Reach

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

Moot_Dundle

Sep 15, 2014 19:38:08

"Reach" allows you to add 5' to your reach when attacking with a weapon with that property.

It doesn't say that your character can not hit an enemy standing witin 5' like in other editions.

So could my glaive armed character hit an enemy within 5'?

Thanks

Moot Dundle

#2

Plaguescarred1

Sep 15, 2014 20:13:52

Yes you can attack anywhere within your reach.

 

 

PHB195 Melee Attacks:  Used in hand-to-hand combat, a melee attack allows you to attack a foe within your reach.

#3

Kalani

Sep 15, 2014 21:10:28

There is one caveat when using a reach weapon however - Enemies normally provoke opportunity attacks for leaving your reach. If your reach is 10ft with your weapon, they can run circles around you to attack a nearby ally 10-ft behind you without provoking an OA. 

 

With that being said, the party can do the same thing to that Ogre they are fighting.

(Reply to #3)

SteveMND

Kalani wrote:
#5

Trance-Zg

Sep 16, 2014 9:50:02

I'm kinda irritated by the rule that an oponent must leave you whole reach for provoking AoO. I liked it better when the provoke AoO after leaving any square that you are threatening.

that prevents anyone to dance around you and pick their targets in formation.

 

 

#6

Timborama

Sep 16, 2014 9:57:35

Kalani wrote:
#7

Nachturnus

Sep 16, 2014 10:00:42

Timborama wrote:
#8

Timborama

Sep 16, 2014 11:21:58

Which is true, but Ogres can't take that feat. Though a DM is well within his rights to give certain monsters a similar ability

(I was discussing both PCs and monsters. sorry if that wasn't clear!)

(Reply to #7)

2Chlorobutanal

Nachturnus wrote:
#10

Nachturnus

Sep 16, 2014 21:15:32

Ah. Informative. Thanks.

#11

Moot_Dundle

Sep 16, 2014 21:53:46

Thak you all for your insights.

#12

Kalani

Sep 16, 2014 22:19:30

SteveMND wrote:
#13

Keendk

Sep 17, 2014 4:55:19

Timborama wrote:
#14

Plaguescarred1

Sep 17, 2014 5:14:44

Keendk wrote:
#15

Timborama

Sep 17, 2014 6:50:19

Plaguescarred wrote:
(Reply to #12)

SteveMND

Kalani wrote: