Can someone check my math? Charge damage...

[pso_zeldaphreak]

Trying to work out a chart of the Power Attack damage for Charge/Leap attack with various nonsense. This also assumes that Battle Jump and Valorous double ALL the damage, including the original damage dice (3d6, Large Greataxe).

As an aside, this is for a meatstick for a BBEG, so I'm not worried about the Frenzied Berserker aspect.


Table! From AC Bonus (2h) Leap Attack
PA -5 10 20
IPA -5 15 25
SPA -5 20 30



So total damage for this attack would be 3x(3d6 + STRx1.5 + X) where X is the appropriate number on the chart.


It's also possible I screwed this up somewhere.


Edit: Sorry for the gross formatting, it erases extra spaces...

There! That's better.

[GilesTheCleric]

To make formatting nicer, you can use the [code] tag. It preserves whitespace and newlines.

Edit: A table might be nicer and easier, though.

[Firechanter]

Eehm... and you should really clarify what feats/abilities exactly you are using.
For instance, you can only combine Leap Attack and Battle Jump if you are starting on high ground, because jumping both far _and_ 10' high is practically impossible.
Also note that Leap Attack has min level 5 (due to Jump prereq), and Shock Trooper requires BAB 6.

[pso_zeldaphreak]

Yeah, Battle Jump might not actually make it in as a feat for that reason - I'm not sure on the numbers but a 10ft high and 10ft long jump would be a huge DC I'm sure (although maybe less for a goliath, because of the standing jump racial thing).

Also, I only used the -5 for an easy number to work with. The character is starting at 12-15, not sure which yet.


To make formatting nicer, you can use the [code] tag. It preserves whitespace and newlines.

Edit: A table might be nicer and easier, though.

I didn't see a way to put in a table... I even tried using the HTML tag and writing out a simple html table, but it's just a color-coded "code" tag D:

Edit: An exact description of the move: Pounce, full round attack, Power Attack/Leap attack for the max bonus (Large Greataxe, Goliath). If feasible, I'd use Extreme Leap to make Battle Jump work (but I see very little info on extreme leap, so I'm not sure how that's used...).

[Firechanter]

Yeah, without Battle Jump, but with Leap Attack and Valorous Weapon, it should be
([D] + Str*1,5 + 3*PA) * 2
where [D] is the weapon damage.

[Crake]

doesn't shock trooper require you use at least -6 on power attack?

[Deophaun]

For instance, you can only combine Leap Attack and Battle Jump if you are starting on high ground, because jumping both far _and_ 10' high is practically impossible.
DC 40 is hardly impossible.

[Firechanter]

DC 40 is hardly impossible.

DC 40 will get you 10' _high_. That doesn't help you with _far_ at all. Also, many many opponents will be Large or larger.

[pso_zeldaphreak]

DC 40 will get you 10' _high_. That doesn't help you with _far_ at all. Also, many many opponents will be Large or larger.

Given that this is an adversary to the player PC's, they'll actually be Medium or Small, barring buffs.

[herrhauptmann]

Sorry, but for the first line, doubling a double is a triple, not a quadruple. The mistake probably continues down through each line, but I'm not sure what those lines are saying.

What is IPA and SPA?

[Deophaun]

DC 40 will get you 10' _high_. That doesn't help you with _far_ at all.
It gets you 40 feet. How far are you looking to move?

[Karnith]

What is IPA and SPA?
Improved Power Attack and Supreme Power Attack, two class features of the Frenzied Berserker. Improved Power Attack improves Power Attack returns to +3 damage per -1 to attack while wielding a weapon two-handed, and Supreme Power Attack improves Power Attack returns to +4 damage per -1 to attack while wielding a weapon two-handed.

[Firechanter]

It gets you 40 feet. How far are you looking to move?

While a Long Jump will get you 1/4 of the distance in height, a Battle Jump requires _dropping_ on the enemy. A DC 40 Long Jump will carry you 10ft high after 20', but you are in mid-air and will sail on smoothly for another 20'. You cannot deliberately abort your jump and drop out of the air.

