My wish for the Monster Core


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's a simple wish:

I hope that the Monster Core specifies what a monster's melee Strike range is, if one is not given.

My default assumption has always been "5 ft". But I think an equally valid assumption is "whatever the standard reach is for a creature of that size".

I brought this up ages ago regarding Tiny creatures. Prior to the release of Book of the Dead, the only creature in the entire game with a listed melee range of "0 ft" was the demilich. But because one existed, I felt comfortable assuming that no listed reach equaled 5ft.
(This does lead to a bit of a silly adjudication regarding the Greater Nightmare, a Huge creature with no listed reach on its Jaws and Hoof)

But a number of people disagreed, saying that GMs should be using the reaches listed in the Size, Space, and Reach table if no reach is listed.

I think these are both valid interpretations.

The release of Book of the Dead introduced several Tiny creatures with a listed melee strike range of "0 ft". This further convinces me that if no range is listed, a 5ft reach should be assumed.

However, complicating this assumption is the existence of creatures which have a melee attack with a listed reach of 5 ft. These include the Dreamscraper, Tehialai-Thief-Of-Ships, Lomori Sprout, and the Gorilla.
The Gorilla is a particularly interesting one because it comes from the first bestiary, and it has 2 melee attacks, each with a listed range:
A 10ft fist and a 5ft Jaws.
Given the Gorilla's Large size and Bipedal nature, it's a fairly safe assumption a Gorilla should be considered a Large, Tall creature, giving it 10ft natural reach. This would make the specified 10ft reach unnecessary.
Alternatively, the generally assumed reach could be 5ft, making the specified 5ft reach on Jaws unnecessary.

Frankly, I don't much care which approach the book takes in the Remaster, though, I think having an assumed 5ft reach on attacks unless the attack specifies is a bit easier and requires less GM fiat on assessing if a creature is Tall or Long.

I just really hope the book specifies a standard and that the writers stick to it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's 5 feet, primarily because there is no "standard reach" for a size of creature in PF2. Even where the game lays out size categories and the idea of increased reach it mentions you're not guaranteed longer reach with larger size.

Reach, when not 5 feet, is meant to be specified. That's just how the game is actually set up.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thenobledrake wrote:

It's 5 feet, primarily because there is no "standard reach" for a size of creature in PF2. Even where the game lays out size categories and the idea of increased reach it mentions you're not guaranteed longer reach with larger size.

Reach, when not 5 feet, is meant to be specified. That's just how the game is actually set up.

Yeah, maybe. Sure be nice if that were written somewhere, tho ;)

My biggest reservation in making this assumption is the existence of dozens of Tiny creatures which don't have a listed melee range. That runs contrary to the Size, Space, and Reach section and table indicating that Tiny creatures usually have 0ft reach.

According to AoN, there are 69 (nice) Tiny creatures across Bestiaries 1, 2, and 3.
One of them has a listed melee range of 0 feet, the Demilich
Four of them have a listed melee range of 10 feet, the 4 elemental wisps.

65 of them have no listed melee range. Preciously few of them are wielding the kinds of reach melee weaponry that one would expect of Tiny creatures having 5ft melee range.


Ectar wrote:
Yeah, maybe. Sure be nice if that were written somewhere, tho ;)

Core Rulebook page 474 (just above the table that shows size and typical reach) says "Table 9–1 also lists the typical reach for creatures of each size, for both tall creatures (most bipeds) and long creatures (most quadrupeds). See page 455 for more about reach" (my bold for emphasis)

And the referenced page 455 says "Your reach is typically 5 feet, but weapons with the reach trait can extend this. Larger creatures can have greater reach..."

So it is written somewhere.

Ectar wrote:
My biggest reservation in making this assumption is the existence of dozens of Tiny creatures which don't have a listed melee range. That runs contrary to the Size, Space, and Reach section and table indicating that Tiny creatures usually have 0ft reach.

Yes, but also no.

Just like there are a lot of examples in the bestiary of creatures of other sizes besides tiny that have a longer reach listed than the table says is typical, it could be intended that these tiny creatures have longer than typical reach (yes, that sounds like a contradiction to have the majority of creatures be atypical, but it's not because having tiny PC options means a massive number of creatures that don't get counted in the bestiary list that do follow the "typical", and the bestiary list isn't all-inclusive so we further can't actually say there's a problem with what is being declared "typical").

