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="tiornys" data-source="post: 4906608" data-attributes="member: 17633">Keep in mind that I haven't (and won't) offer an opinion on whether or not a "lunge" or similar fix is a good or bad idea.  What I will say is that I have, once, seen a well reasoned, convincing, real-world based argument in favor of keeping the bubble intact (or at least against a "lunge"; see below).  Since WotC's boards are down, I can't find that argument to quote it, so I'll try to give you what I remember.The poster had experience with fencing or a similar sword-based martial art, and pointed out that in a duel, there are three levels of (non-grappling) engagement.  In close, it's easy to attack your opponent because you can launch attacks past his guard.  From far away, you have options for rapidly closing and attacking your opponent.  However, there's an in-between point where it's difficult to attack your opponent (without being hit by him) because you aren't close enough to just attack, and if you try to get close and attack you're too slow to get your attack off before you get whacked.IIRC, that poster advocated an interpretation of the charge rules where it was permissible to charge to "the closest square which is both at least 2 squares away and from which you can attack the opponent".  So, if you're 1 square away, you can (usually) still charge the opponent, but you almost certainly will provoke an opportunity attack if you do so.Anyway, I'm sure I've forgotten important details in that argument, but the essence that has stayed with me is that some people with more real-world sword combat experience than I possess think there is merit in having a distance from which it is very awkward to launch an attack.t~</blockquote>

Verification