321a By the way, when I was talking about the inertia throwing the charger off, I was just suggesting a way you could houserule if you thought that the charge+trip was overpowered. I do not use that in my games. Interesting auxiliary rules. I like the part about AoO if successful not ruining the trip attempt. Don't know if I'd use it but it could make for interesting combat scene.
Downtym 03-06-07, 10:52 AM	Interesting auxiliary rules. I like the part about AoO if successful not ruining the trip attempt. Don't know if I'd use it but it could make for interesting combat scene. Unlike grappling and disarm, if you are hit for damage by the AOO during a trip attempt you do not lose the trip attempt. This is, once again, by the RAW.
Kursk 03-06-07, 10:53 AM	Unlike grappling and disarm, if you are hit for damage by the AOO during a trip attempt you do not lose the trip attempt. This is, once again, by the RAW. Funny I couldn't find that in the PHB or DMG. Have those 3.5 books been updated?