Though yes, it could also be a case of oversight where the bestiary was written assuming size granted reach unless specifically over-written so all of the 0-feet mentions that should have been on those tiny creature attacks got missed.

According to AoN, there are 69 (nice) Tiny creatures across Bestiaries 1, 2, and 3.
One of them has a listed melee range of 0 feet, the Demilich
Four of them have a listed melee range of 10 feet, the 4 elemental wisps.

65 of them have no listed melee range. Preciously few of them are wielding the kinds of reach melee weaponry that one would expect of Tiny creatures having 5ft melee range.


Link to table if this is same for remaster

Tiny PC in LOAG wrote:
They can purchase weapons, armor, and other items for their size with the same statistics as normal gear, except that melee weapons have a reach of 0 for them (or a reach 5 feet shorter than normal if they have the reach trait).

Dark Archive

thenobledrake wrote:

And the referenced page 455 says "Your reach is typically 5 feet, but weapons with the reach trait can extend this. Larger creatures can have greater reach..."

So it is written somewhere.

I don't think it's fair to assume the general rules for PCs applies whole cloth to monsters.

Plus in second line you quoted, it says "This is typically 5 feet, but special weapons and larger creatures have longer reaches."
It makes no mention of creatures smaller than Small having shorter reach, but the aforementioned table does.

thenobledrake wrote:

Just like there are a lot of examples in the bestiary of creatures of other sizes besides tiny that have a longer reach listed than the table says is typical, it could be intended that these tiny creatures have longer than typical reach (yes, that sounds like a contradiction to have the majority of creatures be atypical, but it's not because having tiny PC options means a massive number of creatures that don't get counted in the bestiary list that do follow the "typical", and the bestiary list isn't all-inclusive so we further can't actually say there's a problem with what is being declared "typical").

Though yes, it could also be a case of oversight where the bestiary was written assuming size granted reach unless specifically over-written so all of the 0-feet mentions that should have been on those tiny creature attacks got missed.

Yeah, and when those non-Tiny creatures have a reach of something other than a presumed 5ft, it's specifically mentioned.

The ability to create Tiny PCs didn't exist when the Size, Space, and Reach rules were written. Unless everything in that section regarding Tiny creatures was meant exclusively to future-proof the option for Tiny PCs and have no bearing on Tiny monsters, there's no reason it shouldn't apply to them.

And I suppose I can finish the list of Tiny monsters now. There's 42 more:
Teyam Ishtori has a listed melee range of 0ft. It's a modified Demilich, so it presumably used the base creature as a starting point.
The Predatory Rabbit, Festering Gnasher, Taunting Skull, and Mummified Cat all have listed melee ranges of 0ft. Yay Book of the Dead!
The Metal and Wood Wisps have 10ft reach, like the other wisps.
Finally, the Lomori Sprout has listed 5ft reach.

So in total there are 111 Tiny monster on AoN.
6 of them have listed 10ft reach.
1 of them has listed 5ft reach.
6 of them have listed 0ft reach.
98 have no listed reach.
If we assume that an unlisted reach is 5ft, then 94% of Tiny creatures have atypical reach. I am disinclined to believe that's meant to be the case.

Dark Archive

Laclale♪ wrote:

Link to table if this is same for remaster

Tiny PC in LOAG wrote:
They can purchase weapons, armor, and other items for their size with the same statistics as normal gear, except that melee weapons have a reach of 0 for them (or a reach 5 feet shorter than normal if they have the reach trait).

Sure, that table exists as-is in the Player Core.

But nowhere in the Player Core or GM Core (that I've seen) tell you "If a monster's reach is not listed in its stat block, use the typical reach for a creature of it's size" or "If a monster's reach is not listed in its stat block, use a standard reach of 5ft".
And pre-remaster, the vast majority larger-than-medium creatures creatures have their reach specifically listed, even when it uses their Typical reach for a creature of their size and body composition.

But there are exceptions which violate either assumption.
I just want the Devs to tell us which it's supposed to be and to consistently print stat blocks that follow it.


Ectar wrote:
I don't think it's fair to assume the general rules for PCs applies whole cloth to monsters.

Absent any monster-specific rules on the same subject, they aren't "the general rules for PCs" so much as they are "the general rules."


If 1 grid was 30ft, then tiny creature's reach problem is absent.

If blog has advice if that kind of character uses reach/range-written option more often...

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / My wish for the Monster Core All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.