Spring Attack VS Lunge

Spring Attack
Martial feat
You make sudden, rapid movements to catch your enemy off guard.

Prerequisite:
Dexterity 11 or higher

Benefit:
As an action, you move up to 10 feet and make an attack at any point during the movement.
This movement does not provoke opportunity attacks.


VS


Lunge
Martial feat
You stretch out to strike at an enemy just out of your normal reach.

Benefit:
As an action, you can make a single melee attack, and increase your reach for that attack by 5 feet.


 
Why would one ever pick Lunge over spring attack?? I just can't see the purpose of Lunge... it might be that i dont have high enough INT STAT irl :P But this really makes me wonder.

Can a more intelligent/smarter individual please enlighten me about this? 

One could discuss that, if one should make lunge a viable pick, maybe buff it up to EVERY attack has reach (but then it gets severely OP combined with polearms)? Any one got any ideas?


 EDIT: just saw that one could combine "CHARGE" feat with "LUNGE" to make the combination more viable... but is it enough ?
 


 EDIT: just saw that one could combine "CHARGE" feat with "LUNGE" to make the combination more viable... but is it enough ?
 




Actually, you cannot combine charge with lunge, as both require an action and you only get one action a round. 

As to why you would ever take Lunge - well, you already mentioned polearm fighting. Being able to hit from 15 feet away sounds pretty dern swanky. But I think I still see your point. I actually don't know specifically what your point is, but I'll take a crack at phrasing it myself:

 "Why would I take lunge when instead I could take spring? Spring attack allows me to move 5 feet forward, attack, and then move 5 feet back to my original square with no OA, an almost perfect replication of Lunge. SA also allows me to Lunge 10 feet w/o the capacity to return to my original square and allows me to make either a melee OR a ranged attack making it waaaay more flexible than lunge."

Well, there could be something stopping you from moving (difficult terrain, a 5 ft chasm, a small character or monster).
That's it, that's all I can think of. Lunge does actually seem pretty crappy.
Because Lunge doesn't require a DEX score of 11?
For me this means classes less dependant on DEX can choose this feat if they want to play a more mobile, guerilla style of combat. Or something along those lines.

"I am the original gangsta"

-Warlock lvl 5 at the start of the session, dead by the end.


Actually, you cannot combine charge with lunge, as both require an action and you only get one action a round. 

As to why you would ever take Lunge - well, you already mentioned polearm fighting. Being able to hit from 15 feet away sounds pretty dern swanky. But I think I still see your point. I actually don't know specifically what your point is, but I'll take a crack at phrasing it myself:

 "Why would I take lunge when instead I could take spring? Spring attack allows me to move 5 feet forward, attack, and then move 5 feet back to my original square with no OA, an almost perfect replication of Lunge. SA also allows me to Lunge 10 feet w/o the capacity to return to my original square and allows me to make either a melee OR a ranged attack making it waaaay more flexible than lunge."

Well, there could be something stopping you from moving (difficult terrain, a 5 ft chasm, a small character or monster).
That's it, that's all I can think of. Lunge does actually seem pretty crappy.



oh shiart! hmm well that combo went down the drain. I agree wih your points. Difficult terrain, and reallt tight close narrow dungeon fights might benefit "the lunge feat". But i just dont see it as viable a feat, as there are many other better ones :P and i that is a real shame...

Think i might homebrew it, just need to think about balance. 
 
Lunge is for Spartans fighting behind shield walls. 

If you have to fix it, it's broken.

Lunge is for Spartans fighting behind shield walls. 



The more I read spring attack the more I see how right OP is about its being OP. 

Spartans should rather take Spring Attack than Lunge. Why? You can move through allied spaces with no penalty. So, I can spring attack from behind a wall of allies, step 5 ft into them, attack an enemy, and move back to my original position - all without suffering an OA or any setback for moving through my allies squares.

Bro, my army of spring attacking scouts will wreck a bunch of spartans with worthless ol' Lunge ;)
You all seem to be missing the fact that Spring Attack requires you to use 10 to 20 feet of movement to do the same thing that Lunge can do standing still, that's worth something to me.
Your "spring attack from behind shield wall" tactic will not work when your enemy holds their distance.

Someone with lunge can simply keep a 10 ft distance from your shield wall and you can do jack all with your spring attack.

EDIT : Exactly - spring attack is poorly worded. I don't think it gives you an additional 10 ft of movement when you've spent your entire movement pool for one round. It's not like charge, it takes movement AWAY in return of a safe attack.

