HYPERBOREA / Combat Sequence Initative

**Posted by Maezar** 5/07/2014 8:09 pm

I have a question about CHARGING with multiple attacks. A swordsman with two attacks this round performs a "1/2 move charge," slaying an opponant in one blow. Can he then:

a) Make an immediate second attack against a second adjacent enemy, applying the +2 Damage Bonus?

b) Make a second "1/2 move charge" in Phase 2 to reach and attack a different enemy farther off?

Last edited by Maezar (5/07/2014 8:14 pm)

**Posted by Ghul** 5/07/2014 8:38 pm

This may be something that other referees rule differently, and I know folks could say, "But you wrote the game!"; notwithstanding, I do feel it's a matter of preference.

For me, a charge attack is not the same as standard melee. A charge attack is always a single attack -- mutliple attacks do not apply. For example:

[*] Fighter makes charge attack with broad sword. If he hits his enemy, he does +2 damage; in either case (hit or miss) he loses his dex bonus to AC or is at least penalized -1 to AC.
[*] After charge attack he goes into his normal melee routine. Say he is 3/2 with the sword. He will get one attack on the round that follows the charge, and two attacks next.

In a nutsell, I do not allow multiple attacks on a charge and in fact treat it as a separate type of combat action. It has so many benefits already: double the distance and bonus damage.

**Posted by NAJones** 5/08/2014 12:33 am

I'm in the same boat. The charge is all about putting your momentum into single swing, once that kinetic energy is gone, then there's no more "charge."

**Posted by RedJowel** 5/08/2014 12:41 am

ooh, It was my thinking that a charge could fill the role of the first round in the two part 3/2 attack, I thought i was being smart but is that a little overpowered? Although i admit it would have been harder for me to argue that point if i ever got 5/2 attack rate, the charge would be the first attack, sacrificing the second in the first round and getting three attacks the following....
as always it comes down to what our gm decides and this is how we have taken it so far, but i have a feeling given the above example our gm would say no, so this matter may have to be taken up agian

**Posted by Handy Haversack** 5/08/2014 8:18 am

Ghul, I want to say that I do think the rules are clear as written, actually. The only part that trips me up at all is integrating fighting with two weapons and figuring whether a fighter's attacks can be directed at more than one opponent per round. In these undersized six-second rounds (), my gut instinct is to treat these as attack routines that all go against the same foe.

**Posted by mabon5127** 5/08/2014 9:43 am

Handy Haversack wrote:
Ghul, I want to say that I do think the rules are clear as written, actually. The only part that trips me up at all is integrating fighting with two weapons and figuring whether a fighter's attacks can be directed at more than one opponent per round. In these undersized six-second rounds (), my gut instinct is to treat these as attack routines that all go against the same foe.

If a fighter is engaged and kills his opponant then they may move and attack again assuming multiple attacks. The incremental attack from multiple weapons would have to be used with one of the multiple attacks from class ability. Sorry for thinking out loud but I guess I agree with your assessment.