A Monster for Every Season: Summer 2
You can get A Monster for Every Season: Summer 2 now at Gumroad
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 34
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Gender
    Male

    Default The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    This bothers me from time to time; when it comes up, I feel like I'm being cheated out of an action, and if I take advantage of it in the other direction I feel like I'm cheating.

    Suppose I'm dazed, or otherwise have only a standard action to spend. I can hit the goblin adjacent to me, since that's just a normal melee attack. I can hit the one who's standing three squares away, too, if I charge. But I can't hit the goblin exactly two squares away; it's too close to charge, and I can't move and attack with only one action. Why does it have to be like that?

    I'm entertaining the idea of a house rule where you can "charge" 1 square, but you don't get the +1 attack bonus for charging. Would that be reasonable?

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Can you still 5-foot step or "shift" or whatever?

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Shifting is a move action, so a dazed character would not be able to shift and attack.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Okay. Not familiar with 4th edition rules yet.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Meridianville AL
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dentarthur View Post
    This bothers me from time to time; when it comes up, I feel like I'm being cheated out of an action, and if I take advantage of it in the other direction I feel like I'm cheating.

    Suppose I'm dazed, or otherwise have only a standard action to spend. I can hit the goblin adjacent to me, since that's just a normal melee attack. I can hit the one who's standing three squares away, too, if I charge. But I can't hit the goblin exactly two squares away; it's too close to charge, and I can't move and attack with only one action. Why does it have to be like that?

    I'm entertaining the idea of a house rule where you can "charge" 1 square, but you don't get the +1 attack bonus for charging. Would that be reasonable?
    I suspect the blind spot is deliberate to encourage manuever. It's also turns knocking a monster prone from a fairly weak power to occassionally golden (it stands up as a move, now it... sucks to be it since it can't charge and doesn't have the reach to do anything from where it is).

    3.x it wasn't a problem, you 5' stepped to attack if you were too close to charge. 4th it matters, but they didn't take it out, and that "feels" in keeping with including lots of little tactical and manuever advantages.

    All that said, it's clearly rather artificial, and if I were playing in your game I'd have no real objection to the change. But you may want to check with your players prior to implementing this, they may have reach, dazing, and/or knock prone powers in part based on the assumption that they can pull off blindspot screws.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Orc in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Lampert View Post
    I suspect the blind spot is deliberate to encourage manuever. It's also turns knocking a monster prone from a fairly weak power to occassionally golden (it stands up as a move, now it... sucks to be it since it can't charge and doesn't have the reach to do anything from where it is).

    3.x it wasn't a problem, you 5' stepped to attack if you were too close to charge. 4th it matters, but they didn't take it out, and that "feels" in keeping with including lots of little tactical and manuever advantages.

    All that said, it's clearly rather artificial, and if I were playing in your game I'd have no real objection to the change. But you may want to check with your players prior to implementing this, they may have reach, dazing, and/or knock prone powers in part based on the assumption that they can pull off blindspot screws.
    I agree with this, without the blind spot you severly weaken powers that prone etc

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2011

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Don't try to think of Charge as having a real-life analogy. Doing so just hurts your head. It is what it is, just part of the stock game. Customize it to your heart's content.

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    In the one 4e campaign I've played in, I remember we encounter a type of monster that could use a dominate effect.
    Since dominated creatures are dazed, this triggered a strategy of staying precisely 10 feet from the paladin at all times, as a way of containing the problem until he passed his save.
    Fun times.
    If a tree falls in the forest and the PCs aren't around to hear it... what do I roll to see how loud it is?

    Is 3.5 a fried-egg, chili-chutney sandwich?

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    The obvious answer is to wield either a reach weapon or a throwing weapon.

    That said, you can usually charge something on the field. Also, if you're prone but not dazed, you can still move at half your normal speed.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Euphonistan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    If you are that worried your class may have an at will that lets you shift and attack or perhaps an encounter power so you fill this potential void.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Titan in the Playground
     
    ElfRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Imagination Land
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by MeeposFire View Post
    If you are that worried your class may have an at will that lets you shift and attack or perhaps an encounter power so you fill this potential void.
    Yes, the solution to everything in 4E is POWERS.

