Getting the drop on people... dozens of times.

[Kuroimaken]

Why don't you pm that type of stuff? Its just e-peening. . .
You gotta aire all you differences in front of everybody else? Really?

In anycase am I to understand that the major, argument against this build is:
Falling? What kind of action is it?

Or is it something else?

Falling is technically a non-action (otherwise a pit fall trap would only activate when your action came up). The one thing I CAN see against this build is that if you jump, your descent counts against your total movement (theoretically covered by Extended Charge), and since the feat states you can't use a fly/levitate spell or effect (which is not 100% clear involves actual wings or not, but most would rule it probably does), you'd actually be limited to a number of charges equal to your speed/5 (if you jump from your "landing point" atop your foe's head; nowhere in the jump rules does it say you have to be on solid ground to jump) or your speed/10 (if you count the ground as your stopping point). And that's for a MEDIUM opponent. Further, by definition your move action ends when you stop moving, so you'll still need multiple actions. So you'll probably need to squeeze some Ruby Knight Vindicator levels in there plus Travel Devotion for Divine Impetus action abuse.

[BeholderSlayer]

Ooo forum pictures...my favorite.



And to really sum up my argument, just see cru's post on the first page, I agree wholeheartedly with everything he's said (although combining campaign settings doesn't bother me so much).

[Barbarossa]

Unfortunately, Dragonborn don't qualify for Warforged Juggernaut.

Are you sure of that?  They're still Warforged after all, still have Adamantine Plating, and obviously can still have the feat pre-reqs.  So what's the problem?

The mechanics of rebirth
(...)
Type, Subtype and Race: You retain your original type and subtypes, gaining the dragonblood subtype. You still count as a member of your original race for the purpose of any effect or prerequisite that depends on race.

Underlining emphasis mine.

Whoops, I was thinking of a different race. The only problem I see now it that it seems impossible for a Warforged to be descended from dragons. The only reason Dragontouched works is because of a 'spiritual' connection.

[bearsarebrown]

Dragonborn are born again Bahamatists.

[BeholderSlayer]

Unfortunately, Dragonborn don't qualify for Warforged Juggernaut.

Are you sure of that?  They're still Warforged after all, still have Adamantine Plating, and obviously can still have the feat pre-reqs.  So what's the problem?

The mechanics of rebirth
(...)
Type, Subtype and Race: You retain your original type and subtypes, gaining the dragonblood subtype. You still count as a member of your original race for the purpose of any effect or prerequisite that depends on race.

Underlining emphasis mine.

Whoops, I was thinking of a different race. The only problem I see now it that it seems impossible for a Warforged to be descended from dragons. The only reason Dragontouched works is because of a 'spiritual' connection.

I'm not going to argue whether warforged can be descended from dragons (I can see that going both ways, depending on how you write up the fluff).

Thing is, in Eberron, being dragon-descended, dragonborn, etc. is like having a giant target painted on your back. The Argonessen dragons aren't typically big fans of that sort of thing.

Granted, that has nothing to do with mechanics at all. Just a comment.

[Kuroimaken]

Unfortunately, Dragonborn don't qualify for Warforged Juggernaut.

Are you sure of that?  They're still Warforged after all, still have Adamantine Plating, and obviously can still have the feat pre-reqs.  So what's the problem?

The mechanics of rebirth
(...)
Type, Subtype and Race: You retain your original type and subtypes, gaining the dragonblood subtype. You still count as a member of your original race for the purpose of any effect or prerequisite that depends on race.

Underlining emphasis mine.

Whoops, I was thinking of a different race. The only problem I see now it that it seems impossible for a Warforged to be descended from dragons. The only reason Dragontouched works is because of a 'spiritual' connection.

Add dragonblood to his alchemical components! Done.

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Alright. I've been looking at this for a while. The con side has been too mean. The pro side has been too. I understand knew things are scary.

The raw comes down to two things whether the "Charging is a special full-round action" changes thanks to "You can execute a charge by simply dropping from a height of at least 5 feet above your opponent. and if "a fly or levitate spell or effect" means '?[Spell(Fly v Levitate) v Effect[levitate]' or '?[Spell v Effect](Fly v Levitate)'.

Personally I say the latter. I also say even with battlejump proc'ing the charge, that charge is still a full round action. Its a matter of interpretation, but I believe both to be RAW, as I think beholder and jaronk do as well.

edit: PIECE OF SH|T forum doesn't accept my beautiful universal quantifier symbol. It goes to "?"

