Summoner Eidolon - Charge + Pounce + Reach

[Matthew Casey]

So, I have 4 natural attacks in my "full attack" on my Eidolon.
I have the pounce evolution, AND the reach evolution with JUST ONE of those 4 attacks.

Now, charge says "You must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent."

My GM is trying to rule that because one of my attacks has reach, I must stop at the range that is outside of the remaining attacks reach, making pounce worthless. Since all remaining natural attacks only have range 5, instead of the 10 that my Gore has.

However, I feel like this goes against the spirit of the pounce evolution (RAI). Pounce reads the following:

"An eidolon gains quick reflexes, allowing it to make a full attack after a charge. This evolution is only available to eidolons of the quadruped base form."

"Full attack" and "Attack" are both listed as separate types of actions with their own blocks of the "Combat" chapter (same place charge is at). They contain separate traits and features in the rule book, this sort of points to full attacks and the normal kind of attack (although these may be poorly worded / named) being completely different actions with different restrictions (duh?).

Since they seem to be different, and the verbage for Charge doesnt specify that a full attack must also be done from the same reach as an attack, one should assume that if you are performing a full attack, it would be done at the range a full attack is capable of being performed at.

I claim that where charge SAYS "You must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent." due to my evolution it should NOW (for my eidolon anyway) say "You must move to the closest space from which you can full attack the opponent." unless of course I am not intending to utilize pounce and instead intend to just use a normal attack (stead of full attack), at which point I MUST attack at the range of 10.

However, he disagrees and is making my reach evolution nullify pounce. I find this bogus.

Can anyone provide more context or opinions or facts?

[Jonathan Haley]

Your first mistake was taking gore. ;P

RAI I'm fairly certain that your DM is in the wrong. Additional abilities rarely are made to intentionally hinder other ones you already possess. It's counter-productive and counter-intuitive. However, RAW it looks to be vaguely arguable, and Rule Zero means it's moot anyways. Which means unless you can convince him of how silly it is, I'd drop either the reach or pounce (probably reach) at next level.

[NikosBlu]

I agree, your GM is in the wrong here. No need to convince him of anything though, if you can answer the following question:

Does your reach attack allows you to make attacks to targets closer to you, just as with a whip? According to the Evolution at the summoner entry, no since it works just like any other reach weapon.

This means that, yes you can make a charge/pounce attack, using your other weapons, but not the one with reach.

[Carl Cramér]

In the case of an eidolon that has pounce and both reach and non-reach attacks, I'd allow the eidolon to decide a square to make the charge attack from. Any weapon for with this is the first possible square to attack from can be used in the pounce/charge. Basically, I'd let the eidolon use EITHER reach or non-reach weapons in a pounce.

A rider using a lance charge has the same kind of problem. Since the lance has reach, most mounts cannot attack at the same time as a lance charge, which makes perfect sense to me. In 3.0, The unicorn had the same issue - its horn had reach like a lance, its hooves did not. In 3.5 and Pathfinder, this is no longer true, which leaves a unicorn mount with the lance charge issues above. In the 3.5 SRD, it says "Unicorns normally attack only when defending themselves or their forests. They either charge, impaling foes with their horns like lances, or strike with their hooves.", which to seems like am artifact from the 3.0 reach differences.

[NikosBlu]

There is a problem with your example, since the unicorn never had reach, in 3,5 or Pathfinder. Also you can't use the flavor text for ruling. "Like a lance" is not the same with "just like a lance" or "as if using a lance".

[NikosBlu]

Carl Cramér replied:

"The 3.0 unicorn had this text "They either charge, impaling foes with their horns like lances (see Charge, page 124in the player's handbook), or ..." The rules reference is to charge, not to the lance, but to me it implies that this uses the rules of a lance charge, not just a horn charge that is similar in execution to a lance. NB that this is in a rules block, not the flavor text. The Face/Reach section of the stat block also mentions a 10 ft. reach with the horn alone, like a lance. This is not flavor text.

Now, this is 3.0, not 3.5 or Pathfinder, but the OP was asking for anything to base a judgement on, and this is the one case I could come up with where a creature has different kinds of natural reach. If we can come up with a Pathfinder creature that has several kinds of natural reach, that might enlighten us further. The only one I can find at short notice is the animated object, and that only as a special option with no notes attached.

I still think the OP is wrong and his GM right by RAW. The  charge rule says " You must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent.", which is obviously a square at reach, because the eidolon does  have reach."

Sorry for simply copying this, but it didn't appear in the forum, only in my mailbox.

Well, i had no idea in the 3.0 edition unicorn, i'm gonna take your word for it.

But let's see another example: I have in my one hand a longsword and on the other a whip, a reach weapon, and a 15 ft. reach at that. What rule denies me to make a charge attempt with the longsword instead of the whip? In any other case, when you have ready more than one weapons, you can choose what weapon to use/make an attack with. That is far more true in the case of a monk making a flurry of blows.

Does that mean that i'll have to sheath or drop my whip, so i can get closer and hit my target with my longsword?

[Carl Cramér]

As I said above, I think its fair to not include an attack in your attack routine, and then charge into range of the attack you do use. So with with whip/longsword, I am ok with charging adjacent to an enemy to use the longsword, but not with charging adjacent to an enemy to use the whip (you have to do that at the whip's full reach).

What makes the original situation is pounce.

[NikosBlu]

I think we're on the same page here.

So, the Eidolon can use the charge and pounce attacks, but any other attack,  OTHER than the reach attack it has. Am I right here?

[Carl Cramér]

Short answer: Yes