Oh, you can leave your space in other ways: teleport for example.
But your 'space' moves with you! If the dragon occupies a 15-foot square, then he only occupies one. This 'space' is not subject to quantum uncertainty! It is where it is. It can be moves by various means, but when it moves it is no longer where it was.
If the act of attacking moved that space into the square you attack, then the other rules come into play: you can't end your move in a conscious opponent's space, you have a limit on movement based on speed (that dragon can move its full speed and still attack 20-feet beyond its space with a bite attack), entering an opponent's space provokes, etc.
Picture the combat grid. There is the 15-foot square occupied by the dragon, and there is his lunch 20-feet away. When the dragon bites, do you physically move the dragon's mini into the target's space, provoking for movement? Does the dragon's space become something other than a 15-foot square every time it bites?
Oh he is absolutely in his 15ft square, but he is also wherever he has reached to so as to interact with something there. The only space he is with certainty at any given point in a round is his space. Which is why you can always interact with him there. Except for the moment where he reaches into another space to interact with it. Then he is also in that square, for exactly the duration of the interaction.
His 15ft space stays exactly where it is, it needn't change/move, but he also is where he has reached to. Because he can reach there, and chose to reach there to do something there.
That is what reach does, it allows you to reach stuff a distance away from your space. But while you reach it, you must necessarily be said to be there.
If I reach my hand across my desk to grab my cup of coffee from 2ft away, I'm very much still occupying the space of my desk chair. But I'm also occupying the direct vicinity of my cup of coffee, for the entire duration of picking it up.
That is what we can say with certainty. Is my arm in a straight line between me and the cup? Don't know, could be. Is it bent or curved? Don't know, could be. Is it coming in a downward angle, maybe from the side? Could be. Am I reaching with my left or my right arm? Could be.
The only thing we know for certain is that I'm still occupying my space (my chair) and am also where my cup is. I must be to pick it up.
The dragon is still in his 15ft space, his space needn't move. But when he bites the fighter, he is also where the fighter is. If you can take advantage of striking at that exact moment, you will find him there, within 5ft of you.
Logically, this is all true. However, as your argument was rules based, I might concede if there is actually a rule that states that your space essentially traps you within it and you cannot be any location other than your space. Or something to that effect. Like... a bunch of mimes, all stuck in invisible cubes.
When this thread started, I went looking for RAW that said something to that exact effect, and I simply could not find any. I looked fairly thoroughly too... and as of yet none has been brought up here. Just the assertions that there is some RAW out there, somewhere, in the ether.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Arrows fly high.
Real arrows? At point-blank range, they don't fly high. At greater distances, yep you're right.
I don't know how that is relevant, though. My main point was that (although some simple cases like arrows at point-blank range do exist) in many cases it would be difficult to determine which squares a weapon moves through if PF assumed realistic trajectories or lines of attack. So, if anything, your comment bolstered my argument.
Arrows fly high.Real arrows? At point-blank range, they don't fly high. At greater distances, yep you're right.
I don't know how that is relevant, though. My main point was that (although some simple cases like arrows at point-blank range do exist) in many cases it would be difficult to determine which squares a weapon moves through if PF assumed realistic trajectories or lines of attack. So, if anything, your comment bolstered my argument.
Is it hard to determine that the weapon was where it originated from or at the destination? Forget the path for a moment, can you determine when/where it is as it hits someone?
Can we be certain the arrow is within 5ft of Bob literally as Bob is struck with the arrow?
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
And how my argument is relevant to the discussion between Remy and other people is: If we assume that a creature counts as being outside its space when attacking, are we to assume that the only "extra square" you count as being in is the one you're attacking? Or also (realistically, logically) in a number of intervening squares?
If the intervening squares also count, how do we determine which squares the limb, or the head of a dragon, or the weapon moves through? There are no rules for this. Also, the rules don't mention you count as being outside the squares in your space, ever, as far as I can tell. Feel free to quote anything that allows exceptions to this rule. (Other than the Strike Back feat, of course, which also supports this argument.)
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Arrows fly high.Real arrows? At point-blank range, they don't fly high. At greater distances, yep you're right.
I don't know how that is relevant, though. My main point was that (although some simple cases like arrows at point-blank range do exist) in many cases it would be difficult to determine which squares a weapon moves through if PF assumed realistic trajectories or lines of attack. So, if anything, your comment bolstered my argument.
Is it hard to determine that the weapon was where it originated from or at the destination? Forget the path for a moment, can you determine when/where it is as it hits someone?
Can we be certain the arrow is within 5ft of Bob literally as Bob is struck with the arrow?
Which is why I'd house-rule that Bob can ready an action to sunder the arrow. It'd be really awesome to be able to do that.
However, the rules don't support it, (with the exception of feats that specifically allow something like this, such as Deflect Arrows) so it is a house rule.
Arrows fly high.Real arrows? At point-blank range, they don't fly high. At greater distances, yep you're right.
I don't know how that is relevant, though. My main point was that (although some simple cases like arrows at point-blank range do exist) in many cases it would be difficult to determine which squares a weapon moves through if PF assumed realistic trajectories or lines of attack. So, if anything, your comment bolstered my argument.
Is it hard to determine that the weapon was where it originated from or at the destination? Forget the path for a moment, can you determine when/where it is as it hits someone?
Can we be certain the arrow is within 5ft of Bob literally as Bob is struck with the arrow?