"I am the original gangsta"

-Warlock lvl 5 at the start of the session, dead by the end.

You all seem to be missing the fact that Spring Attack requires you to use 10 to 20 feet of movement to do the same thing that Lunge can do standing still, that's worth something to me.



lol wut

No it doesn't. 
Your "spring attack from behind shield wall" tactic will not work when your enemy holds their distance.

Someone with lunge can simply keep a 10 ft distance from your shield wall and you can do jack all with your spring attack.

EDIT : Exactly - spring attack is poorly worded. I don't think it gives you an additional 10 ft of movement when you've spent your entire movement pool for one round. It's not like charge, it takes movement AWAY in return of a safe attack.



No. It reads, "As an action," and things that read as such do not dip into your movement for the round. That would make no sense because you can already use your action at any point in your movement. 

The way your reading the feat makes it arbitrarily select 10 feet of your movement to make immune to OA, but the feat doesn't read like that at all.
 
Disengage is an action. If you spring attack, then move away, they can get an AOO on you. With Spring attack, there's no option of attack and be safe--you are officially in melee afterward.  

Lunge leaves you 10 feet away. You got an attack in, aren't in melee, and next round they have to spend their move to attack you.  
 
One of the hardest parts of my first playtest was 5E was that everyone still assumed a 5 foot shift was a thing you just got.  
Disengage is an action. If you spring attack, then move away, they can get an AOO on you. With Spring attack, there's no option of attack and be safe--you are officially in melee afterward.  

Lunge leaves you 10 feet away. You got an attack in, aren't in melee, and next round they have to spend their move to attack you.  
 
One of the hardest parts of my first playtest was 5E was that everyone still assumed a 5 foot shift was a thing you just got.  



Unless you only move 5 feet to get to the target. Spring attack allows 10 ft of movement. If the enemy is 10 ft away you could move 5 ft, attack, then move back 5 ft to your original square 10 ft away from the foe with no OA, essentially replicating the mechanical advantage of Lunge but with the added flexibility of being allowed to move 10 ft forward and attack and be left engaged in melee as you suggested.

As I said earlier, I think the only real advantage to Lunge is being able to strike foes over difficult terrain that would otherwise reduce the distance spring attack propels you or if there is simply no terrain to move over at all (a 5 ft chasm or pit or fire or through jail bars or some other bull puckey). It totally is stinky poopoo compared to SA.
Disengage is an action. If you spring attack, then move away, they can get an AOO on you. With Spring attack, there's no option of attack and be safe--you are officially in melee afterward.  

Lunge leaves you 10 feet away. You got an attack in, aren't in melee, and next round they have to spend their move to attack you.  
 
One of the hardest parts of my first playtest was 5E was that everyone still assumed a 5 foot shift was a thing you just got.  



Unless you only move 5 feet to get to the target. Spring attack allows 10 ft of movement. If the enemy is 10 ft away you could move 5 ft, attack, then move back 5 ft to your original square 10 ft away from the foe with no OA, essentially replicating the mechanical advantage of Lunge but with the added flexibility of being allowed to move 10 ft forward and attack and be left engaged in melee as you suggested.

As I said earlier, I think the only real advantage to Lunge is being able to strike foes over difficult terrain that would otherwise reduce the distance spring attack propels you or if there is simply no terrain to move over at all (a 5 ft chasm or pit or fire or through jail bars or some other bull puckey). It totally is stinky poopoo compared to SA.

From How to Play, Opportunity attacks: 

"If a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach, you can use your reaction to make a melee attack against that creature. This attack is called an opportunity attack. The attack interrupts the creature's movement, occurring right before the creature leaves your reach.

You can avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the disengage action."

Therein lies the issue. The scenario you outlined WOULD cause an opportunity attack. That 5 feet of movement counts as a move, and therefore stabby stabby. A 5 foot move causes an AOO. A 5 foot disengage (thus taking your whole action) does not.

That's why Lunge measures well against Spring Attack. 
Disengage is an action. If you spring attack, then move away, they can get an AOO on you. With Spring attack, there's no option of attack and be safe--you are officially in melee afterward.  

Lunge leaves you 10 feet away. You got an attack in, aren't in melee, and next round they have to spend their move to attack you.  
 
One of the hardest parts of my first playtest was 5E was that everyone still assumed a 5 foot shift was a thing you just got.  



Unless you only move 5 feet to get to the target. Spring attack allows 10 ft of movement. If the enemy is 10 ft away you could move 5 ft, attack, then move back 5 ft to your original square 10 ft away from the foe with no OA, essentially replicating the mechanical advantage of Lunge but with the added flexibility of being allowed to move 10 ft forward and attack and be left engaged in melee as you suggested.

