Interesting question. If your Monk is prone and your opponent is both standing and Medium size or larger, couldn't you technically attack upwards? This would be like Ryu's Uppercut in Street Fighter II, but from a prone position. Though this kind of positioning isn't exactly going to be encouraged due to you suffering disadvantage when attacked by your opponent, forcing your opponent to take an additional 1d6 falling damage or more could be quite useful.
Interesting question. If your Monk is prone and your opponent is both standing and Medium size or larger, couldn't you technically attack upwards? This would be like Ryu's Uppercut in Street Fighter II, but from a prone position. Though this kind of positioning isn't exactly going to be encouraged due to you suffering disadvantage when attacked by your opponent, forcing your opponent to take an additional 1d6 falling damage or more could be quite useful.
There's also the minor problem of you being roughly where they will be landing with that 1d6 falling damage.
Well, no, because you would not be in the same square to start nor when they land unless they had some kind of flight or glide abiity by which they could change their direction of falling.
Well, no, because you would not be in the same square to start nor when they land unless they had some kind of flight or glide abiity by which they could change their direction of falling.
How do you figure? To push them up, you have to be directly beneath them in the first place, so you'll be directly beneath them when they fall.
Not quite. You can push them upwards + sideways at the same time. Think of diagonal angles of attack, only instead of in two dimensions, consider the oft-neglected 3rd dimension: height. For example, if my Dragonborn Monk is prone, I could arguably be able to use Open Palm vs. a Medium sized creature diagonally upwards, not directly upwards. To hit someone directly upwards I would need to be physically beneath them, which is difficult no matter what if we are both of Medium size. (This does, however, open up some strange possibilities for a gnome or kobold Monk.) A prone character is not in same square/hex as the opponent. It's just the angle of attack that is shifted due to their starting position.
Kobolds and gnomes can only move through the space. They can't "stop" in it. So there is some real grey area on that kind of attack. Though it is possible to stand over a prone target technically in the same square. Though your basically standing on them if you do.
I would say that there are potential risks involved really to knock them upward and that much of the time it may not be practical. But it might be something to ask your DM about in the rare circumstances your put in a position that it's useful.
Kobolds and gnomes can only move through the space. They can't "stop" in it. So there is some real grey area on that kind of attack. Though it is possible to stand over a prone target technically in the same square. Though your basically standing on them if you do.
I would say that there are potential risks involved really to knock them upward and that much of the time it may not be practical. But it might be something to ask your DM about in the rare circumstances your put in a position that it's useful.
Technically, that is correct, by RAW. Narratively speaking, though, I don't see why a small character shouldn't be able to stand between the legs of a Large, Huge or Gargantuan creature. Now, that wouldn't be advisable in most situations, but a Rogue or Monk might have the DEX to pull it off and not get squashed. Maybe b/c a giant put a magic item into his pants to prevent the party from getting to it. Maybe the DM is trying to bring back 1st edition armor rules and say that the underside of a particular monster has a weaker AC than the rest. The point is, it should be possible and, in some limited circumstances, a creative and effective use of small size to get the job done.
Halflings, they can move through anothers space without penalty, this may include disadvantage for attacking in a environment that is too small (sorry kobolds and gnomes)- but the halfling cant end their turn in the opponents space. Attacks can occur before during or after movement and even be broken up, even a shot to the genitals with force enough to hurl someone 15' (and 10' above a very tall halfling) will be enough time for the same (monk and so fleetfooted, capable of moving fast /able to dodge the sprawling ground seeking missile) halfling(?) to move on, aside or even use that second attack to play keepie-ups with the poor fool or overhead kick him into score a goal for added humiliation before victory sliding with t shirt over his head to the roar of enthusiastic fans. Soccer / football players the other other monk.
Tl:Dont like footie: Yup its possible but unless you have some ability to negate the possible disadvantage of fighting in too close proximity is it worth it?
Halflings, they can move through anothers space without penalty, this may include disadvantage for attacking in a environment that is too small (sorry kobolds and gnomes)- but the halfling cant end their turn in the opponents space. Attacks can occur before during or after movement and even be broken up, even a shot to the genitals with force enough to hurl someone 15' (and 10' above a very tall halfling) will be enough time for the same (monk and so fleetfooted, capable of moving fast /able to dodge the sprawling ground seeking missile) halfling(?) to move on, aside or even use that second attack to play keepie-ups with the poor fool or overhead kick him into score a goal for added humiliation before victory sliding with t shirt over his head to the roar of enthusiastic fans. Soccer / football players the other other monk.
Tl:Dont like footie: Yup its possible but unless you have some ability to negate the possible disadvantage of fighting in too close proximity is it worth it?
Sorry, what is the "disadvantage" you are referring to? Most creatures of Small size should have little trouble moving between the legs of a giant or an adult dragon. Perhaps not a behir or basilisk, though.
If you have a giant, trying to squeeze in through a door made for a human, it might be impossible, for a mine cart? Maybe but a giant fighting inside a mine shaft that was too small for them to be able to stand, or swing their arms let alone their club would have a penalty to hit. Again previous editions had plenty of these kinds of scenario included with appropriate penalties attached.
Back to the halfling - IF a medium or small sized creature needs 5' of space to fight effectively in battle with enough freedom of movement to attack, (grid map examples) then 2 or 3 medium sized players couldnt all occupy the same doorway space and expect to attack effectively. Even though your players could demonstrate how to stand there in a single 5' by 5' space of your gaming room they arent considering the back and forth to avoid blows or lunging. If they tried there would no doubt be a penalty applied, if it was possible at all. The halfling can enter anothers space with no move penalty however. This being the case, the little stab machine could very likely attack and retreat without disadvantage of being in a small space that restricts movement as their movement is unaffected, although if they acted on the same initiative order as the other occupant, the same wouldnt be said for the occupant with a halfling, under, and over foot.
Conversely something traversing a location that is way to small for them will be unable to move properly, imagine a giant in that mine tunnel, bent over, slow moving. A human spelunking in a cave with a 1' clearance. They cant move, they cant retreat from blows as easily. Thats advantage to hit by attackers not suffering the same, as no numerical penalties are applied in 5th. Tight spaces are hazardous.
Now you will consider disadvantage when you have a tunnel fight and someone insists on swinging two handed weapons. Now a greased dwarf in a barrel pipe against 4 giant rats becomes trickier, even with a dagger and impossible with a longsword. Now you will remember halflings as the murder machines they were in third edition.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that I never said anything about giants using the tactic I mentioned. I was specifically bringing up the possibility that players playing Small sized races could argue for being able to attack Large and larger creatures from directly underneath them provided there is enough space between their legs. This is why it got confusing when you talked about disadvantage. A Small creature fitting into a Small or Medium size space does not suffer disadvantage to their attack rolls. Also, kobolds and gnomes can still do what you're saying halflings should be able to do b/c there is no rule against moving somewhere and then moving back to your original space. So a kobold or gnome Monk could arguably use 5' of movement to move between a giant's legs, hit them from beneath with an unarmed strike, and move back to their original spot.
To the original question, I'd say yes without any fooling around with prone positions and such. Uppercuts exist, no reason a monk couldn't sock someone under the chin and send them flying upward. I might rule that with gravity they only go 10 feet up and land 10 feet away, though, rather than the full 15.
Song, unless your small character has a racial ability to avoid movement penalties moving through other allies spaces and / or the ability to do the same to enemies (or optionally the creature is two sizes larger and your DM is generous enough to say you can fight underfoot/claw/belly without penalty) then there is no reason to grant them freedom from disadvantage on an attack in an enclosed space. If the DM is cool with it or their is a mechanical tick in the box then sure. It does make map fights more complicated when everyones dogpiling though, but if your 'theatre of the mind' intense, its your bag!
Now, if the Swarmfighting feat came back? Oo boy the carnage that would ensue with halflings would be tremendous.
Related to the Post question, if something is flying you can knock them about with the Open palm strike, which is usually fine, but mounted targets who are flying, and rely on their mounts to remain airborne are vulnerable to aerial monks. If that save is failed and movement occurs the automatic dismount could be fatal.
The stun to the mount dropping it for a turn can also be fatal to the rider because you can drop both. And even when the mount gets up it doesn't mean the rider will still be on the beast. There are a lot of options when it comes to stunning or moving aerial targets with monks.
Song, unless your small character has a racial ability to avoid movement penalties moving through other allies spaces and / or the ability to do the same to enemies (or optionally the creature is two sizes larger and your DM is generous enough to say you can fight underfoot/claw/belly without penalty) then there is no reason to grant them freedom from disadvantage on an attack in an enclosed space. If the DM is cool with it or their is a mechanical tick in the box then sure. It does make map fights more complicated when everyones dogpiling though, but if your 'theatre of the mind' intense, its your bag!
Now, if the Swarmfighting feat came back? Oo boy the carnage that would ensue with halflings would be tremendous.
Related to the Post question, if something is flying you can knock them about with the Open palm strike, which is usually fine, but mounted targets who are flying, and rely on their mounts to remain airborne are vulnerable to aerial monks. If that save is failed and movement occurs the automatic dismount could be fatal.
Yes, we agree on that. I brought it up as a possible creative use of small size in a Monk or Rogue knowing that it generally would not fly with RAW due to creature spaces and the rules pertaining to moving through them regardless of creature size. I'm trying to illustrate how vertical spaces of movement and trajectory get overlooked in tactical planning due to the gaming culture's over-reliance on miniatures and maps.
Ah have you run afoul of 'its a 10' corridor, why the heck cant my barbarian just stand in the middle and block the whole thing? Is someone really going to squeeze through 2 to 3 of space when it gets them a great axe?' as well? grid maps, they do apply blinkers :)
Ah have you run afoul of 'its a 10' corridor, why the heck cant my barbarian just stand in the middle and block the whole thing? Is someone really going to squeeze through 2 to 3 of space when it gets them a great axe?' as well? grid maps, they do apply blinkers :)
As you say, there's enough space on either side for someone to get through, they just get an OA if they do.
To the original question, I'd say yes without any fooling around with prone positions and such. Uppercuts exist, no reason a monk couldn't sock someone under the chin and send them flying upward. I might rule that with gravity they only go 10 feet up and land 10 feet away, though, rather than the full 15.
I know where you're coming from with that line of thinking Maestrino, but a lot of DMs would likely rule that uppercuts + Open Hand 15 feet push being allowed on all creatures with a chin is a bit over-powered because you could just theoretically do it all the time when you're fighting any creature that is A) your size or larger and B) has a chin. That means 1d6 falling damage + Monk's unarmed strike damage + push effect MOST of the time. (I would argue based on physics that a Large or larger creature should take even more fall damage, but that's not RAW.) Anyway, that seems clearly beyond the intent of the class feature design and it also introduces specific body anatomy targetting into 5e, which is definitely not supported by the rules (unless there's some obscure DMG optional stuff that I'm unaware of).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
When knocking someone away from you 15 ft, can the direction be up?
I’d say that it has to be straight away from you, so only if you’re under your target. That pretty much limits it to flying or underwater though.
Professional computer geek
Interesting question. If your Monk is prone and your opponent is both standing and Medium size or larger, couldn't you technically attack upwards? This would be like Ryu's Uppercut in Street Fighter II, but from a prone position. Though this kind of positioning isn't exactly going to be encouraged due to you suffering disadvantage when attacked by your opponent, forcing your opponent to take an additional 1d6 falling damage or more could be quite useful.
