I'm a DM and my players are fighting some incorporeal creatures, ones that can go through walls. If a player is next to a wall and the ghost fades into it, do the players RAW get attack of opportunities if the ghost fades through the wall next to them? The ghost is still technically within 5 ft, and when travelling through the wall the ghost is both behind cover and within melee range. I would say no as that's how I read it, but what do you others think?
RAW is unclear, but I rule it as them leaving reach as the point of attacks of opportunity in 5e is to prevent (or at least make more expensive) hit and run tactics.
Also, ghosts don't need help, they're extremely dangerous for their CR.
Discussed here and here. Basically: you still get to OA them before they move into the wall because your reach doesn't extend into the wall (and Jeremy Crawford - The Sage has indicated this in a Tweet)
Although intuitively it feels like ghosts should be able to avoid OA's this way, allowing it would mean that it'd be easy to avoid OA's from reach weapons (and creatures with reach) by simply stepping behind a wall (making reach weapons even worse). That would be contrary to what OA's were intended to represent (i.e. an abstract representation of unsafely disengaging from melee).
This comes down to DM decision since "reach" is not defined in the PHB as far as I can tell.
"Most creatures have a 5-foot reach and can thus attack targets within 5 feet of them when making a melee attack. Certain creatures (typically those larger than Medium) have melee attacks with a greater reach than 5 feet, as noted in their descriptions."
Most creatures have a default 5' reach.
However, if reach is interpreted as the "distance in which you can make an attack" then the presence of a wall which provides total cover would reduce the reach of the character adjacent to the wall to the distance to the wall since the wall would prevent an attack in that square. A character can't swing most swords at a wall and do any damage to a creature in or behind a wall.
As a result, when the ghost enters the wall it would be leaving the reach of the character and provoke an opportunity attack.
"You can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach."
"You can avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the Disengage action. You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction."
The opportunity attack rules do not include moving into total cover as a way to avoid an opportunity attack though teleport is specifically called out.
----
The other way to interpret it is that reach is just a number specifying a distance around the character and has no relation to the terrain involved. In this case, a target leaving the 5' distance (or 10' for weapons with a reach property) would trigger an opportunity attack. Thus, a ghost moving into a wall and then away from the character would not trigger an opportunity attack.
A lot of folks, including myself, have interpreted it this way though I am thinking that the other way might make more sense. I think RAI might be a creature leaving the area "threatened" by the character would trigger an opportunity attack with the "threatened" area defined as the region where a character could make an attack.
However, reach is only currently defined in RAW as "Most creatures have a 5-foot reach and can thus attack targets within 5 feet of them when making a melee attack. " without mentioning whether adjacent terrain features might reduce the character's reach or defining reach as the area around a character where they could attack a target. As such, RAW, I would think the ghost could move into the adjacent wall without triggering an opportunity attack.
Discussed here and here. Basically: you still get to OA them before they move into the wall because your reach doesn't extend into the wall (and Jeremy Crawford - The Sage has indicated this in a Tweet)
Although intuitively it feels like ghosts should be able to avoid OA's this way, allowing it would mean that it'd be easy to avoid OA's from reach weapons (and creatures with reach) by simply stepping behind a wall (making reach weapons even worse). That would be contrary to what OA's were intended to represent (i.e. an abstract representation of unsafely disengaging from melee).
I know you're just the messenger, but boy this logic does not sit well with me. Your reach does not extend into the wall therefore anything in the wall is out of your reach and provokes an OA. OK, that's fine, except that we're talking about making an OA against a wall that is providing cover for the incorporeal creature traveling through it.
The rules for OAs say the attack is made "right before the creature leaves your reach" if the wall is exactly 5' away (assuming gridded play) and the Ghost is moving into it, then at least part of the Ghost is within 5' (ie not in the wall and not in full cover) when the attack is made since it is technically still "within your reach"
"right before the creature leaves your reach" might be what solves the paradox. Generally, if a weapon has a 5' reach, this happens "right before" the creature leaves that 5' distance. But it doesn't have to be 5'. If entering a wall 1' away constitutes leaving one's reach, then that's where the trigger happens.
I mean there's no great way to deal with it. If you trigger the OA when they leave your reach... then they are out of reach and you can't OA. Thus an OA has to happen before they leave the square they are in.
I like to think of it based on how they're moving rather than where. Pictured in very black-and-white terms, unless you disengage (slowly, guardedly back away), you are essentially turning your back to the enemy when you move to leave that enemy's reach. If someone moves away from you like that, you don't need to wait for them to move 4.9 feet to strike.
When someone decides where they move, since disengage exists they also have to determine how they're doing it. If they intend to move away unguarded, you get to attack before they leave your reach. Thinking of it that way makes more sense to me than the enemy tripping some imaginary trigger that only exists at the edge of your reach.
I like to think of it based on how they're moving rather than where. Pictured in very black-and-white terms, unless you disengage (slowly, guardedly back away), you are essentially turning your back to the enemy when you move to leave that enemy's reach.
Exactly: the rules are an abstraction (which is why you can run circles around an opponent without provoking an OA). Leaving close combat can be done defensively (disengage), or hastily (provoking an OA)
Reasoning: Play this the other way around. Let's say you have a glaive and PAM. You are standing 5 feet from a wall, and the ghost you are fighting comes out of that wall into the 5ft space next to you.