As I said earlier, I think the only real advantage to Lunge is being able to strike foes over difficult terrain that would otherwise reduce the distance spring attack propels you or if there is simply no terrain to move over at all (a 5 ft chasm or pit or fire or through jail bars or some other bull puckey). It totally is stinky poopoo compared to SA.

From How to Play, Opportunity attacks: 

"If a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach, you can use your reaction to make a melee attack against that creature. This attack is called an opportunity attack. The attack interrupts the creature's movement, occurring right before the creature leaves your reach.

You can avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the disengage action."

Therein lies the issue. The scenario you outlined WOULD cause an opportunity attack. That 5 feet of movement counts as a move, and therefore stabby stabby. A 5 foot move causes an AOO. A 5 foot disengage (thus taking your whole action) does not.

That's why Lunge measures well against Spring Attack. 



From the Specialities and Feats PDF

"Spring Attack
Martial feat
You make sudden, rapid movements to catch your enemy off guard.

Prerequisite:
Dexterity 11 or higher

Benefit:
As an action, you move up to 10 feet and make an attack at any point during the movement.
This movement does not provoke opportunity attacks."
(Emphasis mine)


In the scenario I outlined, my enemy is 10 ft away, I use spring attack, use my first 5 ft of movement (of 10 ft) to move 5ft toward the enemy. We are now adjacent. I then make an attack as part of the same action, I then move the second 5 ft of the 10 ft Spring Attack allows me to move to move back to my original position 10 ft away from my target - all with no OA. No disengage action is required as the feat already tells us that the movement from spring attack does not allow for OA's, and that very movement can be used after I make an attack - an attack that can be performed after I move the first five feet. 

So - no. No OA, not in my scenario, and yes, Spring attack is better than Lunge with the exception of a few scenarios as I have mentioned now three times - difficult/blocked terrain (fence, pit, chasm, small monster) squares that cause damage (on fire, wall of fire, stinking cloud, and so on).




Ah, now I see the conundrum. Yeah, that should get fixed. 
4 realz. They could make Lunge a permanent effect (OP suggested this), but OP also wisely noted that that could get real broke real quick. A fighter with a Halberd could Whirlwind two enemies 30 ft apart (15 ft to my left and 15 ft to my right) and that seems way too powerful. And a two weapon fighter could hit two enemies 20 feet apart with a different weapon each and that is so hard to concieve of happening physically that my intuition compels me to reject it as a viable fix. 

Who knows? I think they should drop Lunge and stick with the idea that only polearm fighters can extend their reach. 
Well, SA is superior to Lunge in terms of effect because it gives you the option to move, and also allows for "hostile disengagement" (sic) from most opponents. You can attack, then hop out of melee reach with no OA. Pretty useful.

Lunge is for planting your feet and still getting better reach.

It's too bad that the distinction is greater, because there should be room for both feats. As it is, SA is too obvious a winner in every situation other than those where you can't move at all, which is the only time Lunge pulls ahead.

I think it could be easily balanced by making SA use your reaction to pull off the move, but that's just my opinion.

If you have to fix it, it's broken.

First of all thanks for all of you guys excellent thoughts on the subject! I agree to most/all of it. SA is very powerful, and one might say that meta-gaming-wise, SA could be used as a broke way of moving back and forth game mechanics, but in "fluff" terms stand still in the same square. (Go foreward one step to get reach, hit, then go one step back, VS having lunge and just standing still and attacking with reach). 

If i should do, ANYTHING to make Lunge more viable, i just came up with a solution. I dont know how it is working balancewise, but it will make the feat a better pick, than it is now.

How about increasing the reach from 5ft to 10ft?  
Why would one ever pick Lunge over spring attack?? I just can't see the purpose of Lunge... it might be that i dont have high enough INT STAT irl :P But this really makes me wonder. 

Your in a 5' hall and someone is in melee with the guy in front of you. Sounds like a good reason for lunge.
You have a flying creature above you with a reach weapon. Sure sounds like a good reason to have lunge.
A bad guy is taunting you JUST out of melee range through a gate and you have no missle weapon. Sounds like a good reason for lunge.
Creature using spring attack on you from watr/lava ect. Sounds like a good reason for lunge.
Traps all over the floor/mine field. Sounds like a good reason for lunge.

It's often a better idea to stay in your space and not move around for various reasons. caltrops/ball bearings plus lunge = fun.

Sign In to post comments