Attacking past your ally with a reach weapon

[Lord Pendragon]

I need some clarification regarding reach weapons and attacking through a space occupied by your ally. Let's assume this setup, where F is a fighter, A is his ally, and M is the monster.

FAM

So if the fighter wants to attack the monster with a reach weapon, what are the penalties involved?

Does the type of reach weapon matter? i.e. a halberd vs. a spiked chain vs. a whip?

If the rules are different in 3.0 vs. 3.5 I'd also like to know what they are. Thanks for any help, guys!

 

[ConnorSB]

Hmmm.... thats actually a pretty tough question. I would think that the monster gets some kind of cover bonus from the person, maybe a +4 AC bonus, as if your ally was something the mosnter was hiding behnid.

Well, wait. Hmmm. It kinda depends on the reach weapon. For spears and the like, i think there would simply be a cover bonus to the monster's AC, and if you missed by "just a bit", your ally would not take any damage, as he simply "bumped into the shaft of your weapon." For the spiked chain, it threatens everything within ten feet, so i would say that again the monster would get the cover bonus, and if you missed by just a bit, you attacked your ally instead.

And if you were using a whip, which is technically a ranged weapon, but I like to think of it as a reach weapon, things could get interesting.

Basically, if the ally is activly fighting the monster or not, for a reach weapon the ally simply counts as cover for the monster. But with a whip or with a weapon like the spiked chain that threatens both people, not only does the mosnter get a +4 cover bonus from the ally, but you suffer a -4 attack penalty for firing into a melee.

 

[hong]

Generally +4 cover bonus to AC if all combatants are the same size; weapon type doesn't matter; cover rules have changed slightly from 3.0 to 3.5 but not enough to matter in this case.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Generally +4 cover bonus to AC if all combatants are the same size; weapon type doesn't matter; cover rules have changed slightly from 3.0 to 3.5 but not enough to matter in this case.

What about accidentally hitting your cover? Is that an issue? And if so, again, does the type of reach weapon matter?

 

[ConnorSB]

as I posted earlier, i think if its a hafted weapon like a spear, even if you hit your cover, it will prolly be with the shaft, not the pointy bits. Thats why it doesn't threaten adjacent squares. But with a freaky curving chain thing like a spiked chain, which threatens all the squares around you, hitting your cover would probably actually hurt.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

as I posted earlier, i think if its a hafted weapon like a spear, even if you hit your cover, it will prolly be with the shaft, not the pointy bits. Thats why it doesn't threaten adjacent squares. But with a freaky curving chain thing like a spiked chain, which threatens all the squares around you, hitting your cover would probably actually hurt.

I read your post, Connor, and it does make sense, but your post also sounded very unsure, more a suggestion for how a DM might handle it, rather than an explanation on how the core rules treat the situation. Am I wrong?

Also, I'm particularly interested in the whip. A whip doesn't threaten any squares around it, though it can attack up to 15' away. Would it still have to defeat a +4 cover bonus? Would it still strike the cover if it missed by 4, even though it does not threaten that square? Your reasoning behind the spear seems to lend support to this...

 

[clark411]

The core rules state that reach weapons act like ranged weapons in regards to cover (3.5 PHB 151). The core rules do not however, state that reach weapons act as ranged weapons for the purposes of attacking.

So, M gets +4 AC vs F thanks to A.

and

F does not get a -4 penalty for shooting into melee.

Now, this -4 penalty is a result of the shooter aiming carefully to avoid hitting his friend (3.5 PHB 140), so we may reasonably interpret this to mean that a person fighting with a reach weapon suffers for attempting to attack through the spaces of allies, but is not in danger of actually hitting those allies.

Assigning the dangers of attacking with reach weapons to match those of attacking with ranged weapons firmly resides in the realm of house rules.


Whips are treated as "melee weapons with a 15 foot reach" and so do suffer the +4 AC cover thing.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Also, I'm particularly interested in the whip. A whip doesn't threaten any squares around it, though it can attack up to 15' away. Would it still have to defeat a +4 cover bonus? Would it still strike the cover if it missed by 4, even though it does not threaten that square? Your reasoning behind the spear seems to lend support to this...

Forget "threaten", and just use "can attack". A whip can attack 5', 10', or 15'. A spiked chain can attack 5' or 10'. A longspear can only attack 10', so it can't damage anyone at 5'.

However, in 3.5, you can't accidentally strike the cover unless you incorporate a variant rule in the DMG. The default rule is that the target just gets a cover bonus.

In 3E, there are rules for Striking Cover instead of a Missed Target. Since the whip in 3E is a ranged weapon, this definitely applies. The rules state that a Reach weapon that accidentally strikes cover deals no damage since it strikes with the haft. You'd have to determine for yourself whether this rule applies to a spiked chain or natural reach.

-Hyp.

 

[ConnorSB]

I was pretty unsure, Lord Pendragon, and reading both rulebooks has actually left me more unsure.

The one definite thing I can say is that the monster gets a +4 AC bonus from cover, regardless of ruleset and regardless of whether the ally is fighting the monster or not.

As to whether the fighter gets a -4 penalty to attack the monster due to "shooting into combat," then things get fuzzy and compicated.

What makes it especially unclear is that the Spiked Chain says in both editions that it is "quite different from all other reach weapons in that it can attack adjacent foes as well as those 10 ft out" or somesuch. Whether that makes it whiplike or not, i'm not sure.

But IF I RAN THINGS, this is how I would do it, in either edition. Logically, spears and other hafted weapons don't do damage with thier hafts, and so could not hurt the ally when his "cover-providing-ness" causes the fighter to miss the monster due to cover. Logically, since a spear cannot threaten the ally, he can't be hurt by it. Whips and spiked chains (and potentially other things), however, do threaten both the monster and the ally, and so in that case I would invoke the "you just hit the cover and hurt it lots" rule, but not the shooting into a melee penalty.

 

[Diirk]

Pretty sure this was in the errata.. soft cover doesn't apply to melee, so no +4 bonus to ac anymore for the defender (in 3.5)

Can't remember where the errata is tho