[v3.5] Preparing an action to attack a creature with reach?

[Ravingdork]

I am being attacked by a monster who has 10+ foot reach. I cannot reach him normally with my current melee weapons, so I prepare an action to attack him (or rather his limbs) whenever he attacks me.

Is there anything at all in the rules that would prevent me from doing this? How would you rule the situation if you were GM?

I'm thinking this is a perfect use of the PREPARE AN ACTION rules (and situations such as this are, in large part, why said rules exist), but I just wanted to get a few dozen second opinions on the matter.

[Tyger]

Per RAW, unless you also have reach to target and hit the squares he occupies, you can't hit him. Does it make sense? Not really. But that's D&D for you.

Can you houserule it? Of course! One I have seen (and I think I agree with) is that you can ready to disarm or sunder, as the weapon he is wielding is obviously close enough to you. Haven't seen anyone HR that you can actually hit him, as that would sort of defeat the purpose of reach in the first place.

[Ravingdork]

Per RAW, unless you also have reach to target and hit the squares he occupies, you can't hit him. Does it make sense? Not really. But that's D&D for you.

Can you houserule it? Of course! One I have seen (and I think I agree with) is that you can ready to disarm or sunder, as the weapon he is wielding is obviously close enough to you. Haven't seen anyone HR that you can actually hit him, as that would sort of defeat the purpose of reach in the first place.

Would you please provide some support for your stance? I'm curious to know where you're coming from.

[dextercorvia]

You can reach him, you just don't want to eat the AoO. Don't be silly though. Even if your plan works, you are trading a Full Attack for a Standard Attack. Step up, suck it up, and trade FA for FA. If you can't win that way, you are standing too close already. Also, don't forget the 5' step.

Edit: Allow me.

[QUOTE]Attack

Making an attack is a standard action.
Melee Attacks

With a normal melee weapon, you can strike any opponent within 5 feet. (Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you.) Some melee weapons have reach, as indicated in their descriptions. With a typical reach weapon, you can strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can’t strike adjacent foes (those within 5 feet). [\QUOTE]

[Tyger]

Would you please provide some support for your stance? I'm curious to know where you're coming from.

No one has ever asked me that before... on this point. :)

From the SRD:

Reach Weapons
Most creatures of Medium or smaller size have a reach of only 5 feet. This means that they can make melee attacks only against creatures up to 5 feet (1 square) away. However, Small and Medium creatures wielding reach weapons threaten more squares than a typical creature. In addition, most creatures larger than Medium have a natural reach of 10 feet or more.

That's the short answer. Your target has reach, but he is more than 5 feet away, ergo you can't hit him.

EDIT: Curse you ninja!!! :smallbiggrin:

[Another_Poet]

There is nothing in the rules preventing it.

It is not called preparing an action, it is called Readying an action. You can ready a standard action to go off on a given trigger event. If the trigger does not happen by your next turn, you lose the action. So say "I ready an action to attack then it enters a square I threaten," and hope it moves into a square you threaten.

A second option is to Delay Action. You could simply say, "I delay my initiative." Later, when it has moved into a square that you threaten, you can take your delayed turn. (Again, if the new round comes up before you decide to take it, you lose your delayed turn, effectively doing nothing.) In this case you can take a standard and move action like normal, or make a full attack - just like a normal turn, except delayed.

The advantage to the Readied action is you get to go the second the monster moves into your threatened space. With delaying your action, it gets to complete its turn before you can opt to take your delayed turn.

ap

[Tyger]

There is nothing in the rules preventing it.

It is not called preparing an action, it is called Readying an action. You can ready a standard action to go off on a given trigger event. If the trigger does not happen by your next turn, you lose the action. So say "I ready an action to attack then it enters a square I threaten," and hope it moves into a square you threaten.

A second option is to Delay Action. You could simply say, "I delay my initiative." Later, when it has moved into a square that you threaten, you can take your delayed turn. (Again, if the new round comes up before you decide to take it, you lose your delayed turn, effectively doing nothing.) In this case you can take a standard and move action like normal, or make a full attack - just like a normal turn, except delayed.

The advantage to the Readied action is you get to go the second the monster moves into your threatened space. With delaying your action, it gets to complete its turn before you can opt to take your delayed turn.

ap

Poet, the OP was asking about hitting the target who remains at greater than 5 foot reach - which is prohibited by the rules unless you have reach as well.

Yes, if that creature with reach moves in, you can hit it, but if it stays where it is, and you stay where you are, you can't hit it.

[Binks]

There is nothing in the rules preventing it.

It is not called preparing an action, it is called Readying an action. You can ready a standard action to go off on a given trigger event. If the trigger does not happen by your next turn, you lose the action. So say "I ready an action to attack then it enters a square I threaten," and hope it moves into a square you threaten.

Except if it has reach it never has to enter a square you threaten.

[Ravingdork]

As an example, let's say you are a sailor on a sailing ship and there is a giant squid-like monster in the sea attacking you and others on deck with its long, long tentacles. Attacking the creature is difficult because you are out of its reach and ranged weapons are largely negated by the cover of water.

The way I see it, you are left with 2 options:

1) Jump into the water and fight the creature on its own terms (likely suicidal).
2) Ready an action to attack a tentacle once it enters your space to attack (a logical action as well as a long time fantasy staple).

[Tyger]

As an example, let's say you are a sailor on a sailing ship and there is a giant squid-like monster in the sea attacking you and others on deck with its long, long tentacles. Attacking the creature is difficult because you are out of its reach and ranged weapons are largely negated by the cover of water.

The way I see it, you are left with 2 options:

1) Jump into the water and fight the creature on its own terms (likely suicidal).
2) Ready an action to attack a tentacle once it enters your space to attack (a logical action as well as a long time fantasy staple).

Logical? You bet. Supported by the rules? Not at all. By the Rules as Written (or RAW) you can't do what you are talking about. Its why reach is a valuable commodity for melee characters.

[dextercorvia]

As an example, let's say you are a sailor on a sailing ship and there is a giant squid-like monster in the sea attacking you and others on deck with its long, long tentacles. Attacking the creature is difficult because you are out of its reach and ranged weapons are largely negated by the cover of water.

The way I see it, you are left with 2 options:

1) Jump into the water and fight the creature on its own terms (likely suicidal).
2) Ready an action to attack a tentacle once it enters your space to attack (a logical action as well as a long time fantasy staple).

1) is a legal choice by RAW.

2) is not. It is thematic and logical, but nonetheless it is not possible in the rules.

3) Use a Ranged Weapon

4) Use a Spell

5) Fly away Stanley, Fly away.

Edit 4.5) Expansion or Giantsize would probably give you the reach you need to melee the dumb thing.

[Ravingdork]

Options 3 through 4 aren't really options as the creature has total cover from the water.

[Tyger]

If the water is giving total cover to it, then you have total cover from it... but that's an aside. :)

[Binks]

Options 3 through 4 aren't really options as the creature has total cover from the water.

Well he would if he was totally submerged...which means he can't be attacking since he must be totally submerged, limbs and all. Otherwise if anything's above the water they're not submerged and they're target-able.

But that's not the thread issue. Simply put by RAW you can't melee an opponent outside your reach, even if logically a part of them is entering your space. It's a perfectly reasonable house-rule, particularly if you house rule that you can target the weapon (either sunder or, if it's natural, just hit) but it's not RAW.

[Ravingdork]

Well he would if he was totally submerged...which means he can't be attacking since he must be totally submerged, limbs and all. Otherwise if anything's above the water they're not submerged and they're target-able.

And that doesn't strike you as a double-standard within the rules? If his body is submerged he gets total cover. If his limbs are reaching out of the water, then he gets, at best, superior cover. What if he only attacks on his turn and submerges his tentacles the rest of the time? You'd be in a pretty bad spot with few options left.

[Glimbur]

You could ready an action to take a 5' step and then hit him, provided you haven't done any other movement that round.

[Ravingdork]

You could ready an action to take a 5' step and then hit him, provided you haven't done any other movement that round.

Not in every situation. See above for a not so uncommon sea monster attack scenario.

