Why is the spiked chain so good?

[phindar]

There's no such thing.

There would be now, since I just made it up. This is my last post on the subject, because honestly, I feel I am simply repeating myself.

For the purposes of this house rule (to address the specific balance issues I have listed in the posts above), the Spiked Chain is a special weapon. It's considered a Light Weapon that is wielded with two hands.

This keeps the trip/disarm/sunder bonuses from getting out of control (since the effectively cancel each other out, leaving the chain with a +2 to disarm), removes Power Attack from the equation, and it still threatens adjacent and at Reach which is the main benefit of the weapon.

 

[Hypersmurf]

For the purposes of this house rule (to address the specific balance issues I have listed in the posts above), the Spiked Chain is a special weapon. It's considered a Light Weapon that is wielded with two hands.

There's nothing wrong with that.

This keeps the trip/disarm/sunder bonuses from getting out of control (since the effectively cancel each other out, leaving the chain with a +2 to disarm)

... that's where your problem comes in. There is nothing to cancel the penalty, since wielding a Light weapon in two hands doesn't give a +4 bonus.

What you need to do is say "A spiked chain is a light weapon. It must be wielded in two hands. It gains a +4 bonus to Sunder and a +6 bonus to Disarm."

Now, you have some bonuses to cancel out the -4 penalty for being a light weapon.

-Hyp.

 

[Kerrick]

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%.

Uh... yeah. That's what I meant.

 

[Kerrick]

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%.

Uh... yeah. That's what I meant.

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.

A two-handed weapon is a weapon that MUST be wielded with both hands - it's specifically designed that way. A one-handed weapon is designed to be used in one hand (duh), but CAN be used with both. Since it's not designed to take advantage of two-handed use, however, it doesn't grant double Strength bonus like a true two-handed weapon.

A spiked chain is a corner case - it requires two hands to be wielded properly (because it's so big), but technically you're only using one hand to attack with it - you're holding one end with one hand, and lashing out with the other. If you've ever seen Kill Bill 2, I'm thinking it's similar to the Japanese girl's ball and chain (I can't remember her name - she was O-Ren's bodyguard), except that you lash with it, like a whip. So it'd require two hands to use, you don't get the double Strength bonus, but you CAN finesse it like a whip.

So all that's left, really, is to drop the auto-attack with Imp Trip, change the special size bonus for the opposed check, and I think it'd work just great.

 

[Kaisoku]

Both Two-Handed weapons, and One-handed weapons used with two hands, get the 1.5x Strength damage and 2x conversion from Power Attack.

There is literally no other place, other than in Disarm, that Two-handed weapons are differentiated from a One-handed weapon held in two hands, and even then it's only a differentiation through omission. It's quite possible the rule was written by someone who simply thought it was implied in the rest of the rules that it was the same thing.

The question really is then...
Does a Two-Handed weapon get this +4 bonus because it's a "big weapon", and a Light weapon get the -4 penalty because it's a "smaller weapon"? Or is it because it's being held in two hands?



As for the Spiked Chain itself, it's given up quite a bit of damage capability (two steps lower than the Greatsword or Greataxe) AND costs an extra feat in order to gain the reach capabilities and couple other bonuses.
Also, it has mixed bonuses... Finesse with a weapon that you'll want to pump your Strength as high as possible? If you go mostly Dex, you give up the extra damage from Two-Handed Strength bonus and give up bonuses to Tripping. Variety is a bonus, sure.. but not that big a deal.

My personal feelings are that Disarm and Trip bone characters not built to defend against them in core rules, and the Spiked Chain just happens to be a smart choice for either tactics.

Honestly, you can pick up a Guisarme and get nearly the same benefits as a Trip Monkey anyways. Grab Short Haft if you are really REALLY wanting to use it for close quarters combat.. otherwise some spiked gauntlets are easily accessible. The Spiked Chain gives up that extra x3 crit damage to have an additional +2 Disarm (and the largely unused Finesse in the Trip builds).


If you go with the new Pathfinder rules (adding BAB to the check instead of a straight Strength check, and automatic 15+mods for the defender, lesser size bonus, and nerfed Imp Trip feat), you are already making the Trip/Disarm tactic less overpowered options.
You can allow or deny any overly ridiculous PrCs at your choice too (Weapon Master).


Lastly, do we really need to nerf the Fighter while the flying, greater invisible Wizard is tossing (insert whatever save the target is weakest again) spells around? Really?

 

[pawsplay]

There is a simple reason that the spiked chain is too good: the exotic weapon master prestige class. The flurry of blows ability gives a spiked chain wielder an extra attack which scores full two handed power attack damage and that wielders of other weapons cannot duplicate.

