|
I've a question on this ability. I saw a monk use this when a magus did a 5 ft step toward him and he claimed he could move the magus the full length of his reach weapon plus 5ft. The magus said he couldn't use the reach weapon since he was next to him so the monk turned around and did a kick to move the magus. According to the wording of Rediraction if lets him move him 5ft more then his reach limit and since he has the reach weapon the monk said thats his reach limit and not his kick or leg limit. Anyone able to lend a ruling on this or explain it better to me specially the part about if a kick is used how you use the weapons further reach limit instead of the foot's kick to get a further pushed distance?
The monk was:
(monk) (space5)
(space1)(space6)
(space2)(magus)
(space3)
(space4)
magus moved diagonally to be just south of the monk when all that rediraction happened.The monk said he should be able to knock the magus into space 4.
If your attack is successful, you may move your target 5 feet to a new location. For every 5 by which your attack exceeds your opponent's CMD, you can move the target an additional 5 feet. The target must remain within your reach at all times during this movement, except for the final 5 feet of movement, which can be to a space adjacent to your reach.
At first the monk (flowing monk with redirection ?) has to beat the CMD by 10 to move the target 15ft. to space 4.
Secondly he needs a weapon with 15ft. reach.
Thirdly i would use the reach of the 'attack or weapon' that is used for the maneuver. He cannot use his reach weapon at 5ft. range so he must use an unarmed strike. I cannot provide any RAW but thats how i would rule it. So he can move the Magus only to space 2.
The first part is accurate. The monk cannot use the reach weapon because the Redirection ability activates after the magus moved into space 1 and made the attack. It would also be based on the reach of the attack method used to make the redirection, not on any possible items currently held.
Likewise, if you have a weapon that gives a bonus in trip, but use your foot to trip the guy, you don't get the weapon's trip bonus on the move since you didn't use the weapon to make the trip maneuver.
He can't use the weapon against a 5ft step.
1) If it was the magus's turn you can't redirect against a 5 foot step - even if you are a flowing monk - that immediate action is limited to being used when an attack is made against you. A five foot step isn't an attack.
2) Once the guy is within 5ft of the monk he can't use the reach weapon to make the redirect - unless he took a 5ft step away.
3) You can move someone with redirect to any adjacent square you threaten but only 5 feet unless you beat his CMD by more than 5. The *last* 5 feet can be outside of your reach, so a redirect can push someone backwards (useful for pushing people back into a web spell) but not by 10 feet.
Unless I'm missing something.
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Okay, this wasn't entirely clear (I was playing the character in question so I'll clear some things up).
1. The setup above is correct :)
2. When the Magus stepped into my square with the 5ft step it did NOT do anything.
3. At the time I was holding a reach weapon.
4. When the Magus attacked me, I activated my "Redirection" using an Unarmed Strike (kick)and chose to do a "Reposition" manoeuvre. I have the required feat for this not to provoke.
5. I beat the Magus's CMD by 10+ and so therefore I could push him back further.
Okay, here is where it gets interesting.
My "reach", holding a reach weapon, is 10 feet. That is for attacks, attacks of opportunity - anything.
The Redirection (and subsequent Reposition) was activated by my Unarmed strike.
To quote the rule (as quoted above): "The *last* 5 feet can be outside of your -reach-". As established, my "reach" is 10 feet as I am still equipped with the reach weapon. What activated the ability (the unarmed strike) is irrelevant.
As written, this is how the rule works. I'm happy for it to be FAQ'ed, but until such a time, as per the rules, this is correct.
As it turns out, pushing him back 5, 10 or 15 feet made zero difference to the actual encounter (as even being pushed back 5 feet means they can't attack you (because they've already taken a 5 foot step, they can't move again, so I'm not bothered if the FAQ clarifies against) but it did cause some lively discussion.
If this has been clarified with an official ruling elsewhere, please let us know :)
Thanks.
The hammer was not threatening since it was in 5ft space and not being used. The kick was what used. Sorry you don't get to use the reach weapon.
+1 this. If you use a kick to initiate the Reposition attack, you cannot switch to the polearm part way through to finish it. You used a weapon (unarmed attack, in this case) to do the maneuver, you use that same weapon to resolve the maneuver. Your reach is only 10' if you were using the reach weapon, which in this case you clearly weren't. Since you weren't, your reach only counts as far as the weapon you used, or 5' for the unarmed attack in this scenario.
My "reach", holding a reach weapon, is 10 feet. That is for attacks, attacks of opportunity - anything.
The Redirection (and subsequent Reposition) was activated by my Unarmed strike.
To quote the rule (as quoted above): "The *last* 5 feet can be outside of your -reach-". As established, my "reach" is 10 feet as I am still equipped with the reach weapon. What activated the ability (the unarmed strike) is irrelevant.
No it is not irrelevant. 'Reach' is a special quality of your weapon and you only get the benefit of a weapon as long as you use it.
Reach: You can use a reach weapon to strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can't use it against an adjacent foe.
In your example you dont use the reach weapon so you dont have 10ft. reach! You dont gain 10ft reach by holding a reach weapon. You must use it!
When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver.