[QuantumSteve]

While attacking the tentacles would make sense in this instance. Consider:

An Ogre with IUS.
An Ogre with a Dagger.
An Ogre with a Greatsword.
An Ogre with a Long Spear.

Now you have to qualify what you can ready an against.
Furthermore, do the tentacles have the same AC as the Squid? They're certainly smaller. Does natty armor change? How many HP does a tentacle have?

I propose a feat to solve this called, oh I don't know:


Strike Back (Combat)

You can strike at foes that attack you using their superior reach, by targeting their limbs or weapons as they come at you.

Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +11.

Benefit: You can ready an action to make a melee attack against any foe that attacks you in melee, even if the foe is outside of your reach.

[Ravingdork]

While attacking the tentacles would make sense in this instance. Consider:

An Ogre with IUS.
An Ogre with a Dagger.
An Ogre with a Greatsword.
An Ogre with a Long Spear.

Now you have to qualify what you can ready an against.
Furthermore, do the tentacles have the same AC as the Squid? They're certainly smaller. Does natty armor change? How many HP does a tentacle have?

I propose a feat to solve this called, oh I don't know:

That feat (which only exists in Pathfinder) is the reason why I started this discussion in the first place. It is an ability I think everyone should have by default, not something only limited to 11th-level fighter types.

Not being able to counter-attack without spending valuable resources (at high levels no less) breaks suspension of disbelief to me. Any commoner should be able to ready an attack against an enemy regardless of circumstance (it is logical that if they are close enough to hit you then, during the attack at least, you are close enough to strike out at their limbs/weapons--that's just common sense!).

The fact that the rules seem to prevent this altogether (v3.5) or require a stupidly weak feat with high requirements to accomplish (Pathfinder) is patently ridiculous. Attacking a monster's tentacles or long limbs or dragon snout, after all, is a long time fantasy staple.

[awa]

for creatures with a natural attack i might consider using sunder rules and have it hit their hit points.

[Icewraith]

There's actually a little bit of rules supporting this, stating you can't sneak attack while striking the limbs of a creature beyond your reach.

[Voice of Reason]

The problem is that many creatures will try to hit you with natural weapons (claws, etc.) and others may just be using reach weapons. In the latter case, you're obviously not within striking distance of anything but the weapon. In the former, a case can be made that you can hit the offending natural weapon. One could argue that, since the rules don't provide a means for you to hit them as such, and since trying to rule it on a case-by-case basis is a rules-lawyering hassle, that it should simple stay forbidden.

However, I would encourage it as a houserule if your DM is willing to put up with it. It's not a very powerful combo (until broken with the regular Char-Op cheese, but by then you're not really going to need this exploit). There have been a few examples of cases that support this view:

A Krakken can have its tentacles attacked and sundered; the entry even includes a note saying the Krakken will flee if a certain number of tentacles are severed. Note that this is a special exception, but logically it can be extended to similar situations.

There is also a fourth edition feat called Beast Protector, that allows a Beastmaster Ranger to make opportunity attacks against an enemy making a melee attack against the ranger's animal companion. It allows you to make the AoO even if the creature is out of your reach by striking at the attacking limb. This is a fourth edition example that requires a feat, so take it with a grain of salt, but it's certainly not an unreasonable example.

[Binks]

Any commoner should be able to ready an attack against an enemy regardless of circumstance (it is logical that if they are close enough to hit you then, during the attack at least, you are close enough to strike out at their limbs/weapons--that's just common sense!).

Oh? Alright, I swing my polearm at your head. I'm 7-8ft from you and your 3ft sword (10ft ruleswise, you have a reach of 5). So you're saying that, without any combat training at all, you should be able to hit me when I swing at you from 7ft away with your 3ft sword? Or should be able to hit my very thin polearm with your sword while it's moving at decent velocity at your head.

Hitting an enemies weapon is a non-trivial affair (as the sundering rules represent). Hitting an enemy who never gets within range is impossible, no matter whether he's in range or not.

Here's a fun experiment to try. Grab a friend, hand him a 7-8ft long pole and let him swing it around to get the feel for its heft. Now pick up a toy sword and try and knock the pole out of his hand/damage it while he swings it at your from >5ft away. If you can do this reliably then you've got every right to call the rules out. I highly doubt you can do this reliably (remember, just blocking the pole is already in the rules as them missing your AC, it's damaging the pole/disarming the pole/hurting your buddy that you're complaining you can't do from out of reach).