Which is why I'd house-rule that Bob can ready an action to sunder the arrow. It'd be really awesome to be able to do that.
However, the rules don't support it, (with the exception of feats that specifically allow something like this, such as Deflect Arrows) so it is a house rule.
Again, the assertion that the rules don't allow it. But... nothing to back that up.
A loosed arrow is an unattended object, and it most certainly gets within your reach before it can hit you. It is a perfectly valid target for a readied action. RAW.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh he is absolutely in his 15ft square, but he is also wherever he has reached to so as to interact with something there. The only space he is with certainty at any given point in a round is his space. Which is why you can always interact with him there. Except for the moment where he reaches into another space to interact with it. Then he is also in that square, for exactly the duration of the interaction.
Not according to the rules, which say he occupies his space, never says he occupies anywhere outside his space, and states that you have to reach his space in order to attack him.
Logically, this is all true. However, as your argument was rules based, I might concede if there is actually a rule that states that your space essentially traps you within it and you cannot be any location other than your space. Or something to that effect. Like... a bunch of mimes, all stuck in invisible cubes.
The rules tell you how it works, and visualising body parts reaching outside your space doesn't change those rules.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I guess we both agree that normally you only count as being in your space, correct?
Striking a limb outside a creature's space is thus an exception, correct?
You say this exception is covered in the rules, I say it isn't, correct?
It's hard to disprove something that doesn't exist. It's easier to prove that something does exist. Just quote the text that allows the exception and we're done here. :)
As for the arrow, if it's unattended, youcan ready an action to pick it up before it hits?
Oh he is absolutely in his 15ft square, but he is also wherever he has reached to so as to interact with something there. The only space he is with certainty at any given point in a round is his space. Which is why you can always interact with him there. Except for the moment where he reaches into another space to interact with it. Then he is also in that square, for exactly the duration of the interaction.Not according to the rules, which say he occupies his space, never says he occupies anywhere outside his space, and states that you have to reach his space in order to attack him.
The rules do not say you must reach his space to hit him.
The rules say this, exactly this:
Natural Attacks
Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach (usually 5 feet).
No mention of spaces.
Melee Attacks
With a normal melee weapon, you can strike any opponent within 5 feet.
No mention of spaces.
They simply need to be within your reach. Not that their space needs to be within your reach, just that they do. You are adding additional requirements that simply are not RAW.
Logically, this is all true. However, as your argument was rules based, I might concede if there is actually a rule that states that your space essentially traps you within it and you cannot be any location other than your space. Or something to that effect. Like... a bunch of mimes, all stuck in invisible cubes.The rules tell you how it works, and visualising body parts reaching outside your space doesn't change those rules.
Okay, like I said... direct me to the RAW that explains how we are stuck within little invisible cubes and I will concede.
I guess we both agree that normally you only count as being in your space, correct?
Striking a limb outside a creature's space is thus an exception, correct?
You say this exception is covered in the rules, I say it isn't, correct?
It's hard to disprove something that doesn't exist. It's easier to prove that something does exist. Just quote the text that allows the exception and we're done here. :)
As for the arrow, if it's unattended, youcan ready an action to pick it up before it hits?
Striking a creatures limb? What are you talking about… you just attack the creature. If you are fighting a Colossal dragon, and even adjacent to its space, you don’t say you attack his toe. You just attack him. Part of creature is the same as whole creature.
Attacking a creature has one requirement as far as distance goes… and this most certainly is not an exception. Space isn’t relevant, only location of the opponent. They do occupy their space, so you can certainly attack them in it. But if they bite you… they are also in the realm of chewing on you. Wherever you are, so must they be. Since we know, with absolute certainty that at the moment they are chewing on you that they are within 5 ft of you…Melee Attacks
With a normal melee weapon, you can strike any opponent within 5 feet.
Readying an Action
You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action.
I ready an action to attack with a melee weapon against the dragon whenever he gets within 5ft of me.
The dragon uses a bite attack. Just before the teeth come crashing down, his toothy maw comes within 5ft. Condition met, readied action triggers. Melee attack resolves. Dragon stabbed. Continue dragon’s action.
Remy: Since you have gone from arguing "readying to sunder" to arguing "readying to attack" in general, you'll have to contend with the existence of the Strike Back feat (that you've previously elected to dismiss for the earlier argument).
If you can already ready to attack the dragon when it bites you from reach, then is it your position that the only purpose of the Strike Back feat is to attack someone who uses manufactured weapons from reach? And that even then, you could ready to disarm or sunder even without the feat, making it an exceptionally limited high-level-requirement feat?
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
They do occupy their space, so you can certainly attack them in it. But if they bite you… they are also in the realm of chewing on you. Wherever you are, so must they be. Since we know, with absolute certainty that at the moment they are chewing on you that they are within 5 ft of you…
Alright. If the dragon has to come within 5 ft. to attack you, you'd get an AoO when it moves out of your threatened area (i.e. when the attack has been resolved). Obviously, this isn't the case.
"Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening opponents."
Nowhere in the rules is it mentioned that the attacker has to move closer to attack. All you need is to make sure the target is within your reach, as you yourself pointed out. When the dragon makes an attack against you, this is what happens:
"An attack roll represents your attempt to strike your opponent on your turn in a round. When you make an attack roll, you roll a d20 and add your attack bonus. (Other modifiers may also apply to this roll.) If your result equals or beats the target's Armor Class, you hit and deal damage."
