Spiked Chains: Pure cheese or sometimes OK?

[Jefe Bergenstein]

You know, I completely disagree with anyone who dislikes the spiked chain, but I will defend (with a spiked chain, if necessary ) their right to dislike it.

They have the right to dislike it, but in dam near every situation I've seen people gripe its because they dont understand how attacks of opportunity work. The person initiates the action, the AoO goes off, the action is resolved. You cant trip someone attempting to stand, since the action is completed after the AoO. The other "problem" is people letting multiple AoO's on the same foe for moving through multiple squares (you can only get one AoO off an opponent for movement no matter what they do). Then theres the whirlwind whine - that an enlarged spiked chain wielder can do a whirlwind attack against a bunch of targets. Whirlwind is a mediocre feat with several terrible pre-reqs that actually have nothing to do with its use. Its usable primarily against non-threats... if you're ever surrounded by a bunch of powerful foes, its better to full attack one to drop it fast. People also forget to apply melee cover when using the spiked chain as well... it doesnt magically pass through your buddies/enemy to attack the thing on the other side of them.

So yeah, most of the gripes about the spiked chain are by people who dont bother to learn the rules, and seem to assume that anything that makes a high level fighter even remotely close to the power of a mage is automatically broken. They are FIGHTERS. All they do is fight. They have crappy skills and no utility magic. They should basically dominate combat at all levels.

 

[FireLance]

So yeah, most of the gripes about the spiked chain are by people who dont bother to learn the rules, and seem to assume that anything that makes a high level fighter even remotely close to the power of a mage is automatically broken.

Some, maybe, but I'm not sure about "most". There are quite a few who don't like it because it isn't a historical weapon or a traditional fantasy weapon. Some don't like it because they can't imagine how it would work in the real world, or even in a fantasy world, and it messes with their suspension of disbelief. At least one poster doesn't like it because it seems to be a meta-gamed weapon, created to work well with various combat styles and maneuvers. For others, it is a stylistic issue - they just think the illustration in the PH looks silly.

None of the above bothers me, but I can see why it might bother others, even intelligent people who are familiar with the rules.

 

[pawsplay]

Re: Dire Flail.

A more common portrayal of a heavy flail is just a length of wood with a hinged head, as I depicted here:

http://www.enworld.org/Pozas/Pictures/Classes/cleric.jpg

Is it so hard to picture a meapon with one hinged head on each end?

I'm sure that's exactly the thought its creator had. However, that logic does not work. You can, indeed, stick a hinged head at each end. The result, however, is unusuable. As I noted before, a quarterstaff or a two-bladed sword counterbalances. A double flail does the opposite of counterbalancing; each movement causes the other side to move in an opposite direction. The only way to keep it moving would be to spin it completely around all the time, like a flail-icopter.

 

[ohGr]

Most damage upgrades are 1 point. Ex: longsword to bastard sword, 1d8 to 1d10. I am not talking about a size increase. I am talking about a die increase. All going from a longsword to a bastard sword gets you is an average of +1 damage.

Like it or not, size increase = die increase. Weapon damage die increases follow the standard size increases as given in the PHB. 1d4 -> 1d6 -> 1d8 (2d4) -> 2d6 (1d12); dagger -> short sword -> longsword -> greatsword; or handaxe -> battleaxe -> greataxe; or light pick -> heavy pick -> scythe.

Long sword -> bastard sword (or battleaxe -> waraxe; or warhammer -> maul) isn't a full damage increase and exists outside the standard structure because the bastard sword enjoys another benefit; a dubious benefit, to say the least, but a benefit nonetheless.

Comparing the greathammer to the scythe, it gets a better than average damage increase. Comparing it to a greataxe, it gets a crit increase. As such it would be just a slightly tough exotic (edging out bastard sword in terms of the upgrade you get), but the size increase magnifies it. The greathammer enjoys a nice rounding advantage, twice (1.5 from 2d4 to 1d12, as an upgrade from the scythe, then from 1d12 to 3d6 as a large weapon, an increase of 4 points, as opposed to 3.5, such as a longsword going from 1d10 to 2d8). As a result, the final weapon outperforms most of the things you would compare it to. A large Scythe, for instance, does 2d6, a gain of only 2 points.

