No charge action?

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

Kalandri

Jul 03, 2014 18:10:54

I was thinking some sort of charge mechanic is important to close the gap (literally) between the effectiveness of melee and ranged combat.


As it stands now, you can make two ranged attacks in the time it takes to dash and throat-punch a monster 35 feet away. Not to mention keeping your distance from most monsters is a great way to stay alive.
 

Melee weapons out-damage ranged weapons on average, though -- is that enough?

#2

pukunui

Jul 03, 2014 20:39:37

I asked Mike a while back about this and he told me that they had removed charge as a basic combat action. He didn't specifically say, but it sounds like it'll be an action that requires a feat or some other special ability (maybe a battlemaster maneuver?) to perform. It does kinda suck, but I think charging is something that's easy enough to house rule back in, especially since the public playtest had a version of it. What was it? Spend your action to move at half speed and make a single melee weapon attack against a creature within reach or something?

#3

jaelis

Jul 03, 2014 20:58:40

You can charge pretty effectively by moving your speed and then attacking. I don't feel like it is essential to have something beyond that, myself.

(Reply to #2)

HollowMan42

pukunui wrote:
#5

pukunui

Jul 04, 2014 0:00:20

Thanks. I knew it was something like that, but it's been a while since I used the public playtest rules. That's an easy enough option to allow in the final game as a house rule. If you wanted to, you could "update" the wording so that Charge is an action that lets you move half your speed and then, if you've moved at least 10 feet towards a target that is now within your reach, you can make a single melee attack against it as a bonus action.

#6

Xeviat-DM

Jul 04, 2014 0:12:04

Why do you need charge? Move and attack is perfectly within the rules. Do you need to move more than your speed before making the attack?

 

My group always used charge for the attack bonus, not the range; melee characters always had a backup thrown weapon (and now that all thrown weapons can use Strength, there's less reason not to).

#7

E-Tallitnics

Jul 04, 2014 1:02:09

jaelis wrote:
#8

Nimloh

Jul 04, 2014 5:16:45

Keep in mind that this is D&D Basic. The Basic game is meant not to be loaded down with lots of rules.

 

Does anyone not believe there will be a combat module in the core books containing advanced combat mechanics?

#9

Kalandri

Jul 04, 2014 7:30:42 		Good point brought up about str-based thrown weapons. I'm still leery, but if the assumption is fighters always chuck a javelin on their way to the monster it might be OK after all.
#10

edwin_su

Jul 04, 2014 7:32:21

jaelis wrote:
#11

Prom

Jul 04, 2014 7:45:38

I was confused by the lack of a charge action. I think the reasoning behind it is more to do with not creating bonuses to add to attack rolls. If charge had been added to 5e what would it have looked like?

 

Example: move twice your speed and have advantage on your attack. Or move your speed and have advantage on your attack.

 

There just wasn't an elegant and simple way of keeping charge as we understood it in 3.5 or 4e, without making it a common choice. Maybe overpowered.

#12

E-Tallitnics

Jul 04, 2014 8:14:22

Excellent point Prom!

#13

ProphetSword

Jul 04, 2014 9:09:53

jaelis wrote:
(Reply to #13)

Devilbass

ProphetSword wrote:
#15

leo9sign

Jul 04, 2014 9:53:22

Another perspective to see this from is that of the archer, or anyone else who needs to make the most of ranged attacks.

Forcing the melee attacker to use an action just to close the gap gives the needed time for the ranged attacker to prepare for melee or get off that final shot.

 

 

#16

jackbytor

Jul 04, 2014 10:02:23

leo9sign wrote:
#17

ProphetSword

Jul 04, 2014 10:10:15

Devilbass wrote:
#18

Uchawi

Jul 04, 2014 10:15:14

I could imagine a charge action that was a full attack, no extra attacks, and maybe a bonus to hit and reduction in AC.

(Reply to #17)

Devilbass

ProphetSword wrote:
#20

edwin_su

Jul 04, 2014 11:05:12

ProphetSword wrote:
#21

jaelis

Jul 04, 2014 11:28:46

I think that if a battle starts with the sides far apart, the archers deserve to have the advantage.

(Reply to #21)

Pumpkinman

jaelis wrote:
#23

Dracones

Jul 04, 2014 14:57:12

I'll want to see how this works out in play myself first. For example, 40ft range start archers on one side. Fighter with 30ft move can dash to the archer and draw his sword. Archer is now at disadvantage to shoot and can either do that or disenage to move 30ft back. If he moves, fighter can just move and attack.

 

I like this better than That Certain Other Game where archers are always just taking 5ft steps and shooting you in the face. OTOH it also means that melee classes with lower movement speeds may have a real problem with archers who disenage and run back from them. They'll always be dashing to catch back up limiting their ability to attack. 

#24

Prom

Jul 04, 2014 16:40:49

E-Tallitnics wrote:
#25

ProphetSword

Jul 04, 2014 21:43:26

edwin_su wrote:
#26

Archon007

Jul 05, 2014 0:21:03

DnD 5e Charge Action: as an action move up to half your speed (rounded down) and make a single melee attack, you have disadvantage on that attack.

#27

ProphetSword

Jul 05, 2014 5:55:02

Archon007 wrote:
#28

jaelis

Jul 05, 2014 7:30:59

ProphetSword wrote:
#29

Archon007

Jul 05, 2014 7:45:58

ProphetSword wrote:
(Reply to #29)

ProphetSword

Archon007 wrote:
#31

Rastapopoulos

Jul 06, 2014 7:11:57

 

The reason to use Charge in our games was always to close the gap with enemies. Not any bonus to TH. The real advantage was that you could use a double-move and still make an attack. The disadvantage to it was you could only move in a straight line, and you had penalty to your AC. When you think of it, charging into battle is a reckless move but one that was frequently used in wars, and it strange not having an option to do that in game.

