ShinRyuuBR
First Post
So, I've been thinking, perhaps the terminology for attack ranges could be a little better. And by better I mean simpler and clearer. Nothing huge or fancy, just a bit of simplification.
So, we've got Melee
and Close
, which do not provoke opportunity attacks, and Ranged
and Area
, which do. "Area" is a somewhat deceiving term, since Close attacks always (as far as I've seen) affect an area (though some do not affect EVERY target in the area). A Close attack can be a blast, a burst or a line; an area attack can be a burst or wall. Melee and ranged attacks are always targeted, with either a fixed range, the weapon's range, or touch (melee only); they might have more than one target, like Split the Tree, but these tend to be limited and exception-based.
So, Area attacks are always ranged. Both ranged and area attacks provoke OA's. "Area attacks" is an unfortunate term. So, they could both be called Ranged. Then, instead of having "Ranged 10", "Ranged Weapon" and "Area burst 1 within 10", we would have "Ranged 10, Targeted", "Ranged Weapon, Targeted" and "Ranged 10, Burst 1". The ", Targeted" clause could even be omitted, as there will be a "Target: One creature" entry ("Target: Each creature in blast" for blasts).
In the same line, melee and area attacks do not provoke OA's and have a range based on where you can make a direct physical strike. They could both be Close, or Direct. So, instead of having "Melee Weapon", "Melee Touch", "Close Blast 3" and "Close Burst 1", we could have "Direct, Weapon", "Direct, Touch", "Direct, Blast 3" and "Direct, Burst 1".
Of course, this could be refined a bit. I can see the point of origin being mistakin in a Direct attack as proposed above: an area attack would have origin at the character, but a weapon attack would be adjacent or have reach. So perhaps this is not the best way. We do, however, have the Personal range, though it is not for attacks (apparently, only for utility powers). A Close Burst would probably fit best as "Personal, Burst X" than "Direct, Burst X". Same for blasts and lines.
So, we would have Melee, Personal and Ranged attacks. Area attacks would fit in Personal (blast, burst or line) and Ranged (burst or wall). Only Ranged attacks would provoke OA's, which simplifies the learning process.
So, there you go. Just some cents tossed as a mental exercise. Please share any thoughts.
So, we've got Melee




So, Area attacks are always ranged. Both ranged and area attacks provoke OA's. "Area attacks" is an unfortunate term. So, they could both be called Ranged. Then, instead of having "Ranged 10", "Ranged Weapon" and "Area burst 1 within 10", we would have "Ranged 10, Targeted", "Ranged Weapon, Targeted" and "Ranged 10, Burst 1". The ", Targeted" clause could even be omitted, as there will be a "Target: One creature" entry ("Target: Each creature in blast" for blasts).
In the same line, melee and area attacks do not provoke OA's and have a range based on where you can make a direct physical strike. They could both be Close, or Direct. So, instead of having "Melee Weapon", "Melee Touch", "Close Blast 3" and "Close Burst 1", we could have "Direct, Weapon", "Direct, Touch", "Direct, Blast 3" and "Direct, Burst 1".
Of course, this could be refined a bit. I can see the point of origin being mistakin in a Direct attack as proposed above: an area attack would have origin at the character, but a weapon attack would be adjacent or have reach. So perhaps this is not the best way. We do, however, have the Personal range, though it is not for attacks (apparently, only for utility powers). A Close Burst would probably fit best as "Personal, Burst X" than "Direct, Burst X". Same for blasts and lines.
So, we would have Melee, Personal and Ranged attacks. Area attacks would fit in Personal (blast, burst or line) and Ranged (burst or wall). Only Ranged attacks would provoke OA's, which simplifies the learning process.
So, there you go. Just some cents tossed as a mental exercise. Please share any thoughts.
Last edited: