Devastation Centipede

[Max Caysey]

Hi...

I have been unable to find the lenght of the Devastation Centipede. I can say that I believe that creature not the be shaped like a sqare, as the 3.5 rules indicate, but I have not been able to find it length. Can anyone help?

[SiuiS]

It's exact length isn't given, but since it occupies all ten squares by ten squares, assume it is like a massive snake, moving in a zigzag pattern and coiled on itself. That's where the forty extra feet of easy biting reach comes from.

Unfortunately, unlike 3.0, space/reach defines only squares. You could decide, instead, to limit it's width to only ten or fifteen feet? But fifty length is the current default value, plus reach.

[Lanaya]

The length is listed in the actual book. It's 350ft long.

[Max Caysey]

Thanks...

350 ft does make more sense to me, than 50ft. x 50 ft.

[Khedrac]

Compare it with the Purple Worm - in combat the purple worm takes on a 20x20 space because it curls into coil (which also enables both ends to attack).

Also note that the WotC official Purple Worm figure is the wrong size base (being huge)...

[Max Caysey]

Compare it with the Purple Worm - in combat the purple worm takes on a 20x20 space because it curls into coil (which also enables both ends to attack).

Also note that the WotC official Purple Worm figure is the wrong size base (being huge)...

Indeed, but dragons or horses does not coil up, yet they are square shaped as well. And I mean this (http://www.redorbit.com/media/uploads/2012/10/Megarian-Banded-Centipede-Scolopendra-cingulata.jpg) does give a more "correct" representation of the beast I think.

And what about Dire Crocodile? Is that square too? Or a dire Shark? To my knowledge none of the [Long] creatures are actutally square in shape. [Tall] might be, and at least that representation makes sense. I could probably carry on quite a long list of the [long] creatures that are ill represented by a square and which never coils up in real life - and therefore cannot be expected to do so in their fantasy counterpart - in my view.

WoTC migh have changes this, but that seems stupid to me. I have never actually realised this before now.

In draconomicon they have giving the size of total, neck, body tail and wingspan, but even though a gargantuan blue dragon is 85ft, has a bodu length of 28ft. width of 10 ft, and a tail of 35 ft. its somehow represented by a 20x20 ft field. I personally dont like that.

[Ashes]

The space you occupy in combat is not the full extent of your mass.
It is the area you move around in, and can conceivably defend. Nobody, except the gelatinous cube, are actually shaped like a square.

[Abd al-Azrad]

The space you occupy in combat is not the full extent of your mass.
It is the area you move around in, and can conceivably defend. Nobody, except the gelatinous cube, are actually shaped like a square.

This.

Just like humans do not occupy a 5' square when standing still, the "space" a creature occupies is less about its physical body, and more about its tactical presence. It's dodging and weaving and lashing around, spinning on its heels to respond to threats, etc.

[Max Caysey]

This.

Just like humans do not occupy a 5' square when standing still, the "space" a creature occupies is less about its physical body, and more about its tactical presence. It's dodging and weaving and lashing around, spinning on its heels to respond to threats, etc.

Hmmm... that does explain some of it, but I still dont think thats a very good representation. I understand that a dragon is also not stretching flat, but holding its head high on its neck, so that length is not horisontal but vertical. I think its a mistake not to include more if the body or a more descriptive representation. If the dragons body is 35 ft long, I think that it should at least be that long a space.

[Abd al-Azrad]

Space is an abstraction, designed to make combat faster and easier to run - similar to hit points. If you, in full knowledge of the purpose of the rule, still prefer a more precise measure of how foes behave tactically, that is your prerogative as a DM to correct for your games.

I imagine making creatures irregular-sized tetrahedrons would mostly be an issue when interacting with AoE spells and effects. Someone could argue that this long-necked dragon should be able to withdraw its head and neck entirely from the area of, say, a Fireball on a successful Reflex save, given it has to move so little of its body out of the blast radius.

However you decide to run it, make sure you think through some of the implications of your ruling, and be willing to defend your choices to your players. In the end, it's a rules system just like any other. Take what you want, change what you want.

[Max Caysey]

Space is an abstraction, designed to make combat faster and easier to run - similar to hit points. If you, in full knowledge of the purpose of the rule, still prefer a more precise measure of how foes behave tactically, that is your prerogative as a DM to correct for your games.

I imagine making creatures irregular-sized tetrahedrons would mostly be an issue when interacting with AoE spells and effects. Someone could argue that this long-necked dragon should be able to withdraw its head and neck entirely from the area of, say, a Fireball on a successful Reflex save, given it has to move so little of its body out of the blast radius.

However you decide to run it, make sure you think through some of the implications of your ruling, and be willing to defend your choices to your players. In the end, it's a rules system just like any other. Take what you want, change what you want.

Very good points...

I think that it would become more complicated to run fights, but perhaps a bit more "realistic" - if that word can be used to discribe anything within D&D. What I mean is that a dragon could be as by 3.0 (20x40 ft) be attacked by more and have trouple fiting places where its current 3.5 20x20ft can fit. I dont however see the dragon or other creature getting any new reach template, just a bigger area to hit.

[ExLibrisMortis]

A big problem with a giant centipede being (say) 100 by 10 feet big on the battle grid, is that your players will start asking why the hell they provoke a bite when they're moving away from the middle section, because there can't possibly be a head there (and the legs hardly have 30' reach, if it was a claw instead). You'd have to have separate reach and threat for different attacks, and that will become annoying quickly. Not to mention that the centipede would have a hell of a time turning to move around corners, unless you allow it to modify its space, which is another tough issue (does rearranging yourself provoke? how much movement does it cost? do separate parts of the body have different move/rearrange rates? can't we just go play Snake instead?). Making all monster areas a series of cubes, connected in a specific way, isn't going to make your game easier to run, even if you get lots of realism out of it. Just like squares have a low ratio of circumference to area (compared to rectangles), they also have a low ratio of complexity to sensibility of the resulting situations (compared to 3.0). I'd stick with squares.

If you want to run a more realistic game, in terms of space/reach, then I'd suggest you take a look at the Unearthed Arcana variants on page 124 (Combat Facing) and 128 (Hex Grid), before you try to modify monster areas. Getting those to work in 3D should be headaches enough :smalltongue:.

[Jeraa]

Some creatures had non-square spaces in 3.0. Horses, for example, had 5x10 foot. It didn't work. Having spaces like that almost forces you to include facing rules, which is something that does not exist in 3.5 (by default - there are optional rules). As such, all spaces were made square. It is much simpler, and avoids many problems.

[Max Caysey]

Some creatures had non-square spaces in 3.0. Horses, for example, had 5x10 foot. It didn't work. Having spaces like that almost forces you to include facing rules, which is something that does not exist in 3.5 (by default - there are optional rules). As such, all spaces were made square. It is much simpler, and avoids many problems.

Yeah... I can see how combat can become or will become more complex adding facing rules, but that does not really borther me. Im more interested having a colossal dragon being colossal on the battlemap, so to actually give the impression of just how big that is.

I dont have a problem with [tall] creatures, which to my makes sense, since they are upright, but [long] are horisontally places - sort of - and thus I think it would make more sense that way... albeit make combat more complex.

[SiuiS]

The length is listed in the actual book. It's 350ft long.

Thanks. :smallsmile:


Indeed, but dragons or horses does not coil up, yet they are square shaped as well. And I mean this (http://www.redorbit.com/media/uploads/2012/10/Megarian-Banded-Centipede-Scolopendra-cingulata.jpg) does give a more "correct" representation of the beast I think.

And what about Dire Crocodile? Is that square too? Or a dire Shark? To my knowledge none of the [Long] creatures are actutally square in shape. [Tall] might be, and at least that representation makes sense. I could probably carry on quite a long list of the [long] creatures that are ill represented by a square and which never coils up in real life - and therefore cannot be expected to do so in their fantasy counterpart - in my view.

WoTC migh have changes this, but that seems stupid to me. I have never actually realised this before now.

In draconomicon they have giving the size of total, neck, body tail and wingspan, but even though a gargantuan blue dragon is 85ft, has a bodu length of 28ft. width of 10 ft, and a tail of 35 ft. its somehow represented by a 20x20 ft field. I personally dont like that.

It used to be based on actual size. A horse was one square wide, two squares long, the rider was in the divide tween those squares and could move forward or back as convenient, etc.

But with horses, dragons, snakes, turtles, golems, titans, etc., keeping track of long or tall for size and shape on board became a huge book keeping hassle. They removed it for 3.5 and no one was all that sad. It really did make things harder.

[jordan.k93]

First off, no, not all creatures are square. The Dire Horse for example, is 5ft by 10ft.

And, a more relevant example, the Megapede in MM2 p148 has 15ft by 100ft.

[Max Caysey]

First off, no, not all creatures are square. The Dire Horse for example, is 5ft by 10ft.

And, a more relevant example, the Megapede in MM2 p148 has 15ft by 100ft.

Question... Wasn't MM2 a 3.0 book?

[Jeraa]

Question... Wasn't MM2 a 3.0 book?

Yes. It never received an update to 3.5.

[Extra Anchovies]

Yes. It never received an update to 3.5.

Well, it did, but the update doesn't fix any of its problems *cough* adamantine horror *cough*.