There's also the minor problem of you being roughly where they will be landing with that 1d6 falling damage.
Well, no, because you would not be in the same square to start nor when they land unless they had some kind of flight or glide abiity by which they could change their direction of falling.
How do you figure? To push them up, you have to be directly beneath them in the first place, so you'll be directly beneath them when they fall.
Not quite. You can push them upwards + sideways at the same time. Think of diagonal angles of attack, only instead of in two dimensions, consider the oft-neglected 3rd dimension: height. For example, if my Dragonborn Monk is prone, I could arguably be able to use Open Palm vs. a Medium sized creature diagonally upwards, not directly upwards. To hit someone directly upwards I would need to be physically beneath them, which is difficult no matter what if we are both of Medium size. (This does, however, open up some strange possibilities for a gnome or kobold Monk.) A prone character is not in same square/hex as the opponent. It's just the angle of attack that is shifted due to their starting position.
Kobolds and gnomes can only move through the space. They can't "stop" in it. So there is some real grey area on that kind of attack. Though it is possible to stand over a prone target technically in the same square. Though your basically standing on them if you do.
I would say that there are potential risks involved really to knock them upward and that much of the time it may not be practical. But it might be something to ask your DM about in the rare circumstances your put in a position that it's useful.
Technically, that is correct, by RAW. Narratively speaking, though, I don't see why a small character shouldn't be able to stand between the legs of a Large, Huge or Gargantuan creature. Now, that wouldn't be advisable in most situations, but a Rogue or Monk might have the DEX to pull it off and not get squashed. Maybe b/c a giant put a magic item into his pants to prevent the party from getting to it. Maybe the DM is trying to bring back 1st edition armor rules and say that the underside of a particular monster has a weaker AC than the rest. The point is, it should be possible and, in some limited circumstances, a creative and effective use of small size to get the job done.
Halflings, they can move through anothers space without penalty, this may include disadvantage for attacking in a environment that is too small (sorry kobolds and gnomes)- but the halfling cant end their turn in the opponents space. Attacks can occur before during or after movement and even be broken up, even a shot to the genitals with force enough to hurl someone 15' (and 10' above a very tall halfling) will be enough time for the same (monk and so fleetfooted, capable of moving fast /able to dodge the sprawling ground seeking missile) halfling(?) to move on, aside or even use that second attack to play keepie-ups with the poor fool or overhead kick him into score a goal for added humiliation before victory sliding with t shirt over his head to the roar of enthusiastic fans. Soccer / football players the other other monk.
Tl:Dont like footie: Yup its possible but unless you have some ability to negate the possible disadvantage of fighting in too close proximity is it worth it?
Sorry, what is the "disadvantage" you are referring to? Most creatures of Small size should have little trouble moving between the legs of a giant or an adult dragon. Perhaps not a behir or basilisk, though.
If you have a giant, trying to squeeze in through a door made for a human, it might be impossible, for a mine cart? Maybe but a giant fighting inside a mine shaft that was too small for them to be able to stand, or swing their arms let alone their club would have a penalty to hit. Again previous editions had plenty of these kinds of scenario included with appropriate penalties attached.
Back to the halfling - IF a medium or small sized creature needs 5' of space to fight effectively in battle with enough freedom of movement to attack, (grid map examples) then 2 or 3 medium sized players couldnt all occupy the same doorway space and expect to attack effectively. Even though your players could demonstrate how to stand there in a single 5' by 5' space of your gaming room they arent considering the back and forth to avoid blows or lunging. If they tried there would no doubt be a penalty applied, if it was possible at all. The halfling can enter anothers space with no move penalty however. This being the case, the little stab machine could very likely attack and retreat without disadvantage of being in a small space that restricts movement as their movement is unaffected, although if they acted on the same initiative order as the other occupant, the same wouldnt be said for the occupant with a halfling, under, and over foot.