There is no mention of moving yourself, your weapon or your head, limb, whatever closer to the target. Logically, that's what happens when you describe the action, that's how you visualize it. But mechanically, you only make a roll and compare the result to the AC. You have to understand these things (mechanics and flavor) are separate elements of the gameplay.
The problem is that you're trying to apply real-world logic to a really abstract system.
They simply need to be within your reach. Not that their space needs to be within your reach, just that they do. You are adding additional requirements that simply are not RAW.
And yet a creature is quantified as being in its space.
Let's talk provocations for a moment, since it seems you're forgetting something:
If I'm reaching into a square, by your arguments, before I can even attempt an attack, the creature I am attacking gets to make an attack against me.
Why?
Because according to your argument, reaching into a square counts as moving your limbs involved with the attack (which is still a part of the creature), which inadvertantly moves the creature into the reach of the target, however briefly, to make the attack via their reach. Do you see how stupid that sounds?
It makes the rules for reach absolutely pointless; being able to make attacks, no matter how far away you are, still provoke regardless of how far away your square is, according to your interpretation. (It'd most certainly make Combat Reflexes and Dexterity the de facto Feat and Attribute, though...)
Obviously, RAI doesn't work that way, and there is no RAW that says reaching into a square means you move into that square, no matter how partially you do, in order to make the attack.
Remy,
If you can ready to attack a weapon, and you can ready to attack a dragon as it attacks from reach, then what is the point of the Strikeback feat? Rule it however you want for your game, the rules are just guidelines afterall. The existence of Strike Back as a feat makes it pretty clear that without it you cannot attack a foe outside of your reach with a melee weapon. If your GM will allow you to perform this action without the feat investment (requires +11 BAB), then great. Or if you want to do it that way for your games, more power to you. But it is a houserule and there is nothing wrong with that. I houserule stuff all the time.
Remy: Since you have gone from arguing "readying to sunder" to arguing "readying to attack" in general, you'll have to contend with the existence of the Strike Back feat (that you've previously elected to dismiss for the earlier argument).
If you can already ready to attack the dragon when it bites you from reach, then is it your position that the only purpose of the Strike Back feat is to attack someone who uses manufactured weapons from reach? And that even then, you could ready to disarm or sunder even without the feat, making it an exceptionally limited high-level-requirement feat?
Disarm targets the opponent. Not the held item. You have to be close enough to hit them to perform the disarm maneuver on them.
Disarm
You can attempt to disarm your opponent in place of a melee attack. If you do not have the Improved Disarm feat, or a similar ability, attempting to disarm a foe provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver. Attempting to disarm a foe while unarmed imposes a –4 penalty on the attack.
If your attack is successful, your target drops one item it is carrying of your choice (even if the item is wielded with two hands). If your attack exceeds the CMD of the target by 10 or more, the target drops the items it is carrying in both hands (maximum two items if the target has more than two hands). If your attack fails by 10 or more, you drop the weapon that you were using to attempt the disarm. If you successfully disarm your opponent without using a weapon, you may automatically pick up the item dropped.
Disarm and sunder differ greatly.
But, aside from that... yes it is a high requirement but very limited feat. That happens. Feats come in a variety of strengths and some are awesome, some middling, some no-so-great. Wouldn't you agree to that characterization as well though?
Remy,
If you can ready to attack a weapon, and you can ready to attack a dragon as it attacks from reach, then what is the point of the Strikeback feat? Rule it however you want for your game, the rules are just guidelines afterall. The existence of Strike Back as a feat makes it pretty clear that without it you cannot attack a foe outside of your reach with a melee weapon. If your GM will allow you to perform this action without the feat investment (requires +11 BAB), then great. Or if you want to do it that way for your games, more power to you. But it is a houserule and there is nothing wrong with that. I houserule stuff all the time.
That is like saying 'The existence of ranged attacks makes reach attacks pointless so clearly ranged attacks aren't RAW'.
Strike Back allows you to do something 'more'. It isn't redundant in the least.
What is the "something more" that the Strikeback feat allows you to do? You have said that it is possible to do everything the feat allows you to do without taking the feat?
They simply need to be within your reach. Not that their space needs to be within your reach, just that they do. You are adding additional requirements that simply are not RAW.And yet a creature is quantified as being in its space.
Let's talk provocations for a moment, since it seems you're forgetting something:
If I'm reaching into a square, by your arguments, before I can even attempt an attack, the creature I am attacking gets to make an attack against me.
Why?
Because according to your argument, reaching into a square counts as moving your limbs involved with the attack (which is still a part of the creature), which inadvertantly moves the creature into the reach of the target, however briefly, to make the attack via their reach. Do you see how stupid that sounds?
It makes the rules for reach absolutely pointless; being able to make attacks, no matter how far away you are, still provoke regardless of how far away your square is, according to your interpretation. (It'd most certainly make Combat Reflexes and Dexterity the de facto Feat and Attribute, though...)
Obviously, RAI doesn't work that way, and there is no RAW that says reaching into a square means you move into that square, no matter how partially you do, in order to make the attack.
I didn't follow any of this. What are you talking about? AoOs regard the space a creature occupies as key. That is where that terminology and those game terms are predominately found, discussing threatening and AoOs n stuff. That doesn't relate to this topic, no matter how much you want it to. Readied actions and AoOs are not the same thing.