 

I'll probably be using something like this:

 

Charge

You can move up to double your move speed in a straight line and still make a single melee attack. All attacks against you have Advantage until your next turn, though.

#32

ProphetSword

Jul 06, 2014 11:15:06

At this point, I have no doubt that Charge will appear in either the Player's Handbook or the Dungeon Master's Guide.  So, unless you're planning on only using the Basic rules (and some folks probably are), then an answer to this issue will probably be resolved in the future.

#33

obsid

Jul 06, 2014 19:39:51

Eh, I say keep it out.  You can still double move up to the archers and they cant attack you without disadvantage (or moving away and provoking).  Its good to give the distance attackers something for thinking more strategicly and keeping at a distance (you will still pound them in a round just wait for it).

(Reply to #13)

crabcrouton

ProphetSword wrote:
(Reply to #34)

ProphetSword

crabcrouton wrote:
(Reply to #35)

Lucas_Blackstone

I agree with those who say that there isn't a need for a charge action as a stock action for everyone. It's not previous editions of D&D and while people may have been use to previous editions having it, the game changes and so do the rules.

#37

Hailrobonia

Jul 09, 2014 7:50:44

Like many of you, I am not a fan of special charge rules. To charge, just move and attack... none of these "get a special extra move and attack" things. As a frequent user of Ray of Frost, I find it annoying when I slow down a monster and yet it can still reach me no problem because it charges. Or when you knock a creature down, and it can still get up and move and attack (unless you are staying in that special 5 foot distance away).

#38

2Chlorobutanal

Jul 10, 2014 23:09:32

I, too, think the combination of Dash, Cunning Action, and Action Surge do a pretty good job of allowing the two basic martial classes to approximate charges.

 

If a fighter just dashes on top of archers without surge, he still is guaranteed his Attack of Opportunity if they try to disengage, as opposed to in previous editions which had a Shift action.  I think this makes up for the loss of the 'charge' attack on the fighter's turn:

 

3.5:   Fighter charges, makes 1 basic attack with +2(?) to hit.  Archer shifts away and shoots whoever he wants (or shoots from melee and gets whacked again with an AoO).

5:     Fighter dashes, makes no attack.  Archer moves away, taking 1 attack from the fighter and shoots whoever he wants (or stands in melee and has disadvantage on his shots).

 

Wizards can Misty Step if they really need to gap close and melee (for some reason) on the same turn.  I guess only clerics are left out of the "per encounter" tricks for double moving and attacking.  They can still double move to control archers though.

#39

rwschris

Jul 14, 2014 13:32:59

As a War Priest in the D&DNext Playtest, I charged into combat frequently, so frequently, in fact, I took the Charger feat. It fit my character's personality very well and gave me a boost in comabt to boot. I will wait for the PHB release, however, when the full rules and feats are released before deciding on whether the charge action needs a house rule.

#40

2Chlorobutanal

Jul 14, 2014 17:11:46

If there was a "Charger" feat in the playtest, it's very possible that the "charge" action could be included in a feat down the road.

 

I myself don't see a big difference between taking the "charge" action to describe a hasty PC and using dash or just always advancing quickly to achieve the same demeanor.

(Reply to #40)

rwschris

Well, the charge action got you attacking, whereas dash does not. And the charger feat also let you use the bull rush mechanic.

#42

2Chlorobutanal

Jul 14, 2014 19:35:28

As I mentioned before, dashing to threaten a creature that doesn't want to melee often times functions the same as a charge did in previous editions.

 

 If you don't need the extra 50% movement speed to close the gap, "moving and then attacking" is the same as, possibly superior to, charging.  You'd also be able to push (bull rush) an enemy in this case.

 

Thematically, I don't see a difference between "I 'charge' 30' and attack/shove the goblin." and "I charge 45' and attack/shove the goblin." (technically the second option would be "I move 30', then I charge 15' and attack/shove the goblin.")

 

There exists the possibility for a "Charger" feat without "charge" being a default combat option.

#43

rwschris

Jul 16, 2014 11:28:59

If you're moving in heavy armor, you will want the extra movement component. But you're right that if you don't need the extra movement there is little difference between moving and attack versus taking the charge action. The shove is a nice generic bull rush, although not quite the same as the 10' plus the possibility to follow-up. I'm looking forward to seeing what they've done in the PHB.

#44

thewok

Jul 16, 2014 22:49:47

Should there be no Charge action in the PHB (or I am suitably unimpressed with it), I'll be adding the following to the list of possible actions in combat:

 

Charge: Move up to your speed and then make an attack with disadvantage.

#45

Hailrobonia

Jul 18, 2014 9:06:07

rwschris wrote:
#46

Scottevil912

Jul 18, 2014 9:19:03

Luke-Lightning wrote:
#47

ProphetSword

Jul 18, 2014 10:43:34

Scottevil912 wrote:
#48

rwschris

Jul 22, 2014 6:50:40

Thanks for the clarity, ProphetSword. I think that helps explain the point of including the action well (although I'm less convinced about worrying over the semantics of 'extra').

 

At any rate, it looks like the Charger feat still exists -- http://www.wizards.com/Dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20140721 -- hooray!

#49

Oulak

Jul 22, 2014 12:55:17

ProphetSword wrote:
#50

E-Tallitnics

Jul 22, 2014 18:44:28

The bonus to damage, supposedly, comes from the velocity the character has by charging in a straight line for at least 10'.