Conversely something traversing a location that is way to small for them will be unable to move properly, imagine a giant in that mine tunnel, bent over, slow moving. A human spelunking in a cave with a 1' clearance. They cant move, they cant retreat from blows as easily. Thats advantage to hit by attackers not suffering the same, as no numerical penalties are applied in 5th. Tight spaces are hazardous.
Now you will consider disadvantage when you have a tunnel fight and someone insists on swinging two handed weapons. Now a greased dwarf in a barrel pipe against 4 giant rats becomes trickier, even with a dagger and impossible with a longsword. Now you will remember halflings as the murder machines they were in third edition.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that I never said anything about giants using the tactic I mentioned. I was specifically bringing up the possibility that players playing Small sized races could argue for being able to attack Large and larger creatures from directly underneath them provided there is enough space between their legs. This is why it got confusing when you talked about disadvantage. A Small creature fitting into a Small or Medium size space does not suffer disadvantage to their attack rolls. Also, kobolds and gnomes can still do what you're saying halflings should be able to do b/c there is no rule against moving somewhere and then moving back to your original space. So a kobold or gnome Monk could arguably use 5' of movement to move between a giant's legs, hit them from beneath with an unarmed strike, and move back to their original spot.
To the original question, I'd say yes without any fooling around with prone positions and such. Uppercuts exist, no reason a monk couldn't sock someone under the chin and send them flying upward. I might rule that with gravity they only go 10 feet up and land 10 feet away, though, rather than the full 15.
Song, unless your small character has a racial ability to avoid movement penalties moving through other allies spaces and / or the ability to do the same to enemies (or optionally the creature is two sizes larger and your DM is generous enough to say you can fight underfoot/claw/belly without penalty) then there is no reason to grant them freedom from disadvantage on an attack in an enclosed space. If the DM is cool with it or their is a mechanical tick in the box then sure. It does make map fights more complicated when everyones dogpiling though, but if your 'theatre of the mind' intense, its your bag!
Now, if the Swarmfighting feat came back? Oo boy the carnage that would ensue with halflings would be tremendous.
Related to the Post question, if something is flying you can knock them about with the Open palm strike, which is usually fine, but mounted targets who are flying, and rely on their mounts to remain airborne are vulnerable to aerial monks. If that save is failed and movement occurs the automatic dismount could be fatal.
The stun to the mount dropping it for a turn can also be fatal to the rider because you can drop both. And even when the mount gets up it doesn't mean the rider will still be on the beast. There are a lot of options when it comes to stunning or moving aerial targets with monks.
Yes, we agree on that. I brought it up as a possible creative use of small size in a Monk or Rogue knowing that it generally would not fly with RAW due to creature spaces and the rules pertaining to moving through them regardless of creature size. I'm trying to illustrate how vertical spaces of movement and trajectory get overlooked in tactical planning due to the gaming culture's over-reliance on miniatures and maps.
Ah have you run afoul of 'its a 10' corridor, why the heck cant my barbarian just stand in the middle and block the whole thing? Is someone really going to squeeze through 2 to 3 of space when it gets them a great axe?' as well? grid maps, they do apply blinkers :)
As you say, there's enough space on either side for someone to get through, they just get an OA if they do.
I know where you're coming from with that line of thinking Maestrino, but a lot of DMs would likely rule that uppercuts + Open Hand 15 feet push being allowed on all creatures with a chin is a bit over-powered because you could just theoretically do it all the time when you're fighting any creature that is A) your size or larger and B) has a chin. That means 1d6 falling damage + Monk's unarmed strike damage + push effect MOST of the time. (I would argue based on physics that a Large or larger creature should take even more fall damage, but that's not RAW.) Anyway, that seems clearly beyond the intent of the class feature design and it also introduces specific body anatomy targetting into 5e, which is definitely not supported by the rules (unless there's some obscure DMG optional stuff that I'm unaware of).