That ghost was already in your "reach" if you consider reach to be an aura around you, always at the same radius, with no regard to your surroundings. Therefore, PAM should not provoke an OA, no?
Alternatively, the ghost entered your "reach" because your reach is the space around you that you can attack at that given moment. This reading makes much more sense to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm a DM and my players are fighting some incorporeal creatures, ones that can go through walls.
If a player is next to a wall and the ghost fades into it, do the players RAW get attack of opportunities if the ghost fades through the wall next to them?
The ghost is still technically within 5 ft, and when travelling through the wall the ghost is both behind cover and within melee range. I would say no as that's how I read it, but what do you others think?
RAW is unclear, but I rule it as them leaving reach as the point of attacks of opportunity in 5e is to prevent (or at least make more expensive) hit and run tactics.
Also, ghosts don't need help, they're extremely dangerous for their CR.
If it's in the wall the ghost has full cover and can't be attacked.
I have a weird sense of humor.
I also make maps.(That's a link)
If it was in the wall before leaving weapon range, it has full cover.
This has happened at my table, and I said no OA for the reasons discussed above.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Discussed here and here. Basically: you still get to OA them before they move into the wall because your reach doesn't extend into the wall (and Jeremy Crawford - The Sage has indicated this in a Tweet)
Although intuitively it feels like ghosts should be able to avoid OA's this way, allowing it would mean that it'd be easy to avoid OA's from reach weapons (and creatures with reach) by simply stepping behind a wall (making reach weapons even worse). That would be contrary to what OA's were intended to represent (i.e. an abstract representation of unsafely disengaging from melee).
This comes down to DM decision since "reach" is not defined in the PHB as far as I can tell.
"Most creatures have a 5-foot reach and can thus attack targets within 5 feet of them when making a melee attack. Certain creatures (typically those larger than Medium) have melee attacks with a greater reach than 5 feet, as noted in their descriptions."
Most creatures have a default 5' reach.
However, if reach is interpreted as the "distance in which you can make an attack" then the presence of a wall which provides total cover would reduce the reach of the character adjacent to the wall to the distance to the wall since the wall would prevent an attack in that square. A character can't swing most swords at a wall and do any damage to a creature in or behind a wall.
As a result, when the ghost enters the wall it would be leaving the reach of the character and provoke an opportunity attack.
"You can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach."
"You can avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the Disengage action. You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction."
The opportunity attack rules do not include moving into total cover as a way to avoid an opportunity attack though teleport is specifically called out.
----
The other way to interpret it is that reach is just a number specifying a distance around the character and has no relation to the terrain involved. In this case, a target leaving the 5' distance (or 10' for weapons with a reach property) would trigger an opportunity attack. Thus, a ghost moving into a wall and then away from the character would not trigger an opportunity attack.
A lot of folks, including myself, have interpreted it this way though I am thinking that the other way might make more sense. I think RAI might be a creature leaving the area "threatened" by the character would trigger an opportunity attack with the "threatened" area defined as the region where a character could make an attack.
However, reach is only currently defined in RAW as "Most creatures have a 5-foot reach and can thus attack targets within 5 feet of them when making a melee attack. " without mentioning whether adjacent terrain features might reduce the character's reach or defining reach as the area around a character where they could attack a target. As such, RAW, I would think the ghost could move into the adjacent wall without triggering an opportunity attack.
I know you're just the messenger, but boy this logic does not sit well with me. Your reach does not extend into the wall therefore anything in the wall is out of your reach and provokes an OA. OK, that's fine, except that we're talking about making an OA against a wall that is providing cover for the incorporeal creature traveling through it.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
The rules for OAs say the attack is made "right before the creature leaves your reach" if the wall is exactly 5' away (assuming gridded play) and the Ghost is moving into it, then at least part of the Ghost is within 5' (ie not in the wall and not in full cover) when the attack is made since it is technically still "within your reach"
"right before the creature leaves your reach" might be what solves the paradox. Generally, if a weapon has a 5' reach, this happens "right before" the creature leaves that 5' distance. But it doesn't have to be 5'. If entering a wall 1' away constitutes leaving one's reach, then that's where the trigger happens.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I mean there's no great way to deal with it. If you trigger the OA when they leave your reach... then they are out of reach and you can't OA. Thus an OA has to happen before they leave the square they are in.
I like to think of it based on how they're moving rather than where. Pictured in very black-and-white terms, unless you disengage (slowly, guardedly back away), you are essentially turning your back to the enemy when you move to leave that enemy's reach. If someone moves away from you like that, you don't need to wait for them to move 4.9 feet to strike.
When someone decides where they move, since disengage exists they also have to determine how they're doing it. If they intend to move away unguarded, you get to attack before they leave your reach. Thinking of it that way makes more sense to me than the enemy tripping some imaginary trigger that only exists at the edge of your reach.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Exactly: the rules are an abstraction (which is why you can run circles around an opponent without provoking an OA). Leaving close combat can be done defensively (disengage), or hastily (provoking an OA)
Agreed with those who said the OA goes off.
Reasoning: Play this the other way around. Let's say you have a glaive and PAM. You are standing 5 feet from a wall, and the ghost you are fighting comes out of that wall into the 5ft space next to you.
That ghost was already in your "reach" if you consider reach to be an aura around you, always at the same radius, with no regard to your surroundings. Therefore, PAM should not provoke an OA, no?
Alternatively, the ghost entered your "reach" because your reach is the space around you that you can attack at that given moment. This reading makes much more sense to me.