You used an unarmed strike with a reach of 5 ft. The reach quality is part of your reach weapon and not of your unarmed strike. You dont use the reach weapon so you dont have 10ft. reach with your manuever.
|
|
Actually, you DO have reach 10 just "by holding it". Take for example someone who holds a reach weapon and hasn't swung it, instead casting spells or moving. What happens if someone provokes 10 feet away?
Do they not have reach because according to you, "you only get the benefit of a weapon as long as you use it"?
Actual answer is - yes they do. So the matter is not so black and white, thanks anyway.
You cannot use a weapon as part of a Redirection attempt. Therefore you can't use the reach a weapon gives you to perform that Redirection. Sunder, Disarm, and Trip are the only maneuvers that allow the use of a weapon to perform them. So it really is black and white.
It's an extrapolation from the Weapon Finesse on Combat Maneuvers FAQ.
Basically: You get the weapon benefits if you use the weapon to do a thing.
Would you say you get to do +1d6 fire damage from a flaming temple sword if you kick a guy? No. Reach is just another weapon quality that is only valid when you use the weapon.
Also, you aren't wielding your reach weapon when you do the redirection maneuver, you are holding it. Just like if you have a 2-handed weapon in your right hand and a dagger in your left; you cannot attack with the greatsword at all even though you are holding it.
Likewise, if you do have a two-handed weapon in your grip and decide to punch something, you don't get to use the Power Attack special clause for two-handed weapons because you aren't attacking with that weapon.
If rules don't say you can't do something, you aren't supposed to just assume whatever is most awesome is probably the best option. You're suppose to use common sense and some reasonable interpretation of the situation.
|
|
It's an extrapolation from the Weapon Finesse on Combat Maneuvers FAQ.
I wonder if that was written before Reposition came out. I don't know when books were released.
It's an extrapolation from the Weapon Finesse on Combat Maneuvers FAQ.
I wonder if that was written before Reposition came out. I don't know when books were released.
First printing of Advanced Player's Guide, which introduced the Drag, Dirty Trick, Reposition, and Steal maneuvers was printed in April 2010. FAQ is from Oct 2011. So it was written after.
the only way to use reposition with a weapon is if it has tye trip quality. its in a blog somewhere.
but as others have said reach is a quality of the weapon used in an attack. many monsters have weapons with different ranges a dragon using reposition with its claw cannot use the reach on his bite to determine range for repsition.
so in the above monk example any bonuses from the reach weapon would only pply if it was used as part of the combat maneuver which is only the case if the polearm itslf threatened and the weapon had the tip special quality.
since the monk used an unarmed strike the polearm has no relevance.
Actually, you DO have reach 10 just "by holding it". Take for example someone who holds a reach weapon and hasn't swung it, instead casting spells or moving. What happens if someone ]}provokes 10 feet away?
Do they not have reach because according to you, "you only get the benefit of a weapon as long as you use it"?
Gooooood example.
Can you attack the enemy 10ft. away with your 'reach' weapon? Yes you can.
Can you attack the enemy 10ft. away with your unarmed strike? No you cannot.
You dont have 10ft reach with everything. You only have it with your reach weapon as everybody said before!
I put all the neccesary rules together in my previous post and the rules are pretty clear. So stop crying .. you are wrong
|
|
Cool. I see the counter-argument (as I said to the GM on the day) however it because it says "your reach" and whether you used the reach weapon for the maneuver or not is not relevant to what your "reach" is. Otherwise AoOs would be seriously screwed up.
I'm going to run with it as you guys have said purely because (as I stated above) it makes ZERO difference really. If you interrupt someone's attack and move them back 5 feet or 50 feet, they still can't attack you - so all good :)
I'm waiting for the day I can get my CMB high enough I can sling-shot them all the way around me - which will of course send them back in time ;)
If rules don't say you can't do something, you aren't supposed to just assume whatever is most awesome is probably the best option. You're suppose to use common sense and some reasonable interpretation of the situation.Yeah, you can stop making condescending assumptions as to my motivations.
Thanks all the same but you can keep flames to yourself. I tend to respond exceptionally harsh to them so let's not go down that road, okay?
I won't be responding to any more of your posts - don't provoke.
You misunderstand my comment.
I'm not saying you are necessarily trying to game the system, I'm saying you're reading the rules without considering the common sense possibility. The rules act to codify a reality. When one does not have the rules to cover a situation, common sense is to be used in its place.
Picture in your mind the actions occurring: Guy standing next to you attacks. You hook your foot behind his leading hip, then twist and shove, forcing him to move backwards. Your foot remains in contact for the distance of your reach (5') at which point, he stumbles another five feet further.
The reach weapon has nothing to do with this scenario. You aren't using the reach weapon to perform the redirection, you're using your foot. The above actions remain identical regardless of your hands being empty or if you're holding a crossbow or if you've got a martini that you are trying to not spill.
You also seem to have missed the majority of my argument, fixating on the interpretation that what I said was attempting to provoke you. If that was my goal, I'd have only used the last paragraph and not said all the stuff above it.
just to clear something the reposition maneuver was not done with an unarmed strike no weapon ( in the game sense) was involved in the maneuver.
this perhaps may help covey the perception issue. reposition as worded makes no assumption of weapons as it normally does not involve one.
