5ft, 10ft step [Archive] - Wizards Community

5ft, 10ft step [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Corvus Corax
12-20-04, 10:04 AM In regards to the 5ft step in combat. Do creatures larger the medium size get a bigger 5ft adjustment? Would a large creature get a 10ft adjustment?
Burgundy Lotus
12-20-04, 10:14 AM No

Though you could make a feat to give them a bigger free move.
anders
12-20-04, 10:15 AM no. Creatures medium and up can only take a 5'adjustment.
clarkvalentine
12-20-04, 03:54 PM Fencers in my Pirates game have access to an ability called "Lunge", which allows them to take a 10 foot step as a 5 foot step. However, they give up -2 AC in exchange.
Ibbins
12-20-04, 03:56 PM i think it would make sense to make the step size equal to the natural reach. Its 5ft for large, 10 for huge, and so on. It seems like it would be hard and tedious for a colossal dragon to move 5 ft, since his stride is about 30ft long.
trapspringer
12-20-04, 04:34 PM Yea, but game breaking. A fighter fighting a cr x giant would lose all the time.
PaladinSix
12-20-04, 07:00 PM I agree that it would make huge or larger creatures much more mobile, but I don't think it would qualify as "game-breaking." Sure, the tactics used against huge giants (for instance) would have to be modified, and perhaps a standard fighter would be at a greater disadvantage, but I can envision new PC tactics that would arise quite quickly to counter this new threat.

The bottom line, it seems to me, is that a huge giant's natural stride should mean that a minor readjustment would be greater than five feet. The core rules seem to be written from the perspective of a medium-sized creature like a human, but in reality, movement and scale are relative to the size of the creature. Of course, greater reality is not what everyone wants out of their game system.

If one did implement a rule that said that, for instance, a huge giant's 5' step actually covered 10' of distance, then one could also rule that such a creature couldn't take less than a 10' step (as a free action), unless he used a move-equivalent action to carefully adjust his position. That would reflect the longer stride and greater range of such a large creature, but also the difficulty they might have in making smaller adjustments.
Nom
12-20-04, 09:23 PM As it stands, a creature with 5 ft. reach suffers a single AoO as it moves through the extended reach of a Large creature. Once in range, the two combatants may shuffle 5 ft. if they wish, but neither can fully disengage from the other.

If you allow a large creature an extended adjustment, then they can force an AoO every turn, since they can disengage "for free" beyond the ability of the opponent to shuffle forward and re-engage. This becomes nastier with creatures larger than Large, since they can still threaten their opponent after disengaging.

This house rule is also built on the idea that a larger creature is more manoeuvrable in combat. This is typically not true. While a smaller creature lacks reach, their reduced size gives them exponentially less momentum and thus far greater manoeuvrability.

Finally, the game is built around medium (and small) creatures. The rules are designed to maximise playability for typical PCs. Changing the rules to disadvantage small and medium creatures works against this.
PaladinSix
12-21-04, 02:03 AM This house rule is also built on the idea that a larger creature is more manoeuvrable in combat. This is typically not true. While a smaller creature lacks reach, their reduced size gives them exponentially less momentum and thus far greater manoeuvrability.

On the contrary, I would argue that a larger creature, despite the greater stride length, actually has less manoeuverability than a smaller creature. His longer stride, while allowing him to cover more ground than a human, also prevents him from making the fine adjustments in combat that allow him to choose precisely which five foot square he is standing in. Due to a giant's great size, he might not be capable of thinking in terms of five foot adjustments, like a human or a dwarf.

If you allow a large creature an extended adjustment, then they can force an AoO every turn, since they can disengage "for free" beyond the ability of the opponent to shuffle forward and re-engage. This becomes nastier with creatures larger than Large, since they can still threaten their opponent after disengaging.

That is certainly true. If I were to allow a huge creature a greater range on a "5 foot step," I might also rule that they provoke an attack of opportunity when they do so. That would reinforce the idea that giants (for instance) can cover great distances easily, but whose maneuverability is somewhat limited, relative to a human. A rule like that would increase the mobility of a giant, but only at the cost of an attack of opportunity, somewhat of a balancing factor.

Before everyone jumps all over me, bear in mind that I'm not using these rules currently, and I'm not suggesting everyone should. I might, but at this point, I'm mostly thinking out loud (so to speak).
Skyth
12-21-04, 10:14 AM If you go by some 3rd edition rules, a (I believe) 40 on a tumble check allows you to make a 10' step as opposed to a 5' step.
astute1
12-21-04, 01:47 PM Drunken Masters get the 10' step ability, and having played with some in a recent campaign, I can say it is really, really good. It allows one to full attack much more of the time. If you combine it with a reach weapon or a large creature with reach... that's devastating.
Stuntman
12-21-04, 07:48 PM The game mechanics are designed with 5'-steps being 5' regardless of the size of creature. Even if two large creatures with reach engage one another, they will only need to enter a single threatened square to attack without incurring an AoO. If they decide to move closer, they will incur an AoO from leaving the first threatened square anyway.

Now that they are engaged, if one of them wanted to do something that incurs an AoO, they just need to make a 5'-step back away to be out of the threatened square. This way, they can take their action without incurring an AoO. This is exactly the same with medium or small creatures.

