Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 6982745" data-attributes="member: 12731">Let me just add that to me "relatively short range" includes a range of 70 ft or even as short as 40 ft. To me, that's entirely reasonable. (What I don't see as reasonable is the expectation that monsters can routinely charge a hero in the first round, assuming they win initiative. That simply stretches credulity too much, given the inherent disadvantage group sneak have visavi group perception, and especially given the lack of racial skill modifiers in 5E). "Charge outta nowhere" as I call it still happens of course, but as a player, getting ambushed like that needs to be the exception and not the rule or I get (very) frustrated that my character lacks any ability to ward himself from being jumped from a paltry ten yards...70 feet - the monster cannot close to melee this round, and - assuming the party isn't surrounded and retreats 30 ft - still starts the next round not able to deliver a full round's worth of melee attacks.40 feet - the monster cannot both close to melee and deliver a full round's worth of attacks this round. Either the monster "loses" one round (compared to the party) or it has to rely on ranged attacks. Some creatures have excellent ranged attacks, of course - but on average, this is a huge win for the party.Do note that this depends on the party being able to deal as much (or nearly so) damage at range as in melee.Which is exactly the core of the entire issue.</blockquote>

Verification