Situation: A human character with a long spear who uses the feat "Lunge" becomes enlarged (as per spell). Question: Which fields does he threaten? Are these the squares in 15', 20' and 25' distance?


1 Answer 1


The creature can attack anything within 25' of it, but can't attack anything within 10' of it.

First, here are the pieces that are important:

Enlarge Person:

A humanoid creature whose size increases to Large has a space of 10 feet and a natural reach of 10 feet. This spell does not change the target's speed.


All equipment worn or carried by a creature is similarly enlarged by the spell.

Reach Weapons:

Reach Weapons: A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows its wielder to strike at targets that aren't adjacent to him. Most reach weapons double the wielder's natural reach, meaning that a typical Small or Medium wielder of such a weapon can attack a creature 10 feet away, but not a creature in an adjacent square. A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away.


You can increase the reach of your melee attacks by 5 feet until the end of your turn[.]

The layering works as follows:

Enlarge person sets you natural reach (10'). Your long spear doubles your natural reach and adds a dead spot (20', not within 10'). Lunge then adds 5 to your reach (25', not within 10').

I've not found a great citation for reach/natural reach, but it appears to be used to segment bonuses for calculations like the above.

Your reach calculation appears to be:

((natural reach * natural reach bonuses) * (reach weapon modifier)) + (reach modifiers)
  • \$\begingroup\$ I’m not convinced by your order of effects; can you provide any citation for that? I would have assumed that lunge applies before the reach weapon, so that for that turn your reach is 15 ft. and the reach weapon modifies that (ending with a threatened area out to 30 ft. but not within 15 ft.). \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Commented Dec 29, 2015 at 17:07
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan Reach weapons double a creature's "Natural Reach," and Lunge increases "Reach." There are three interpreations: 1. Natural Reach and Reach are the same (but then why do they go to the trouble of specifying the phrase "Natural" in the rules?). 2. Reach is a subset of Natural Reach (this is the interpretation you appear to be using); meaning that effects that increase Reach increase Natural Reach, but not vice versa. 3. Natural Reach is a subset of Reach (my interpretation); meaning that effects that increase Natural Reach increase Reach, but not vice versa. \$\endgroup\$
    – AceCalhoon
    Commented Dec 29, 2015 at 18:41
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan I saw a fair bit of forum chatter suggesting three, and it fits better with the way I'd use the terms. But of course that's all just hearsay. If you have a citation for the other way around, I'd love to hear it! \$\endgroup\$
    – AceCalhoon
    Commented Dec 29, 2015 at 18:42
  • \$\begingroup\$ Actually, Paizo does not use either term consistently, in my experience. I find it impossible to draw any conclusion based on them because Paizo isn’t consistent about it. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Commented Dec 29, 2015 at 18:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan Could you point to an example you feel is inconsistent? \$\endgroup\$
    – AceCalhoon
    Commented Dec 29, 2015 at 19:24

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .