Close Quarters Fighting and Reach

[rvalle]

Yep - though if they want to hold, they must move forward into the opponent's square. If he has friends, the movement = reach to get him there will likely provoke at least one AoO.

Seems to me it would be the grabbed creature moving into the creatures area as it pulls him/her in.

To use the LoTR example above, Frodo was moving to the creature, not the other way around.

rv

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

That's because the creature in LotR has Improved Grab, which explicitly allows you to pull the target into your own square.

Normal grappling, however, requires that you come to them.

 

[rvalle]

That's because the creature in LotR has Improved Grab, which explicitly allows you to pull the target into your own square.

Normal grappling, however, requires that you come to them.

Ahh, thanks. I didn't know that rule.

Nice to see LoTR played by the rules though.

rv

 

[Philip]

Take these two sentences together. Must threaten to make any melee attack, including AoO and readied action/Sunder.

The only exceptions are (1) the whip, which doesn't threaten an area (therefore no AoO) but it can still make a melee attack, and (2) that pesky Ellusive Target/Overreach.

It just seemed to me that Close Quarters Fighting was meant to give the little guy a chance against those Big Reaching Improved Grapplers. Saying that reach makes it impossibly for the character with the feat to make the attack makes the feat rather worthless for this purpose, since it does not give any extra benefit against creatures without Improved Grab, and most dangerous creatures with Improved Grab are large or larger.

 

[kjenks]

It just seemed to me that Close Quarters Fighting was meant to give the little guy a chance against those Big Reaching Improved Grapplers. Saying that reach makes it impossibly for the character with the feat to make the attack makes the feat rather worthless for this purpose, since it does not give any extra benefit against creatures without Improved Grab, and most dangerous creatures with Improved Grab are large or larger.

So maybe characters who have CQF should use a reach weapon to take advantage of this feat.

If you're unarmed, you don't threaten any squares, so CQF doesn't help you. If you walk around with inadequate equipment, you give up your right to whine about getting grappled.

 

[Philip]

So maybe characters who have CQF should use a reach weapon to take advantage of this feat.

If you're unarmed, you don't threaten any squares, so CQF doesn't help you. If you walk around with inadequate equipment, you give up your right to whine about getting grappled.

Doesn't it seem a little bit 'odd' to you need a reach weapon for close quarters fighting to be effective. It just seems against the spirit of the feat.

 

[Balord]

CLOSE QUARTERS fighting with a REACH weapon? Philip obviously has a high Wisdom score. CQF is designed to give you an attack of opportunity against an opponent that's trying to succeed on a touch attack and grab hold of you. Basically, you are attacking the part of the creature that's touching you. How are you supposed to do that with a reach weapon? Reach weapons are designed for reach, not close quarters.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

I can see the argument for CQF not working vs. a reach opponent. But I think it was meant to work, even against opponents with reach. It only kicks in when someone tries to grapple, and if we then restrict that to opponents who try to grapple--that don't have reach--the times when it will actually activate are laughably rare.

So while I applaud the rules-lawyering of the "no" camp here, I personally will use the loophole that it doesn't mention reach in the feat description--combined with the precedent of Elusive Target--to rule that yes, CQF allows you to get an AoO, even on the aboleth twenty feet away.

 

[sfedi]

Ok, now you can TRIP someone who has tried to grab you, even if you can't reach his legs.

Nice.

 

[Creat]

Well to me close quater fighting clearly doesn't allow attacks of opportunity against opponents who have reach for the following reasons:
a) you can't attack limbs in DnD (at least afaik) AT ALL unless specifically mentioned in the creatures description (like the Hydra, but there are others as well), in which case its also alowed to sever the head or the limb that can be attacked (this actually is the reason for allowing this attack at all). If you could you could also ready an action every round to "attack his hand when he tries to hit me". That would make reach pretty much useless, except for only getting one attack instead of a full attack action.
b) If the feat would negate the reach-problem it would be mentioned in one form or the other in it's description. If it was meant to give you AoOs agains ALL creatures trying to grab (with or without improved grab) - even those out of reach - it would be mentioned, because as mentioned above attacking/severing limbs is normally not allowed in DnD (or I would always aim for severing a head and not just hitting him somewhere) and the Troll that grabs you is out of reach so you can't hit him.
c) if you argue that you could get the AoO when the creature drags you into your space or moves into yours, that can't work either because at that point the grab is already established and you count as grappled and as such you 1) can't make attacks of opportunity and 2) you probably can't use the weapon you're holding since it's not small I assume (which is the maximum size allowed when grappling).

This feat is already quite good the way it is. It allows you to make AoOs against everyone trying to grapple you AND add the caused damage to the grapple check. As a bonus you also get to make those AoOs against creatures with improved grab. If would also negate reach for the purpose of grappling attempts that would be a bit too much, and they would have mentioned it in the feat's description if that's what the designers intended. You don't just 'forget' something this significant if you wanted it to be this way.