Reach and attacking in 3D.

[Chris Knapp]

I was just reading through the Tarrasque's Earthbinding aura (target's maximum altitude reduced to 20 feet (putting it within the tarrasque’s reach)) and wondered at the weirdness of the assumption that a creature would have to be brought to an altitude of 20' in order to be attacked by a 20'(+?) tall gargantuan (4 square cube?) creature. I know 4E never had 3D in mind when it came out but it seems a bit silly that a reach attack starts at ground level when attacking vertically. An altitide of 40' seems much more reasonable, and much more threatening.

 

[Ryujin]

Yeah, some things, like vertical reach, just aren't too well fleshed-out. I generally assume that a creature 'occupies' a height equal to its length and width, then allow reach to go from there.that means a 2x2 creature, with a reach of 2, can readily hit 204 squares other than the 8, that it occupies.

 

[AeroDm]

I was just reading through the Tarrasque's Earthbinding aura (target's maximum altitude reduced to 20 feet (putting it within the tarrasque’s reach)) and wondered at the weirdness of the assumption that a creature would have to be brought to an altitude of 20' in order to be attacked by a 20'(+?) tall gargantuan (4 square cube?) creature. I know 4E never had 3D in mind when it came out but it seems a bit silly that a reach attack starts at ground level when attacking vertically. An altitide of 40' seems much more reasonable, and much more threatening.

I think the design goal was to ensure future artists could draw that tarrasque with t-rex arms.

 

[DracoSuave]

I think the design goal was to ensure future artists could draw that tarrasque with t-rex arms.

Heh.

Not all animals are capable of vertically being as threatening as they are horizontally. I don't see it as a problem.

A terrasque is a giant eating machine. It can eat things on ground level easily. Reach doesn't imply it has long arms, it implies it has a way to attack distant creatures. Maybe it just pounces forward, bites, then heads back.

That doesn't mean it necessarily has or doesn't have vertical reach.

Not that it matters, it's a giant fictional critter.

Edit: It's also an elemental, which implies it's connected to some element or elements. In this case, if it's tied to earth, vertical reach might not be appropriate, which explains why it makes things earthbound.

 

[wlmartin]

I was just reading through the Tarrasque's Earthbinding aura (target's maximum altitude reduced to 20 feet (putting it within the tarrasque’s reach)) and wondered at the weirdness of the assumption that a creature would have to be brought to an altitude of 20' in order to be attacked by a 20'(+?) tall gargantuan (4 square cube?) creature. I know 4E never had 3D in mind when it came out but it seems a bit silly that a reach attack starts at ground level when attacking vertically. An altitide of 40' seems much more reasonable, and much more threatening.

Dev's have said in a podcast previously (I forget which one.. sorry) that effects are cubed, this would include auras.

So when someone casts a spell that is close blast 5, it isnt just 5x5 it is 5x5x5.

Hope this helps