The battle grid doesn't scale up with larger than 5' square. You still use the same size squares regardless of the size of the creatures that are fighting. Even though the creature is large, moving more than just a 5'-step will probably require them to let their guard down enough to incur an AoO.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Corvus Corax 12-20-04, 10:04 AM	In regards to the 5ft step in combat. Do creatures larger the medium size get a bigger 5ft adjustment? Would a large creature get a 10ft adjustment?
Burgundy Lotus 12-20-04, 10:14 AM	No Though you could make a feat to give them a bigger free move.
anders 12-20-04, 10:15 AM	no. Creatures medium and up can only take a 5'adjustment.
clarkvalentine 12-20-04, 03:54 PM	Fencers in my Pirates game have access to an ability called "Lunge", which allows them to take a 10 foot step as a 5 foot step. However, they give up -2 AC in exchange.
Ibbins 12-20-04, 03:56 PM	i think it would make sense to make the step size equal to the natural reach. Its 5ft for large, 10 for huge, and so on. It seems like it would be hard and tedious for a colossal dragon to move 5 ft, since his stride is about 30ft long.
trapspringer 12-20-04, 04:34 PM	Yea, but game breaking. A fighter fighting a cr x giant would lose all the time.
PaladinSix 12-20-04, 07:00 PM	I agree that it would make huge or larger creatures much more mobile, but I don't think it would qualify as "game-breaking." Sure, the tactics used against huge giants (for instance) would have to be modified, and perhaps a standard fighter would be at a greater disadvantage, but I can envision new PC tactics that would arise quite quickly to counter this new threat. The bottom line, it seems to me, is that a huge giant's natural stride should mean that a minor readjustment would be greater than five feet. The core rules seem to be written from the perspective of a medium-sized creature like a human, but in reality, movement and scale are relative to the size of the creature. Of course, greater reality is not what everyone wants out of their game system. If one did implement a rule that said that, for instance, a huge giant's 5' step actually covered 10' of distance, then one could also rule that such a creature couldn't take less than a 10' step (as a free action), unless he used a move-equivalent action to carefully adjust his position. That would reflect the longer stride and greater range of such a large creature, but also the difficulty they might have in making smaller adjustments.
Nom 12-20-04, 09:23 PM	As it stands, a creature with 5 ft. reach suffers a single AoO as it moves through the extended reach of a Large creature. Once in range, the two combatants may shuffle 5 ft. if they wish, but neither can fully disengage from the other. If you allow a large creature an extended adjustment, then they can force an AoO every turn, since they can disengage "for free" beyond the ability of the opponent to shuffle forward and re-engage. This becomes nastier with creatures larger than Large, since they can still threaten their opponent after disengaging. This house rule is also built on the idea that a larger creature is more manoeuvrable in combat. This is typically not true. While a smaller creature lacks reach, their reduced size gives them exponentially less momentum and thus far greater manoeuvrability. Finally, the game is built around medium (and small) creatures. The rules are designed to maximise playability for typical PCs. Changing the rules to disadvantage small and medium creatures works against this.
PaladinSix 12-21-04, 02:03 AM	This house rule is also built on the idea that a larger creature is more manoeuvrable in combat. This is typically not true. While a smaller creature lacks reach, their reduced size gives them exponentially less momentum and thus far greater manoeuvrability. On the contrary, I would argue that a larger creature, despite the greater stride length, actually has less manoeuverability than a smaller creature. His longer stride, while allowing him to cover more ground than a human, also prevents him from making the fine adjustments in combat that allow him to choose precisely which five foot square he is standing in. Due to a giant's great size, he might not be capable of thinking in terms of five foot adjustments, like a human or a dwarf. If you allow a large creature an extended adjustment, then they can force an AoO every turn, since they can disengage "for free" beyond the ability of the opponent to shuffle forward and re-engage. This becomes nastier with creatures larger than Large, since they can still threaten their opponent after disengaging. That is certainly true. If I were to allow a huge creature a greater range on a "5 foot step," I might also rule that they provoke an attack of opportunity when they do so. That would reinforce the idea that giants (for instance) can cover great distances easily, but whose maneuverability is somewhat limited, relative to a human. A rule like that would increase the mobility of a giant, but only at the cost of an attack of opportunity, somewhat of a balancing factor. Before everyone jumps all over me, bear in mind that I'm not using these rules currently, and I'm not suggesting everyone should. I might, but at this point, I'm mostly thinking out loud (so to speak).
Skyth 12-21-04, 10:14 AM	If you go by some 3rd edition rules, a (I believe) 40 on a tumble check allows you to make a 10' step as opposed to a 5' step.
astute1 12-21-04, 01:47 PM	Drunken Masters get the 10' step ability, and having played with some in a recent campaign, I can say it is really, really good. It allows one to full attack much more of the time. If you combine it with a reach weapon or a large creature with reach... that's devastating.
Stuntman 12-21-04, 07:48 PM	The game mechanics are designed with 5'-steps being 5' regardless of the size of creature. Even if two large creatures with reach engage one another, they will only need to enter a single threatened square to attack without incurring an AoO. If they decide to move closer, they will incur an AoO from leaving the first threatened square anyway. Now that they are engaged, if one of them wanted to do something that incurs an AoO, they just need to make a 5'-step back away to be out of the threatened square. This way, they can take their action without incurring an AoO. This is exactly the same with medium or small creatures. The battle grid doesn't scale up with larger than 5' square. You still use the same size squares regardless of the size of the creatures that are fighting. Even though the creature is large, moving more than just a 5'-step will probably require them to let their guard down enough to incur an AoO.