Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kbrakke" data-source="post: 6968742" data-attributes="member: 6781797">I was not aware of that, my fantasy gaming experience being restricted to D&amp;D, Pathfinder, and Dresden. But as another point of evidence Ranged Attacks in the PHB&quot;You can make ranged attacks only against targets within a specified range... Some ranged attacks, such as those made with a longbow or a shortbow, have two ranges. The smaller number is the normal range, and the larger number is the long range. Your attack roll has disadvantage when your target is beyond normal range, and you can’t attack a target beyond the long range.&quot; - PHB p. 195Again no mention of there being a lower bound on the range. And a natural reading of within a specifided range would indicate a range of&nbsp; Blank - 120 would include creatures within five feet of you. I don't think 5e has an established history of starting indexing at 5 feet.Compare to Melee Attacks later on that page.&quot;Used in hand-to-hand combat, a melee attack allows you to attack a foe within your reach.&quot; - PHB p. 195It then defines your reach as 5ft for most creatures.Just reading what is there, there is not much compelling evidence for ranged attacks within five feet to be impossible. The only thing is what you have found where they say range attacks are &quot;at distance&quot;, but that isn't really firm, whereas I find &quot;within a specified range&quot; sans restrictions at five feet to be compelling evidence for no restriction.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kbrakke, post: 6968742, member: 6781797"] I was not aware of that, my fantasy gaming experience being restricted to D&D, Pathfinder, and Dresden. But as another point of evidence Ranged Attacks in the PHB "You can make ranged attacks only against targets within a specified range... Some ranged attacks, such as those made with a longbow or a shortbow, have two ranges. The smaller number is the normal range, and the larger number is the long range. Your attack roll has disadvantage when your target is beyond normal range, and you can’t attack a target beyond the long range." - PHB p. 195 Again no mention of there being a lower bound on the range. And a natural reading of within a specifided range would indicate a range of Blank - 120 would include creatures within five feet of you. I don't think 5e has an established history of starting indexing at 5 feet. Compare to Melee Attacks later on that page. "Used in hand-to-hand combat, a melee attack allows you to attack a foe within your reach." - PHB p. 195 It then defines your reach as 5ft for most creatures. Just reading what is there, there is not much compelling evidence for ranged attacks within five feet to be impossible. The only thing is what you have found where they say range attacks are "at distance", but that isn't really firm, whereas I find "within a specified range" sans restrictions at five feet to be compelling evidence for no restriction. [/QUOTE]

Verification