Overcoming Reach Disadvantage?

[atom crash]

If you wanted to attack someone in an adjacent square with the butt end of a reach weapon, could you just treat it as a double weapon with the spear (or whatever) end with reach and a club or staff (or maybe just an improvised weapon) end without reach?

 

[Khaalis]

To overcome the existing rule and do so in the middle of combat, apparently you do. (And it begs the question, do you still threaten squares at the weapons normal reach when you're choking up?)

I think I read over on Andy Collins site that he has a house rule where characters can still attack adjacent squares with a reach weapon (such as a spear), but at a -4 penalty. I'm using it in my own campaign, and the feat could still function to remove the -4 penalty (similar to Precise Shot.)

Dragon #331 - Haft Strike - Requires TWF, Has restrictions but fits the bill.

 

[werk]

RAW, though, you're going to want to go with the spiked gauntlet.

How do you use a spiked gauntlet if you are holding a two-handed weapon?

Armor spikes, baby!

 

[argo]

I am having a rough time remembering if there is a way to gain the ability to threaten adjacent squares with a reach (non-chain) weapon, and I dont have books handy. Is there such a feat or ability? Or is my brain playing tricks on me?
Thanks!

There is a feat for this, and in the core rules too: Improved Unarmed Strike

An unarmed strike does not have to be with your hands. You can easily use your glaive at reach and your feet to kick adjacent opponents.

This does however bring up the question of weither or not you would incurr the TWF penalties when fighting like this, but that is another thread.

Hope that helps.

 

[Khaalis]

There is a feat for this, and in the core rules too: Improved Unarmed Strike

An unarmed strike does not have to be with your hands. You can easily use your glaive at reach and your feet to kick adjacent opponents.

This does however bring up the question of weither or not you would incurr the TWF penalties when fighting like this, but that is another thread.

Actually this (as with natural weapons or spiked gauntlet) doesnt quite fit the original intent of the question, which is how to threaten adjacent squares WITH a reach weapon. The Unarmed/Natural/Gauntlet route is a work-around but a sub-optimal one, which is why I was trying to find the feat that allowed a reach weapon to be used adjacent. I knew it was out there, just couldnt remember where it was.

However, on the TWF issue, I do not think it would because you would have to choose to either attack with the weapon or with your unarmed strike. You wouldnt gain both, especially since you can only target one creature in the round to attack (thus cant target one with the reach weapon and another with unarmed).

 

[argo]

especially since you can only target one creature in the round to attack (thus cant target one with the reach weapon and another with unarmed).

:\

Uh, if you have more than one attack per round and more than one opponent you can hit then you divide your attacks up any which way you want

If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.

 

[Khaalis]

:\
Uh, if you have more than one attack per round and more than one opponent you can hit then you divide your attacks up any which way you want

Maybe its just my interpretation, but I dont see the SRD passage as saying this. My interpretation is that in the case you drop a foe, and have attacks left over, you can designate a new threatened target (or take a 5' step to threaten a new target) at that time. The passage basically says that you dont lose iterative attacks because your are forced to designate or "assigned" only one target for the round. I dont see this as saying you can attack mutliple targets simultaneously in a round because you have iterative attacks.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

No, "You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time."

That means I can make my first attack against target A, and if I don't like how that works out or if target A drops, make my second attack against target B, C, or D.

The way you are reading it - "If you first attack target A, you must continue to attack target A unless it drops" - means that you are specifying your targets ahead of time.

 

[glass]

This does however bring up the question of weither or not you would incurr the TWF penalties when fighting like this, but that is another thread.

I was just going to mention that, as I think it is very important to this thread. I can't speak for the feats in Dragon, but IUS and armour spikes both require you to take TWF penalties to be effective in this circumstance.


glass.

 

[glass]

However, on the TWF issue, I do not think it would because you would have to choose to either attack with the weapon or with your unarmed strike. You wouldnt gain both, especially since you can only target one creature in the round to attack (thus cant target one with the reach weapon and another with unarmed).

You can choose to simply attack with one or the other, but unless you are not wielding one or the other you take TWF penalties. And if you are not wielding one or the other you do not threaten with them.


glass.