[Deophaun]

While a Long Jump will get you 1/4 of the distance in height, a Battle Jump requires _dropping_ on the enemy. A DC 40 Long Jump will carry you 10ft high after 20', but you are in mid-air and will sail on smoothly for another 20'. You cannot deliberately abort your jump and drop out of the air.
Please cite the rule that says "dropping" must occur directly above the target. Otherwise, we're using plain English here, and a ballistic trajectory is still dropping. Or are we saying B-52s hover over their target while they "drop" bombs?

[Firechanter]

No, but they are dropping _bombs_, not themselves. The Battle Jumper has to drop himself.
I really don't see what's so difficult about this. If the apex of your trajectory is at 10 feet when you are directly over the target, you are not dropping on it. If you are already dropping, you aren't at 10' anymore when you hit its square.

But as you want a specific rule, here you are:
you have to hurl yourself down on your foe.

Sticking with Plain English, "smoothly sailing on a 40' ft long jump" and "hurling yourself down on someone" are two entirely different statements that nobody would set equal to each other.

[Deophaun]

No, but they are dropping _bombs_, not themselves. The Battle Jumper has to drop himself.
I really don't see what's so difficult about this. If the apex of your trajectory is at 10 feet when you are directly over the target, you are not dropping on it. If you are already dropping, you aren't at 10' anymore when you hit its square.
So... you need a reach weapon to use Battle Jump? Because otherwise, you aren't 10' anymore when you threatened it.

But as you want a specific rule, here you are:
you have to hurl yourself down on your foe.
I thought we were talking about Battle Jump. Where is this "hurl yourself down on your foe" that you speak of? It seems to me like you are trying to artificially narrow the original language of "dropping" to support your argument.

[Firechanter]

It's right there in the description of the feat. Read it. I can't tell you more than that. oÔ

[Karnith]

I thought we were talking about Battle Jump. Where is this "hurl yourself down on your foe" that you speak of?
At the end of the first paragraph under the Benefit section of the feat. Per Unapproachable East:

Benefit: You can execute a charge by simply dropping from a height of at least 5 feet above your opponent. For example, a ledge 10 feet above the floor of a cavern would suffice for jumping on a Medium-sized creature, while a ledge 15 feet high is required for jumping on a Large creature. You can't jump from more than 30 feet above your opponent, nor can you effectively battle jump while under the influence of a fly or levitate spell or effect, as you have to hurl yourself down on your foe.
(Emphasis mine)

[Deophaun]

At the end of the first paragraph under the Benefit section of the feat. Per Unapproachable East:
(Emphasis mine)
It should be noted that the line contradicts the very first sentence, or is being horribly misinterpreted to apply to situations where you do not have levitation, featherfall, or other forms of magical flight.

[Firechanter]

It does not contradict the first sentence, it _clarifies_.

[Deophaun]

It does not contradict the first sentence, it _clarifies_.
The first sentence says "simply dropping." "Simply" there is clarification. The requirement that "You must hurl yourself down" (which, if on a ledge, would first require you to climb onto the ledge's face, and then do a standing jump off of the face, as there's no way you can "hurl yourself down" from on top of a horizontal surface) is, well, the polar opposite of "simply." It is a direct contradiction, not a clarification.

[Firechanter]

At the risk of some catgirl's lives, the idea of a Battle Jump is obviously to benefit from the velocity / kinetic energy / impulse generated by the free fall over several feet. It's funny, _I_ find the feat description and rules totally easy, straightforward and intuitive, whereas you see a contradiction in it. The reason for the latter is that you want the feat to do things it was not designed to do.

[pso_zeldaphreak]

At the risk of some catgirl's lives, the idea of a Battle Jump is obviously to benefit from the velocity / kinetic energy / impulse generated by the free fall over several feet. It's funny, _I_ find the feat description and rules totally easy, straightforward and intuitive, whereas you see a contradiction in it. The reason for the latter is that you want the feat to do things it was not designed to do.

You would have the same downward velocity from a horizontal leap that achieved the same height as you would from dropping from 10 feet above (with no horizontal movement). In total, you would have MORE kinetic energy in a leap that crossed a large distance, because you'd have both horizontal AND vertical movement.

It's the same principle that is shown when a bullet is fired horizontally and a bullet is dropped next to it. Assuming no obstacle, they'd touch ground at the same time (although obviously the fired bullet moves much farther).

[Firechanter]

Yeah, the horizontal momentum's benefit is what Leap Attack is for.

Edit: in a long jump, the vertical velocity cancels out: you only get back as much energy as you put into reaching the height. So you get nothing extra for that bit of drop.

I'd allow Battle Jump and Leap Attack to stack if the character actually meets both conditions - i.e. doing a horizontal jump from high ground. However, the problem never came up in my games at all because nobody ever ever wanted to play a Taer.

[Deophaun]

Edit: in a long jump, the vertical velocity cancels out: you only get back as much energy as you put into reaching the height. So you get nothing extra for that bit of drop.
The same can be said for climbing up a 10' ladder and falling off: You get no more energy out of it as you put in. So why should Battle Jump work for one, and not the other?

[Firechanter]

Twining Pheats&Physics again:
Because on the long jump, the energy that goes into altitude ("potential energy") is subtracted from your horizontal energy. You get it back automatically as you descend. This is part of what Leap Attack does, especially considering the difference between _leaping_ and just _running_ on a charge. The energy put into and regained from altitude is already factored in here. You can't benefit from the same thing twice.

When you scale a ladder, you _store_ the potential energy, and get it back when you descend again (one way or other). If you do a long jump off a ladder, this adds a separate horizontal vector. Same as when jumping off a ledge, actually.

But at this point in the discussion, I'd rather refer you to a junior high school science textbook for a basic understanding of newtonian physics.

[herrhauptmann]

Guys, take it to a different thread.

[Deophaun]

You can't benefit from the same thing twice.
Sure you can. A Paladin can add his Charisma modifier to his saves through Divine Grace. Then he can benefit from his Charisma modifier again and take Force of Personality to add it another time to his saves against mind-affecting spells. The system lets you benefit from the same thing all the time.

Oh, but I forgot. We're talking about mundane characters, so we must twist the system in whatever way possible to ensure they do not get nice things.

But at this point in the discussion, I'd rather refer you to a junior high school science textbook for a basic understanding of newtonian physics.
If you're subtracting the vertical from the horizontal get the total vector of a propelled object, you're doing it wrong.

[Piggy Knowles]

This is why I hate Battle Jump, and cringe when I see it used.

In addition to the issues with its wording, there's also the fact that it has a required region of Taer, despite the fact that Taer isn't a region - it's a race of mountain-dwelling ape-like giants.

I know intention is a dirty word here, but every time I read the feat, I find it fairly clearly that the intent was to create a feat where you can drop from a ledge or cliff onto your opponent for double damage. It makes sense to me, because the taer are described as fighting this way, flinging themselves down from the cliffs and mountains of the Icewind Dale. When I think of it in that way, it more or less makes sense. You hurl yourself down from a point above your enemy, thus fulfilling both the "dropping from above" and the "hurling" aspects of the feat. But as the feat is written terribly, that's only an assumption on my part.

If you want another doubling to damage that doesn't require strange hoops to be jumped through, and with less dubiousness, I'm a big fan of Headlong Rush. It's orc-only, but it's about as straightforward as can be - in exchange for provoking AoOs on your charge, you can deal double damage. Watch out for enemies with reach weapons and Stand Still. (As an aside, what happens when you hit a Leap Attacking enemy mid-charge and you've got Stand Still? Does he fall to the ground mid-jump?)

