New FAQ entry on mis-sized reach weapons

[Iku Rex]

What possible reason, besides exploit, would a medium character weild a small weapon?

Maybe they are using the most common infantry equipment combo in history - shield and spear?

Some of those spears are accurately described as shortspears (no reach) in DnD terms, but many armies were equipped with longer spears clearly intended to give "reach". Sure, the spears weren't made for halflings, but they were no doubt harder to wield accurately than shorter spears, as represented by the -2 penalty on attacks.

 

[werk]

Some of those spears are accurately described as shortspears (no reach) in DnD terms, but many armies were equipped with longer spears clearly intended to give "reach". Sure, the spears weren't made for halflings, but they were no doubt harder to wield accurately than shorter spears, as represented by the -2 penalty on attacks.

That is why, under equipment, there is the one-handed shortspear, and the two-handed longspear which grants reach.

Are you suggesting that the medium sized shortspear should be discarded in favor of a small longspear? I guess I don't really understand the point you are making...other than you wish to take advantage of the exploit (one-handed spear granting reach).

 

[DanMcS]

That is why, under equipment, there is the one-handed shortspear, and the two-handed longspear which grants reach.

Are you suggesting that the medium sized shortspear should be discarded in favor of a small longspear? I guess I don't really understand the point you are making...other than you wish to take advantage of the exploit (one-handed spear granting reach).

He wants to do something that was done fairly often historically- use a shield in one hand and a spear in the other that is long enough to attack past the ally in front of you. Far more common than spiked chains or double-bladed swords, but not really possible in the 3.5 D&D rules.

Personally, I would stat the spear this way: someone with the simple weapon proficiecy can use it in two hands, someone with the appropriate exotic proficiency can use it in one hand. It's a 1d8 x3 weapon, and when you're using it with one hand it has improved reach like a spiked chain- it threatens at 5' and 10'. Then give humans weapon familiarity with this usage so it's a martial weapon for them to use it in one hand.

 

[Iku Rex]

Maybe they are using the most common infantry equipment combo in history - shield and spear? <snip>

That is why, under equipment, there is the one-handed shortspear, and the two-handed longspear which grants reach.

Now explain to me exactly how you duplicate the historical "shield and long spear" combination while wielding a two-handed DnD longspear. Spears were typically used with a shield.

I guess I don't really understand the point you are making...other than you wish to take advantage of the exploit (one-handed spear granting reach).

Why are you calling it an "exploit"? It's not a bug, it's a feature.

It may not be a game-mechanically optimal choice, but it's still nice to have the opportunity to make a character based on such well known ancient warriors as the Greek hoplites (aka "the archetypal spear-armed warrior").

 

[werk]

Remember, it's not meant to be historically accurate (FANTASY ROLEPLAYING), it's supposed to be balanced and playable without obvious advantages do to mechanics.

What you are describing is a tactic that yeilded an unfair advantage in the real world, hence it's wide-spread use and efficacy...and why it's not allowed by game mechanics.

All is my opinion, but the goal of the game is fair, balanced play, not historical accuracy. Once you examine the issue from that perspective, and disregard the "that doesn't make sense" or "that's not how it really works" you get a game instead of a simulation.

 

[Iku Rex]

obvious advantages do to mechanics.

There's no "obvious advantage due to mechanics" involved here. Using a small reach weapon is generally a sub-optimal choice.

 

[werk]

There's no "obvious advantage due to mechanics" involved here. Using a small reach weapon is generally a sub-optimal choice.

The advantage is reach with a one-handed weapon (that doesn't do subdual damage).

Reducing one step in damage die isn't that big of a penalty when weighed against reach considering all of the bonuses to damage outside the weapon damage roll...So you lose (up to) 2 points of damage by reducing to a small weapon vs. ability to use a shield, gain reach, and still get all the other damage bonuses.

Those don't balance very well on my scales.

I think the faq addition makes "Using a small reach weapon is generally a sub-optimal choice." As it should be.

 

[Christian]

Well, there's also the -2 attack penalty. I'm not inclined to think that this combo is terribly overpowered. But I really have trouble wrapping my head around the FAQ ruling ... There needs to be some kind of in-game explanation for any kind of rule like this, but they don't provide one and I can't think of one. It's just bizarre. If one wants to absolutely insist that there be no use of one-handed reach weapons (other than, as Hyp pointed out, the whip), then go back to the 3.0 sizing rules, or throw in an ad hoc rule that two-handed reach weapons are still two-handed for characters of larger sizes, or something that makes some kind of sense.

 

[Staffan]

If one wants to absolutely insist that there be no use of one-handed reach weapons (other than, as Hyp pointed out, the whip),

And the kusari-gama from the DMG. 10 gp, 1d4/1d6, crit x2, Weight 3 lbs, Slashing, light exotic weapon, reach and close weapon.

 

[Coredump]

It may not be a game-mechanically optimal choice, but it's still nice to have the opportunity to make a character based on such well known ancient warriors as the Greek hoplites (aka "the archetypal spear-armed warrior").

It may be balanced, or fair, or sub-optima, or whatever. But using the Hoplites is not relavent.

Yes, they used a spear and shield, but that does not mean they were getting 'reach' from it. Plus using the spear one handed was effective... in a phalanx. So if you have 30 players that want to base characters on hoplites, it makes sense. But to assume that a single Hoplite, with a spear and a shield, would be effective, let alone at range.... is fallacious.


Now, upon thinking about it; I don't have a problem making a 'light longspear' that gives range, but does less damage, and is a bit harder to control. (1d6, -2 to hit) It seems balanced. (and yes, it is the same as a 'small longspear'.) But that is because this is a game, and fun is cool; the Hoplites were not able to do this.