There's no way that a line or five rogues with daggers require a similar 25 foot space as other comhatants and arcuably 5 wielders of glaves or two-handed swords might typically need a lot more.
Here are rules adaptations that I'd suggest: Adjust all 5ft grids to 3' (or perhaps 6' if not using physical miniatures or a snap to grid). - the choice of three foot measure is that this fits in with the space typically taken by roman soldiers in a phalanx with a 2ft (or slightly more) being taken up by the shield and with the rest of the space being used for fighting with a thrusting sword or spear. I'd suggest that, while the character remains medium sized, that they have a space requirement of a large creature.
Here's a list of weapons from the ad&d (1e) PHB of weapons with their space required stats (weapon lengths were shown separately):
Axe, Battle 4' Axe, Hand 1' Bardiche 5' Bec de Corbin 6' Bill-Guisarme 2' Bo Stick 3' Club 1'3" Dagger 1' Fauchard 2' Fauchard-Fork 2' Fist or Open Hand 1' Flail, Footman's 6' Flail, Horseman's 4' Fork, Military 1' Glaive 1' Glaive-Guisarme 2' Guisarme 2' Guisarme-Voulge 2' Halberd 5' Hammer, Lucern 5' Hammer 2' Jo Stick 2' Lance (heavy horse) 1' Lance (medium horse) 1' Lance (light horse) 1' Mace, Footman's 4' Mace, Horseman's 2' Morning Star 5' Partisan 3' Pick, Military, Footman's 2' Pike, awl 1' Ranseur 1' Scimitar 2' Spear 1' Spetum 1' Staff, quarter 3' Sword, bastard 4' Sword, broad 4' Sword, long 3' Sword, short 1' Sword, two-handed 6' Trident 1' Voulge 2' I'd argue that a glaive requires more side to side space but perhaps a lot of this is reasonable.
Perhaps creature sizes could be open to DM interpretation to fit.
Every single spell and ability that is currently expressed in increments of 5 would now not line up with a grid unless it happened to have both 5 and 3 as factors
Minis become too small because you've changed the scale from 1" ~ 5' to 1" ~ 3'
All of this for what? To ameliorate the lack of suspension of disbelief you have for some niche edge cases? Edge cases that—rather than modifying the foundational scale of the game—the DM could just adjust for on the fly?
This is one of those cases where the rules aren't meant to directly simulate reality in a 1 to 1 model, but rather the rules approximate combat in a way that is fun and still understandable. Just like how in a turn-based strategy game, when you see the characters fighting, you understand that they're not just standing around taking turns whakcing each other and letting themselves get whacked, and that in the fiction it's an epic, skillful duel.
The rules exist to give you meaningful tactical options, to be easily understood by all, and to still be fun. 5 feet works just fine for that.
I see what you mean about minis but would argue that they are mainly representative. I was looking for a way in which minis might still be consistently used, though it might alternatly be possible to keep a 5' grid but consider that two sword and board fighters could operate in the same area. Several games I've known use tokens anyway so this might not be a great issue. It's not like characters would be forced to occuply a smaller area though I;s argue that rogues with knives and various others could choose to do so.
I'd also say that a spear can be considered as a reach weapon when thtust one-handed and that a staff can also be used at reach when used as a long club which could be used two-handed.
It could just be an optional rule. It could be greatly advantageous with choke points while increasing vulnerabiity to AoE.
AoE is another subject that might ideally be revisited. Many forms of AoE come from sprays or explosions against which shields might be effective, There's certainly an argument that a shield might be a better defence against a fireball than a dexterous within the envelopment attempt to dodge.
The rules already say that characters can move through a space occupied by a non-hostile creature. Usage of things like tokens permitting, I think it could be fine for creatures to remain functional in that shared space if they were armed with suitable weaponry like spears of daggers. Perhaps we could just say that very occupied spaces were less easy to pass through.
I see what you mean about minis but would argue that they are mainly representative. I was looking for a way in which minis might still be consistently used, though it might alternatly be possible to keep a 5' grid but consider that two sword and board fighters could operate in the same area. Several games I've known use tokens anyway so this might not be a great issue. It's not like characters would be forced to occuply a smaller area though I;s argue that rogues with knives and various others could choose to do so.
I'd also say that a spear can be considered as a reach weapon when thtust one-handed and that a staff can also be used at reach when used as a long club which could be used two-handed.
It could just be an optional rule. It could be greatly advantageous with choke points while increasing vulnerabiity to AoE.
AoE is another subject that might ideally be revisited. Many forms of AoE come from sprays or explosions against which shields might be effective, There's certainly an argument that a shield might be a better defence against a fireball than a dexterous within the envelopment attempt to dodge.
