How does a general ruling on weapon reach work, if you have a 7 foot tall PC with a 3 foot arm reach (which is a short reach for someone that tall) and a 5 foot great sword, and that player wants to attack something 10feet up. I am a little unclear on how to explain to the player that 15 feet of reach is not enough to hit something 10 feet up. It’s hard enough to explain the 5 foot attack range on the ground. I understand that there is possibility of over extending on the ground, and you can lose balance, but if it’s over head, those limits are a lot less. You might even have more stability with an attack that is reaching up, then reaching straight out. Any help with this would be welcome.
How does a general ruling on weapon reach work, if you have a 7 foot tall PC with a 3 foot arm reach (which is a short reach for someone that tall) and a 5 foot great sword, and that player wants to attack something 10feet up. I am a little unclear on how to explain to the player that 15 feet of reach is not enough to hit something 10 feet up. It’s hard enough to explain the 5 foot attack range on the ground. I understand that there is possibility of over extending on the ground, and you can lose balance, but if it’s over head, those limits are a lot less. You might even have more stability with an attack that is reaching up, then reaching straight out. Any help with this would be welcome.
Sounds like you understand the rules fine, but you're asking how to describe them narratively. If you don't mind the extra paperwork, you could always handwave this by saying that your grid spaces are 5x5x10, and Medium reach is 1 space, so your PCs can reach 1 space in any direction, but "up" is 10 feet. That would seemingly fit your conception of the relative measures involved. Provided you basically ignore this mechanically and measure everything in spaces, this is pure flavor - all you're doing is describing your spaces differently, with no mechanical impact.
Think of your 5 foot reach as "the distance at which you can deliver a solid, effective strike." It isn't enough that the tip of your blade can technically graze the target. You need to be able to deliver a decisive blow capable of circumventing enemy defenses.
A creature's space represents the region that it controls during combat - creatures don't usually fill their entire space. You need to do more than reach the creature's space. Your attack, in theory, should be able to deliver a potent strike across a large percentage of the creature's occupied space in order to account for the creature's moment-to-moment movement.
A 10' standing reach on a 7' person is actually abnormally high. Rudy Gobert, the NBA player with the highest standing reach, is a 7'1" player with a standing reach of only 9'9". The average standing reach is around 4/3 of height, so a 7' creature should have a standing reach of around 9'4". And that measures to the tips of their fingers - when properly holding a greatsword with both hands and making a standing strike with it (no jumping), the base of the weapon's blade is going to start significantly lower than your standing reach. And remember, you need to do more than graze a target with the very tip of the blade.
For tall humanoids with long non-reach weapons like a greatsword, I think you could make a strong narrative argument for reaching 10 feet above your 'space', and as a DM I'd probably give it to you. However, 15 seems like a pretty big stretch(pardon the pun).
Melee weapons seldom are effective striking at maximum reach. This is why most character races are restricted to 5' of effective distance. It isn't that the weapon plus arm length can't reach further. It is because the weapon isn't effective at that longer distance in causing sufficient damage.
Building on Aethelwolf's comments, that 7' character's hand is roughly 9' from the ground when the arm is fully extended. A weapon with a 6' blade after the guard will just reach to 15'. But, there's no arm movement to assist in stabbing and there is a serious challenge with control of the weapon. A more reasonable length of 3' (which is fairly typical for a longsword) only gets the tip of the blade to 12' -- and still without any adjustment for thrusting. But note that 12' is in fact 7'+5' which is the 5' threat range of that weapon.
There might be an argument for including Reach for a Greatsword but I doubt it. Historically what D&D calls a "longsword" is a weapon with a blade length of 33-42 inches. The average length of the two-handed sword that D&D calls a "greatsword" is just over 49 inches. So, at most the Greatsword gives 7 more inches of reach. The real difference between the two weapons is in the amount of force generated when it is swung. The two-handed sword generates more force for more damage -- reflected well in the damage differences in D&D.
While you could poke up at something 15" above the ground that is not the same as effectively attacking. You are slashing with the blade portion of the weapon of a 5' weapon that has a hilt. Extending your arms as you swing it seems reasonable expect to attack something within the 5' standard melee range. Try swinging something with 2-hands. Attack something horizontally. Notice, when you attack you don't stand straight up, instead you widen you stance and may even lunge forward. Then try to same swinging motion but attack something directly above your head. It is much more difficult biomechanically. I would argue that you actually have less reach above you than in front of you.
Thank you. That was very helpful. I was basing my interpretation of swinging the weapon on my experience swinging tools. I always found it far easier to hit things above my head, than out in front of me at reach. I had more control of the tool, if I had more of my body under or above it, than I did if it was out in front of me. I could hit more accurately. I think that explanation of 5 feet in any direction will satisfy my player.
