Mounted + Reach = Which Threatened Squares?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Lets say you have a Halfling Hunter who is using a reach weapon like a lance and is mounted on a Large sized Axebeak.

...which squares do you threaten?

I originally had thought that it would be all squares 10' away and none that are adjacent. However... as you are considered to occupy all squares of your mount it seems like you would be able to attack from any one of those squares which would basically allow you to threaten all adjacent squares as well.

Or is it that you occupy ALL squares your mount does rather than ANY square your mount does?

I'm just not certain because one option it seems like it is giving you extra threatened squares for melee range weapons and the other way seems like it is giving you extra threatened squares for reach weapons.

...maybe both are intentional?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Consider this entry for a moment:

CRB, Combat chapter, "Big and Little Creatures in Combat" wrote:
Large or larger creatures using reach weapons can strike up to double their natural reach but can't strike at their natural reach or less.

Effectively, while mounted, you are considered to be your mount's size and determine your threatened area based on your normal "natural reach" but based on your new size footprint. Thus, your reach weapon while on the axebeak (which shouldn't matter whether you're small or medium sized) will not reach any square that would be adjacent to the mount. This still adds several threatened squares, mind you, but you don't get the benefit against adjacent targets.


you occupy ALL squares your mount does

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A standard lance and a shield will allow you to threaten regular and range since they're both weapons.


claudekennilol: Well, that is true. The character in question has a spiked gauntlet, a lance and a shield so he is set. I was more asking which squares he would threaten with the reach weapon though. DO you have an opinion on that?

Serisan: Mmm... I dunno, that seems like a wobbly stance. If what you were saying would be correct then you would be effectively large and when using a reach weapon a large creature threatens at an even further distance than a small or medium sized creature. I'm fairly certain that is not what is intended.

Chess Pwn: So then you believe that the character would only threaten at 10' with the lance?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lune wrote:

claudekennilol: Well, that is true. The character in question has a spiked gauntlet, a lance and a shield so he is set. I was more asking which squares he would threaten with the reach weapon though. DO you have an opinion on that?

Serisan: Mmm... I dunno, that seems like a wobbly stance. If what you were saying would be correct then you would be effectively large and when using a reach weapon a large creature threatens at an even further distance than a small or medium sized creature. I'm fairly certain that is not what is intended.

Chess Pwn: So then you believe that the character would only threaten at 10' with the lance?

You occupy all squares that your mount does. Not just "whichever one you want at any given moment". So that would mean that, with a lance, you can't threaten the inner ring but you do threaten every 10' out square (including the second diagonal).

I wouldn't say "that you're your mount's size" but you are in all of its squares simultaneously.

PRD, Combat, Mounted Combat wrote:
For simplicity, assume that you share your mount's space during combat.

And since you're talking about an axebeak, I'd like to point out that the axebeak animal companion does not have reach like his monster-counterpart does. Just in case that's relevant.


In regards to the whole "you occupy all the squares that your mount does" bit the attack still has to originate from somewhere. I mean a lance is only so long. It doesn't seem feasible that the attack could originate from the SW square but hit something 10' away from the NE square. Know what I mean?

So who chooses where the attack originates from? This matters! Things can provide cover or concealment from some squares but not others. Do you go with the most advantageous? Least advantageous? Are you truly considered to occupy all the squares at once so if you have cover from one of the squares then you have cover from all?


Also... why would an Animal Companion Axebeak not have reach then?... Did I miss a rule somewhere?

*edit: I am, of course, speaking about once it becomes large sized at 4th level.


I don't interpret "you occupy all the squares that your mount does" as meaning "you are the size of your mount," but instead that you are shifting your position on the mount from second to second. (This is the technical abstraction and also explains, e.g. why you and someone else can occupy the same 5' square. You're not a gelatinous cube.)

Based on this, I would argue that you can hit any of the following squares with your reach weapon.

(ETA: putting in some space)

XXXXXXXX
X?++++?X
X++++++X
XE+AAE+X
X++AA++X
X++++++X
X?++++?X
XXXXXXXX

The large axebeak occupies the A squares. If you are sitting on the northwest corner of the axebeak this second, then this second you can hit either of the E squares. You can also (as a not-even-a-free-action) move to any other square of the axebeak, because you occupy them all.

In general, you can hit any of the squares with +'s in them. The question marks are the (literal) corner cases where the AoO rules break down anyway.


