| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Nicolai Withander
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1093 Posts |
 Posted - 19 Oct 2012 : 21:01:11
|
After some careful reading, I found that you can’t attack an adjacent foe with a reach weapon. So one would have to move if one were fighting a fighter that came 5 feet from one. So if you’re flanked, you can’t attack at all. Unless you move. Now I might be slow to see he good thing about this kind of weapon. Is there anything good about a reach weapon???
Also… can a dragon with reach 40ft hit you if you stand 5 feet from it, or is there a difference between natural and marshal weapons???
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4435 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2012 : 21:27:26
|
If we're talking about 3rd Edition, Reach can be beneficial if you have the right Feats for it. For the most part, Reach-using characters always go with the Spiked Chain, as it can also be used to attack Adjacent Foes. Others take the Short Haft feat (PH2) which allows you to attack an adjacent foe with a Reach weapon as a swift action, but you no longer get reach until your next turn.
The most effective combo I've seen with a Reach weapon was a Spiked Chain (or polearm with Short Haft feat) and the Combat Reflexes/Stand Still feats. Combat Reflexes allows for more Opportunity Attacks per round and Stand Still allows you to forego any damage on a successful AoO to keep that person rooted to the spot. The main problem with Stand Still is that not only do you have to hit the target of the AoO but he's allowed a Reflex save vs. DC 10 + damage done to negate the effect AND you lose out on the damage too.
Add in effects like Enlarge Person and now that reach is 40' and a Fighter can effectively control an area of decent size. Additionally, you can take the Thicket of Blades stance (Tome of Battle supplement) which makes any 5' movement provoke an Opportunity Attack too.
Another thing that's hand about Reach is the Trip rules too. Getting a Reach weapon and Improved Trip means that anyone who provokes an AoO can be tripped instead. If you trip them, your automatically entitled to a free attack. So a Fighter with Enlarge Person and a Spiked Chain with the Improved Trip, Combat Reflexes, and Thicket of Blades stance can prone/attack anyone within 40' that moves. And when it comes to the Fighter's turn, he then gets bonuses to melee attacks against prone targets, which would be anyone he attacked the turn before.
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
Also… can a dragon with reach 40ft hit you if you stand 5 feet from it, or is there a difference between natural and marshal weapons???
I would assume so, yes. Reach is granted by the weapon in most cases and a dragon would probably have a better sense of awareness to gauge accordingly.
I must say that the rules for not allowing adjacent foes to be attack with Reach weapons is stuipd and was removed for 4E. I often times just remove the rule entirely. |
Edited by - Diffan on 19 Oct 2012 21:29:36 |
 |
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2012 : 22:00:25
|
Although I certainly wouldn't disagree with any of the crunchy bits Diffan talks about (I am certainly no expert on 'builds' - that not my thing), I do think a dragon should be hampered at close range.
From all the stories I've read - and not just FR - the idea is to get really close to a dragon so that all his weapons can't be brought to bear, and you actually have a chance of killing it. It makes perfect sense to try and get in-close so the dragon couldn't get at you (its why small opponents get benefits from fighting larger opponents - dwarves and halflings are masters of dodging between legs, etc).
Reach weapons are most beneficial in formations, which don't really come into play too often in an RPG. Being able to hit from the second line of formation is pretty handy, and some armies could even hit from the third line - that triples your damage at contact. In FR, the best example of that is when the dwarves used phalanx tactics against the Tuigan (which was taught to them by Alusair, based on a book written by Azoun himself on halberd warfare). The Tuigan were unable to break the formations and took heavy losses. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 19 Oct 2012 22:01:15 |
|
|
|
Bladewind
Master of Realmslore
Netherlands
1280 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2012 : 00:28:41
|
Being small in melee combat is a liability in the most essential way, you lack reach. Making use of the long spear, a weapon nearly all adventurers can pick up and use, helps eleviate that liability. Learn to use that reach advantage whenever possible at lower levels this can save your skin! Combat relfexes are not really needed, but can help a great deal.
The furthest a dragon can bite is 30 ft when its collosal size. Its natural reach can be used up close. The bite of a dragon (its 'reach' natural attack) is not avoidable by keeping close, and I strongly advice not to go in that close unprepared or without ensurance you deal a killing blow.
Against giants I'd say small creatures might have a slight advantage closing in from all sides (they need to avoid having felled foes falling ontop of them though!); but small creatures (even with reach) are in serious trouble against an unrestrained colossal sized dragon. It's ability to just land on them for massive damage, or attack a whole cone worth of them with a tail sweep is killer. In real close melee (20ft still) a dragons claws and wings and tail come to bear, giving it a huge number of attacks to maul anyone. |
My campaign sketches
Druidic Groves
Creature Feature: Giant Spiders |
|
|
|
Jakuta Khan
Senior Scribe
496 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2012 : 10:39:07
|
I Have always thought, in 3e, that it wouldbe useful that if you are hit with a pole with reach it prevents you from getting close to the wielder of the reach weapon. playtesting showed, that this can eventually lead to overpowering polearms, as a swordsmen usually does not have a chance against someone wielding a longspear.