I am late to the party, but explain to me again why this beautiful German Schlactschwert has only five feet reach, while a much shorter Poleaxe has 10 feet.
I am late to the party, but explain to me again why this beautiful German Schlactschwert has only five feet reach, while a much shorter Poleaxe has 10 feet.
while that sword has impressive reach, I doubt it could be used effectively at a range longer than 7 feet.
polearms/axes are able to be held at the hit and are significantly easier to thrust than swords, I believe. You can even straight up hold a polearm in one hand while thrusting.
Let us see about that, here Björn is wielding a Bardiche. A 10 feet range polearm in D&D. I doubt you will find an actual poleaxe with longer reach than that beautiful German Flammberge.
And here he is with a Poleaxe.
Edit the only Polearm you can hold in one hand at the end and thrust with is the onehanded spear. Fiore recommends you do the same with a Montante (Greatsword). Try is with a Poleaxe, Halberd, or Pike. The latter should have 15 feet reach BTW, but disadvantage below 10.
I try not find logic behind Weapon Properties in D&D, they usually make sense to apoint but also has balance purposes.
That's where I am. I consider 5e weapons to be labeled abstractions designed to deliver a variety of weapon properties while staying relatively true to their names. It works if you squint just right and don't scrutinize things too hard 🤣
Let us see about that, here Björn is wielding a Bardiche. A 10 feet range polearm in D&D. I doubt you will find an actual poleaxe with longer reach than that beautiful German Flammberge.
And here he is with a Poleaxe.
Edit the only Polearm you can hold in one hand at the end and thrust with is the onehanded spear. Fiore recommends you do the same with a Montante (Greatsword). Try is with a Poleaxe, Halberd, or Pike. The latter should have 15 feet reach BTW, but disadvantage below 10.
What do you mean the Bardiche is a poleaxe? It says in the video tittle that it is, in fact, a battleaxe. Also, weapons in D&D generally represent what is practical for an adventurer to use. 15 foot pikes were used, but I doubt that's what a player has in mind when they choose a pike.
"What do you mean the Bardiche is a poleaxe? It says in the video tittle that it is, in fact, a battleaxe. Also, weapons in D&D generally represent what is practical for an adventurer to use. 15 foot pikes were used, but I doubt that's what a player has in mind when they choose a pike."
Where do I write that a Bardiche is a Poleaxe? I even posted a video of a Poleaxe; does it have 10 feet reach? No, does the Schlachtschwert? No, but it is longer, and the rules presume some stepping and lunging anyway (Dagger or short sword at 5 feet reach?).
I have practiced competetive Viking Reenactment fighting for almost 32 years, the last 20 with a two-handed spear as that is all my injuries allow me using; Western and Eastern style, and I am a military historian. I know my weapons. The shortest polearm that has a reach comparable to that Schlachtschwert is a Halberd or long and cumbersome 1-hand spear.
"What do you mean the Bardiche is a poleaxe? It says in the video tittle that it is, in fact, a battleaxe. Also, weapons in D&D generally represent what is practical for an adventurer to use. 15 foot pikes were used, but I doubt that's what a player has in mind when they choose a pike."
Where do I write that a Bardiche is a Poleaxe? I even posted a video of a Poleaxe; does it have 10 feet reach? No, does the Schlachtschwert? No, but it is longer, and the rules presume some stepping and lunging anyway (Dagger or short sword at 5 feet reach?).
I have practiced competetive Viking Reenactment fighting for almost 32 years, the last 20 with a two-handed spear as that is all my injuries allow me using; Western and Eastern style, and I am a military historian. I know my weapons. The shortest polearm that has a reach comparable to that Schlachtschwert is a Halberd or long and cumbersome 1-hand spear.
"Let us see about that, here Björn is wielding a Bardiche. A 10 feet range polearm in D&D." It cannot reasonably be expected of people to fully understand what you mean if you do not use proper grammar.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
"What do you mean the Bardiche is a poleaxe? It says in the video tittle that it is, in fact, a battleaxe. Also, weapons in D&D generally represent what is practical for an adventurer to use. 15 foot pikes were used, but I doubt that's what a player has in mind when they choose a pike."
Where do I write that a Bardiche is a Poleaxe? I even posted a video of a Poleaxe; does it have 10 feet reach? No, does the Schlachtschwert? No, but it is longer, and the rules presume some stepping and lunging anyway (Dagger or short sword at 5 feet reach?).
I have practiced competetive Viking Reenactment fighting for almost 32 years, the last 20 with a two-handed spear as that is all my injuries allow me using; Western and Eastern style, and I am a military historian. I know my weapons. The shortest polearm that has a reach comparable to that Schlachtschwert is a Halberd or long and cumbersome 1-hand spear.
