Fighting with reach weapons - Page 2

Elethiomel · 1st March 2009, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glass

As other have noted, you can keep holding your polearm and still make attacks with your unarmed strike. Note that the key word there is "hold"; if you wield your polearm and unarmed strike at the same time you take TWF penalties. And to threaten with both weapons, you need to wield both.

Not everyone agrees with me on this, but just in case your DM does...

There's been long discussions on this before, and basically it boils down to what you interpret "fight this way" to mean under the two-weapon fighting rules. If you think it means "Enable you to attack with both [weapon A] and [weapon B] interchangeably" then wielding a polearm while also threatening with unarmed strike incurs TWF penalties. If you think it means "Gain bonus attacks from your "off hand" weapon above and beyond what is allowed by your base attack bonus", then wielding a polearm while also threatening with unarmed strike does not incur TWF penalties. I'm in the latter camp, but recognise that it could go either way.

wylantern · 24th March 2009, 10:39 AM

I think maybe polearms should stop a target from moving if you hit them. That sounds reasonable to me. What say the mob?

Jeff Wilder · 24th March 2009, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wylantern

I think maybe polearms should stop a target from moving if you hit them. That sounds reasonable to me. What say the mob?

I think it'd be a really nice house rule, with two caveats:

(1) It should be piercing polearms that do this. (I also think piercing polearms shouldn't do two-handed damage, but that's a different argument.) Or perhaps piercing polearms just get a +2 bonus to the check (see below).

(2) It shouldn't be automatic. I'd probably go with something mechanically similar to a Trip attempt: Str versus Str or Dex. (Obviously the check is reversed from what Trip uses.) Unlike a Trip, an opponent who wins the check gets no reciprocal attempt.

Jeff Wilder · 24th March 2009, 11:04 AM

Double-post. No idea how.

Dannyalcatraz · 25th March 2009, 04:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wylantern

I think maybe polearms should stop a target from moving if you hit them. That sounds reasonable to me. What say the mob?

Well, there is the feat, Stand Still.

Elethiomel · 25th March 2009, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

I think it'd be a really nice house rule, with two caveats:

(1) It should be piercing polearms that do this. (I also think piercing polearms shouldn't do two-handed damage, but that's a different argument.) Or perhaps piercing polearms just get a +2 bonus to the check 9see below).

(2) It shouldn't be automatic. I'd probably go with something mechanically similar to a Trip attempt: Str versus Str or Dex. (Obviously the check is reversed from what Trip uses.) Unlike a Trip, an opponent who wins the check gets no reciprocal attempt.

I would add another rule to this to heighten the verisimilitude of it: If you stop someone in this way during their movement they may make an automatically successful sunder attempt against your polearm in the place of an attack. You are, after all, holding them at bay by sticking a polearm into them. Moving that polearm out of the way of a sunder attempt should be mutually exclusive.

insanogeddon · 26th March 2009, 03:40 AM

Special feats like stand still/awesome blow(srd mont feat)/driving attack(PH 2) allow you to stop foes or drive them back, trip locks them down. All have special requirements as is necessary and sensible, just cause your stick is bigged doesn't mean you can automatically keep things at bay.

Popping that can of worms you may as well go back to 1st edition that had weapon reach and initiative type rules. but under 3.5 what would you sensibly rule ? Whats the logical conclusion? If long spears keep long swords at bay, long swords should keed short swords at bay and they all trump daggers. Next players will be making long swords with 1-2 extra inches on the end (rennasance and musashi stylez), the big creatures with reach just become sillyer etc etc.

Some gems for reach:

5ft step
Tumble away (and have an attack item.. or a wand storing weapon from dungeon scape I think)
Monk dip
Armour Spikes + 2wpn fighting
Dust of Dissapearance
Sorcerer (true strike/feather fall) dip to dragon disciple for claw/bite and other goodies (also good as a archer even if unlike monk archers melle is not auto scaling in effectiveness)
Scout (move first and wait for the beef)
Spring Attack
Short Haft (PH 2): change reach to 5ft or wpns that have both are: Kusari Gamma (DMG)/Spiked Chain/Great Axe(complete adventurer i think)
Deft Opportunist (complete adventurer): +4 to hit on opp attks
Expert Tactician (complete adventurer): +2hit/dam on opponent opp. attacked for 1rnd for everyone.{great for party helping}
Standard of Courage (complete warrior): put on a reach weapon, 30ft rad = +2 morale bonus to hit and damage and saves.
... The last 2 in unison make ANYONE a bard... alas I love them so, but they suck n they die !!

Reach is a great way to make the non BAB full classes comparable in melle awesome!

Dannyalcatraz · 26th March 2009, 08:49 AM

Other gems include the Enlarge spell, the Expansion psionic power and the various mutation feats that add to your PC's reach.

With a Dex-based Monk taking Combat Reflexes feat tree (plus others like Stand Still and Hold the Line) and a good polearm (personal fave: Greatspear), they become nasty second rank melee forces, poking around the front-liners and controling a large portion of the battlefield with their multiple AoOs.