D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Halfling with Reach, you like it?

[Cybern]

Think of a midget in real life.
They can use weapons the same size as a normal person but are some times half the height of a normal person.

There reach is no diferant than a normal persons when it comes to horazontal reach as they take up teh same space horazontaly.

Verticaly is a differant story.

Halflings aren't midgets! Midgets have about the same hands/feets as most of us, but halfling and gnomes don't. If the illustrations aren't enough to prove this, then explain to me why they get a -2 for wielding a medium short sword (wich is like a small longsword). The only explanation I found for this one is that the handle isn't of the same size.

Another example: A human knight with a lance (10' reach) is hit by a Reduce (humanoid?) spell. He now his ½ height, ½ weight(or 1/8, doesn't have my PHB in hand), so I guess that his gear his reduced to ½ too. His 10' lance is now 5' long. He still threathens a 10' reach. If not, then why should a halfling?

Why, then, doesn't a medium greatsword grant +5' reach?

The above example, inverted (enlarged halfling), gives us a 6' tall halfling with a 20' long lance who threatens only 10'?

 

[melkoriii]

Halflings aren't midgets! Midgets have about the same hands/feets as most of us, but halfling and gnomes don't. If the illustrations aren't enough to prove this, then explain to me why they get a -2 for wielding a medium short sword (wich is like a small longsword). The only explanation I found for this one is that the handle isn't of the same size.

Another example: A human knight with a lance (10' reach) is hit by a Reduce (humanoid?) spell. He now his ½ height, ½ weight(or 1/8, doesn't have my PHB in hand), so I guess that his gear his reduced to ½ too. His 10' lance is now 5' long. He still threathens a 10' reach. If not, then why should a halfling?

Why, then, doesn't a medium greatsword grant +5' reach?

The above example, inverted (enlarged halfling), gives us a 6' tall halfling with a 20' long lance who threatens only 10'?

OK then

Its game machanics.
THere is no other explanation.
Live with it.

 

[Darklone]

OK then

Its game machanics.
THere is no other explanation.
Live with it.

In real life, guys in a phalanx had 20ft pikes. In Fantasy worlds, I can easily imagine halflings and gnomes to adapt to the majority of "giants" by using slightly larger or at least longer weapons than would be optimised for their size. So especially with spears, length isn't really an issue, a foot more or less will not hurt you too much, but if that foot more puts you on equal "footing" with the "giants" you are fighting, you will get it.

 

[CrimsonTemplar]

IIRC, the PHB gives the example of a Tiny creature (Pixie) wielding a Tiny Longspear being able to attack opponents in adjacent squares. Since their ordinary reach is 0' and the Longspear allows them to have a 5' is it really that hard to accept a Halfling with a Longspear?

I don't see it as all that unbalancing since they get the shaft on weapon damage now. Halfling Longspear will do D6 & a Halfling Spiked Chain will do 2D3.

Besides, you should remember that this is a game. KaeYoss made a very good point. The rules are designed to mimic how things work in the real world, but at some point realisim has to be sacrificed for playability.

In the end, if you don't like it Rule 0 it in your home campaign. Until I see a Sage Advice or official eratta that says otherwise, I'll play it so Halfling, Gnomes, Kobolds, etc. can use reach weapons.

 

[Rel]

If you look at the various animals that are smaller than humans in "real life" you'll notice that most are disproportionately strong for their size. Take a chimpanzee for instance. Despite the fact that they are quite a bit shorter than humans, they are in most cases as strong or stronger than their human handlers.

My understanding is that this is largely a function of the square/cube law and a result of the fact that less bone mass and muscle mass needs to be devoted to supporting their own frame. Therefore a halfling long-spear may well be bigger in proportion to his frame than a human long-spear is to a human. But he would still have no problems weilding it.

Also note that this disproportionate strength to size ratio is supported by the rules. Small gear (such as armor) weighs half as much for small creatures but their carrying capacity is 3/4 that of a Medium sized creature. This is the most compelling reason that I've come up with for the -2 penalty for using a weapon not designed for your size (though I'm still not fond of the rule).