[Barbarossa]

charge is still a full round action. Its a matter of interpretation, but I believe both to be RAW, as I think beholder and jaronk do as well.

The only problem with this interpretation is that you would already have to be falling in order to use the feat in a single round, and it's hard to fall for more than one round without falling more than 30 feet, as per the feat. With your interpretation, it is literally impossible to gain a benefit from this feat without the Quickness supernatural ability, a belt of battle, or Celerity.

[BeholderSlayer]

charge is still a full round action. Its a matter of interpretation, but I believe both to be RAW, as I think beholder and jaronk do as well.

The only problem with this interpretation is that you would already have to be falling in order to use the feat in a single round, and it's hard to fall for more than one round without falling more than 30 feet, as per the feat. With your interpretation, it is literally impossible to gain a benefit from this feat without the Quickness supernatural ability, a belt of battle, or Celerity.

Not true. The drop is considered part of the movement inherent in the charge. Following your logic, you could never charge at all because it requires movement.

It's fairly simple how it works as we have said:
- you start above your opponent on a ledge, or whatever
- you jump off the ledge and fall the required amount
- you are qualified as charging, and therefore you spent a full round action doing this

I don't have any idea how you've come to the conclusion that you'd need Quickness to make it work. Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that you couldn't MOVE and perform this at the same time? In that case, you'd be right, but you'd definitely be able to use the feat without Quickness, BoB, or Celerity. It would just be your full round action, falling and swinging your weapon.

Granted, that's incredibly weak for a feat, but that's pretty much what it says.

Were a PC to want to take this feat, I'd make it a little stronger, and say they could use it in conjunction with movement and still be qualified as charging. However, without some way to gain extra actions, it would still be a full round action and end their turn. That'd let a player use, say, Battle Jump, Leap Attack, and Pounce to gain some good benefits. They just wouldn't be able to multi-pounce without Shadow Pouncing.

[Kuroimaken]

See, my question would be: why do you need the feat for this?

The basic prerequisites for a charge are:

A) Move at least 10 feet.
B) Spend a full-round action.
C) Move in a straight line.

By doing as you claim, you can already execute the charge from a higher vantage point without the feat - you satisfy all three conditions for a normal charge. You don't gain the double damage or the extra size advantage for tripping without it. However... note the "normal" part of the feat.

Normal: Anybody can try to jump down on an enemy, but
it is not considered a charge, and they do not gain double
damage or the size bonus for the ensuing attack.

Now this is odd. We've already established that by jumping from a higher ledge you CAN execute a charge, as you fulfill all three necessary conditions. And the feat DOES specify you need only drop from a height at least five feet above your opponent - but no more than a total of 30 feet.

Except that a charge doubles your normal movement rate. Even taking a small creature into account, we're already talking about 40 feet worth of potential movement. By taking this feat you would be theoretically reducing your ability to move in a vertical charge.

This all leads me to conclude that you can execute a charge by leaping down onto your opponent (a move action, assuming you don't have the ledge destroyed beneath you or anything of the sort). So the movement becomes a charge. Simple as that.

[BeholderSlayer]

Falling from a ledge is not considered movement. It is just falling, so therefore you can't charge since you don't satisfy the 10 foot movement requirement. If a character is falling from the sky, a mile high, they can perform move actions/standard actions despite falling. They are not actually making any "movement" per game terms.

Battle Jump lets you count falling as a charge, which is a full round action. Essentially, you give up the fact that falling is a free action for the charge benefits. In all reality, were you to be able to fall and land on your feat, you'd be able to get a full attack. Using this feat actually weakens your attack, since unless you have pounce you get no full attack.

That's pretty much it.

[Kuroimaken]

Falling from a ledge is not considered movement. It is just falling, so therefore you can't charge since you don't satisfy the 10 foot movement requirement. If a character is falling from the sky, a mile high, they can perform move actions/standard actions despite falling. They are not actually making any "movement" per game terms.

Battle Jump lets you count falling as a charge, which is a full round action. Essentially, you give up the fact that falling is a free action for the charge benefits. In all reality, were you to be able to fall and land on your feat, you'd be able to get a full attack. Using this feat actually weakens your attack, since unless you have pounce you get no full attack.

That's pretty much it.

And you'd want a feat like that BECAUSE...?

What you're basically saying is that people can fall off ledges without moving. We're not talking about someone pushing someone else here. We're talking about someone VOLUNTARILY leaping off a ledge.

And falling does too count as movement when jumping. The rules are pretty clear on that.

Distance moved by jumping is counted against your normal
maximum movement in a round.