"Let us see about that, here Björn is wielding a Bardiche. A 10 feet range polearm in D&D." It cannot reasonably be expected of people to fully understand what you mean if you do not use proper grammar.
No you are right. The Poleaxe, which is supposedly a 10 foot reach Polearm still has a shorter reach though.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
The usual excuse. Human physiology is still the same though, as humans are the same. So no.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
The usual excuse. Human physiology is still the same though, as humans are the same. So no.
If you want a realistic portrayal of weapons, there are many games out there that are far better than D&D in that regard.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
The usual excuse. Human physiology is still the same though, as humans are the same. So no.
Human physiology isn't the same though. And humans aren't the same. My human character just got stabbed a few dozen times last game and healed up after an hour to eat lunch.
Don't try to tell me that's normal real world physiology. It isn't.
It isn't an excuse either. The fundamental laws of reality that governs our world... don't govern the worlds of make believe.
A fighter can simply attack with a 10ft 200lbs greatsword if I want him to because... I want him to. So he does.
Physics aren't relevant. The laws of thermodynamics do not apply. Chemistry isn't how things even work. They work alchemically instead.
Everything is a little magical and whimsical and fantastical. Why? Because it is fantasy.
The game is a game. It isn't a reality simulator. It isn't supposed to be one, either. Any problem you have with it not being a reality simulator is not applicable.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
The usual excuse. Human physiology is still the same though, as humans are the same. So no.
Human physiology isn't the same though. And humans aren't the same. My human character just got stabbed a few dozen times last game and healed up after an hour to eat lunch.
Don't try to tell me that's normal real world physiology. It isn't.
It isn't an excuse either. The fundamental laws of reality that governs our world... don't govern the worlds of make believe.
A fighter can simply attack with a 10ft 200lbs greatsword if I want him to because... I want him to. So he does.
Physics aren't relevant. The laws of thermodynamics do not apply. Chemistry isn't how things even work. They work alchemically instead.
Everything is a little magical and whimsical and fantastical. Why? Because it is fantasy.
The game is a game. It isn't a reality simulator. It isn't supposed to be one, either. Any problem you have with it not being a reality simulator is not applicable.
This exactly. Don't read into the physics too much. If the weapon choices of the game don't fit how you think they should work, homebrew a new 10' reach Flameberge (maybe 2d12 damage, 10' reach, disadvantage on attacks within 5', graze or cleave weapon mastery).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
How does a general ruling on weapon reach work, if you have a 7 foot tall PC with a 3 foot arm reach (which is a short reach for someone that tall) and a 5 foot great sword, and that player wants to attack something 10feet up. I am a little unclear on how to explain to the player that 15 feet of reach is not enough to hit something 10 feet up. It’s hard enough to explain the 5 foot attack range on the ground. I understand that there is possibility of over extending on the ground, and you can lose balance, but if it’s over head, those limits are a lot less. You might even have more stability with an attack that is reaching up, then reaching straight out. Any help with this would be welcome.
Sounds like you understand the rules fine, but you're asking how to describe them narratively. If you don't mind the extra paperwork, you could always handwave this by saying that your grid spaces are 5x5x10, and Medium reach is 1 space, so your PCs can reach 1 space in any direction, but "up" is 10 feet. That would seemingly fit your conception of the relative measures involved. Provided you basically ignore this mechanically and measure everything in spaces, this is pure flavor - all you're doing is describing your spaces differently, with no mechanical impact.
Narratively, consider the following:
For tall humanoids with long non-reach weapons like a greatsword, I think you could make a strong narrative argument for reaching 10 feet above your 'space', and as a DM I'd probably give it to you. However, 15 seems like a pretty big stretch (pardon the pun).
Melee weapons seldom are effective striking at maximum reach. This is why most character races are restricted to 5' of effective distance. It isn't that the weapon plus arm length can't reach further. It is because the weapon isn't effective at that longer distance in causing sufficient damage.
Building on Aethelwolf's comments, that 7' character's hand is roughly 9' from the ground when the arm is fully extended. A weapon with a 6' blade after the guard will just reach to 15'. But, there's no arm movement to assist in stabbing and there is a serious challenge with control of the weapon. A more reasonable length of 3' (which is fairly typical for a longsword) only gets the tip of the blade to 12' -- and still without any adjustment for thrusting. But note that 12' is in fact 7'+5' which is the 5' threat range of that weapon.
