Jaerun's page

Bizbag wrote:

I think it boils down to the fact that the developers didn't write the Reach Weapon rules with the possibility that a creature could be both adjacent AND 10' away at the same time. Also, were they change from 3.0 to 3.5? In 3.0, tall Large creatures like Ogres only took up a 5' square.

I don't think that matters. The only difference would be that you can't attack ogres, but you can attack fire giants or dragons

I think the developers just took a gamist aproach: balance trumps realism. Reach weapons are already very powerful, even with reduced damage.

Well, if you allow attacking the ogre's butt, as it were, what's to stop a player from doing the following in a Med.vs Med combat:

+-+-+
| -| Z|
A-+-+
| X| Y|
+-+-+

X attacks Y or Z with a reach weapon from corner A, while giving Y cover, but getting no penalties for Z... this is better than "pole-fighting"... if you ignore the black & white nature of "adjacent" you break the detriment for reach weapons.

I asked a question, so i figured I should give an answer:

Eidolon: A summoner begins play with the ability to summon to his side a powerful outsider called an eidolon. The eidolon forms a link with the summoner, who, forever after, summons an aspect of the same creature. An eidolon has the same alignment as the summoner that calls it and can speak all of his languages. Eidolons are treated as summoned creatures, except that they are not sent back to their home plane until reduced to a number of negative hit points equal to or greater than their Constitution score. In addition, due to its tie to its summoner, an eidolon can touch and attack creatures warded by protection from evil and similar effects that prevent contact with summoned creatures.

Re question 2, you already get +2/+2 from Shield Ally and +4/+4 from Greater Shield Allay. This bonus applies to the Ally (i.e. you) not to the eidolon.

I can see this going either way.

On the one hand, there is the phrase cited by King of Vrock, which suggests that the square you move into, and only the square you move into determines the difficulty of the terrain.

On the other hand, the very next sentence states that "If you occupy squares with different kinds of terrain, you can move only as fast as the most difficult terrain you occupy will allow."

This, for a medium sized creature implies that if the creature occupies a square with difficult terrain, his movement is encumbered. This makes sense. If you are assumed to be in the middle of the square you occupy, moving from normal terrain to difficult terrain and moving from difficult terrain to normal terrain both involve moving through half a square of difficult and half a square of normal terrain.

This begs the question, what does it mean to move "through" a square? is it entering and exiting the square or is it enough to exit the square?

Take these 3 scenarios:

1) on difficult terrain square (double movement cost) with normal terrain adjacent
2) in a greased square ("A creature can walk within or through the area of grease at half normal speed with a DC 10 Acrobatics check") with normal, non-greased terrain adjacent
3) in a webbed square ("The entire area of the web is considered difficult terrain. Anyone moving through the webs must make a combat maneuver check or Escape Artist check as part of their move action") with normal, non-greased terrain adjacent.

Can you 5-foot step/move without penalty onto the normal terrain in each of these situations without encumbrance?