I'M going with xenonaught because she's not adjacent her weapon is which is what luke concentrating the most on.

Perhaps Sithborg stepped in to keep it that way

It makes since to me, and is far easier to understand now then when it first hit the table with UNI.

Again real world logic doesnt' work i na game, let alone a gmae based on fiction

I look at it as 1-2 squares extra range when doing a move/attack - or perhaps not having to move at all. And keep in mind that while your target may get to riposte or whatever, when it becomes their turn you are not considered adjacent anymore. So if they have double/triple attack, they are forced to move to attack you. That is better than mobile in, attack, retreat taking an AoO and is far from useless in my book .

ps - Wookie Elite Warriors are da

I always thought melee reach worked like this.

The attacker treats the target as being x amount of squares away for all purposes & from the targets point of view the attacker with melee reach is x amount of squares away. If it isnt like that it would make no sense. Why have the melee reach ability if all characters are all considered adjacent. So your saying melee reach, if i were to move in 2 squares away from a target with Lumiya, & attacked the target & then went to move away that would cause an attack of oppurtunity? That makes no sense, then whats the point of even have the melee reach ability in the first place. It would be exactly the same as just walking up adjacent & doing the same thing. It would make no sense if it were like that.

Hense i always used it as the attacker with melee reach treats the target as adjacent for attacks, SA etc. & the target treats the attacker with melee reach as being x amount squares away. Atleast thats how i always did it & how all of the somewhat 80 players i know always played it. But one thing i learned on these boards is if emp dragon or sithborg comment on a rule, they are usualy right. So if there saying it dont work like that, then me personally will start doing it how they explained it. I think its stupid if thats not how its used, but i would listen to them. It would just make no sense to me for any figure to even have the special ability if even the targets treat the attacker as being adjacent. Then why even have the melee reach SA in the first place.

It's a MUCH more useful ability than it was before. Before the change in 07, it was a worthless ability. Sure, you avoided Self Destruct and Riposte, but the enemy could get cover, it didn't work against Super Stealth, couldn't be used with Momentum and Cleave, et al. And the most annoying aspect. You could not target an enemy 2 squares away if there was an enemy already adjacent.

Melee Reach gained much more than it lost with the change, namely being a much simpler ability and in it's interactions.

i dont think yer a Muppet man.
i dont like the ruling on melee reach all that much either.
i mean, Lumiya has a whip for Chrissakes, her melee reach should be something that actually keeps an enemy at bay a few feet away, I.E, characters NOT being able to use Djem So Mastery, lightsaber Riposte.
But it is what it is....
as long they dont revise the ruling again, where if a character with melee reach is 2-3 squares away from an enemy, and they decide to move away, the enemy gets an AoO.

Since I'm seeing a lot of comments about AoOs after my last post above, it seems my meaning was not clear.

I was simply making a comparison between what is possible with melee reach vs normal or mobile attacks, and I did so to illustrate MR's "usefulness". You hit their melee piece from 2 squares away. When it is their turn, they have to move to hit you (probably sacrificing double/triple attack ability in the process). The typical way of achieving that result without MR involves mobile up to adjacent, hit them, move away ---> AoO triggered in most cases.

From how I understand it, the melee reach ability is confined to your turn and only during the attack action (and for any abilities directly triggered by said attack). If you move away after attacking, your enemy is not considered adjacent to you (you aren't attacking at that point, so the ability deactivates). No AoO generated.

If that is incorrect, then I will join the ranks of those confused by the rules...

@Xeonaught - I wasn't trying to slam you, sorry if you took it that way - just that Emp. D. and Sithborg are pretty much the rules experts on the forums here (not that there aren't others, they just help out with questions the most). Seemed like you were refusing to accept ED's answer as valid. Well now we have the background on the rules, a bunch of folks are hashing this stuff over (good explanation kenred2), and others can benefit from the discussion so s to you!

I don't think you're a muppet (I have no idea what that would be besides yoda...). The reason I said he had patience is because you seemed to be getting upset at him when he was trying to explain the interaction and why it worked that way. It is ok to be confused and ask questions when you don't get it (I do that frequently myself on some issues), but some people on here (like EmperorDragon) know ALL of the rules like the back of their hand. Its not that they are interpreting differently, just giving you the actual rules as put out by WOTC.

Yes.