Attacking someone only provokes if it is like, unarmed, anyway. What does that have to do with this topic? Nothing.
But it really sounds stupid to you that someone who attacks you with a sword has to swing their arm? Or that a monster that bites you has to move his face into your immediate vicinity? The moving of limbs... sounds dumb... to you. Well. >.>
Your position though, correct me if I am wrong here... is:
You occupy your space, only your space, and nothing but your space, ever. You cannot and do not leave your space, you are trapped within the cube that has been assigned to you. You cannot ever extend any portion of yourself outside of this space and interact with anything that is outside your space. Interactions can still happen, simply by magic, because you can hit someone without them ever being in contact with you, nor you them, because no, yes you hit because because and so therefore you win.
So, that means that you can make a melee touch attack without ever getting anywhere near someone. None of your being, no part whatsoever, ever, never, gets close enough to touch them, but you do touch them while you don't because you do.
That about right?
What is the "something more" that the Strikeback feat allows you to do? You have said that it is possible to do everything the feat allows you to do without taking the feat?
You can attack anything within your reach, without the feat.
With the feat, you can attack anything that attacks you with reach, even if it doesn't get within your reach. (With a readied action)
I explained it earlier in the thread. But, mostly, strike back helps counter reach weapons.
What is the "something more" that the Strikeback feat allows you to do? You have said that it is possible to do everything the feat allows you to do without taking the feat?You can attack anything within your reach, without the feat.
With the feat, you can attack anything that attacks you with reach, even if it doesn't get within your reach. (With a readied action)
I explained it earlier in the thread. But, mostly, strike back helps counter reach weapons.
According to earlier in the thread, you stated that you can ready an action to sunder a reach weapon without the feat. So are you now saying that you need Strike Back to do this?
What does the Strike Back feat do?
Why would you take this feat if you can already perform these actions without it?
I didn't follow any of this. What are you talking about? AoOs regard the space a creature occupies as key. That is where that terminology and those game terms are predominately found, discussing threatening and AoOs n stuff. That doesn't relate to this topic, no matter how much you want it to. Readied actions and AoOs are not the same thing.
Attacking someone only provokes if it is like, unarmed, anyway. What does that have to do with this topic? Nothing.
But it really sounds stupid to you that someone who attacks you with a sword has to swing their arm? Or that a monster that bites you has to move his face into your immediate vicinity? The moving of limbs... sounds dumb... to you. Well. >.>
According to you, your limbs (which are a part of you, the creature), and any object attended by said limbs, move into the square of which you're making an attack in. By rights, that would either A. Take a move action to do, and/or B. Provoke via movement out of a threatened space. That's what I'm saying. In addition, your argument ignores that clause altogether, since the space a creature occupies is irrelevant to you making the attack. (Assuming your case is true of course, which it isn't.)
What it has to do with the topic is that your premise is half-cocked and doesn't enlist the entire parameters that it otherwise should enlist. If I have to move my limbs, I'm taking movement. If I'm taking movement, that, by RAW, requires a move action. If I'm taking movement in a threatened square, that provokes an attack of opportunity, which is resolved before my movement.
Reaching into a square, as you so kindly pointed out, requires that limbs associated with reaching into the square enter that square, and since limbs are part of the creature, the creature then reaches into the square. Since the creature is considered moving into that square, to reach into the square, it's considered movement, and since you're moving from a threatened space to reach the creature in question, it provokes.
Running the game like the above example(s) makes the system very clunky, slow, boring, and nigh-neverending. If that's how you like your games, fine, but it's most certainly not RAI.
What is the "something more" that the Strikeback feat allows you to do? You have said that it is possible to do everything the feat allows you to do without taking the feat?You can attack anything within your reach, without the feat.
With the feat, you can attack anything that attacks you with reach, even if it doesn't get within your reach. (With a readied action)
I explained it earlier in the thread. But, mostly, strike back helps counter reach weapons.
According to earlier in the thread, you stated that you can ready an action to sunder a reach weapon without the feat. So are you now saying that you need Strike Back to do this?
What does the Strike Back feat do?
Why would you take this feat if you can already perform these actions without it?
You can attack the wielder of a reach weapon with Strike Back. Normally that requires getting closer.
According to you, your limbs (which are a part of you, the creature), and any object attended by said limbs, move into the square of which you're making an attack in. By rights, that would either A. Take a move action to do, and/or B. Provoke via movement out of a threatened space. That's what I'm saying. In addition, your argument ignores that clause altogether, since the space a creature occupies is irrelevant to you making the attack. (Assuming your case is true of course, which it isn't.)
What it has to do with the topic is that your premise is half-cocked and doesn't enlist the entire parameters that it otherwise should enlist. If I have to move my limbs, I'm taking movement. If I'm taking movement, that, by RAW, requires a move action. If I'm taking movement in a threatened square, that provokes an attack of opportunity, which is resolved before my movement.
Reaching into a square, as you so kindly pointed out, requires that limbs associated with reaching into the square enter that square, and since limbs are part of the creature, the creature then reaches into the square. Since the creature is considered moving into that square, to reach into the square, it's considered movement, and since you're moving from a threatened space to reach the creature in question, it provokes.
Running the game like the above example(s) makes the system very clunky, slow, boring, and nigh-neverending. If that's how you like your games, fine, but it's most certainly not RAI.
If this is really tripping you up, then it would appear to me you don't even understand your own interpretation, or you are not expressing it very clearly.
I don't understand what you are talking about.
It has zero to do with anything I've discussed. My argument ignores whatever clause you are referring to because what I’m discussing has nothing to do with this gibberish you are spouting.
Attacking with weapons doesn’t provoke AoOs. It just doesn’t.
Moving your limbs isn’t ‘taking move actions’… moving your space around is a ‘move action’. Attacking with reach doesn’t cause your space to magically jump around the battlemap. Your space remains fixed, you simply reach wherever it is you want to within your reach range. You are… yet again confusing AoOs with having anything whatsoever to do with this topic.
Just in case you think otherwise. I’ll give you a tip. I’m not telling you that AoOs are irrelevant because I think there is something about AoOs that counters my argument. It is that I am certain that there isn’t.
I’m not certain my argument is valid, or at least I wasn’t when this thread started. But the more I’ve read over the relevant rules the more sure I’ve become. I know what the RAW actually says. I’ve linked much of it. The RAW disagrees with you. It disagrees with a lot of people.
I read the… rules. The simple fact is that you don’t need to reach an enemy’s space to attack them… ‘space’ isn’t referenced in range restrictions at all. You simply can attack any enemy within your reach.
You need to reach ‘them’. Fact.
They are within your reach when they attack you. Fact.
You can ready an action to attack. Fact.
Your readied action can be set to trigger when they get close enough to attack them. Fact.
You can ready an action to attack an enemy who is attacking you with reach when they attack and are thus close enough to hit. Fact.
That really is all there is to it. Which of those facts is wrong, and why? An actual RAW answer this time, k? Don’t have any? Probably because they are all facts. But go ahead and give it a try.
I kinda thought Mala might have actually had a counter argument based in RAW for a second. It was logically consistent if there had been any RAW behind it. See… the irony is that I’m actually pointing out where my argument can be attacked. See those facts? Disprove one and the argument falters. I’d recommend focusing on the first two. Mala went after the second one, and if there was RAW backing him I would have conceded that I was wrong.
Number 3 and 4 are pretty rough if you wanna counter either of those two. I’d avoid focusing on either of them, as they’re fairly well established facts about the game. And… fact 5 is basically my position, at this point, which is built entirely out of facts 1-4. You can disprove this by disproving any of 1-4. Or you could attack it directly, but… while facts 1-4 remain un-countered it will be fairly resilient to being countered directly.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
"They are within your reach when they attack you. Fact."
This is the part of your argument I'm questioning. As far as I can tell, you argue that this must be RAW because in real life it's impossible to reach someone without moving a part of your body closer, correct?
A number of people tried to explain that sometimes there is a disconnect between realism and how the rules work, but you seemed to ignore that completely.
Where in the rules is it mentioned that you count as being in the target's square when you attack? If you cannot quote that passage in the srd, your argument falls apart.
At this point Remy it's become quite clear that you are arguing just to argue. You are welcome to your own interpretations, just don't expect others to follow along with your flawed assumptions.
|
|
"They are within your reach when they attack you. Fact."
This is the disconnect between reality and the rules, and why your position is incorrect.
A creature occupies its space. When it moves, in game terms its space is moved; they are interchangeable in the rules.
Attacking, in the game, does not require moving your space. In the game, you stay entirely within your own space, even when you reach out of it to attack.
My argument was if you could attack the limbs of the creature reaching into your space, even if their occupied space was not in your reach, then it would provoke because the limbs (which are part of the creature, whose space is apparently unclearly defined if they have to reach their limbs into squares to make attacks) are moving from threatened spaces into the space you occupy to carry out the attack.
Since the limbs of the creature provoke via movement, and the limbs are part of the creature, then by the transitive property, the creature provokes via movement. And that's not taking into consideration that, if the creature is moving, regardless of method, that it would take a Movement Action to do.
Attacks of Opportunities are relevant because by this interpretation you originally carried, they are provoked by the creature's limbs reaching into the square you occupy to carry out attacks.
But I'll take a bite out of your flow chart like everyone else has, however, by a step-by-step walkthrough.
You need to reach ‘them’. Fact.
Yes, you must reach the square(s) in which they occupy to make an attack or combat maneuver against them or any of their worn equipment. It's not like an Animated Shield or a Dancing Weapon, though in those cases they still come out and say those objects remain in your space and follow you around in the very spaces you occupy with every action you take (until discharged). After all, reaching into a square that the creature doesn't occupy only results in attacking an empty square. It's otherwise no different than, say, trying to attack an invisible (yet smaller) creature, and simply missing the square, versus hitting the square they actually occupy.
They are within your reach when they attack you. Fact.
If the square they inhabit is within your melee reach, then yes, they are. Otherwise, you can't. Why? See above.
You can ready an action to attack. Fact.
Nobody disputed this. Covering all the bases, sure, but if I get chastised for bringing up something as irrelevant as AoOs, then the same applies to you.
Your readied action can be set to trigger when they get close enough to attack them. Fact.
The condition set must be if the creature's space gets into your melee reach. You would otherwise be attacking an empty square. Another condition would be to ready a space to attack upon being attacked, and hope it does something, but again, unless the creature occupies that space (which, according to you, it does when it makes attacks), you're just attacking an empty square.
You can ready an action to attack an enemy who is attacking you with reach when they attack and are thus close enough to hit. Fact.
Your interpretation ignores this bolded part. Simultaneously, the Strike Back feat allows you to ignore that same bolded part. Gee, I wonder if I should trust your interpretation for RAW, or the book's. Very hard question there.
If your interpretation is "Players should get the effects of Strike Back for free!", then it goes into houserules. I bet you are also of the sort who believes players should get Combat Casting, Power Attack, Combat Expertise, etc. for free also, which falls into the same disrepute. I rest my case.
That feat is an unfortunate example of "rules for rules' sake" and ends up complicating more than it clarifies.
I tend to pretend it doesn't exist. Hopefully someone will weigh in for PFS. :/
|
|
I don't believe for a moment that you can ready an action to sunder an arrow in flight, unless you have a special ability that let's you.
Why not bullets? Why not lasers?
Just because you can frame a sentence so that it seems to satisfy the grammatical needs of a readied action, doesn't mean that you are able to do it, or even that it is possible.
'Okay DM, I'm readying an action to sunder the darkness as soon as it enters my reach!'
'Okay DM, as soon as the 3,435,670th photon enters my space I'll teleport away!'
'As soon as he kills me I cast cure light wounds on myself!'
Some things are not possible, others are not within your capability. People who have the Deflect Arrows feat can deflect them, and those without it can't. I don't believe that intercepting ammunition in flight is a general ability, and Sunder doesn't change that.
It'd be a cool feat! 'Arrow Cutting', prerequisites: Combat Reflexes, Weapon Focus with the weapon used, Deflect Arrows, BAB +11.
But something that anyone can do just by saying so?
Nah.
"They are within your reach when they attack you. Fact."This is the disconnect between reality and the rules, and why your position is incorrect.
A creature occupies its space. When it moves, in game terms its space is moved; they are interchangeable in the rules.
Attacking, in the game, does not require moving your space. In the game, you stay entirely within your own space, even when you reach out of it to attack.
I believe you are mistaken on this point. A creature absolutely needs to reach through beyond his space to melee attack something a distance away. There is no disconnect between reality and the rules here.
Moving and moving your space are indeed synonymous. They are one and the same. Which is why you don't incur AoOs from attacking with reach, despite making contact with and being where your target are, as well as being in your space.
To make an attack, you only need to reach your target. By RAW. There is no requirement to reach your target's space. So, unless a creature is confined to their space as if stuck in an invisible cube, then you most certainly can interact with them at any place that they happen to be.
While a dragon bites a guy, he is most certainly near the guy. Unless by RAW he is stuck in his space and never leaves it, like some weird mime horror show.
But, not only do the rules say nothing about being trapped in your cube space, the seem to indicate very strongly that you do in fact reach beyond your space when you interact with things beyond it. Disagree? Answer me this question...
A wizard is standing 10ft away from a dragon who has 20ft reach. Directly between them is a wall of force.
Can the dragon attack the wizard? Why or why not?
My argument was if you could attack the limbs of the creature reaching into your space, even if their occupied space was not in your reach, then it would provoke because the limbs (which are part of the creature, whose space is apparently unclearly defined if they have to reach their limbs into squares to make attacks) are moving from threatened spaces into the space you occupy to carry out the attack.
Since the limbs of the creature provoke via movement, and the limbs are part of the creature, then by the transitive property, the creature provokes via movement. And that's not taking into consideration that, if the creature is moving, regardless of method, that it would take a Movement Action to do.
Attacks of Opportunities are relevant because by this interpretation you originally carried, they are provoked by the creature's limbs reaching into the square you occupy to carry out attacks.
If it's still "gibberish", then I might as well drop this point because it's only proven to me you don't understand my explanations anyway.
AoOs don't work that way. The creature's space is fixed and defined. It is a square and doesn't move when they attack, reach or otherwise. They would not incur any AoOs for attacking, as attacking doesn't provoke typically. Even if it did, you must actually reach a creature's space to threaten them, which is what is required to be able to take an AoO. Space and threatened areas are AoO rules terms. You need not necessarily threaten to attack. You need not necessarily reach their space to attack them either.
All you need do is reach them.
Chatter away all you like about AoOs... But none of that is relevant to the conversation at hand. You simply do not seem capable or unwilling of discerning the difference between attacking and how AoOs work.
AoOs simply aren't relevant in this conversation, no matter how much you think they are.. they aren't.
You need to reach ‘them’. Fact.Yes, you must reach the square(s) in which they occupy to make an attack or combat maneuver against them or any of their worn equipment. It's not like an Animated Shield or a Dancing Weapon, though in those cases they still come out and say those objects remain in your space and follow you around in the very spaces you occupy with every action you take (until discharged). After all, reaching into a square that the creature doesn't occupy only results in attacking an empty square. It's otherwise no different than, say, trying to attack an invisible (yet smaller) creature, and simply missing the square, versus hitting the square they actually occupy.
Show me, link me to, or otherwise direct me to the RAW that tells us that we "must reach the squares in which they occupy to make an attack".
I'll concede that I was wrong if you do.
Your interpretation ignores this bolded part. Simultaneously, the Strike Back feat allows you to ignore that same bolded part. Gee, I wonder if I should trust your interpretation for RAW, or the book's. Very hard question there.
If your interpretation is "Players should get the effects of Strike Back for free!", then it goes into houserules. I bet you are also of the sort who believes players should get Combat Casting, Power Attack, Combat Expertise, etc. for free also, which falls into the same disrepute. I rest my case.