    Problem: "I only have 1 action, I'm too far away to use a basic attack but too close to charge." Solution: Use a power that includes movement before your attack. Or a power that lets you move as a free action, since you can still use free actions while dazed. Or heck, just spend an action point and try to take the guy out with your strongest attack.
    "Nothing you can't spell will ever work." - Will Rogers

    Watch me draw and swear at video games.

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Nu's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Beyond the flow of time

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    While GMing a 4E game, I issued all three of my STR-based melee players a farbond spellblade for their weapon, and so far they have seen a lot of use in the early heroic tier.

    For situations where charging just isn't feasible.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by KillianHawkeye View Post
    Or heck, just spend an action point and try to take the guy out with your strongest attack.
    I would not recommend spending an action point on a move action.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nu View Post
    While GMing a 4E game, I issued all three of my STR-based melee players a farbond spellblade for their weapon,
    That's almost making it too easy
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2007

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    I would not recommend spending an action point on a move action.
    I spend Action Points for movement all the time. I usually consider spending them on attacks as a waste, going so far as to avoid PPaths that have effect, when you spend an Action Point for an attack.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by 1of3 View Post
    I spend Action Points for movement all the time. I usually consider spending them on attacks as a waste, going so far as to avoid PPaths that have effect, when you spend an Action Point for an attack.
    Well, let me put it like this: there's a reason why you're allowed to trade a standard action (i.e. an attack) for a move action, but not vice versa; and why a heroic item that gives you an extra move action every combat is not a problem, whereas a paragon item that gives you an extra standard action once per day was overpowered and had to be nerfed.

    So in terms of roleplaying, you should of course do whatever you like; but in terms of tactics, it's almost always a bad idea to spend an action point on a move.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Yuki Akuma's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    The Land of Angles

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    Well, let me put it like this: there's a reason why you're allowed to trade a standard action (i.e. an attack) for a move action, but not vice versa; and why a heroic item that gives you an extra move action every combat is not a problem, whereas a paragon item that gives you an extra standard action once per day was overpowered and had to be nerfed.

    So in terms of roleplaying, you should of course do whatever you like; but in terms of tactics, it's almost always a bad idea to spend an action point on a move.
    What about using your normal actions to move and your action point to attack?
    There's no wrong way to play. - S. John Ross

    Quote Originally Posted by archaeo View Post
    Man, this is just one of those things you see and realize, "I live in a weird and banal future."

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Atlantic Stand Time
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    spending that action point on a move can be a good idea. double moving then reviving your cleric can be wonderful when you need that leader to keep your squishies up.

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Nu's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Beyond the flow of time

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    That's almost making it too easy
    Well, I suppose technically I only advised one of them to take one as one of his starting magical items. The other two did come as "rewards" though :P

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    tcrudisi's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by mikau013 View Post
    I agree with this, without the blind spot you severly weaken powers that prone etc
    I'm a big fan of that blind spot. It encourages the players to use tactics (since they can do it to the monsters) and think critically (how can I avoid having this done to me?). Since, at this point, I primarily play a controller, I make use of that blind spot fairly religiously. It feels good making a Daze or Prone power into "you lose your turn ... or at least delay it, at which point, we'll work around you so that you lose your turn anyway."
    Thank you Ceika for the wonderful Avatar avatar!

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Banned
     
    true_shinken's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrudisi View Post
    I'm a big fan of that blind spot. It encourages the players to use tactics (since they can do it to the monsters) and think critically (how can I avoid having this done to me?).
    I kind of like it.
    But it does corner into ridiculous situations like the Paladin one. "Oh, no! They dominated his mind! Quickly, everyone! Stay exactly 10 foot away from him! Yeah, psionic mastermind, that is some cunning planning, isn't it? Prepare to eat dailies."

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Yuki_Akuma View Post
    What about using your normal actions to move and your action point to attack?
    Trading a standard action down to a move action is usually not a good idea. Of course, it doesn't matter if the standard action comes from your normal set of actions or from an action point.

