Small Weapons Revisited


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion


A player of mine and I got into a spirited discussion over small weapons, spears to be more specific. The crux of the argument was whether or not a goblin could reach another player who was on a 5' high ledge with a spear, which migrated over to the question of the length of a longspear for a small character. The only description provided for a longspear is that it's 8' long. When factoring the weight of said weapon for a small character is that it weighs half as much as its medium sized counterpart. If I'm understanding this correctly it would mean one of two things, either the smaller longspear is narrower and/or the weapon is shorter, meaning it would be either too thin to be effectively used or it would be too short to provide a reach bonus. The wording is too vague and I can't come up with a valid argument for this. Thoughts?


From a rules standpoint only 2 things matter. The creatures natural reach, and if it is wielding a reach weapon or not.

A Small creature has a natural reach of 5 feet (same as a Medium creature). With a non-reach weapon, it can strike5 feet way. A reach weapon doubles that to 10 feet. Same as a Medium creature.

If a Medium creature could hit the opponent in a given situation, so can the Small creature.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, you can get into wonky situations, such as a medium creature using an undersized small 2 handed reach weapon to get reach, while wielding the weapon 1-handed.

Even though that small long spear is roughly the same size as a non-reach medium regular spear.


An unrelated note, I have ruled that a player can wield a spear or longspear one handed as a martial weapon. It takes away from the Phalanx Fighter archetype, but the way I see farmer Joe wouldn't have the martial training to be able to use it one handed, but soldier Johnny would have the training to be able to wield it with one hand and still have a shield. This ruling doesn't apply to polearms such as the glaive or other such arms. At least not without an exotic weapon proficiency.


When I brought that up, my player argued that a small character would dart forward and back to make up for the difference with weapon length. I don't think that's the case. I think it's an overlooked game mechanic that we're just fighting over, but it begs the question do small characters truly have reach or do they just get the shaft?


The point I'm trying to make is that a longspear for a small character would have similar length as a standard spear of a medium character which doesn't have reach, why would it grant reach for a small character?


draugr, because the rules were built to minimize the play-differences between small and medium characters as much as possible, including not giving small-sized characters many bonuses and penalties. (Same reach, cannot save more small-sized characters with feather fall, etc.)

Trying to rework it all would be a massive mess that, should you wish to deal with it, will require systematic retooling of a great deal of the game to avoid being arbitrary. Including changes such as "how much space does a small-sized character occupy" and many, many more.

By the rules you are completely and totally wrong; a small-character with a longspear can strike an opponent ten feet away without penalty, even though it doesn't make much sense from a physics standpoint. (Though, really, the spear weighing half as much means that it's about 80% as long, wide, and tall)


Fair enough, I think I'm just over thinking what is ultimately a non-issue. Note to self for later arguments, "Never apply real world physics to a fantasy RPG." Thanks for your thoughts guys


You're welcome. I hope you both have plenty of fun playing. :)


draugr_hrafn wrote:
An unrelated note, I have ruled that a player can wield a spear or longspear one handed as a martial weapon. It takes away from the Phalanx Fighter archetype, but the way I see farmer Joe wouldn't have the martial training to be able to use it one handed, but soldier Johnny would have the training to be able to wield it with one hand and still have a shield. This ruling doesn't apply to polearms such as the glaive or other such arms. At least not without an exotic weapon proficiency.

Just FYI, normal spears are one handed weapons.


_Ozy_ wrote:
draugr_hrafn wrote:
An unrelated note, I have ruled that a player can wield a spear or longspear one handed as a martial weapon. It takes away from the Phalanx Fighter archetype, but the way I see farmer Joe wouldn't have the martial training to be able to use it one handed, but soldier Johnny would have the training to be able to wield it with one hand and still have a shield. This ruling doesn't apply to polearms such as the glaive or other such arms. At least not without an exotic weapon proficiency.
Just FYI, normal spears are one handed weapons.

Regular spears and longspears are 2 handed. Shortspears are one handed.


Jeraa wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
draugr_hrafn wrote:
An unrelated note, I have ruled that a player can wield a spear or longspear one handed as a martial weapon. It takes away from the Phalanx Fighter archetype, but the way I see farmer Joe wouldn't have the martial training to be able to use it one handed, but soldier Johnny would have the training to be able to wield it with one hand and still have a shield. This ruling doesn't apply to polearms such as the glaive or other such arms. At least not without an exotic weapon proficiency.
Just FYI, normal spears are one handed weapons.
Regular spears and longspears are 2 handed. Shortspears are one handed.

Ah, you're right, my bad. We just call shortspears 'spears' in our game and don't tend to use the regular spears at all.


draugr_hrafn wrote:
Fair enough, I think I'm just over thinking what is ultimately a non-issue. Note to self for later arguments, "Never apply real world physics to a fantasy RPG." Thanks for your thoughts guys

I would say, if you have a problem with the rules fix them if you are comfortable with the fix.

So you could say small creatures reach weapons need to be longer do to their size and how it interacts with the focus on medium sized creature rules.

MDC


We usually do, but we get into arguments over the rules from time to time. We do argue about rules, but I think that's inherent to just playing the game, considering that there are just so many rules and abilities and a few contradict each other. One example was the 5 ft step. They swore that they were entitled to an AoO when a goblin took a 5 ft step away from the fighter, until I read the rules clearly, and repeated myself a couple of times, did they relent.


I could see a GM rule that a medium weapon with reach 2 squares, when shifted to small size would have reach.
I could also see a GM say a medium weapon with reach when shifted to small would have a 50% chance of reach which would be rolled each time it occurred.
I could also see a GM just rule weapon by weapon based on its description and how they felt it should work so some weapons would have reach when shifted to small size and others did not.

So it just works out to how much work do you want to put in and be sure to have everyone agree to the changes or at least take a vote and go with the vote.
I also find it very helpful to remind players that what works for them can also work for NPC's and monsters and often this changes how they feel a rule should be ruled on.

MDC

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Small Weapons Revisited All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.