In any case, your math is more or less correct, although it's also worth noting that Leap Attack has some confusion around it as well. There are two readings:

1. That the +100% damage applies to +100% of the penalty, in which case you're off by 5 on each Leap Attack line (so regular Power Attack gives you your penalty as bonus damage, using a two-handed weapon adds +100%, and using Leap Attack adds another +100%, with an end result of triple PA damage in all).

2. That the +100% damage applies to the bonus damage granted by PA, which is equal to twice the penalty for a two-handed weapon (in which case your numbers are correct, as you have a penalty of 5 and therefore 10 points of bonus Leap Attack damage).

Neither position has been clarified to my satisfaction; I typically build with the conservative estimate in mind, and check with my DM for a ruling. As you're the DM, of course, you can choose whichever reading makes the most sense to you.

[Firechanter]

Oh, but I forgot. We're talking about mundane characters, so we must twist the system in whatever way possible to ensure they do not get nice things.

Sorry, that won't fly with me here. I'm all for melee, but let's keep it plausible. Besides, it's not like you _need_ Battle Jump to oneshot anything you might conceivably encounter.


If you're subtracting the vertical from the horizontal get the total vector of a propelled object, you're doing it wrong.

What makes you think I do? oÔ Ah you know what, please don't bother answering. We won't come to an agreement here. I've given you about a dozen reasons why BJ won't work on level ground, you prefer to ignore all of them. Okay, go ahead, play a taer.


In addition to the issues with its wording, there's also the fact that it has a required region of Taer, despite the fact that Taer isn't a region - it's a race of mountain-dwelling ape-like giants.

Actually, the book clarifies that in this case, "Region" stands for "taer driven into exile by his clan".

Anyway, it _is_ a racial requirement. As I said, no player I've ever met ever wanted to play one, and even if one did, sure as hell the rest of the party wouldn't want to suffer a mountain-dwelling stinking ape in their midst. So on the player side, Battle Jump is a total non-issue. The whole stunt is apparently intended for a kind of ambush-from-above situations that the DM can throw at the players travelling the appropriate regions. Oops, you said exactly the same thing. ;)
Anyway, if a DM had some Orc charging me on open plain and pulling a Battle Jump, I'd call shenanigans on that. But as you also say, there's Headlong Rush for that.


(As an aside, what happens when you hit a Leap Attacking enemy mid-charge and you've got Stand Still? Does he fall to the ground mid-jump?)


Good question actually. I'd say yes. Certainly makes more sense than hanging suspended in the air for 6 seconds. Stand Still is a bit weird because it was a Psionic feat in 3.0 (requiring reserve Power Points, and in which case "left hanging in the air" would be imaginable), which was nixed in 3.5 but without any explanation or rationalization how it actually _functions_.

[Gemini476]

(As an aside, what happens when you hit a Leap Attacking enemy mid-charge and you've got Stand Still? Does he fall to the ground mid-jump?)


There is no inertia in Dungeons and Dragons. See Also: Commoner Railgun.

Also, wasn't there a (confusing) errata for Leap Attack?

[Piggy Knowles]

The errata changed it from double damage to +100% damage, without clarifying whether this referred to the base amount or the post-doubling amount.

[Karnith]

The errata changed it from double damage to +100% damage, without clarifying whether this referred to the base amount or the post-doubling amount.Didn't it also only replace the second sentence of the feat's benefit, meaning that the two-handed Leap Attacking part was left un-errata'd?

EDIT: Ah, yes, here we go: Leap Attack, per the mothership: (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20050107a&page=3)

Benefit: You can combine a jump with a charge against an opponent. If you cover at least 10 feet of horizontal distance with your jump, and you end your jump in a square from which you threaten your target, you can double the extra damage dealt by your use of the Power Attack feat. If you use this tactic with a two-handed weapon, you instead triple the extra damage from Power Attack.