Player's Handbook pg. 77. Note how it doesn't mention this is any different for leaping off a ledge. Speaking of which...

Jumping Down: If you intentionally jump from a height, you take
less damage than you would if you just fell.

[...]

Action: None. A Jump check is included in your movement, so it
is part of a move action. If you run out of movement mid-jump, your
next action (either on this turn or, if necessary, on your next turn)
must be a move action to complete the jump.

Given that it is possible to jump as part of a charge (remember Leap Attack?), you CAN charge normally by taking a full-round action and leaping off a ledge.

So, again. If the feat works as you describe it, why would anybody take it?

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

with this interpretation ... you would already have to be falling in order to use the feat in a single round. With your interpretation, it is literally impossible to gain a benefit from this feat without the Quickness supernatural ability, a belt of battle, or Celerity.

You do not understand me. I am sure of that.

Also remember that I have two points of contention. Which do you address above?

Its quite late so forgive me if I'm not thinking straight. If you are charging already (and jump like a hood), the 'still a full round thing' is fine. In essence the 'full round flag' is already set, preventing repeated procs. Like I said, but its late and I believe that is how Endaire, hood extraordinary, interprets this feat. Its still powerful due to the multiplier, it just isn't shadow-pounce-in-a-can.

[cru]

Given that it is possible to jump as part of a charge (remember Leap Attack?), you CAN charge normally by taking a full-round action and leaping off a ledge.

Actually, Rules Compendium specifies what kind of jump can you make as a part of a charge (hint: it's long jump). FAQ clarifies that e.g. high jump is not possible because you change direction (unless you take a feat like Fleet of Foot or Psionic Charge that allows you to change direction). Similarly, when jumping off a ledge, you first move 5 ft ahead and then move/fall/jump down, so that's a 90 degrees turn, i.e., no charge. Also, you're going around a corner, i.e., no charge.

Battle Jump is another feat that allows these unorthodox jumps while charging, and, it also grants you various other benefits, e.g. double damage. Good enough for a feat.

[Brainpiercing]

Given that it is possible to jump as part of a charge (remember Leap Attack?), you CAN charge normally by taking a full-round action and leaping off a ledge.

Actually, Rules Compendium specifies what kind of jump can you make as a part of a charge (hint: it's long jump). FAQ clarifies that e.g. high jump is not possible because you change direction (unless you take a feat like Fleet of Foot or Psionic Charge that allows you to change direction). Similarly, when jumping off a ledge, you first move 5 ft ahead and then move/fall/jump down, so that's a 90 degrees turn, i.e., no charge. Also, you're going around a corner, i.e., no charge.

Battle Jump is another feat that allows these unorthodox jumps while charging, and, it also grants you various other benefits, e.g. double damage. Good enough for a feat.

I would tend to agree with this - with the exception of giving the RC too much weight. But ok, it's a clarification.

I'm not entirely sure that it's strict RAW, but the I believe letting falling count as movement while you are doing it intentionally should be in order. I think the rules tend to make that distinction - intentional falling, such as when you are dropping after a high jump, counts as moving. But when you fall unintentionally, i.e. from stalling with poor maneuverability, or from falling into a trap, then it doesn't count. I believe the rules are also inconsistent on this: Gliding with wings, for instance, does not count as movement. Also, other types of movement which do no take YOUR actions still preclude full-attacks - such as when using a mount.

IMHO the game should have been designed with more consistency in that respect: Either movement ALWAYS counts as your move action - and then falling might give you a "falling"-bonus to movement speed, or it consistently does not count when you are not actively doing anything - such as when are falling, riding, gliding, etc.

After those deliberations, what I also believe does not work is dropping only five feet towards an opponent with a reach weapon, you do have to move 10 feet, even with Battle Jump.

So the OPs action sequence is this:
Fly over an opponent, with enough room to drop 10 feet on top of him to hit him.
Drop intentionally by folding your wings, drop 10 feet, this counts as a charge, you hit or pounce him. You also gain 5ft of movement. Either falling counts as movement or it doesn't.
Now either this counts as a FRA, in which case your round is now over, or it doesn't. In which case (like with Sudden Leap multipouncer models), you can still move.
You fly up again 10 ft vertically, and drop again. Rinse repeat.