Historically it wouldbe correct. 9 out of 10 duels spear vs sword, the spear wins. if both combatants are equally skilled. - that leads to misinterpretion. swords were higher valued, and therefore nobility, which had much more wep training used swords, and the spear was seen as weapon of peasants - a farmer with a spear can of course not stand against a skilled swordsman. |
|
|
|
Nicolai Withander
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1093 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2012 : 11:34:37
|
So for an adventurer who is dungeon crawling, a reach weapon sucks!!!
I must admit that unless we are talking battle formations, I can’t see a reach weapon being any good.
That being said, the whole idea that you can use a reach weapon behind someone seems weird to me too.
I would not like having someone standing behind me, swinging a Lucerne Hammer or a spiked chain.
And lastly, if natural weapons can reach from adjacent to full reach then a weapon, say from a storm giant, must only be usable at the indicated reach. Or else there is no fairness involved!
|
|
|
|
Jakuta Khan
Senior Scribe
496 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2012 : 12:52:18
|
@nicolai:
I agree not completely. a corridor, ten feet wide, and two orcs try to rusdh u, and u just set down two longspears, eventually even kneeling, and let archers / mages do their thing while u keep em at distance?? depends on situation heavily I would say.
Taking ranks is the same, with lucerne hammer or spiked chain "tricky" I agree, but pikes and the likes...
Again highly depending on the situation and the reach wep used.
the point with huge creatures like dragons, or giants and their massive weps is interesting to dicuss |
Edited by - Jakuta Khan on 20 Oct 2012 12:54:01 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4435 Posts |
Posted - 21 Oct 2012 : 06:41:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
So for an adventurer who is dungeon crawling, a reach weapon sucks!!!
I must admit that unless we are talking battle formations, I can’t see a reach weapon being any good.
That being said, the whole idea that you can use a reach weapon behind someone seems weird to me too.
I would not like having someone standing behind me, swinging a Lucerne Hammer or a spiked chain.
Reach weapons have their place, and with limited areas they're even more impressive. Again, it depends on what feats you take to use them effectively. From my experiences in fighting with "Boff" weapons and in the SCA, polearm weapons can be extreamly powerful. This is doubly so with a shieldsman in front of you. In the game I fight in (Dagorhir) we have a rule that allows Red* weapons to break shields in two solid hits. This can demolish a front line or people with shields in front of you. You swing once or twice then duck behind cover. It's an effective method of fighting. Also, Polearms (in RL) can push aside shields and defenses, thus allowing the shieldsman to knife in with their 1-handed weapons.
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
And lastly, if natural weapons can reach from adjacent to full reach then a weapon, say from a storm giant, must only be usable at the indicated reach. Or else there is no fairness involved!
I'm not entirely sure, but it's why the rule is a bit silly. Often it doesn't really come up because if a Monster is adjacent to you and is using a reach weapon, it's nothing to move 5' and get the full benefits of reach.
*Red weapons are considered a weapon that's over 4' long and struck using two-hands on the haft. |
|
|
|
Nicolai Withander
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1093 Posts |
Posted - 21 Oct 2012 : 11:36:28
|
Well in a dungeon there is not always room to move about! And so you could end up in a situation where you are boxed in, ant can’t use your reach weapon. You could be surrounded or caught in a corner.
|
Edited by - Nicolai Withander on 21 Oct 2012 11:39:48 |
|
|
|
Derulbaskul
Senior Scribe
Singapore
408 Posts |
Posted - 21 Oct 2012 : 13:34:39
|
Reach weapons are good in 3.5E if you have some way of capitalising on the attacks of opportunity that are triggered (or I should say "attack" and "is" if the reach weapon fighter lacks the Combat Reflexes feat) when an opponent moves through the threatened area and into a square adjacent to you, but to my mind that is not worth the risk - as you correctly point out - in a dungeon environment of being boxed in and having to drop your reach weapon to use, for example, your dagger.
Personally, I would never use a reach weapon in 3.5E unless it was a spiked chain which is able to attack adjacent squares. Even then, the PC would need to be built to focus on trip attacks because you want something to offset the lower damage and the lower shield-less AC.
(4E is different. A reach weapon can be used to attack an opponent in the square adjacent to you but you do not gain opportunity attacks against opponents in the next rank as you do in 3.5E.) |
Cheers
D
NB: Please remember: A cannon is a big gun. Canon is what we discuss here. |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11803 Posts |
Posted - 22 Oct 2012 : 01:37:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
So for an adventurer who is dungeon crawling, a reach weapon sucks!!!
