Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GMMichael" data-source="post: 8099501" data-attributes="member: 6685730">More support for Furthest-Reach-Only: fleeing becomes the more likely motivation as a character gets further away.There's an overriding intention though: consistent rules interpretation.  It's more important that the entire structure remains standing than one part of it getting called out for being built strangely.  Interpreting OAs based on RAI instead of RAW calls all clearly written rules into question.  That's not good for the franchise, but it can work for your table.The opportunity attack was born back in 3.0 edition (it probably had inspiration in other games before that) and it answered the turn-based combat problems:1) How do I create a defensive line when opponents can just waltz through any 5-foot gap in it?  (Hence, "passing by.")2) How can my opponent run away from me without consequence, as if I'm letting him go unharmed?An attack of opportunity is intended to answer those problems by saying, "now they can't!"  To apply that to the 3-range-dragon problem, you can apply the Crawford solution or the DMMike solution:Crawford (RAW):1) As your opponent (the PC) waltzes through, you have three different decision points to consider, occurring chronologically, to harm your opponent/defend the line. 2) As your opponent moves near you (possibly without fleeing), three zones around you allow you to get an extra attack against him.DMMike (RAI):1) As your opponent (the PC) waltzes through, you can attack him once with any of your melee attacks if he continues beyond your (furthest) reach.2) As your opponent moves near you, combat continues as normal.  If your opponent leaves the range of (all) your melee attacks, you can make an attack with any weapon that would have not let him go unharmed.Note that the OP problem diminishes or vanishes when you eschew the "optional" grid rules.  If you say "we form a defensive line!" then it's clear that someone trying to get through will be stopped or attacked.  If you say "I back away from the dragon's claws!" then it's clear that you're not fleeing.  Or if you say "I'm getting away from the dragon!" then it's clear that the dragon will get an OA with whatever means it had available.</blockquote>

Verification