You're looking for a level of complexity that D&D 5th edition is not intended nor designed to support. You might want to try another edition or system
There's no way that a line or five rogues with daggers require a similar 25 foot space as other comhatants and arcuably 5 wielders of glaves or two-handed swords might typically need a lot more.
[...]
D&D's combat is highly abstracted. A rogue standing there with a dagger might technically need less space, while a Goliath with a battleaxe would need more, but 5 feet is a reasonable approximation for the amount of space a character occupies. And they may well need that space during a round, since they're not standing there in formation. They need to be able to thrust, turn, parry, spin. Even a halfling with a knife will need room to move around.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There's no way that a line or five rogues with daggers require a similar 25 foot space as other comhatants and arcuably 5 wielders of glaves or two-handed swords might typically need a lot more.
Here are rules adaptations that I'd suggest:
Adjust all 5ft grids to 3' (or perhaps 6' if not using physical miniatures or a snap to grid).
- the choice of three foot measure is that this fits in with the space typically taken by roman soldiers in a phalanx with a 2ft (or slightly more) being taken up by the shield and with the rest of the space being used for fighting with a thrusting sword or spear.
I'd suggest that, while the character remains medium sized, that they have a space requirement of a large creature.
Here's a list of weapons from the ad&d (1e) PHB of weapons with their space required stats (weapon lengths were shown separately):
Axe, Battle 4' Axe, Hand 1' Bardiche 5' Bec de Corbin 6' Bill-Guisarme 2' Bo Stick 3' Club 1'3" Dagger 1' Fauchard 2' Fauchard-Fork 2' Fist or Open Hand 1' Flail, Footman's 6' Flail, Horseman's 4' Fork, Military 1' Glaive 1' Glaive-Guisarme 2' Guisarme 2' Guisarme-Voulge 2' Halberd 5' Hammer, Lucern 5' Hammer 2' Jo Stick 2' Lance (heavy horse) 1' Lance (medium horse) 1' Lance (light horse) 1' Mace, Footman's 4' Mace, Horseman's 2' Morning Star 5' Partisan 3' Pick, Military, Footman's 2' Pike, awl 1' Ranseur 1' Scimitar 2' Spear 1' Spetum 1' Staff, quarter 3' Sword, bastard 4' Sword, broad 4' Sword, long 3' Sword, short 1' Sword, two-handed 6' Trident 1' Voulge 2'
I'd argue that a glaive requires more side to side space but perhaps a lot of this is reasonable.
Perhaps creature sizes could be open to DM interpretation to fit.
Here are some reasons why this is a bad idea:
All of this for what? To ameliorate the lack of suspension of disbelief you have for some niche edge cases? Edge cases that—rather than modifying the foundational scale of the game—the DM could just adjust for on the fly?
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
This is one of those cases where the rules aren't meant to directly simulate reality in a 1 to 1 model, but rather the rules approximate combat in a way that is fun and still understandable. Just like how in a turn-based strategy game, when you see the characters fighting, you understand that they're not just standing around taking turns whakcing each other and letting themselves get whacked, and that in the fiction it's an epic, skillful duel.
The rules exist to give you meaningful tactical options, to be easily understood by all, and to still be fun. 5 feet works just fine for that.
I see what you mean about minis but would argue that they are mainly representative.
I was looking for a way in which minis might still be consistently used, though it might alternatly be possible to keep a 5' grid but consider that two sword and board fighters could operate in the same area. Several games I've known use tokens anyway so this might not be a great issue. It's not like characters would be forced to occuply a smaller area though I;s argue that rogues with knives and various others could choose to do so.
I'd also say that a spear can be considered as a reach weapon when thtust one-handed and that a staff can also be used at reach when used as a long club which could be used two-handed.
It could just be an optional rule. It could be greatly advantageous with choke points while increasing vulnerabiity to AoE.
AoE is another subject that might ideally be revisited. Many forms of AoE come from sprays or explosions against which shields might be effective, There's certainly an argument that a shield might be a better defence against a fireball than a dexterous within the envelopment attempt to dodge.
The rules already say that characters can move through a space occupied by a non-hostile creature. Usage of things like tokens permitting, I think it could be fine for creatures to remain functional in that shared space if they were armed with suitable weaponry like spears of daggers. Perhaps we could just say that very occupied spaces were less easy to pass through.
You're looking for a level of complexity that D&D 5th edition is not intended nor designed to support. You might want to try another edition or system
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
D&D's combat is highly abstracted. A rogue standing there with a dagger might technically need less space, while a Goliath with a battleaxe would need more, but 5 feet is a reasonable approximation for the amount of space a character occupies. And they may well need that space during a round, since they're not standing there in formation. They need to be able to thrust, turn, parry, spin. Even a halfling with a knife will need room to move around.