Do elves stack (in a 5' square)

[Gromm]

You can occupy the same space as a creature in combat ONLY by grappling it (be it friend or foe).
In the above example with the large creature the grappled 5x5 creature is in one of the squares of the larger creature (pick the most logical one). This keeps the character from becoming say a huge or colossal creature, and makes it easy to tell where the character is for say healing spells or what have you that other players might want to cast on them.
Plus this keeps a person, say a behir's or purple worm'smouth, in a tunnel as wide as the creature from suddenly appearing behind the behir/worm.
It works well and isn't too confusing (I've seen many PCs grabbed, held, and swallowed from improved grabs in my day).

 

[Iku Rex]

Where is this fabled rule saying that you can never occupy the same square as another (friendly) creature?

The rule we use is that two creatures in the same square both get a -2 penalty to attack and AC, and a +2 cover bonus. I guess these penalties would stack for more than two creatures, and the cover bonus would also improve.

(At some point there is no more room to fight of course...)

 

[Henrix]

The DMG is a good book, often discussing the rationale behind rules in the PHB.
On p. 70, it says "A 5-foot square, for instance, can hold several characters, they just can't all fight."

I take this to mean that yes, you can stack as many elves as you reasonably could in a 5-foot square, but they cannot fight, cast spells, threaten the area around them, etc.
(I am tempted to have "stacking" provoke AoO's as well.)


So;

1) Yes, see above.

2) No rule, but it seems appropriate.

3) Try it out at home, you might like it! (Perhaps four, with some degree of comfort, and still standing.)

4) That would be up to the DM. Far too many factors involved for it to be any good hard rules.

5) No.

6) It is a standard action, as it says in the rules for grappling. It does not seem like you're out of the same square, though, so you are advised to move as well.
You can do what you normally can do as a standard action as a partial action, yes.

7) I'd say no, see above.

 

[Rel]

I use exactly the same rules as Iku Rex does (which makes me wonder if we both read them somewhere). It seems obvious to me that two or more people could occupy the same 5 foot square and the game even allows for moving into someone else's square.

But it seems equally obvious that being in such a cramped space makes it harder to attack and easier to be hit. The players in my campaign have taken advantage of this situation a couple of times when fighting in a narrow stairwell. But then again, so did the orcs who were fighting them.

 

[Greythax]

Yah, I read that page last night after posting (p. 70, DMG). That information was speaking about non-combat actions, or combat actions outside normal combat sequence. But reading in that area does bring up question 2 again due to a foot note on page 63 (i think, don't have a book in front of me) table 3-10. "Creatures with a 0 reach must move into the same square as their opponent to attack." I think this is a perfectly reasonable rule, otherwise we would open ourselves up to gnats dive bombing on every attack from 5 feet away. However, if one of your characters was being attacked by a cloud of gnats (up to 100 according to the table) trying to help him seems like it would incur more than a 25% chance of hitting him (if you were say, swinging a sword at the gnats)

Perhaps this is one of those situations where the rules are badly incomplete. Fighting monsters with Improved Grab, my party is finding more and more situations where they are attacking creatures that are occupying the same square as allies. I guess in absence of better rules, I will go with the one from bull rush. Thanks for the posts everyone.

Greythax

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

So, for those who do not allow stacking of med creatures under any circumstances, what would you do in that 10' square raft scenario I portrayed earlier? Force the extra two PCs off the raft? Make them lay down and play dead while the others fight with/without some penalty for them being in the way? Or would you in fact let them all fight but with some penalty?

 

[Oracular Vision]

Because it is totally unaddressed in the rules, I have had to rule that two characters of small to large size can occupy the same square in combat, but they may not cast spells with somatic components, use anything but small melee weapons, and they both lose their dex bonuses to AC because they can't dodge away from attacks anymore. Sometimes the characters do it anyway, to save someone, and there is no reason in combat they couldn't do it, it should just be a bad idea, not impossible.

YMMV

 

[Gromm]

If you want to house rule it, something along the lines of -4 to all attack rolls and no Dex bonus makes pretty good sense. Only allowing light weapons, or medium piercing weapons also feels about right. You also could disallow a Reflex save, or penalize it. In any case that should be only for 2 friendlies in the same square, anything else is a grapple.

 

[the Jester]

Well really! Get together with your friends and see how many people can fit in a five-foot square area; it's quite a lot.

Then put a backpack (a real camping pack, not a school pack or anything sissy like that) on everyone, and give everyone three sticks that are about 2'-3' long (roughly .7- one meter for you non-American folks). These represent weapons and gear. You'll find that this reduces the amount of cramping together you can do and still effectively move.

Then try to poke those sticks at a tree five feet away from you. It's a lot easier if you all give each other a little room.

After some experimentation like this in the hall outside my apartment, I came to this ruling for my game: characters can cram into the same space but it is difficult to function effectively. The creatures lose their dex bonuses to everything (AC, saves, ranged attack, skills,etc); this means they also lose all their dodge bonuses. Uncanny dodge doesn't help, either, so rogues tend to really avoid these situations. Characters also suffer a -4 attack penalty when sharing a square.

I've never really considered the cover issue; maybe I'll start using the 25% cover rule too, with (naturally) a chance that the blow would strike the covering creature if it would penetrate its AC...

I've also never had it come up with more than two characters in the same space; I'm sure the penalties would be much much worse.

 

[chilibean]

I am almost certaint in the PhB it is mentioned in the Bull Rush description that there is a certain situation in which you can end up in with the bull rusher lying prone in the bull rushee's square (I think it's if the first trip attack fails and the reversed trip attack succeeds, but I don't have my book with me). So in that situation you end up with a prone enemy in the same square as you.

You can add that as ammunition for the side arguing for stacked elves ... assuming my memory is worth a darn ...

For those that with to impose house rule penalties for occupying the same square, consider giving a break to those with the close-quarters combat feat from S&F.