This attack must follow all the normal rules for using the Jump skill and for making a charge, except that you ignore rough terrain in any squares you jump over.
And the errata: (https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a)
The second sentence of the Benefit paragraph should read as follows:
If you cover at least 10 feet of horizontal distance with your jump, and you end your jump in a square from which you threaten your target, you deal +100% the normal bonus damage from your use of the Power Attack feat.
So, all together, Leap Attack now looks like:

Benefit: You can combine a jump with a charge against an opponent. If you cover at least 10 feet of horizontal distance with your jump, and you end your jump in a square from which you threaten your target, you deal +100% the normal bonus damage from your use of the Power Attack feat. If you use this tactic with a two-handed weapon, you instead triple the extra damage from Power Attack.

This attack must follow all the normal rules for using the Jump skill and for making a charge, except that you ignore rough terrain in any squares you jump over.

[Piggy Knowles]

I believe so. It was... not one of the WotC errata team's finest moments. Not quite as bad as the ToB errata, mind you, but still pretty bad.

[Firechanter]

Hmm. my print edition of CAd has a different wording that is entirely unambiguous:

"...you can double the extra damage dealt by your use of the Power Attack feat. If you use this tactic with a two-handed weapon, you instead triple the extra damage from Power Attack".

This is totally clear. And this is how I've always used it. However, the errataed version reads,

"you deal +100% the normal bonus damage from your use of the Power Attack feat."

So, yeah. Now that I think about it, the only plausible reason I can think of to even publish this erratum is that they actually _want_ Leap Attack to increase the Two-handed Power Attack bonus damage to x4. Because for a x3 they would never have needed to write an erratum in the first place.
And again on the other hand, if that was indeed the case, why didn't they write exactly that?
Help me, my brain melts. I am caught in a Schrödinger's Box of rule interpretation.

edit:
Ah now I read Karnith's posting. Yeah well. If that's how it's supposed to read, I _still_ don't get why they ever errated it at all.

[Deophaun]

I've given you about a dozen reasons why BJ won't work on level groundThen it seems that the board ate them.

[Karnith]

edit:
Ah now I read Karnith's posting. Yeah well. If that's how it's supposed to read, I _still_ don't get why they ever errated it at all.
One presumes that they forgot about the third sentence entirely when writing the errata. Certainly CustServ consistently ruled that the third sentence was supposed to be taken out by the errata.

[lsfreak]

I believe so. It was... not one of the WotC errata team's finest moments. Not quite as bad as the ToB errata, mind you, but still pretty bad.

It still wasn't as bad as the errata for An important settlement for more than two millennia, by the late 12th century Paris had become a walled cathedral city that was one of Europe's foremost centres of learning and the arts and the largest city in the Western world until the turn of the 18th century. Paris was the focal point for many important political events throughout its history, including the French Revolution. Today it is one of the world's leading business and cultural centres, and its influence in politics, education, entertainment, media, science, fashion and the arts all contribute to its status as one of the world's major cities.


Good question actually. I'd say yes. Certainly makes more sense than hanging suspended in the air for 6 seconds. Stand Still is a bit weird because it was a Psionic feat in 3.0 (requiring reserve Power Points, and in which case "left hanging in the air" would be imaginable), which was nixed in 3.5 but without any explanation or rationalization how it actually _functions_.
Well, considering Stand Still is generally used with reach weapons, and especially spiked chains, it can at least be fluffed as purposefully catching your weapon on them in some way and using it like a leash, or slamming them into the ground. Throwing a little realism in there compared to what D&D thinks weapons can do, you could potentially do the same with a sword by holding the sword by the blade and using the crossguard to catch them, which is a real-word technique in armored longsword fighting. Don't ask me how you do it with club, though.

[Firechanter]

One presumes that they forgot about the third sentence entirely when writing the errata. Certainly CustServ consistently ruled that the third sentence was supposed to be taken out by the errata.

That would be how dndtools records the feat:

If you cover at least 10 feet of horizontal distance with your jump, and you end your jump in a square from which you threaten your target, you deal +100% the normal bonus damage from your use of the Power Attack feat. This attack must follow all the normal rules for using the Jump skill and for making a charge, except that you ignore rough terrain in any squares you jump over.

So this would indeed mean that THPA gets you 4x PA damage?