    The key word is "usually": there are some unusual occasions where it is a good idea; but if you're doing it frequently, then your tactics could stand improvement.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dentarthur View Post
    I'm entertaining the idea of a house rule where you can "charge" 1 square, but you don't get the +1 attack bonus for charging. Would that be reasonable?
    This is exactly how the DMs of my group rule it. It's a simple solution to a rules inconsistency, and it works just fine.

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    MonkGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Springfield, MO
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    The problem with that houserule is that this isn't a "rules inconsistency" it's there on purpose. Like several people already said, if you can always charge anytime from any distance you can move then Defenders' jobs get harder. A Polearm Momentum Fighter's main schtick is to put enemies prone and one square away from him with nobody else in charge range. They can use their move to stand up, but they can't charge anyone, so the Fighter has just forced the enemy to waste an entire turn on movement.
    Master Rahl guide us. Master Rahl teach us. Master Rahl protect us. In your light we thrive. In your mercy we are sheltered. In your wisdom we are humbled. We live to serve. Our lives are yours.

    Awesome Richard avatar by kpenguin!

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Yakk's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    How about "a charge from merely 10' away provokes an OA from the charged target, because you don't have enough speed yet"?

    This makes it a bit less discontinuous.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Gralamin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2005

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Charging has A LOT of stuff associated with it: Powers that can be used on a charge, feats and abilities that refer specifically to charging, etc. If you wanted to make a maneuver to beat the blind spot, I would recommend considering carefully whether you want all that comes with charge in 4e to apply.

    That said I have no problem with blindspots, except for the dominate type situation. This is why I generally keep some interesting effects on my dominate, like increasing dominated creatures reach by 1, or sliding them 1 before they attack.

  26. - Top - End - #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Master_Rahl22 View Post
    The problem with that houserule is that this isn't a "rules inconsistency" it's there on purpose.
    I assume you have some source for this assertion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Master_Rahl22 View Post
    A Polearm Momentum Fighter's main schtick is to put enemies prone and one square away from him with nobody else in charge range.
    Hm, nerfing one combo in exchange for ironing out a bizarre rules inconsistency. For me, the choice is easy; no defender in my group has ever played a polemom fighter, and defenders still have no trouble grinding the DMs' teeth.

  27. - Top - End - #27
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Gralamin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2005

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Sine View Post
    rules inconsistency
    I don't think that means what you think it means. The Blindspot is entirely consistent with the rules, with any definition of consistent I've heard.

  28. - Top - End - #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gralamin View Post
    I don't think that means what you think it means. The Blindspot is entirely consistent with the rules, with any definition of consistent I've heard.
    I think you know what I mean. "A rules-inconsistency" is easier to type than "an inconsistency-created-by-the-rules," but to avoid confusion and semantic debate, I shall hereafter refer to it as an icbtr.

  29. - Top - End - #29
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Meridianville AL
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Sine View Post
    I think you know what I mean. "A rules-inconsistency" is easier to type than "an inconsistency-created-by-the-rules," but to avoid confusion and semantic debate, I shall hereafter refer to it as an icbtr.
    I think you're missing his point. It may well be WRONG, it may well be STUPID, it may well be UNREALISTIC, but the current rules are not at all INCONSISTENT.

    They are very consistent, you can charge, but to do so you must move at least 10'. You can attack, but to do so a target must be in range. Niether the rules nor the implementation suffers from any actual inconsistency, which means an internal contradiction.

  30. - Top - End - #30
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: The charging "blind spot" [4e]

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Lampert View Post
    I think you're missing his point. It may well be WRONG, it may well be STUPID, it may well be UNREALISTIC, but the current rules are not at all INCONSISTENT.
    I'm not missing Gralamin's point. I'm simply refusing to be drawn into an English grammar discussion in the vain hope of finding a term that nobody can find a way to nitpick. So call it whatever you want, and I'll follow suit.

    Incidentally, if you want to discuss English grammar for the sake of discussing English grammar, start a new topic in the off-topic forum and I'd be happy to!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •