Why is the spiked chain so good?

[Hypersmurf]

Being a 2-handed weapon gives it a +4 on Disarm and Sunder attempts, making it a light weapon would basically negate this.

It wouldn't just negate the bonus; it also imposes a -4 penalty.

The difference between a two-handed weapon and a light weapon is 8 points, for Sunder and Disarm.

-Hyp.

 

[Herzog]

I think Phindar means making it a light, two-handed weapon would mean both a +4 (for two-handed) and -4 (for being light) on the Disarm and Sunder attempts.

Herzog

 

[Kat']

For my money, I think the Trip build is more annoying than the Disarm build (not that most spiked chain fighters don't do both), if for no other reason than more monsters stand than use weapons.

Well, there are still a lot of monsters that are hard to trip. Those with four legs or more, those with no legs at all (can you trip a Purple worm?), those with flight...

 

[Rackhir]

Another thing is that at medium-high levels lots of monsters have greater than or equal reach to that provided by the spiked chain, which negates the reach advantage.

The spiked-chain seems mostly to me, to only be "too good" if you permit pcs to run things like a large creature that's enlarged all the time. We've had a character using a spiked chain in Shil's campaign from 3rd to 16th lvl and he's never been overpowered. If anything he's one of the weakest members of the party.

So in actual usage, I just have not seen the spiked chain being overpowered.

 

[Kerrick]

The boards ate the post I tried to make yesterday, so let's do this again - hopefully it'll take this time.

As for reach, you're thinking of 3.0 and Arcana Evolved. Perhaps Paizo, too (I know nothing of that). These systems have reach weapons adding +5 ft to your reach and leaving the first 5 ft around you the area you cannot attack (unless it's a spiked chain or similar reach weapon).

I'm not sure how Paizo does it - I don't think I've seen it come up yet. They do have a really good system for handling disarm, trip, etc., though - they condensed all the opposed rolls into one roll called a CMB (combat maneuver bonus), which is your BAB + Str + size mod* vs. DC = 15 + opponent's CMB. Obviously this needs a bit of work - the base DC is too high (drop it to 10) and the size mods too low (double them) - but it's a pretty good system, and it makes grappling SO much easier.

*Size mod is much lower - +1 for Large, then +2, +4, etc.

I didn't realize that 3.5 flat out doubled the reach, but I came up with an idea - a reach weapon increases the creature's reach by 150%, instead of 200% (round up). So, a Medium creature still has a reach of 10 ft., a Large is 15, a Huge 25, Gargantuan 30, and Colossal 45. This is much more than simply extending it by 5 ft. (imagine a storm giant waving around a toothpick) but much less than double the reach. (What they actually did wasn't "double the reach", but increased the reach by 5 ft. per size over Medium - it just happens to double.)

I was going to combine this with another rule - you can make attacks within the range of your natural reach with the butt of a reach weapon (polearm or longspear), but it deals damage as a staff and you suffer a -4 penalty.

I think Phindar means making it a light, two-handed weapon would mean both a +4 (for two-handed) and -4 (for being light) on the Disarm and Sunder attempts.

Light weapons and 2-handed weapons are totally different things. You can wield a Light weapon with two hands, but you won't get anything out of it. You cannot, however, make a weapon Light AND 2-handed.

 

[phindar]

The chain would be an exception. You also can't Finesse a non-light weapon by the rules; the exceptions are listed in the weapon description. Instead of reading, "You can Finesse the Spiked Chain even though it is not a light weapon," it would be, "The Spiked Chain is a Light Weapon that must be wielded with two hands."

 

[Bad Paper]

my proposed change

The thing I have always hated about the spiked chain is that it never really existed out here in the real world, presumably because it's so impractical. Think about the comic misuse of nunchaku that leads to hitting yourself in the face. Can you imagine that with a spiked chain?

That being said, I suggest any roll of a natural 1 on a spiked-chain attack results in the wielder getting a critical hit...on himself.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The chain would be an exception. You also can't Finesse a non-light weapon by the rules; the exceptions are listed in the weapon description. Instead of reading, "You can Finesse the Spiked Chain even though it is not a light weapon," it would be, "The Spiked Chain is a Light Weapon that must be wielded with two hands."

You can do that, but it still ends up with a -4 penalty to Sunder and a -2 penalty to Disarm (-4 for being light, +2 bonus to disarm checks).

Wielding with two hands doesn't give a +4 bonus; wielding a two-handed weapon does.

I didn't realize that 3.5 flat out doubled the reach, but I came up with an idea - a reach weapon increases the creature's reach by 150%, instead of 200% (round up). So, a Medium creature still has a reach of 10 ft., a Large is 15, a Huge 25, Gargantuan 30, and Colossal 45.

If you increase a Large creature's reach by 150%, it goes from 10 feet to 25 feet. I suspect you mean increase it by 50%.

-Hyp.

 

[phindar]

Wielding with two hands doesn't give a +4 bonus; wielding a two-handed weapon does.

Which, if it were a two-handed light weapon, it would. Granted, this makes it an exception to the general rule about light weapons, but it already is (in that it is a non-light, two-hand weapon that can be Finessed).

That is separate from the issue that I've never been sold on the difference between a two-handed weapon and a weapon wielded with two hands. But once that discussion starts up, we're no longer arguing about the Spiked Chain and should really continue on in a different topic.

Now, if you say the Spiked Chain is fine and doesn't need fixing, I can respect that. Or if you say the Spiked Chain is horribly broken and making it a Light Weapon doesn't go far enough, I can respect that as well. (As I said, I perceived the problem to be with the combat maneuvers and in house-ruling that I never had another issue with the Spiked Chain.)

I am responding primarily to the OP, in that making the Spiked Chain a 2-Handed Light Weapon (as opposed to a 2-Handed Non-Light Finessable Weapon) is a fairly minor change that I think will remove some of the balance issues surrounding the weapon.

The things that annoyed my GM the most in regards to the Spiked Chain was that it was almost impossible for that character to fail at tripping or disarming any opponent that wasn't specifically designed around avoiding trip or disarms, and that in addition to being a very versatile weapon in maneuvers, combined with Power Attack the chain-fighter was also doing the most damage (on the "free 8 points of damage" program I detailed above). Making the Spiked Chain a 2-Hand Light Weapon solves those specific problems.

If the complaint is the solution isn't RAW, I would say, "Yeah. It's a house rule."

 

[Hypersmurf]

Which, if it were a two-handed light weapon, it would.

There's no such thing.

Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons: This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon’s size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.

A melee weapon is a light weapon, or a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.

Your use of the phrase "two-handed light weapon" is like saying "He's a Large Medium creature", or "He's a Humanoid Dragon", or "He's Chaotic Lawful Good".

If it's a light weapon, it's not a two-handed weapon. If it's a light weapon with a special rule that it must be wielded in two hands, it's not a two-handed weapon.

-Hyp.