Strike back allows you to attack a creature that is farther away than you can reach. That isn't the same thing. I've already explained that like what, 4 times now? You don't need to be disingenuous. Simply show the RAW that you are claiming exists.
Because I don't believe it does.
I am, and have been using RAW to make my case. My interpretation is entirely based on the actual words printed in the rules. I think the term for that is rules as written.
I don't think people should get feats for free, part of the fun of this game is playing a character who is a bit clunky and flawed, who continually gets better and better over time and transitions into a hero, a legend, an all star. Starting off too awesome cheapens the reward of having earned your greatness.
But my gaming philosophy isn't really on trial here, nor do I think yours is.
I'm fairly certain we are here discussing what the rules say. We happen to disagree. That'll happen.
Sometimes when people disagree about something that has an objective source, it behooves them to actually reference that source. You feel the RAW disagrees with me? Okay. Reference where it disagrees.
Because, at this point I'm fairly sure that the RAW doesn't disagree with me. I'm fairly sure that you don't even know what the RAW actually says. You feel that the way you play is 'the right way', and that your way is what RAW is.
But that isn't what RAW is. You are simply... wrong.
If im not mistaken when u rdy an action it either happens BEFORE or AFTER the action u are readying for except for special situations such as counter spell. The reason why u have to be able to reach the targets square to ready an action to sunder is because u are sunder either BEFORE the attack or AFTER where the weapon is no longer reaching u but is in the square of teh creature weilding it. You are not sundering it right before it reaches you in ur square away from the creature holding the weapon u are trying to sunder.
remember when u rdy an action uare doing ur turn when an action is suppose to happen so u are either doing it before or after the action goes off. When an archer readys an action to shot a spell caster when its gonna cast a spell, u are shooting BEFORE the spell goes off not during or else the caster doesnt have to make a check. When u are readying an action to sunder a weapon u are doing it either before or after (most likely u wanna do it before the attack) to which it hasnt reach or attack u yet. Counterspelling is unique in which u can do it at the same time to cancel each out.
Thats why the rules say u cannot sunder a reach weapon without the feat if u are not in range of them because u are sundering the attack BEFORE it attacks.
Thats my 2 cents and i amybe wrong as i have been many times but thats what i think. If u are not in range and someone attacks u with a reach, the attack has already gone off hence why u cant do it unless u have the feat which states u can.
Since my last two posts were ignored and Remy hasn't been able to show an srd quote that specifies when you count as being in any other squares than your space, I guess I'm done here.
Lol... I replied to Mala, who mirrored your sentiments exactly. My reply to him was perfectly applicable to your last post.
Answer me the question...
A wizard is standing 10ft away from a dragon who has 20ft of reach. Directly in between them is a wall of force. Can the dragon attack the wizard? Why or why not?
How you answer this question will demonstrate my point, well, unless you believe that wall of force doesn't stop the dragon from attacking.
A wall of force creates an invisible wall of pure force. The wall cannot move and is not easily destroyed. A wall of force is immune to dispel magic, although a mage's disjunction can still dispel it. A wall of force can be damaged by spells as normal, except for disintegrate, which automatically destroys it. It can be damaged by weapons and supernatural abilities, but a wall of force has hardness 30 and a number of hit points equal to 20 per caster level. Contact with a sphere of annihilation or rod of cancellation instantly destroys a wall of force.
Breath weapons and spells cannot pass through a wall of force in either direction, although dimension door, teleport, and similar effects can bypass the barrier. It blocks ethereal creatures as well as material ones (though ethereal creatures can usually circumvent the wall by going around it, through material floors and ceilings). Gaze attacks can operate through a wall of force.
Either
A) A creature with reach can still attack someone behind a wall of force, because they never leave their space.or
B) A creature with reach cannot attack someone behind a wall of force because they cannot pass through it.
Pick your poison.
Read the rules on combat, show where you can attack an opponent 2 squares away from you when you only have one square of reach without an item, feat, or ability that changes the equation. The whole point of a reach attack is that the main body of your opponent is outside of your ability to attack it. Combat is not a matter of everyone standing around like a dufus waiting for an initiative tick. It's an interplay of constant mostion. It's why polearms and tentacles make a difference when you're fighting with swords and daggers.
Actually Lazar... The combat rules are rather silent on how many squares away you can attack a creature. "Squares" isn't brought up at all when talking about the range of your reach when making an attack.
That is my point exactly. That is what everyone seems to be confused about.
But I do appreciate being told to read the rules, as though that is something I haven't done. I find it continually perplexing that I keep being told that I am wrong, that the rules say I am wrong, and yet... no one will actually point to the rule that says so.
I'm pretty sure that I'm not wrong. That RAW doesn't disagree. And that people need to either put up and quote something, or concede that they simply don't know what they're talking about.
I quote rules all the time, I've been doing it this whole thread. Like this one, for example. It tells us how far away we can attack. Notice, will you please, that it doesn't include the words "space" or "square".
Melee Attacks
With a normal melee weapon, you can strike any opponent within 5 feet. (Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you.) Some melee weapons have reach, as indicated in their descriptions. With a typical reach weapon, you can strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can't strike adjacent foes (those within 5 feet).
All it requires, by RAW, is that the opponent be within 5ft. Any part of the opponent whatsoever satisfies that requirement.
The reason your wall of force example doesn't work is this:
When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from any corner of your square to the target's square goes through a wall (including a low wall). When making a melee attack against a target that isn't adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks.