Natural attacks are a slightly different matter, but not all that different. Hitting a large person with a sword, easy. Hitting the forearm/hand of that person when it briefly comes into range during an attack while also trying to not get hit by the attack, hard. Think of how long that weapon/arm is going to be in range. It's moving pretty fast so you basically have two choices, meet it head on (block, AC) or try to hit it and dodge (what you're trying to do). The latter is way harder than the former, so it makes sense for it to be a feat. Not everyone can fight while blind, by the same token not everyone can hit a small fast moving target while dodging.

[QuantumSteve]

That feat (which only exists in Pathfinder) is the reason why I started this discussion in the first place. It is an ability I think everyone should have by default, not something only limited to 11th-level fighter types.

Not being able to counter-attack without spending valuable resources (at high levels no less) breaks suspension of disbelief to me. Any commoner should be able to ready an attack against an enemy regardless of circumstance (it is logical that if they are close enough to hit you then, during the attack at least, you are close enough to strike out at their limbs/weapons--that's just common sense!).

The fact that the rules seem to prevent this altogether (v3.5) or require a stupidly weak feat with high requirements to accomplish (Pathfinder) is patently ridiculous. Attacking a monster's tentacles or long limbs or dragon snout, after all, is a long time fantasy staple.

If attacking a dragon snout or sword as it's attacking you is so simple a commoner could do it, then no one should lose a sword fight (or any other fight for that matter) ever.
Player: I hit the commoner with my axe.
DM: The commoner sunders it out of the way, and also, you take damage.

You want to lower the requirements for the feat, great! I did that myself. But counter-attacking a squid and a Storm Giant with a Glaive (30' reach) is not the same thing.

Rather than spread-sheeting what you can counter-attack, and what you can't a single feat is the best fix for this.

Edit: Upon reflection, that last comment was out of line and I withdraw it.

[Ravingdork]

So you're saying that, without any combat training at all, you should be able to hit me when I swing at you from 7ft away with your 3ft sword? Or should be able to hit my very thin polearm with your sword while it's moving at decent velocity at your head.

I'm not saying I should be able to hit you, but I should be able to lash out at your weapon (though I may not be successful) as the polearm is clearly within my threatened squares at the time of the attack and I have readied an action to attack it. If you were lashing out at me with a natural weapon, then I should be able to attack that in the same manner, dealing hit point damage directly to you. To say otherwise is to set up an illogical double standard.


If attacking a dragon snout or sword as it's attacking you is so simple a commoner could do it, then no one should lose a sword fight (or any other fight for that matter) ever.
Player: I hit the commoner with my axe.
DM: The commoner sunders it out of the way, and also, you take damage.
Keep in mind, attempting to counter in the way I describe does not guarantee success. Yes, I think a commoner should be able to attack a dragon as it bites him. Due to the dragon's thick scales, however, it will likely do him little good (in all likelihood, he will miss the AC, or crit and have most of the damage absorbed by DR). Either way, the dragon will still snap that poor commoner in half with the bite attack.

Also, the enemy can make a full attack against me. My readies action will only ever trigger during the first attack. It's not like I'm trying to abuse some loop hole. I am merely trying to convince fellow roleplayers that the rules as written don't allow for such a simple maneuver (a fantasy staple!) when they absolutely and logically should.

[Icewraith]

Just delete the text if you feel it's out of line. This is still pretty insulting if I call you a whiner, isn't it?

Anyways in the examples about "try to hit someone attacking you with a reach weapon in real life" that isn't necessarily a good basis for how easy or difficult something is or should be in d&d. Attacking the limbs of a creature that is beyond reach won't provoke an attack of opportunity, but sundering a weapon without the feat certainly will.

Anyways I still thing that if nothing else the line

A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment or striking the limbs of a creature whose vitals are beyond reach. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/rogue.htm) indicates you would need to be able to perform this action to require this line of text disallowing sneak attack in this situation.