Lastly, I'll just say that, from a game mechanics standpoint, the small races are plenty screwed as it is without robbing them of the ability to use a reach weapon.

 

[Hypersmurf]

3.5 Tumble is now half your movment.

Human tumble is 15'
Halfling tumble is 10'

Tumble at one-half speed as part of normal movement.

If my speed is 30, my normal movement can be up 30 feet with a move action, or 60 feet with a double move.

If I'm tumbling, I move at one-half speed - 15. So with a move action, I can tumble up to 15 feet, and 30 feet with a double move.

It's not "tumble half your speed as a full round action", it's tumble at one-half speed as part of normal movement".

And with a -10 modifier, I can double-tumble the full 60 feet.

-Hyp.

 

[AuraSeer]

To answer the question in the thread title: yes, I like it.

In terms of game mechanics, it makes the melee classes far more viable for the Small races. That satisfies my personal sense of freedom of choice. In 3.0, I never did like the feeling that they were forced to be spellcasters or rogues, or else be condemned to suboptimal performance. (In some combat situations there's simply no substitute for reach, and the little 'uns had no way to get it ever.)

 

[Destil]

Yeah. I'd have to agree. This is about the only redeaming trait of the new weapon system.

Of course with small rogues stuck with their 1d4 shortswords I think small PCs may accualy be just as well suited to fighting classe rather than sneaky types... the option of a reach weapon certinaly is applealing for that gnome fighter I never did get a chance to play...

Edit: Or even better, a halfling with a spiked chain. Finess it and you get +1 to hit for being small and +1 to hit for your natural dex bonus. And you could power attack for 1-2 points to even out the damage disparity a little if you wanted...

 

[DreamChaser]

Yeah. I'd have to agree. This is about the only redeaming trait of the new weapon system.

I personally think the new weapon system is the best so far in D&D. I always, always, always (should I??? nah) hated the implication that small creatures didn't make their own weapons, instead they used the little ones that humans or elves make.

Yet another thing we can thank Tolkein for. Hobbits running around with elven daggers and calling them swords has done more damage to the idea of halfling independance than other other image.

The reduction in damage also makes sense...it hurts a little but at higher levels when you have magical weapons, major strength and technique bonuses, etc it doesn't hurt as much.

My understanding is that this is largely a function of the square/cube law and a result of the fact that less bone mass and muscle mass needs to be devoted to supporting their own frame.

That and the fact that smaller creatures tissues are the same strength as ours only less of it. A short string or rope is harder to pull apart or cut than a long one because there is less area for trauma or separation This is part of the reason why smaller creatures survive falls better.

Also, a halfling is 1/2 the height, 1/2 the thickness, and 1/2 the width of a human which means it is 1/8th the weigth. Their tendons and bones are 1/2 the thickness and width (which makes them weaker) but also 1/2 the length (which makes them stronger).

Back to the weapons, as Rel said, a proportional halfling longspear would be half the length and half the radius (for again about 1/8 the weight) but it is only half the weight which means it is probably much longer than a human longspear is proportally, and thicker. In fact, according to my handy calculator, a longspear about 3/4th the dimensions of a human longspear would be about half the weight. If a human's longspear is around 11' long (according to the drawing in the book anyway) then a halflings would be 8.25 feet, which is plenty long for reach.

There it is, my long winded diatribe on why I think small creatures can have reach and why the new weapons system rocks and the old one was broken (heh heh heh, I hate that term).

DC

 

[Aaron2]

I personally think the new weapon system is the best so far in D&D.

I originally thought the new weapon system sucked (changed just for the sake of changing), but now I really like it. For me it was the arrow problem. A hobbit will pull his shortbow back less than a human would. Thus arrows for a shortbow used by a hobbit would be different from arrows for a shortbow used by a human. At least now the game recognizes that.

So, concerning the topic ... I like it.


Aaron