PDA

View Full Version : 3D Threatenting [3.5]

bbugg
2010-03-11, 09:31 AM
How does threatening work in 3D?

I think my DM has decided that a medium character takes up 5' cubed, so only 5' high, just to keep things simple.

If I am flying 5' above the ground and I have a 5' reach, what do I threaten?
Only the square I'm above? The 9 squares? A cross of 5 squares?

What if I'm using a polearm (10ft reach) and I'm 10ft off the ground? What do I threaten?

Then there are the same questions in reverse - where do I fly to keep out of reach of a person with a sword or polearm.

Other info:

I know flying is not suited for melee, but this is for a Darwin's World game, so it's slightly different. I can fly (clumsy) but have taken a feat to allow me to hover. My thought is to fly out of 5ft reach range and use a glaive to hack at anyone who pulls a gun at me (I also have combat reflexes). In case you're familiar with Darwin's World, I also have elongation, so I can actually reach 15ft, but I don't want to get into that conversation here - I can extrapolate from the 5 and 10' discussion.

ericgrau
2010-03-11, 10:05 AM
It gets more complicated because when you fly you have some degree of facing. IMO average mobility or below could attack anything within the hemisphere in front of him, which is probably facing to one side or to one side and angled a little up or down, but not fully up or down. Up or down could still be inside that hemisphere, but I mean he couldn't attack behind him. Good mobility could face his hemisphere in any direction at the end of his turn, but reversing direction consumes a little bit of movement. Perfect manuevaribility could threaten the entire sphere around him IMO. See flight rules for more information on maneuverability, to see how to change direction and so on.

I dunno about how right it is to use a 5 foot cube as your "square" but it is the simplest option so I'd stick with it.

bbugg
2010-03-11, 10:43 AM
Right, and in my case it's even more complicated because I'm clumsy but can hover. In my mind, if I can hover over your head, then the facing might go away? So in that respect, it's perfect manuevaribility?

bbugg
2010-03-11, 10:45 AM
We did talk about using something other than the 5ft cube, but it gets ugly. It's not a 5x10ft cube, because that seems too big. And we really didn't want to get into partial squares (5x5x7.5).

Ashiel
2010-03-11, 10:48 AM
I would just assume you threaten spaces around you normally (5ft or 10ft reach with a pole-arm). You already have to maintain a minimum forward movement. I guess I just don't see the need to complicate the mechanics. :smallconfused:

Godskook
2010-03-11, 10:50 AM
We did talk about using something other than the 5ft cube, but it gets ugly. It's not a 5x10ft cube, because that seems too big. And we really didn't want to get into partial squares (5x5x7.5).

Thing is, a human body only takes up a cube about 2x2x6, so the original 5x5 has a lot of dead space in it anyway. But once you get into fitting the cube to the player like that, you start needing to ask what his rotation is(A raptoran would be horizontal when flying and vertical when hovering, for instance).

ericgrau
2010-03-11, 10:54 AM
We did talk about using something other than the 5ft cube, but it gets ugly. It's not a 5x10ft cube, because that seems too big. And we really didn't want to get into partial squares (5x5x7.5).
That plus your vertical reach isn't all that great; your horizontal is only good b/c it's assumed you can move side to side freely. Yeah keep it simple and go with a 5 foot cube.

Right, and in my case it's even more complicated because I'm clumsy but can hover. In my mind, if I can hover over your head, then the facing might go away? So in that respect, it's perfect manuevaribility?

You have to stop and spend a move action to hover, so it's not like you're doing it all the time. Though you could move around at half speed while hovering. IMO you can only reach the hemisphere in front of you while on the move but not hovering.

As for when you're hovering it's complicated. Do we treat it like good or perfect? I mean good lets you move in any direction too, though it costs movement to switch your facing. I'd be tempted to treat it like good maneuverability as I can't see you spinning around all that fast. For that matter I can't see you facing straight up while still hovering, unless you have some funky flexibility in your wings. So then really it's the same as when you're not hovering.

bbugg
2010-03-11, 11:04 AM
And here I didn't think I'd find anyone who knew Darwin's World....

I think I agree that I'd get the front sphere while moving and whole sphere while hovering. Makes sense to me.

So, if I have a normal (5' reach) weapon, that would mean I can attack all 9 squares below me when hovering, and fewer when moving. I'm going to propose to my DM that it's 4 - the three in front and one directly below.

If it's a polearm, do I get the whole 4x4 square below me if I'm hovering? (I can't remember if the corners are cut out for 10' reach.)

bbugg
2010-03-11, 11:06 AM
And ericgrau, while I've got you on the line as someone familiar with DW, how do you read the elongation feat?

If I elongate to increase my reach by 5', can I attack adjacent opponents? Essnetially, does my sword turn into a polearm, or do I get the reach of a large character?

ericgrau
2010-03-11, 11:10 AM
And then I changed my mind in an edit to say that I couldn't figure how you'd spin around to quickly reach behind you even while hovering :smalltongue:. Though maybe you'll think of something.

I'm not familiar with darwin's world or the elongation feat unfortunately. But if it's from having longer arms I think you still threaten the square next to you since, unlike a polarm, arms can bend.

bbugg
2010-03-11, 11:27 AM