When the Axebeak becomes large, it gains a 10ft reach.

It's a Large (tall) creature.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Maps Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
I don't interpret "you occupy all the squares that your mount does" as meaning "you are the size of your mount," but instead that you are shifting your position on the mount from second to second. (This is the technical abstraction and also explains, e.g. why you and someone else can occupy the same 5' square. You're not a gelatinous cube.)

No. This isn't right. The rules have you occupying all the squares of your mount. You're not large, you just take up as much space as one.

The distinction, from your model, is that you are reachable (i.e. threatened and attackable) as though you were in all squares simultaneously.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I believe my post was inelegantly worded. I did not mean that you actually become large, but as others have said, you occupy all of the squares that your mount occupies. Your natural reach in unaffected. You don't get the adjacent ring with a reach weapon, but you would get the reach ring as normal.

Grand Lodge

Axebeak Sanctuary Society wrote:

When the Axebeak becomes large, it gains a 10ft reach.

It's a Large (tall) creature.

Where does it say it's large, tall?

This is all I see

PRD wrote:

Axe Beak Companions

Starting Statistics: Size Medium; Speed 50 ft.; Attack bite (1d6 + 1-1/2 Str); Ability Scores Str 10, Dex 17, Con 12, Int 2, Wis 11, Cha 10; Special Qualities low-light vision.
4th Level Advancement: Size Large; AC +2 natural armor; Attack bite (1d8 + 1-1/2 Str); Ability Scores Str +8, Dex –2, Con +4; Special Attacks sudden charge.

None of that says anything about reach with its 4th level advancement and nothing about it says it's tall.


claudekennilol wrote:
Axebeak Sanctuary Society wrote:

When the Axebeak becomes large, it gains a 10ft reach.

It's a Large (tall) creature.

Where does it say it's large, tall?

This is all I see

PRD wrote:

Axe Beak Companions

Starting Statistics: Size Medium; Speed 50 ft.; Attack bite (1d6 + 1-1/2 Str); Ability Scores Str 10, Dex 17, Con 12, Int 2, Wis 11, Cha 10; Special Qualities low-light vision.
4th Level Advancement: Size Large; AC +2 natural armor; Attack bite (1d8 + 1-1/2 Str); Ability Scores Str +8, Dex –2, Con +4; Special Attacks sudden charge.
None of that says anything about reach with its 4th level advancement and nothing about it says it's tall.

I will counter equally by asking why you assume it is Large (long).

There is no general default for all Large creatures.

Just as with any Companion, you compare its natural reach to its Bestiary entry. Apes, Snakes, and Bipeds (like the Axebeak and T-Rex) are all considered to be Large (tall). Tigers, Wolves, and Quadrupeds (like Horses and Camels) are all considered to be Large (long).

Grand Lodge

Axebeak Sanctuary Society wrote:
Just as with any Companion, you compare its natural reach to its Bestiary entry.

Where does it say to do this?


I believe a couple creatures have exceptional reach, perhaps the Diplodocus IIRC. Those are the ones that are given specific wording in their Companion statblocks.


claudekennilol wrote:
Axebeak Sanctuary Society wrote:
Just as with any Companion, you compare its natural reach to its Bestiary entry.
Where does it say to do this?

Where else would you get it from?

That's like saying Horses have 20ft reach because nowhere says they don't.

You can only go off what you're given.

Grand Lodge

Axebeak Sanctuary Society wrote:
You can only go off what you're given.

That's my entire point...


What is the reach of a Horse?


Its the doughnut shape.

Since you occupy all of the squares, not just one...
*
*
*
1234
5HH6
7HH8
90AC

All of those spaces are adjacent to the horse, So they're all adjacent to you. You can't attack an adjacent space. Adjacent is creature determined, not square determined.


Ok, I dig that you occupy all of the squares of your mount. That still doesn't answer where your attack originates from. Can it originate from any of the squares of the mount being that you are a small/medium creature and are only actually 5x5 regardless of how many squares you are considered to be occupying currently shouldn't you need to specify where the attack is coming from?

There are problems with this on either side as I see it. If you don't have to declare what square you are in then how do cover/concealment rules work? If you do have to declare what square you are attacking from how do AoOs that you may provoke work?

This seems like more of a mess the more I am thinking about it. You know what?... can you just hit FAQ?