What I suggest concerning movement:
Falling itself should be a non-action, or a free action that simply happens when it happens. Falling in a controlled manner, now that should, IMHO, count as movement. If you are falling in a way so that you can stop yourself at any time, then it's not the same as simply dropping. There is also a difference in speed: Uncontrollably dropping makes you fall 150 feet in one round (and 350 in the second). The fastest speed you can fly vertically down at is twice your normal speed - even for perfect maneuverability. (Now with fast fly speeds this can be faster than just dropping... which is just another one of those weird things.)

So, I propose letting the dropping count as movement, and letting the charge not be a FRA. But that's just me...

(I have to say, though, "execute a charge" does give a strong argument to the full-round-action thing.)

[skydragonknight]

"What Dm would allow this"

The "Make a Will Save" kind.

[Cagemarrow]

I don't see this working as you expect it to, simply because the way I read the feat it turns the Full Round Charge action into a standard action instead, using the free action fall to substitute for the movement. To get the extra attacks you would need additional move actions, to climb away from the target, and then extra standard actions to make the charge again. May need belts of battle, skirmisher boots, or other means to get move and standard actions to pull this off reliably.

I think what the opening post forgot was that ending the climb, to start the fall after the attack, ends the move action. So you wouldn't be able to climb again after the fall with the same move action. Am I missing something with this? Perhaps Flyby Attack would be required to bypass this.

[BeholderSlayer]

The feat doesn't say anything about not being able to use it when already charging, so if you use it conjunction with Leap Attack you can still gain the benefits as long as you fall the required distance. The feat also changes falling the required amount into a charge, but it doesn't change charging from a Full Round Action. This allows the tactic I stated above.

I will amend my position to include that you would be allowed to also perform a move action in order to jump from a height (as cru stated above), and gain the benefits of a charge. However, it still wouldn't change it from a full round action. Since moving and jumping off a surface higher than your target is normally not able to be made into a charge, you may use this feat to make it qualify.

I am pretty sure that getting double damage from a Leap Attack and also having the option to jump from above a target and use a charge that gets double damage is worth a feat. Also, the ability to double damage from a Leap Attack is also worth a feat. The feat doesn't have to arbitrarily grant actions or change the type of action that a charge is in order to be useful as a feat.

In fact, I'm going to recommend this feat to one of my players. He's playing a Warblade/Wizard/AC/JPM gish that uses Leap Attack and Sudden Leap to great results. All he needs to do is get a source of pounce and he will have a truly interesting leaping attacker. He already loves to use Leap Attack and Sudden Leap together, and this feat would give that massive Jump check he has even more power.

[Kuroimaken]

The feat doesn't say anything about not being able to use it when already charging, so if you use it conjunction with Leap Attack you can still gain the benefits as long as you fall the required distance. The feat also changes falling the required amount into a charge, but it doesn't change charging from a Full Round Action. This allows the tactic I stated above.

I will amend my position to include that you would be allowed to also perform a move action in order to jump from a height (as cru stated above), and gain the benefits of a charge. However, it still wouldn't change it from a full round action. Since moving and jumping off a surface higher than your target is normally not able to be made into a charge, you may use this feat to make it qualify.

I am pretty sure that getting double damage from a Leap Attack and also having the option to jump from above a target and use a charge that gets double damage is worth a feat. Also, the ability to double damage from a Leap Attack is also worth a feat. The feat doesn't have to arbitrarily grant actions or change the type of action that a charge is in order to be useful as a feat.

In fact, I'm going to recommend this feat to one of my players. He's playing a Warblade/Wizard/AC/JPM gish that uses Leap Attack and Sudden Leap to great results. All he needs to do is get a source of pounce and he will have a truly interesting leaping attacker. He already loves to use Leap Attack and Sudden Leap together, and this feat would give that massive Jump check he has even more power.

I just wanted to ask: what part of the feat's description states that it doesn't change the action required to charge? I have yet to see you provide evidence to support that.

[Midnight_v]

 I'm looking at it in the book and it doesn't, kuroimaken.
I'm confused about a couple things but here's the big division if I'm not mistaken
Execute a charge or considered a charge.
The thing is you can't take a 5-foot step then charge. Though if this feat is in effect you totally can, by 5-ft stepping off a ledge.
The issue is...
 This feat lets you move (however much of you movement is required) then drop off a cliff (however far you need to get the drop on the enemy) then execute a charge/drop considered a charge.
All in all its just not very well written, but I KNOW there are people who'll poo poo it cause they hate melee's having nice things. Its an obstacle.
Further, and in response to the jaronk, crowd... technically you one you fall you're no longer under a fly effect, technically. You may have to fall 5 ft first or whatever but if you're flying by wing power an then you're NOT flying, you qualify. Again its poorly written.