Well, that makes it suck slightly less. A few points:

- You've got a fairly weak AC, because you have no shield and do not benefit from the heavier armors. Until you get an animated shield and mithril armor, life will be hard.
- Power Attack already has diminishing returns. Slapping another -2 to hit on top of the for another attack may or may not help.
- Elusive Target.
- There are a variety of monsters that will mess you up. The Rust Monster, Black Pudding, and Hydra spring to mind.
- You've already spent feats on EWP, Weapon Focus, and Power Attack. What do you do for ranged attacks?
- Greater Manyshot is way more impressive in terms of extra damage.

 

[Kerrick]

The question really is then...
Does a Two-Handed weapon get this +4 bonus because it's a "big weapon", and a Light weapon get the -4 penalty because it's a "smaller weapon"?

I would say so. Light weapons sized for a Medium creature are considered Tiny; one-handed weapons are Medium; and two-handed weapons are Large. Therefore, they probably assigned the same modifiers for weapon size as they did for monster size.

My personal feelings are that Disarm and Trip bone characters not built to defend against them in core rules, and the Spiked Chain just happens to be a smart choice for either tactics.

So... you think the feats are overpowered, and the chain just adds to it?

If you go with the new Pathfinder rules (adding BAB to the check instead of a straight Strength check, and automatic 15+mods for the defender, lesser size bonus, and nerfed Imp Trip feat), you are already making the Trip/Disarm tactic less overpowered options.

I'm using a modified form of the PF rules - DC 15 + mods is way too high, and doesn't fit the standard 10 + mods formula, so I dropped it to 10. And what's wrong with making them "less overpowered"? If they're overpowered in the first place, they NEED to be nerfed. If they're relatively balanced, they'll see much more use by both sides without people bitching about it, and that's a win in my book - I like seeing people do stuff besides "I swing at the ogre with my sword".

Lastly, do we really need to nerf the Fighter while the flying, greater invisible Wizard is tossing (insert whatever save the target is weakest again) spells around? Really?

I know this isn't really relevant to this discussion, but don't worry - the spells are getting a good lookover too.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I would say so. Light weapons sized for a Medium creature are considered Tiny; one-handed weapons are Medium; and two-handed weapons are Large. Therefore, they probably assigned the same modifiers for weapon size as they did for monster size.

A weapon’s size category isn’t the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon’s size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.

In general, for weapons sized for a Medium creature, Light->Tiny, One-Handed->Small, Two-Handed->Medium.

-Hyp.

 

[Kerrick]

In general, for weapons sized for a Medium creature, Light->Tiny, One-Handed->Small, Two-Handed->Medium.

Oops. I read that paragraph too, but I was posting from memory. Shame on me.

 

[Kaisoku]

So... you think the feats are overpowered, and the chain just adds to it?

No. I think the core rules mechanics for things like Disarm and Trip are already designed in such a way that anyone not focused on defending against them are going to be hurt inordinately by them.

It becomes a binary system essentially, and this is beyond the problem with the Improved Trip feat.

It's an aspect of the game that could be tweaked to make it so it can be used more often.

I'm using a modified form of the PF rules - DC 15 + mods is way too high, and doesn't fit the standard 10 + mods formula, so I dropped it to 10. And what's wrong with making them "less overpowered"? If they're overpowered in the first place, they NEED to be nerfed. If they're relatively balanced, they'll see much more use by both sides without people bitching about it, and that's a win in my book - I like seeing people do stuff besides "I swing at the ogre with my sword".

I think you misunderstood here. I was saying that what Pathfinder is doing IS nerfing the mechanics on a whole. I agree with this. This is a good thing. Like you said, it'll see more use.

However, my point was that you don't need to also Neuter the Spiked Chain so completely. It has one thing over other reach weapons: useable in close quarters.

If you were to give a feat that allows reach weapons to be used within close quarters, it loses it's power. And if spending a feat (exotic weapon proficiency) is okay in that direction, then spending a feat on a more open version of Short Haft should work just as well.


Now, Improved Trip had the issue (similar to Spiked Chain) that it was clearly the better choice over the other feats because it gave the free attack. Basically it was no longer a choice of just "damage or tactic", rather "tactic, then damage".

I'd like to go one step further and give the option (in some form.. Fighter only, expanding the feat trees, etc), to allow all combat tactics to do damage AND the tactic. If you make it a Fighter thing, then it gives them something a bit more unique and actually "fightery" too.

I know this isn't really relevant to this discussion, but don't worry - the spells are getting a good lookover too.

Save or Die vs Save or take 100+ damage isn't much different. But still, scry and fry, teleport, fly, greater invisibility... there's a lot of things you'd have to nerf before you could make the Wizard more like the Fighter.

And by then, you'd have 4e anyways, so whats the point? Give the Fighter his powerful options is all I'm saying, instead of nerfing something that doesn't even come close to what other powerhouses can still do in the modified PRPG rules.