As for the question about reach with animal companions when they hit large size (I don't think we are talking about just the Axe Beak anymore) has there been on thread on this yet? Any Dev posts I'm not aware of? Should we start a thread on that too and get it FAQ'd?


Ok lets not read into the rules to much, by doing that you are adding to them and it becomes RAI instead of RAW.

For simply argument you occupy the squares your mount has if you are riding it, you do not get it's reach or the benefits of its size other than occupying it's squares. As for arguing how the mechanics work, that comes into a general explanation or fiat territory. Can you suddenly explain how a character with combat reflexes gets to attack enemies on either side of him in-between his turns when they trigger his attacks of opportunity. The rules don't explain how he does it they just say he can and gives him limitations to how many times he can do it per turn as well as what squares or distance he can do it etc. Same way when a medium character attacks from the back of a large creature no matter if its it front, back or one of its sides. I picture the mount shifting in my mind to allow the rider to get an attack in, technically the mount didn't move from the space it occupies nor did it attack, thus not violating the action economy.

As for arguing whether an animal companions, like the axe beak gets reach when they become large. By strict RAW they do not. Now before you go quoting the bestiary to me, keep in mind your getting your stats from the animal companion block not the bestiary block. Two different sets of stats. And as for referring to the rules concerning large, huge, gargantuan, etc creatures, its up to the gm to decide whether he wants to apply them to your animal companion. I do know for a fact large wolves and horses do not have reach, even in the bestiary. Based on this, its strictly up gm/dm as to whether you animal companion qualifies to have a natural reach.

Lets say your dm/gm decides to be very strict and says no the your animal companion getting reach, there are some ways around this. The first is spells like animal growth or items such as dire collars. The second is the feat called lunge. And finally there is prestige class called mammoth rider you can take at pc lvl 10 or later that makes your animal companion huge and gives it a 10 ft natural reach at class lvl 1. Should you stick to mammoth rider and keep taking lvls in it your animal companion's reach will increase to 15 ft.


swordfalcon wrote:
As for arguing whether an animal companions, like the axe beak gets reach when they become large. By strict RAW they do not.

What is the reach of a Horse?

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

The point about Animal Companion reach is that some people are choosing to base their assumption on all Large creatures being Large (long) creatures, when there is no basis for that anywhere.

There are two types of Large: long and tall.

Assuming that all Large companions are long is as erroneous as assuming that all Large companions are tall.

So, since reach is an unknown in Animal Companion statblocks, you go to the only other place where it's listed: in its Bestiary entry.

Otherwise you could just as easily claim that a Horse has 10ft reach. It's as made up of an answer as claiming that an Axebeak has 5ft reach.

If your defense is "RAW", then you can't claim that a Large Axebeak has 5ft reach. That is not written anywhere.


Nefreet wrote:

The point about Animal Companion reach is that some people are choosing to base their assumption on all Large creatures being Large (long) creatures, when there is no basis for that anywhere.

There are two types of Large: long and tall.

Assuming that all Large companions are long is as erroneous as assuming that all Large companions are tall.

So, since reach is an unknown in Animal Companion statblocks, you go to the only other place where it's listed: in its Bestiary entry.

Otherwise you could just as easily claim that a Horse has 10ft reach. It's as made up of an answer as claiming that an Axebeak has 5ft reach.

If your defense is "RAW", then you can't claim that a Large Axebeak has 5ft reach. That is not written anywhere.

I apologize, when I refer to RAW, I mean just that read as written. If it is not written down anywhere in the rules than it cannot be used simply because it is not there or not written down. Given the points you made I will stick to my answer, its up to the gm because there is no official set answer on this. The point can be argued either way, and for each gm you can find that will argue one way there is another out there that will pick the other way to argue.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I'm super curious about this. I want to know where you're coming from.

What evidence do you have that a Large Axebeak Companion has only 5ft of reach?

Really, I'd like to know.


Nefreet wrote:

I'm super curious about this. I want to know where you're coming from.

What evidence do you have that a Large Axebeak Companion has only 5ft of reach?

Really, I'd like to know.

Went back a reread some of the rules around animal companions, Nefreet your right. Using the stat blocks in the bestiary for the animal companions if there is one to determine if the animal companion gets reach or not is the right way to go. But I have one question, if some how someone could get their tyrannosaurs animal companion to gargantuan, does that mean it gets the swallow whole ability.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Swallow whole isn't dependent on the size of the creature. There's plenty of Gargantuan critters that don't have it.


