Charge and Multiple Attacks

[Demiurge]

Should combatants with multiple attacks get to use them all on a charge?

[serleran]

Not at my table. The rules, as I recall, make it quite clear when it says "make one attack." C&C, unlike AD&D, does not differentiate between attacks and attack routines.

[Go0gleplex]

I'm with Serl on this one. The charging character focuses on a single attack losing any extra they might have...sort of using the same logic that penalizes them on their AC.

[GameOgre]

Multiple attacks should be a full round action. If you charge or move more than a few feet you lose that option. I have had them try to do a ungodly large amount of things and still get try and get Multiple attacks but I smack em down every time. Keep it the costly but powerfull option it is.

[Demiurge]

I figured that was the intent, but the wording seemed somewhat vague to me when I read it.

[Treebore]

I think it pretty clearly states "a" attack is allowed, no more.

"CHARGING
Charging is a special, movement-based
combat maneuver. When charging, a
character precedes a melee attack by jogging
or running, with the intent of using the gained
leverage and momentum to inflict greater
damage on a defender. A successful charge
attack results in a +2 bonus to damage
inflicted, but imposes a -4 penalty to the
attacker’s armor class for the entire combat
round. The charge must be announced prior
to the character moving.
When charging, a character is considered to
be jogging or running. The character must
minimally move the full distance of their
normal movement rate. The charge must be
in a straight line. The total distance moved
while charging cannot exceed the character’s
jogging movement rate. For example, Una
the elf announces that she is going to charge an orc standing across the
battlefield. Una’s base movement is 30 feet, and thus, her jogging rate is 60
feet. As long as the orc is at least 30 feet away, but no more than 60 feet, Una
may attempt the charge maneuver.
When charging, the attacker suffers a -4 penalty to armor class for the combat
round. The penalty applies even if the charge attack is not successful. The
penalty also applies if the defender attacks first due to size or weapon length, or
by ranged attack. If a defender scores a successful hit upon a charging character,
the charge is negated. If a charge is negated, the attacker is still allowed their
movement and attack, but a successful hit does not deal any extra damage."

PH, third printing, page 116.

[Omote]

I would personally allow all attacks, even though the intent of charging probably meant to only be one attack. The reason for this is, why would a high level fighter charge, giving up his secondary attack for a lowly +2 damage? Though, the argument against this is probably that descpit moving anywhere from X2-X4 the movement, the fighter is still allowed to attack when normally only 1/2 move then attack.

~O

[Treebore]

I would personally allow all attacks, even though the intent of charging probably meant to only be one attack. The reason for this is, why would a high level fighter charge, giving up his secondary attack for a lowly +2 damage? Though, the argument against this is probably that descpit moving anywhere from X2-X4 the movement, the fighter is still allowed to attack when normally only 1/2 move then attack.

~O

Why? Because they need to hit that target THIS round, not next round. Usually this is of concern when your trying to disrupt an action of the enemy, usually spell casters, but far from always.

Plus your putting everything into moving a minimum of 30 feet and/or a maximum of 60 feet, so your doing far more than just trying to attack.

Now, due to my house rules, I would allow a SIEGE check, probably at a CL=HD of opponent +6 from moving, to get in one extra attack on a "successful" charge, meaning they don't get hit first. But I certainly would not allow their "normal" allotment of extra attacks, since this is not a "normal" attack action.

[Omote]

My assumption here is that the fighter should be good at attacking, since they are not good at anything else. The fighter of 10th level or higher should not charge at the same modifiers as any other class at 10th level or higher. Give the fighter the benefit if attacking twice while charging, he's earned it. Since extra attacks in C&C is such a boon, there is probably no reason to penalize the fighter for charging beyond the -4 AC (which is a big penalty in the scope of C&C).

~O

[Mark Hall]

My assumption here is that the fighter should be good at attacking, since they are not good at anything else. The fighter of 10th level or higher should not charge at the same modifiers as any other class at 10th level or higher. Give the fighter the benefit if attacking twice while charging, he's earned it. Since extra attacks in C&C is such a boon, there is probably no reason to penalize the fighter for charging beyond the -4 AC (which is a big penalty in the scope of C&C).

~O

I'm with the randy korred.

[Omote]

My assumption here is that the fighter should be good at attacking, since they are not good at anything else. The fighter of 10th level or higher should not charge at the same modifiers as any other class at 10th level or higher. Give the fighter the benefit if attacking twice while charging, he's earned it. Since extra attacks in C&C is such a boon, there is probably no reason to penalize the fighter for charging beyond the -4 AC (which is a big penalty in the scope of C&C).

~O

I'm with the randy korred.

Haha!

~O

[GameOgre]

To be honest here I do use Adjuncts as per Crusader and would just give one to the fighter who charged around a good deal of the time a Adjunct to be able to use multiattacks while charging. Then again I might just give him a Adjunct that lets him charge at twice the distance......who knows??