Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="HellHound" data-source="post: 1330130" data-attributes="member: 3397">Some of this may have been addressed already, but here goes.BUT, if you set a human shortsword beside a halfling longsword, they WOULDN'T be the same. In 3.0, the halfling 'longsword' was a human shortsword and thus was a stabbing weapon. Why wouldn't halflings have slashing weapons at that scale? This is NOT semantics, it is weapon design. On top of it, this allows small creatures to use weapons like the spiked chain.---For those asking about reach.I'm sick and tired of people claiming that the new weapon size rules create a new &quot;unaddressed&quot; rule problem regarding reach and variant weapon sizes. These rules are stated VERY clearly in the rulebooks. All you have to do is read them.WotC -HAS- spelled out the reach rules for creatures of ALL sizes. It's in the templates at the back of the DMG and in the PHB on page 112-113. In the back of the DMG, it shows each size of creature from Medium on up, it's normal reach, and it's reach while using a reach weapon. For small creatures, the graphics there don't help, but check out page 112 of the PHB.Reach Weapons: ...Most reach weapons described in this chapter 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.Anyone claiming that this is an unresolved issue hasn't read the PHB3.5 yet and is using myth and misinformation instead of facts in arguing regarding the 3.5 weapon size rules.Then we move on to fine and diminuative creatures. They have a reach of 0. Therefore, doubling their reach makes their new reach... ZERO.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="HellHound, post: 1330130, member: 3397"] Some of this may have been addressed already, but here goes. BUT, if you set a human shortsword beside a halfling longsword, they WOULDN'T be the same. In 3.0, the halfling 'longsword' was a human shortsword and thus was a stabbing weapon. Why wouldn't halflings have slashing weapons at that scale? This is NOT semantics, it is weapon design. On top of it, this allows small creatures to use weapons like the spiked chain. --- For those asking about reach. I'm [b][i]sick and tired[/i][/b][i][/i] of people claiming that the new weapon size rules create a new "unaddressed" rule problem regarding reach and variant weapon sizes. These rules are stated VERY clearly in the rulebooks. All you have to do is read them. WotC -HAS- spelled out the reach rules for creatures of ALL sizes. It's in the templates at the back of the DMG and in the PHB on page 112-113. In the back of the DMG, it shows each size of creature from Medium on up, it's normal reach, and it's reach while using a reach weapon. For small creatures, the graphics there don't help, but check out page 112 of the PHB. [i]Reach Weapons[/i]: ...Most reach weapons described in this chapter 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. Anyone claiming that this is an unresolved issue hasn't read the PHB3.5 yet and is using myth and misinformation instead of facts in arguing regarding the 3.5 weapon size rules. Then we move on to fine and diminuative creatures. They have a reach of 0. Therefore, doubling their reach makes their new reach... ZERO. [/QUOTE]

Verification