Nefreet wrote:
Swallow whole isn't dependent on the size of the creature. There's plenty of Gargantuan critters that don't have it.

Yeah true, but the gargantuan T-rex in the pathfinder bestiary has it. I was just wondering if you could get your t-rex companion up to the same size, it would get it too.


RAW it wouldn't (because as said it's not tied to the size directly, but rather an ability that the real counterpart has... -- perhaps you could explain it as something that they have due to experience. swallowing something that's alive might not be all that easy. Being bigger than that which you are swallowing is a necessary but not sufficient condition...), but I'd probably allow it, at least I'd allow training it as a trick if you find a permanent way of size increase.

Again, raw probably not.


Julix wrote:

RAW it wouldn't (because as said it's not tied to the size directly, but rather an ability that the real counterpart has... -- perhaps you could explain it as something that they have due to experience. swallowing something that's alive might not be all that easy. Being bigger than that which you are swallowing is a necessary but not sufficient condition...), but I'd probably allow it, at least I'd allow training it as a trick if you find a permanent way of size increase.

Again, raw probably not.

Could only temporally make the t-rex gargantuan, I don't think there is a way to make it permanent officially. Unless someone can figure out how to cast enlarge person on animal companion and combine it with the permanency spell. Maybe there is class archetype that can get you an animal companion and also have the sor/wiz spell list at your disposal.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

There are lots of abilities that Animal Companions will never get compared to their Bestiary cousins (damage dice is an obvious one). I see the connection you're trying to make, but reach is not one of those abilities. It's a universal rule dependent on creature size and scale that only deviates by exception.

It's the "RAW", for those that like to hear that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Lune, lets change tack a moment, can an Ogre, using a Longspear, attack any square adjacent to him? Nope.

Same thing here, a Halfling using a Longspear while mounted on a Horse cannot attack any square adjacent to the Halfling/Horse.

The Halfling is considered to take up the same space as the Horse, which is also the same space as an Ogre.


Thanx for bringing it back on track, Gauss. ;) Honestly, I appreciate the discussion about the Axe Beak too as I have never heard that expressed and wanted to hear both sides. I think I am firmly in the "has reach cause the only thing that suggests either way suggests that they do" category on that one.

Don't take this the wrong way as I am not truly arguing with you. More just playing devil's advocate as I am as of yet undecided on this rule. And while I definitely understand where you are coming from with that my counter is that while I get that the Halfling is taking up all the squares that the mount is in that does not answer where the attack comes from. IMO it can be argued that even though the Halfling is taking up all of those squares he is still making the attack from one of them.

In other words I can see where there could be a distinction between "taking up the same space as/occupying" and actually being large.

Let me put it this way: If we go with the same example and the Halfling casts Animal Growth on his Axe Beak does his reach increase to 15'? No? Why not? If he is taking up the same space as a Huge size creature (the size of his mount at this point) then shouldn't he gain the reach of that creature? Of course not. Because his reach isn't determined by the size of his mount. It is determined by his size and where he is attacking from.

Now I know your knee jerk reaction is going to be to disagree with that but keep with me for a second on this. Draw out a diagram of a huge creature and then imagine which squares the Halfling rider could attack to. What about those corner squares? Can he get them? He can if he is dealing with his reach if he is unmounted. But the rules for reach on large and larger creatures tell us that you can't. Which do you go with here? If you go with that he can attack those squares then you are going with the "Determined by his size and where he is attacking from." So if he can attack from the corner square of his huge sized mount then why can he not attack from one of the middle squares of his mount?

Again, this is not actually my opinion per se, but I can easily see it being a solid counter argument and I am just trying to iron out where I stand on this one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't have to imagine it, I just have to look up the rules. The rules state that a rider on a mount occupies the entire mounts space.

Going with your large example, if a rider is on an huge creature, where is the rider? The rider is in all 27 (3x3x3) cubes, even the mount's feet!
Does that make any kind of realistic sense? Nope! But those are the rules.

Reach is not determined by space, you are conflating the two. You have a small creature occupying a medium, large, huge, or whatever, space. That does not change the small creature's reach (5' or 10' with a reach weapon).