So, is your real problem with the greathammer's "above average" damage increase (which, going by the RAW, it isn't) or with the goliath wielding it?

It would appear to me that a die type not normally assigned a x4 was used without a careful consideration of the consequences.

And i'm just not seeing these consquences. Following the standard rules of weapon creation, the greathammer is fine.

Also, why would a hammer have a x4 multiplier?

Because 1d12, 20 x3 would make it the worst exotic weapon in existance? Why they didn't just give the greathammer those stats and make it a martial weapon is beyond me, but there it is.

 

[Goldmoon]

Wasnt there a thread about how you could take a certain feat and use a spiked chain to "flank with yourself"? High level rouge cheese anyone?

 

[Storyteller01]

If you're willing to look outside of WoTC, there are various systems that will help out here.

1) Blood and Fists adds a new use for balance. You can resist trip attempts with a skill check. True20 does this as well (with an acrobatics check)

2) Iron heroes has a new AoO system (much simpler than D&Ds BTW), and standing up doesn't provoke AoOs

3) Iron Heroes also has as simple DC 20 Jump check to get up from prone as a free action. DC 35 kip up was something I always found ludicrous. It's DC 25 to go through someone's space? Youy use tumble insead of jump. Bleh. Iron Heroes does it better.

OA has a feat that allows you to fight prone. Several 3rd partu sources have a 'kip up' feat that allows you to stand as a free action without an AoO.

 

[Storyteller01]

I'm sure that's exactly the thought its creator had. However, that logic does not work. You can, indeed, stick a hinged head at each end. The result, however, is unusuable. As I noted before, a quarterstaff or a two-bladed sword counterbalances. A double flail does the opposite of counterbalancing; each movement causes the other side to move in an opposite direction. The only way to keep it moving would be to spin it completely around all the time, like a flail-icopter.

A weighted chain works on the same principle, and a trained practitioner can keep both sides moving as a counter-balance. It isn't all that great in battlefield combat though.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

I dunno. The criticals are rarer and larger than on 18-20/x2 weapons, but the expected value is the same. I'd choose 18-20/x2 over 20/x4 weapon any day. The rarer and larger criticals will end up wested more often than smaller criticals. By wasting I mean scoring a 100 point critical when the target only has 40 or 50 hps left. That's 60 to 50 points overkill. At least in my memory every time the dwarf in our group rolled some insane 80+ points critical the critter or whatever had a lot fewer hit points left.

My dwarven fighter used a keen waraxe, and got a crit threat ONCE in four months of play.

My goliath walking death machine of cheese uses a Large Great Falchion and crit rampantly often, often taking down a levelled giant in a single hit (in full rage, divine wrath, smiting, feat of strengthing, lotsa power attacking, etc). He also carries a greathammer, but only pulls that out when we're facing something with DR/bludgeoning.

Brad

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Some, maybe, but I'm not sure about "most". There are quite a few who don't like it because it isn't a historical weapon or a traditional fantasy weapon. Some don't like it because they can't imagine how it would work in the real world, or even in a fantasy world, and it messes with their suspension of disbelief. At least one poster doesn't like it because it seems to be a meta-gamed weapon, created to work well with various combat styles and maneuvers. For others, it is a stylistic issue - they just think the illustration in the PH looks silly.

I can understand that. I don't agree with any of it, but I can understand it.

Ruleswise, it's not excessively powerful, despite all the special features and extra reach. It does cruddy damage (rolling d4s is punishment, BTW), requires a boatload of feats to take advantage of all its features, and even then, it isn't that big a deal. The cool tricks are usually opposed rolls, and you're bound to lose some of them, and the utility decreases markedly when you're fighting a monster or larger creature. You can improve your odds by stacking all the various abilities in supplements onto the weapon, but that's expensive and subject to DM approval (i.e. not guaranteed). Magic versions are unlikely to randomly appear off of your enemies' corpses, too, or in treasure hoards, so you have to have one commissioned, which eats up time.

Even when the DM threw a humongously cheesed-out spiked chain wielder in an al Qadim game, we took it down with no real issue. There's no penalty to casting when prone, after all.

 

[Fishbone]

Hey, Jotunbrund personal item of Enlarge Person, get some reach and hit adjacents. Aw, yeah. I don't think its that bad, the only way it'd be really nasty is if damage rolls were open ended/penetrating.