There might be an argument for including Reach for a Greatsword but I doubt it. Historically what D&D calls a "longsword" is a weapon with a blade length of 33-42 inches. The average length of the two-handed sword that D&D calls a "greatsword" is just over 49 inches. So, at most the Greatsword gives 7 more inches of reach. The real difference between the two weapons is in the amount of force generated when it is swung. The two-handed sword generates more force for more damage -- reflected well in the damage differences in D&D.
While you could poke up at something 15" above the ground that is not the same as effectively attacking. You are slashing with the blade portion of the weapon of a 5' weapon that has a hilt. Extending your arms as you swing it seems reasonable expect to attack something within the 5' standard melee range. Try swinging something with 2-hands. Attack something horizontally. Notice, when you attack you don't stand straight up, instead you widen you stance and may even lunge forward. Then try to same swinging motion but attack something directly above your head. It is much more difficult biomechanically. I would argue that you actually have less reach above you than in front of you.
Thank you. That was very helpful. I was basing my interpretation of swinging the weapon on my experience swinging tools. I always found it far easier to hit things above my head, than out in front of me at reach. I had more control of the tool, if I had more of my body under or above it, than I did if it was out in front of me. I could hit more accurately. I think that explanation of 5 feet in any direction will satisfy my player.
I am late to the party, but explain to me again why this beautiful German Schlactschwert has only five feet reach, while a much shorter Poleaxe has 10 feet.
I try not find logic behind Weapon Properties in D&D, they usually make sense to apoint but also has balance purposes.
Let us see about that, here Björn is wielding a Bardiche. A 10 feet range polearm in D&D. I doubt you will find an actual poleaxe with longer reach than that beautiful German Flammberge.
And here he is with a Poleaxe.
Edit the only Polearm you can hold in one hand at the end and thrust with is the onehanded spear. Fiore recommends you do the same with a Montante (Greatsword). Try is with a Poleaxe, Halberd, or Pike. The latter should have 15 feet reach BTW, but disadvantage below 10.
That's where I am. I consider 5e weapons to be labeled abstractions designed to deliver a variety of weapon properties while staying relatively true to their names. It works if you squint just right and don't scrutinize things too hard 🤣
"Not all those who wander are lost"
What do you mean the Bardiche is a poleaxe? It says in the video tittle that it is, in fact, a battleaxe. Also, weapons in D&D generally represent what is practical for an adventurer to use. 15 foot pikes were used, but I doubt that's what a player has in mind when they choose a pike.
"What do you mean the Bardiche is a poleaxe? It says in the video tittle that it is, in fact, a battleaxe. Also, weapons in D&D generally represent what is practical for an adventurer to use. 15 foot pikes were used, but I doubt that's what a player has in mind when they choose a pike."
Where do I write that a Bardiche is a Poleaxe? I even posted a video of a Poleaxe; does it have 10 feet reach? No, does the Schlachtschwert? No, but it is longer, and the rules presume some stepping and lunging anyway (Dagger or short sword at 5 feet reach?).
I have practiced competetive Viking Reenactment fighting for almost 32 years, the last 20 with a two-handed spear as that is all my injuries allow me using; Western and Eastern style, and I am a military historian. I know my weapons. The shortest polearm that has a reach comparable to that Schlachtschwert is a Halberd or long and cumbersome 1-hand spear.
"Let us see about that, here Björn is wielding a Bardiche. A 10 feet range polearm in D&D." It cannot reasonably be expected of people to fully understand what you mean if you do not use proper grammar.
The weapons of a fantasy world governed by the laws of make believe don't conform to the design restrictions of the real world governed by the laws of physics.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
No you are right. The Poleaxe, which is supposedly a 10 foot reach Polearm still has a shorter reach though.
The usual excuse. Human physiology is still the same though, as humans are the same. So no.
If you want a realistic portrayal of weapons, there are many games out there that are far better than D&D in that regard.
Human physiology isn't the same though. And humans aren't the same. My human character just got stabbed a few dozen times last game and healed up after an hour to eat lunch.
Don't try to tell me that's normal real world physiology. It isn't.
It isn't an excuse either. The fundamental laws of reality that governs our world... don't govern the worlds of make believe.
A fighter can simply attack with a 10ft 200lbs greatsword if I want him to because... I want him to. So he does.
Physics aren't relevant. The laws of thermodynamics do not apply. Chemistry isn't how things even work. They work alchemically instead.
Everything is a little magical and whimsical and fantastical. Why? Because it is fantasy.
The game is a game. It isn't a reality simulator. It isn't supposed to be one, either. Any problem you have with it not being a reality simulator is not applicable.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
This exactly. Don't read into the physics too much. If the weapon choices of the game don't fit how you think they should work, homebrew a new 10' reach Flameberge (maybe 2d12 damage, 10' reach, disadvantage on attacks within 5', graze or cleave weapon mastery).