Reach and AoO's: Cross, or Square?

[dcollins]

Is this, like, the 3rd thread on this topic in just the last week?

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30733
http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30895

Once, again, officially, from the Main FAQ, v. 10152002, p. 24, under (oddly) "Goods and Services":

When counting diagonals, the first (and all odd diagonal) is 5 feet and the second (and all even diagonal) is 10 feet. ou'd need a reach of 15 feet to attack 2 diagonals away (but only a 20-foot reach to attack 3 diagonals away). Likewise, if you move 3 diagonals, your total movement would be 20 feet.

That having been said, I too would prefer a square-shaped reach area (at the 10 ft. level). The "majority of the space" argument is persuasive to me (among other reasons).

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

The clincher for me is reach weapons. If you follow the cross shaped threat pattern, reach weapons can't attack at all on the diagonal.

2XXX2 P=PC
X1X1X
XXPXX
X1X1X
2XXX2

Under the FAQ ruling, the PC can't attack square 2 because it's 15 feet away and can't attack square 1 because it's five feet away. Consequently, a PC with a longspear in a diagonal corridor can't attack at all--a rather absurd conclusion.

So, I use the square threated area approach. 10' reach threatens square #2.

 

[Berk]

Under the FAQ ruling, the PC can't attack square 2 because it's 15 feet away and can't attack square 1 because it's five feet away. Consequently, a PC with a longspear in a diagonal corridor can't attack at all--a rather absurd conclusion.

hey, that's what happens when you use a weapon that doesn't allow you to attack right in front of you.

 

[0-hr]

hey, that's what happens when you use a weapon that doesn't allow you to attack right in front of you.

Yea, it's just like in real life. If you are in a north-south corridor, then you can attack with your long spear. But if you go into a nothwest-southeast running corridor, then it suddenly stops working.

 

[Negative Zero]

Yea, it's just like in real life. If you are in a north-south corridor, then you can attack with your long spear. But if you go into a nothwest-southeast running corridor, then it suddenly stops working.

come now, don't change the situation from 3 dimensions to 2 and assume that the same rules apply. i won't say what that kind of thinking is, and just give you the benefit of the doubt, OK?

anyway, ironically, my DM and i were just talking about this very problem in our game and how it applies to spells as well. here's how he's decided to rule:

I think its unfair to completely take that box away for reach weapons and spells. Since reach/spell cover 1/2 of that box, the best way to handle it is to roll a d6 -- 1-3: within reach/spell, 4-6 -- out of reach. So if you are in that square you have 50% to be affected by spell or reach weapon

whaddayaall think?

~NegZ

 

[dcollins]

whaddayaall think?

I actually have considered a 50/50 roll like that for the edge of spell areas. On the one hand, it would be nice to have a bit of unpredictability as casters try to perfectly situate their blasty spells. On the other hand, it would be one more roll/complication to slow the action down.

 

[Negative Zero]

... On the other hand, it would be one more roll/complication to slow the action down.

yeah but rolling dice IS the action! all gamers love to roll dice. ... no? and like someone said in another thread, indecision slows down games/action not dice.

~NegZ

 

[Kae'Yoss]

One of the players in my game, a Psionicist, has extended his reach to 2 meters.

You mean 3 meters, or 10 feet, right?

 

[thegreatbuddha]

The European version probably uses a 1 square= 1 meter convention, as having to convert from meters to feest every time distance is involved would be a huge hassle. Five feet is ~1.7 meters, and you always round down in 3e, unless specifically stated otherwise, so 1.7m = 1m.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

The European version probably uses a 1 square= 1 meter convention

The German version uses 1 square = 1,5m (so 5 feet = 1.5 meters).
Dunno what other languages the rules have been translated to, but I think the rest of the localized versions in Europe use the same thing.

, as having to convert from meters to feest every time distance is involved would be a huge hassle.

It is a huge hassle: we have some people with the German Spielerset (the unfortunate ones with bad English who must use the terribly badly translated versions!), and the others have Player's Handbooks. The other rules we only have in English. So some want to know the distance in meters, and we have conversions all the time.

Five feet is ~1.7 meters,

1 foot is 30.48cm, so 5 feet are 1.524 meters.

and you always round down in 3e, unless specifically stated otherwise, so 1.7m = 1m.

I would not apply that rule here. That rule's only for rounding down bonuses and the like, not for something that is converted.

Funny enough, the Star Wars d20 RPG uses meters, and has a 2-meters-step, and base speed for medium-size and small species is 10 and 6 meters, respectively.