Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 7141168" data-attributes="member: 7006">For example, Lunging Attack gives you an extra 5' reach on your melee weapon attack.  The boon of this maneuver is you can now reach a target that you otherwise couldn't get to (because perhaps you are in a corridor behind a pair of your allies and thus can't get adjacent to the target.)Now, had it been impossible to attack that target except with this maneuver, then we could say this maneuver had great value (because it'd be turning a 0-damage non-attack into a potential damaging attack.)  However, if that fighter can't reach the target with his melee weapon, he can still pull out a javelin  and attack the target at range.  Yes, there will be slight negatives to doing that (target gets a +2 bonus to AC due to cover, the weapon damage is probably less than what the melee weapon would give etc.), but it's still an attack you get to make.  One that you still can potentially add one of your other maneuvers to.So the question is... is the gain from getting to use your melee weapon on this target because of the Lunging Attack maneuver you decide to take, more than enough to offset the much smaller amount of times you actually would find the need to use it?  Or does just using a ranged attack (plus potentially another one of your maneuvers) make the Lunging Attack relatively unnecessary for how you fight?  That I can't answer, it comes down to individuals as you suggested... but indeed most those individuals will probably make a "spreadsheet" analysis of its usefulness even if it's just casually.  We can't help ourselves.I mean, we might SAY "I'm going to make my character a knife-fighter" (even though daggers are the lowest-damage weapons out there)... but I'm pretty sure that even if we do, we're going to end up dual-wielding them, and will probably make ourselves a Rogue to boot.  And then we'll justify it to ourselves why this character concept we came up with now fights with daggers in both hands, and is actually a Rogue, not a Fighter.And it's by that same token why we would look at the gains from having Lunging Attack as an option versus what our potential would be without it, and determine whether or not we would bother taking (or using) Lunging Attack.  And in truth, there's nothing wrong with making that determination, or determining that Lunging Attack isn't worth taking over another option.And then at that point, we can ask ourselves... what gains would Lunging Attack need to have to change our determination?  And how easy would it be to make that change?  And there's nothing wrong with asking ourselves that either.</blockquote>

Verification