I must admit that unless we are talking battle formations, I can’t see a reach weapon being any good.
That being said, the whole idea that you can use a reach weapon behind someone seems weird to me too.
I would not like having someone standing behind me, swinging a Lucerne Hammer or a spiked chain.
And lastly, if natural weapons can reach from adjacent to full reach then a weapon, say from a storm giant, must only be usable at the indicated reach. Or else there is no fairness involved!
Reach weapons were oftentimes used from behind someone in real warfare. Your sword and shield person took the front line and the person with the reach weapon struck from over him.
Reach is also pretty good if you have extra attacks of opportunity via combat reflexes, so that you can strike individuals not only coming at you, but also coming at other people.
Also, in a tunnel type environment where the person at the front holds everyone else back, with feats to stop them in their tracks, a reach weapon could be great depending on the situation. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Ozreth
Learned Scribe
188 Posts |
Posted - 22 Oct 2012 : 01:44:53
|
You don't have to get into melee range of an opponent but you can still attack them...I fail to see how this isn't a benefit?
You just have to play more like a caster, try not to get yourself right up against somebody. |
|
|
|
Nicolai Withander
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1093 Posts |
Posted - 22 Oct 2012 : 10:29:06
|
Well if you fight with a Lucerne Hammer against a fighter with a sword, he will take 5 ft step to get close to you, and you would have to move 5 foot step yourself. So it will not help to have reach. So en an enclosed envirounment you could run into problems. What happens when you are getting flaked on all sides???
Im not sure I like the 3.x version of the rule! |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4435 Posts |
Posted - 22 Oct 2012 : 13:07:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
Well if you fight with a Lucerne Hammer against a fighter with a sword, he will take 5 ft step to get close to you, and you would have to move 5 foot step yourself. So it will not help to have reach. So en an enclosed envirounment you could run into problems. What happens when you are getting flaked on all sides???
Im not sure I like the 3.x version of the rule!
Short Haft (PH2): as a swift action, lose the benefits of reach to make attacks against adjacent foes.
Spiked Chain: can make both adjacent and Reach attacks
Thicket of Blades (Tome of Battle, stance): A 5' step still provokes Attacks of Opportunity.
These are simple ways to make Reach weapons awesome. Add in other elements (ala Feats) and it makes them better than most other options |
Edited by - Diffan on 22 Oct 2012 13:43:46 |
|
|
|
Nicolai Withander
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1093 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 20:19:35
|
I see when you take the feats mentioned, it can be helpful and a very good weapon, but I’m inclined to use the 4.0 version of the reach rule.
I still have some trouble clarifying what kind of reach a frost or storm giant has with their huge great axe and great sword.
If a frost giant has a great axe, but has 10ft reach, can it then attack at 5 ft.??? To me, a huge great axe is difficult to swing up close and would to me be like a reach weapon, but since it’s not a "reach" weapon per say, I’m guessing that even a colossal great axe in the hands of a colossal giant would still be able to attack adjacent foes??? Or what??? |
|
|
|
Kilvan
Senior Scribe
Canada
894 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 20:42:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
If a frost giant has a great axe, but has 10ft reach, can it then attack at 5 ft.??? To me, a huge great axe is difficult to swing up close and would to me be like a reach weapon, but since it’s not a "reach" weapon per say, I’m guessing that even a colossal great axe in the hands of a colossal giant would still be able to attack adjacent foes??? Or what???
Exactly. |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4687 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 21:16:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
I see when you take the feats mentioned, it can be helpful and a very good weapon, but I’m inclined to use the 4.0 version of the reach rule.
I still have some trouble clarifying what kind of reach a frost or storm giant has with their huge great axe and great sword.
If a frost giant has a great axe, but has 10ft reach, can it then attack at 5 ft.??? To me, a huge great axe is difficult to swing up close and would to me be like a reach weapon, but since it’s not a "reach" weapon per say, I’m guessing that even a colossal great axe in the hands of a colossal giant would still be able to attack adjacent foes??? Or what???
Well there is Real World and there are game rules.
RW a person can get to close to foe for larger weapons to work, best example get within sword guard that a sword has to become hit with hilt of the blade, because the slashing blade can not be be used to do damage.
Game rules, refer to the rules for edition. The game rules cover most normal combat including grapple where weapons are hard to use.
On my opinion a giant weapon can not be effectively used to attack a foe that is too close. At best, short of feats, the long the reach weapon at best might be used to hit with the shaft of the weapon, it might cause some damage it might not. Natural weapons reach might be less a problem, however even in unarmed combat, size can make it hard to catch or hit something too close. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Reach Weapons