Summary: the rules clearly state that the rider occupies the same space as the mount.
The rules do not state that the rider can choose where he is located on the mount or where he can attack from.
You are trying to add a level of detail to the game which the rules do not support. That level of detail may make sense, but it is not part of the existing rules.

Grand Lodge

swordfalcon wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

I'm super curious about this. I want to know where you're coming from.

What evidence do you have that a Large Axebeak Companion has only 5ft of reach?

Really, I'd like to know.

Went back a reread some of the rules around animal companions, Nefreet your right. Using the stat blocks in the bestiary for the animal companions if there is one to determine if the animal companion gets reach or not is the right way to go.

Tell me where the CRB says to do this.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Combat Chapter.

Grand Lodge

Nefreet wrote:
Combat Chapter.

Now tell me where it says which of those rows an Axebeak fits in.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What is the reach of a Horse?


Lune wrote:
Ok, I dig that you occupy all of the squares of your mount. That still doesn't answer where your attack originates from.

It does actually. An attacker can chose any corner to originate the attack from so the answer becomes

1) It originates from whatever corner you want BUT...

2) That doesn't matter because what corner the attack originates from is irrelevant to whether or not a creature is adjacent, because adjacent is a property of the creature not the origin of the attack.

Quote:
If you do have to declare what square you are attacking from how do AoOs that you may provoke work?

What corner you're attacking from is irrelevant: if something threatens your horse and you draw the aoo they're threatening you.

Quote:
As for the question about reach with animal companions when they hit large size (I don't think we are talking about just the Axe Beak anymore) has there been on thread on this yet? Any Dev posts I'm not aware of? Should we start a thread on that too and get it FAQ'd?

That might be more FAQable.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber
claudekennilol wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Combat Chapter.
Now tell me where it says which of those rows an Axebeak fits in.

The same place that tells you where the Horse fits in.

The Bestiary.


Gauss: You failed to answer the simplest question that I had. Let me restate it.

1. Can a Large sized creature attack at the 10' diagonal square?
2. Can a Medium creature with a reach weapon attack the 10' diagonal square?
3. If the Medium creature is riding a large creature and wielding a reach weapon can he attack the 10' diagonal square? If so, why?

BNW: Ah. I see. Yeah, I think I agree with you now then on the "adjacent is a property associated with a creature" bit. I can get behind that. Still not certain that answers all of the questions about reach when mounted though. Like the ones I posted above to Gauss.

Grand Lodge

Lune wrote:

Gauss: You failed to answer the simplest question that I had. Let me restate it.

1. Can a Large sized creature attack at the 10' diagonal square?
2. Can a Medium creature with a reach weapon attack the 10' diagonal square?
3. If the Medium creature is riding a large creature and wielding a reach weapon can he attack the 10' diagonal square? If so, why?

BNW: Ah. I see. Yeah, I think I agree with you now then on the "adjacent is a property associated with a creature" bit. I can get behind that. Still not certain that answers all of the questions about reach when mounted though. Like the ones I posted above to Gauss.

All yes, the second diagonal can be reached if you can hit something ten feet away. I'm on my phone so can't link it easily, but check the CRB faq and you'll see one from about eight months ago or so specifically talking about reach and the second diagonal.


Lune wrote:

BNW: Ah. I see. Yeah, I think I agree with you now then on the "adjacent is a property associated with a creature" bit. I can get behind that. Still not certain that answers all of the questions about reach when mounted though. Like the ones I posted above to Gauss.

It answers them.

Yes yes and yes

. Can a Large sized creature attack at the 10' diagonal square?

10-Foot Reach and Diagonals: I’m confused about reach and diagonals. I heard somewhere online that you don’t threaten the second diagonal with a 10-foot reach but that you somehow get an attack of opportunity when opponents move out of that square, but the Rules Reference Cards show that you do threaten the second diagonal. Which one is correct?

The cards are correct. As an exception to the way that diagonals normally work, a creature with 10 feet of reach threatens the second diagonal. These changes will be reflected in the next errata.
____________

That FAQ makes it an exception for all reach, not just medium critter with blade on a stick.

2. Can a Medium creature with a reach weapon attack the 10' diagonal square?

Yes (see faq)

3. If the Medium creature is riding a large creature and wielding a reach weapon can he attack the 10' diagonal square? If so, why?

Eyup. See above.