If it can hit you, you can hit it, or its weapon, back. Technically you should be able to attack the limbs of any creature who melee attacks anyone within your reach, however you probably need to ready an action to do so, therefore you only get one attack.

[Binks]

I'm not saying I should be able to hit you, but I should be able to lash out at your weapon (though I may not be successful) as the polearm is clearly within my threatened squares at the time of the attack and I have readied an action to attack it. If you were lashing out at me with a natural weapon, then I should be able to attack that in the same manner, dealing hit point damage directly to you. To say otherwise is to set up an illogical double standard.

That's a perfectly logical homerule you could definitely add to your game. It also violates RAW. Simple as that. And I don't honestly think it's as easy as you're setting it out to be. Let me put it this way, if hitting X is hard, hitting X while it's moving at a decent velocity and still maintaining the ability to evade the attack from X normally is downright next to impossible. Sure you can swing your sword at the dragon's hand as it goes to claw you, but if you're also trying to avoid getting hit then you're trying to do something that takes a lot of training and experience...the sort of thing you'd take a feat for character-wise.

Go for it if you really want to, but it seems to me that you're vastly overestimating the skill of an average fighter. Hitting a large slow moving target like a person is vastly different from hitting a small fast moving target like a sword. Same goes for a dragon and its arm (though in that case your odds are much better). The weapon has speed and size very much on its size, your odds of hitting should be low enough not to matter 99% of the time.

EDIT: Preemptive defense - Blocking is a different matter entirely and doesn't have any real bearing on this. Blocking involves placing your weapon in a location before your opponent's weapon reaches that location. Striking an opponent's weapon to damage it involves swinging to hit a small location in time and space and hoping that your opponent doesn't vary their swing speed at all so the two fast moving objects intersect. Very different concepts, if I swing a little faster as I near the target I'll throw off your aim for an attack but won't do anything to a block.

[Togo]

I can understand being able to attack the limbs/tentacles of a long monster.

I'm less sure that doing so should do anything at all to the creature's hp total. It's not like striking a limb is a as effective as actually getting in to hit something important. The fantasy staple is to hack at the limbs ineffectually, and then do something to the main body of the monster to actually kill it. Allowing damaging attacks on the limbs leads to the strange situation where the barbarian punches one of ten tentacles really really hard, killing the entire creature.

Leaving the rules as is seems better. Certainly any attempt to sunder natural weapons should be handled as per the normal rules for sunder - it should provoke, it shouldn't help killing the actual creature, and so on.

[The Cat Goddess]

Anyways I still thing that if nothing else the line
indicates you would need to be able to perform this action to require this line of text disallowing sneak attack in this situation.

If it can hit you, you can hit it, or its weapon, back. Technically you should be able to attack the limbs of any creature who melee attacks anyone within your reach, however you probably need to ready an action to do so, therefore you only get one attack.

Actually, that rule is specifically for creatures like the Kraken, Roper & others that have rules for attacking their limbs.

You can't sneak-attack a Kraken's tenticles. You can't sneak-attack a Roper's tenticles. You can't sneak-attack the guy hiding behind the curtain.

Now, I'm all for attacking a claw/face/whatever of a creature with Reach... but I agree that it takes a lot of training to do so. The +11 BAB requirement for the Feat from Pathfinder seems a little steep... +8 should be more than enough.

[Killer Angel]

That feat (which only exists in Pathfinder) is the reason why I started this discussion in the first place. It is an ability I think everyone should have by default, not something only limited to 11th-level fighter types.


OK, but this discussion is a little pointless. By RAW, in D&D you cannot. In PF you can, but you need a feat and a 11 lev. fighter.
Can it be logical? yes, but at least with some pre-requisite, as PF (imho a commoner shouldn't be able to hit the reach weapon of an expert fighter, for he has no experience to do what seems a special manoveur).
But, anyway, it will be a house rule, so you must resolve the thing with the DM and the other players.

[Tyger]

Anyways I still thing that if nothing else the line
indicates you would need to be able to perform this action to require this line of text disallowing sneak attack in this situation.

That generally refers to creatures of such size that you can't reach their vitals... but could be interpreted either way.