Creatures with Reach using Reach Weapons

[Tav_Behemoth]

OK, so a human with 5' reach can strike the adjacent squares with a non-reach weapon, and can strike the second ring of squares (but not the first) with a reach weapon. In this case, the diagonal doesn't count as two squares -- so the ring of squares threatened is a perfect square.

What happens when a giant with 10' natural reach uses a reach weapon?

My assumption was that it doesn't threaten the first two rings of squares, but that it does threaten the next two. However, letting it strike 4 diagonals away seemed pretty extreme.

Anyone know if this issue has been addressed anywhere?

 

[Kyrail]

Pretty Sure it only gets 3 quares on a diagnal if it's a reach creature with a reach weapon. Thats 20' feet if the first counts as 5' then 7.5 and 7.5.

 

[Squire James]

A Large monster with natural 10' reach (which means he can attack 5' and 10' away with normal weapons) uses a Reach weapon appropriate to its size. AFAIK, this means he can attack things an extra 5' away, in this case things 10' and 15' away.

I normally count 2 diagonal squares as 15'. My only exception is exactly 10' reach, where the 15' diagonals are still covered in order to close a loophole where a combatant could choose to approach at a diagonal to avoid an AoO.

 

[Egres]

A Large monster with natural 10' reach (which means he can attack 5' and 10' away with normal weapons) uses a Reach weapon appropriate to its size. AFAIK, this means he can attack things an extra 5' away, in this case things 10' and 15' away.
.

A Large Monster with a reach weapon would have its reach doubled, just like any other creature.

But it couldn't strike a creature between 5ft to 10ft far.

It could only hit creatures at least 15ft far.

 

[Tav_Behemoth]

A Large monster with natural 10' reach (which means he can attack 5' and 10' away with normal weapons) uses a Reach weapon appropriate to its size. AFAIK, this means he can attack things an extra 5' away, in this case things 10' and 15' away.

I normally count 2 diagonal squares as 15'. My only exception is exactly 10' reach, where the 15' diagonals are still covered in order to close a loophole where a combatant could choose to approach at a diagonal to avoid an AoO.

The SRD specifies "Most reach weapons double the wielder’s natural reach, meaning that a typical Small or Medium wielder of such a weapon can attack a creature 10 feet away, but not a creature in an adjacent square. A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away."

But I think your logic is good that the exception to the normal rule for diagonals is only applicable to the 10' range. Thanks!

 

[rilus]

To me that rule about not being able to attack an adjacent enemy with a reach weapon makes no sense. I mean, if you use a spiked chain for instance, you can't make your chain just "jump" over the adjacent spaces around you. If I am surrounded by enemies and I try to hit someone in the very back, chances are, I will hit one of the enemies adjacent to me before my chain gets to the guys behind them.

That's why, whenever any of my players use reach weapons, be it lances, chains, etc, I always let them use them on anyone, even on enemies normally within the "untouchable region", but with only half their attack bonus. It's a lot harder to hit someone standing five feet away from you with a lance, but it is definitely not impossible.

Here's a quick rundown of the rules I use for reach weapons:
Imagine you're using a lance and you have a Gnoll five feet from you and an Orc ten feet from you right behind the gnoll.

Situation 1: If you're trying to attack the Orc without harming the Gnoll, you only get half your attack bonus.

Situation 2: If you don't care if you hurt Gnoll, then you get no penalty against the Orc, but you still have a penalty against the Gnoll.

Resolution A for Situation 2:If you hit both the Gnoll AND the Orc, you hurt the Gnoll at normal damage and the Orc with a -6 penalty because you're having to go through the Gnoll to hit the Orc. So, sometimes, if you don't hit hard enough, you may cause very little to no damage to the Orc as you went through the Gnoll.

Resolution B for Situation 2: If you only hit the Orc, you deal full damage as the Gnoll evaded your attack.

 

[Geoff Watson]

Have a look at pages 308-310 of the DMG. It shows exactly which squares are threatened by each creature size with or without reach weapons.

Geoff.

 

[MichaelH]

To me that rule about not being able to attack an adjacent enemy with a reach weapon makes no sense. I mean, if you use a spiked chain for instance, you can't make your chain just "jump" over the adjacent spaces around you. If I am surrounded by enemies and I try to hit someone in the very back, chances are, I will hit one of the enemies adjacent to me before my chain gets to the guys behind them.

Spiked chains are an exception to that rule. You can attack adjacent enemies with a spiked chain by the rules as written.