Orfamay Quest wrote:

I don't interpret "you occupy all the squares that your mount does" as meaning "you are the size of your mount," but instead that you are shifting your position on the mount from second to second. (This is the technical abstraction and also explains, e.g. why you and someone else can occupy the same 5' square. You're not a gelatinous cube.)

Theres a lot of problems with that.

RAW its all the squares, not any one square.

You would also be able to gain a +4 cover bonus simply by saying "i shift a littleback and to the left so he has to attack me through the horse"

You could avoid attacks entirely by hiding on the far side of your horse from someone with a standard melee weapon: since the person can't enter the square with your horse they can't swing at you, at all.

HH
RH Orc

You could do the above by playing "press your luck" no wammies no wammies... by "blinking" to any square as your opponent moved around you... all while firmly seated in your saddle.

Lets you use reach weapons at melee and adjacent, something pathfinder tries to avoid.


Lune wrote:

Gauss: You failed to answer the simplest question that I had. Let me restate it.

1. Can a Large sized creature attack at the 10' diagonal square?
2. Can a Medium creature with a reach weapon attack the 10' diagonal square?
3. If the Medium creature is riding a large creature and wielding a reach weapon can he attack the 10' diagonal square? If so, why?

BNW: Ah. I see. Yeah, I think I agree with you now then on the "adjacent is a property associated with a creature" bit. I can get behind that. Still not certain that answers all of the questions about reach when mounted though. Like the ones I posted above to Gauss.

1) Yes, a large creature with a reach of 10 can attack 2 diagonals away, this was covered in this FAQ.

2) Yes, a medium creature with a reach weapon can attack 2 diagonals away, this was covered in this FAQ.
3) Yes, a medium creature using a reach weapon riding a large creature can attack 2 diagonals away, this was covered in this FAQ.

A creature with 10' reach (or a 10' reach weapon) has the same reach mounted as not mounted, 10 feet. Only where you start to count changes due to the creature using the space of the mount instead of his own.

In any case, I am not sure how your questions regarding reach attacking 2 diagonals away relates to your question(s) regarding reach attacking one diagonal away.


Thats... not right. I'm at work right now though so cannot access several sites. Those FAQs are only providing answers for medium sized creatures with reach. Large and larger creatures cannot attack their second diagonals. That is why I asked the questions in the way that I did.

I can't find the link for it right now but I will try to do so when I get home.


If I am wrong then I totally apologize now and will just wonder where I got my confusion from on the diagonals bit. I already think that BNW gave a great rules answer with the "adjacent" bit as that gives me a firm rules base to stand on for an answer.

Grand Lodge

Lune wrote:
If I am wrong then I totally apologize now and will just wonder where I got my confusion from on the diagonals bit. I already think that BNW gave a great rules answer with the "adjacent" bit as that gives me a firm rules base to stand on for an answer.

It doesn't say anything about size. It only talks about 10' reach.

FAQ wrote:

10-Foot Reach and Diagonals: I’m confused about reach and diagonals. I heard somewhere online that you don’t threaten the second diagonal with a 10-foot reach but that you somehow get an attack of opportunity when opponents move out of that square, but the Rules Reference Cards show that you do threaten the second diagonal. Which one is correct?

The cards are correct. As an exception to the way that diagonals normally work, a creature with 10 feet of reach threatens the second diagonal. These changes will be reflected in the next errata.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Maps Subscriber

Might I offer a couple pieces of information on the "What reach does my Animal Companion have" question?

Quoted text is from paizo.com/.../prd/...

CRB/Druid wrote:

Ape

Starting Statistics: Size Medium; Speed 30 ft., Climb 30 ft.; AC +1 natural armor; Attack bite (1d4), 2 claws (1d4); Ability Scores Str 13, Dex 17, Con 10, Int 2, Wis 12, Cha 7; Special Qualities low-light vision, scent.

4th-Level Advancement: Size Large; AC +2 natural armor; Attack bite (1d6), 2 claws (1d6); Ability Scores Str +8, Dex –2, Con +4.

Please note there is no reference to reach.

Monster Index wrote:

Ape, Gorilla

Space 10 ft.; Reach 10 ft.

Now, I know Mike Brock is only the word-of-god for PFS, but he's also closely connected to the design team.

Mike Brock wrote:
The large ape has 10' reach.

1 to 50 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Mounted + Reach = Which Threatened Squares? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.