Nowhere in any rule does it say that you leave your space when making an attack from reach. Point to where it does. You are applying real world interactions to this situation and assuming that you must be in the adjacent space when making a reach attack. Nowhere does it say that.
Edit: Also, I didn't see you respond to this which was raised earlier. If the creature's limb/weapon/whatever is moving from its square to adjacent to the target of its attack, why is there no attack of opportunity for the other creatures since its limb is moving through a threatened square? Or do you think there should be an attack of opportunity for that?
If im not mistaken when u rdy an action it either happens BEFORE or AFTER the action u are readying for except for special situations such as counter spell. The reason why u have to be able to reach the targets square to ready an action to sunder is because u are sunder either BEFORE the attack or AFTER where the weapon is no longer reaching u but is in the square of teh creature weilding it. You are not sundering it right before it reaches you in ur square away from the creature holding the weapon u are trying to sunder.
remember when u rdy an action uare doing ur turn when an action is suppose to happen so u are either doing it before or after the action goes off. When an archer readys an action to shot a spell caster when its gonna cast a spell, u are shooting BEFORE the spell goes off not during or else the caster doesnt have to make a check. When u are readying an action to sunder a weapon u are doing it either before or after (most likely u wanna do it before the attack) to which it hasnt reach or attack u yet. Counterspelling is unique in which u can do it at the same time to cancel each out.
Thats why the rules say u cannot sunder a reach weapon without the feat if u are not in range of them because u are sundering the attack BEFORE it attacks.
Thats my 2 cents and i amybe wrong as i have been many times but thats what i think. If u are not in range and someone attacks u with a reach, the attack has already gone off hence why u cant do it unless u have the feat which states u can.
You're slightly wrong, and a little right too.
A readied action happens in response to "a condition".
When that condition occurs the readied action triggers.
If the condition is another character/creature performing an action, then your readied action goes before their action.
But... not all conditions are the action of another creature.
Example: I ready an action to shoot the first enemy to attack. This triggers when someone declares they attack, and happens before the attack goes off.
Example: I ready an action to shoot the first person through the doorway. When the enemy comes around the corner, this readied action doesn't happen before the action. If it did... you'd be trying to shoot a guy you've not seen yet, through a wall. No, it happens in response to the condition that someone has come around the corner. So it triggers and fires off immediately, essentially putting the game on pause the moment an enemy met the trigger condition. The readied action triggers immediately, and after the ranged attack resolves the guy who was interrupted continues his turn where he left off.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why all this debate?
The rules clearly say no (unless you have Strike Back). However, if you don't like it just follow the very reasonable suggestion of house ruling that everyone has the strike back feat.
Whats to argue or debate about? There is no question about how it funcitons. The existence of the feat Strike Back makes it crystal clear.
The reason your wall of force example doesn't work is this:
When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from any corner of your square to the target's square goes through a wall (including a low wall). When making a melee attack against a target that isn't adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks.Nowhere in any rule does it say that you leave your space when making an attack from reach. Point to where it does. You are applying real world interactions to this situation and assuming that you must be in the adjacent space when making a reach attack. Nowhere does it say that.
Edit: Also, I didn't see you respond to this which was raised earlier. If the creature's limb/weapon/whatever is moving from its square to adjacent to the target of its attack, why is there no attack of opportunity for the other creatures since its limb is moving through a threatened square? Or do you think there should be an attack of opportunity for that?
I would agree if the wall of force said it blocked attacks or provided cover.
It does not.
It says it blocks creatures.
Why all this debate?
The rules clearly say no (unless you have Strike Back). However, if you don't like it just follow the very reasonable suggestion of house ruling that everyone has the strike back feat.
Whats to argue or debate about? There is no question about how it funcitons. The existence of the feat Strike Back makes it crystal clear.
If the rules clearly say no...
Quote the rule.
Why all this debate?
The rules clearly say no (unless you have Strike Back). However, if you don't like it just follow the very reasonable suggestion of house ruling that everyone has the strike back feat.
Whats to argue or debate about? There is no question about how it funcitons. The existence of the feat Strike Back makes it crystal clear.
If the rules clearly say no...
Quote the rule.
The rules don't have to clearly say no to every single corner case and possibility that can be imagined. By that logic, a wall of force doesn't block objects because it doesn't say it does, it only says it blocks creatures. Therefore you can attack through it because it doesn't block your weapon, only you. You and I both know that that is preposterous.
The rules don't have to clearly say no to every single corner case and possibility that can be imagined. By that logic, a wall of force doesn't block objects because it doesn't say it does, it only says it blocks creatures. Therefore you can attack through it because it doesn't block your weapon, only you. You and I both know that that is preposterous.Why all this debate?
The rules clearly say no (unless you have Strike Back). However, if you don't like it just follow the very reasonable suggestion of house ruling that everyone has the strike back feat.
Whats to argue or debate about? There is no question about how it funcitons. The existence of the feat Strike Back makes it crystal clear.
If the rules clearly say no...
Quote the rule.
Claxon says the rules clearly say no. You say the rules don't have to say no. Which is it?
And... you and I both know this isn't a corner case. We are discussing some fundamental rules about how combat works.
So fundamental in fact, that is should be the easiest thing in the world to point to the rule that tells me I'm wrong. But... there isn't any, because I'm not wrong.