Knight Feat Build

ImperatorK said:

RAW is RAW. It doesn't have to make sense. By RAW it doesn't matter how long actually is a weapon. What matters is what size is it's intended wielder and what special abilities it has.

Click to expand...

In this case the RAW is kind of bad but the way I see it, Dannyalcatraz is correct in emphasizing the wording "of the appropriate size". RAI this would indeed translate easily to "double the standard reach of this size category".

Let's say I give a choker a small spear. He has a base reach of 10ft. which is not standard for small size. It's because of his special abilities. Clearly I would rule (as a DM) that his spear only adds 5ft. to his reach since it's not scalable to adjust to the arm length of its current wielder.

The problem I see with your argument is that you determine special abilities to be on par with size category in this matter. There has been no mention of that anywhere. Actually, the "a wielder of the appropriate size" part states that only size matters RAW.

I'd think of it like sneak attacks / elemental weapon enchantments and critical hits. You don't double the extra damage added by a special quality. Rather, you double the standard and add special qualities on top.

P.S. I don't know whether the OP enjoys munchkin cheese or not (probably not since he's going with a knight) but maybe we should consider the in-game effects of a character having arms which are longer than he is tall, no? Also, his DM might just rule something mean about the use of armor with the arms in question.

I don't know whether the OP enjoys munchkin cheese or not (probably not since he's going with a knight) but maybe we should consider the in-game effects of a character having arms which are longer than he is tall, no? Also, his DM might just rule something mean about the use of armor with the arms in question.

Click to expand...

Well, he's going to need special armor, no question!

As for just getting around, well...he'd probably just keep his arms folded up against his body. He'd be kind of like a human version of the Wandering Albatross (4' tall, but with a wingspan over 10')...but maybe with an additional joint.

Wandering Albatross - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Back to the OP...

I wouldn't splash Fighter with Knight. I'd splash something that deals with some of the class' shortcomings, and Fighter doesn't do much to help there unless you burn your bonus feats for the "archery" feats.

For example, the reason the whole Reach tangent occurred is that Knighs have a hard time dealing with anything that won't close to melee range with them. I was at a ENWorld Gameday in which- in the final conflict- the Knight did not land a single blow because they simply flew up out of his reach.

PsyWar and BattleSorc deal with that in a variety of ways. Both can use powers to increase size, thus increasing reach. Each can have powers that directly affect foes at range.

The problem I see with your argument is that you determine special abilities to be on par with size category in this matter. There has been no mention of that anywhere. Actually, the "a wielder of the appropriate size" part states that only size matters RAW.

Click to expand...

No, actually. It only mentions "natural reach", which isn't specified what it means and can be interpreted either way.

1) Weapon size establishes the size of the weapon, and whether a weapon grants Reach is related to size- they are interrelated.

Click to expand...

I don't see such an indication in the rules. There are no rules for adding the reach property to larger weapons. If a medium character with Monkey Grip wields a large greatsword it doesn't gain Reach, even though it probably is as long as some of the medium sized reach weapons. There should be such rules, but unfortunately there aren't.

It cannot possibly add 15' to someone's reach.

Click to expand...

You forgot to include the creatures limbs.

2) while it is true in some ways that a game rule is an arbitrary construct and thus does not have to make sense, following such rules blindly and without analysis is not using your rational mind. A rule that has results at odds with what it is designed to simulate is worthy of reconsideration, interpretation, and ultimately revision.

Click to expand...

you're free to alter rules at will in your games, but houserules are of no relevance in discussions of RAW.

If, by RAW, D&D's falling damage rules healed increasing amounts of damage (the farther you fell, the more you healed) instead of increasing damage dealt, would you still follow the RAW?

Click to expand...

But it doesn't. And if it did it would have to be a part of the world/setting and reasonably justified and explained why it works in such a weird manner. For example it could be some weird-ass plane or something. Like the Plane of Positive Energy heals people until they explode, heh.

Tiny creatures may wield polearms appropriate to their size, but, by rule, their reach is so small that they cannot attack outside of the square they occupy. Their effective reach is 0'.

If, via powerful magics, a Tiny warrior were given the ability to fully and properly wield a polearm of Gargantuan size, your interpretation of the rules would result in this creature still having a Reach of 0' (since 2x0=0) despite swinging a redwood tree around.

Does that sound sensible to you?

No, but I'm not talking about what's sensible. I'm talking about RAW.

ImperatorK said:

No, actually. It only mentions "natural reach", which isn't specified what it means and can be interpreted either way.

Click to expand...

ImperatorK said:

No, but I'm not talking about what's sensible. I'm talking about RAW.

Click to expand...

This seems to contradict. First you admit that the rules can be interpreted either way in this case but then hold to the view that your interpretation is RAW. If there are many ways to interpret RAW, I'd most definitely pick the one that's RAI.

Edit: Though I just noted that you use Screwball as your avatar, which might imply a troll. Not necessary but I'm beginning to have my doubts.

This seems to contradict.

Click to expand...

Not really.

First you admit that the rules can be interpreted either way in this case but then hold to the view that your interpretation is RAW.

Click to expand...

Well, yes. It's within the rules, thus it's RAW.

If there are many ways to interpret RAW, I'd most definitely pick the one that's RAI.

Click to expand...

And how exactly do you know what is RAI? And what RAI do you mean? Read As Intended or Read As Interpretated?

Edit: Though I just noted that you use Screwball as your avatar, which might imply a troll. Not necessary but I'm beginning to have my doubts.

Click to expand...

My avatar implies that I'm a troll? You're joking, right? I don't know if I should find it amusing or insulting. Please refrain from such remarks in the future and we'll forget this ever happened.
As to my avatar, I change it quite often. Now I have Pinkie Deadpool, but I was too lazy to also change it on this boards. Sue me for liking crazy ponies.

RAI = Rules As Intended.

I'm sorry for implying that you might be a troll based on your avatar. As I said, it was not something I took for guaranteed because of it. However, Discord is known as the troll of Equestria and Screwball was his creation so there is a connection though a slight one. (Oh, and it doesn't appear as Deadpool Pinkie to me.)

I'm not judging you for using a pony as your avatar. As you might have noted, I even knew its fanhood name. It's not like I'm one to judge.

Ok, this thread has gotten a bit off rails and partially because of me. So I'm just going to summarize a bit:
1. Knight is not a very good class. Adding Crusader as soon as possible will make it better due to Thicket of Blades and helpful manouvers (from Stone Dragon and Devoted Mind).
2. For a good Knight build, you'll probably want to use a reach weapon (and armor spikes to have a close-range weapon as well). This trumps using a shield, even if being a Knight promotes the use of shields.
3. The better your reach, the better. The easiest ways to manage this include the use of Vile [Deformity] feats and/or Abomination Bloodline feats. These are pretty specific regarding your characters alignment and appearance. If you were going to make him evil and abominable to begin with, be my quest.
4. There is disagreement on some rules. Just ask your DM's opinion on these if you intend to abuse them. He has final authority over your game after all.

(Oh, and it doesn't appear as Deadpool Pinkie to me.)

Click to expand...

Because I was too lazy to change Screwball to Pinkie. I did it on other boards I post on, just not here.
Now it's changed.