Required Space For Weapons?
It doesn't look like there's an official rule for this, except for the rule where one Medium sized fighter fights from one 5' square.
So, I guess, if you've got 10' of space in a corridor that you can put two Humans, one in each square, each equipped with a Reach weapon with no problem.
I'm not sure if I like that.
I'm thinking of allowing it with Piercing reach weapons, but not with Slashing or Bludgeoning reach weapons.
Therefore, if a Human has a polearm that only allows for slashing damage, and his reach is out to 10', then his comrade can't stand in the adjoining square. That polearm will be swinging around, slicing through the air, as the attacker moves around in melee.
Thoughts?
So, I guess, if you've got 10' of space in a corridor that you can put two Humans, one in each square, each equipped with a Reach weapon with no problem.
I'm not sure if I like that.
I'm thinking of allowing it with Piercing reach weapons, but not with Slashing or Bludgeoning reach weapons.
Therefore, if a Human has a polearm that only allows for slashing damage, and his reach is out to 10', then his comrade can't stand in the adjoining square. That polearm will be swinging around, slicing through the air, as the attacker moves around in melee.
Thoughts?
Teemu
Hero
As far as established rules are concerned, one additional instance of limiting attacks based on weapon size is grappling. You can use a light weapon to attack while grappling, but with a -4 penalty. Can't attack with other, larger weapons at all. Same thing when you're swallowed whole -- light melee weapon only.
Now, as to your proposed rules -- allies already grant cover if they're between you and the enemy target when you're using a reach weapon. Also, I'd be wary of applying yet more penalties to martial characters, since they're already at a disadvantage compared to magic-users. The combat rules are abstract as is, and there are many other instances where you could apply realism to make things more sensible -- but at the same time, you'd just be nerfing the mundane classes, and they really don't need it.
Now, as to your proposed rules -- allies already grant cover if they're between you and the enemy target when you're using a reach weapon. Also, I'd be wary of applying yet more penalties to martial characters, since they're already at a disadvantage compared to magic-users. The combat rules are abstract as is, and there are many other instances where you could apply realism to make things more sensible -- but at the same time, you'd just be nerfing the mundane classes, and they really don't need it.
Greenfield
Adventurer
There are rules for "tight quarters" that apply general penalties. Realistically, many pole arms are "piercing" weapons. A long spear might be hard to walk around with, but since you don't actually swing it, the amount of space next to you hardly matters.
Consider how many of those were originally designed to be used by men in a line/shield wall or other tight formation. If there's ever an open space next to you in that situation, it means that there's a hole in the line, and you're in trouble.
IRL many towers were designed to aid defenders by having inner stairs spiral counter-clockwise as they ascended. This left a swordsman defender with open space to their right hand, out over the central space, while attacker had a wall tight on their weapon hand side.
So I could see some sort of penalty for slashing or bludgeoning weapons, reach or otherwise, but piercing weapons should be okay, as a general rule.
(Which means that there's another exception to a "general rule" given to the spiked chain.
)
Consider how many of those were originally designed to be used by men in a line/shield wall or other tight formation. If there's ever an open space next to you in that situation, it means that there's a hole in the line, and you're in trouble.
IRL many towers were designed to aid defenders by having inner stairs spiral counter-clockwise as they ascended. This left a swordsman defender with open space to their right hand, out over the central space, while attacker had a wall tight on their weapon hand side.
So I could see some sort of penalty for slashing or bludgeoning weapons, reach or otherwise, but piercing weapons should be okay, as a general rule.
(Which means that there's another exception to a "general rule" given to the spiked chain.
)Similar Threads
