|
“IRON GRIP” [General]
You are able to use two-handed weapons with one hand.
Prerequisite: BAB +6
Benefit: You can use two-handed melee weapons one-handed with a -2 to your attack roll. The weapon must be of your size category (ie. A medium creature could not use a Large Greataxe one-handed with this feat). You cannot use this feat in your off hand or use it with a double weapon.
Normal: You cannot wield two-handed weapons one-handed.
Thoughts?
Please, no. Or, at least, not for me. Weapon sizes are already totally absurd as depicted in most of the artwork... I'd hate for the game rules to add legitimacy to that. Personally, I prefer less BESM in my DND.
To be fair, he specifically prohibits using it with your off-hand. I'm sure you could create an Improved Iron Grip feat to overcome that, but the penalties would increase.
Paul -- Thanks. I caught that, too, but somewhat belateldly (hence the edit above).
Anyway, I'm still just not caught up in the whole "bigger weapons are so much cooler!" thing.|
|
Please, no. Or, at least, not for me. Weapon sizes are already totally absurd as depicted in most of the artwork... I'd hate for the game rules to add legitimacy to that. Personally, I prefer less BESM in my DND.
My intent wasn't to legitimize the artwork :)
I was shooting for spear and shield combos and the like. The spin off is shield and greataxe or shield and two-handed sword, but I don't see that as a problem. It seems a lot of thought and effort is being put into the high level fighter versus high level wizard conundrum. Wouldn't at least a little boost in the weapon damage be a start?
|
|
To be fair, he specifically prohibits using it with your off-hand. I'm sure you could create an Improved Iron Grip feat to overcome that, but the penalties would increase.Paul -- Thanks. I caught that, too, but somewhat belateldly (hence the edit above).
Anyway, I'm still just not caught up in the whole "bigger weapons are so much cooler!" thing.
I am not going for the "bigger weapons are cooler" either. Those rules and feats already exist. (see [FEAT] Monkey Grip in the Comp Warrior)
|
|
*sigh* I got disconnected as I was trying to send this the first time, so if its not as eloquent or well thought out as I usually try to be, please pardon the discrepancy.
Anyways, on to the topic. I rather like the feat, but I think the attack penalty is a little steep. -2 for a more versatile version of Exotic Weapon Proficiency bastard sword? I would recommend a -1.
Unless your planning to let the two handed weapon still be treated as a two-handed weapon for purposes of strength bonus and power attack damage. Then deffinitely keep the -2.
Of course, that would probably never make it through. Nobody wants the sword and boarders or the two-weapon martial classes to ACTUALLY have competitive damage do they? Afterall, power attack is only a prerequisite for alot of things that all fighters want, but only two-handers really get their worth out of it.
I hadn't thought about the strength bonus / power attack implications. I would be inclined to keep them as though you were using 2 hands. So then I would agree the penalty would have to stay at -2 then.
I was shooting for spear and shield combos and the like.
I agree, it's totally absurd that a spear can't be used with a shield -- insofar as, historically, that's how spears were most often used! I'd correct that in the spear rules, though (and open the benfits to everyone), rather than by adding a feat that potentially applies to two-handed poleaxes.
It seems a lot of thought and effort is being put into the high level fighter versus high level wizard conundrum. Wouldn't at least a little boost in the weapon damage be a start?
Yes, it sure would -- but I disagree that the answer is to give them bigger weapons. Why not make a fighter class feature that goves them +1 damage bonus/2 levels with ANY weapon? Then they could efficiently use short swords to kill things as well.
Um... because shortswords are off-hand weapons or rogue weapons? XD sorry Kirth, couldn't help it lol.
Historically, they were efficient killing weapons; the Roman legionaries worked wonders with them. I disagree with what 3.X has turned them into (i.e., glorified daggers).
I agree things should improve across the board, but I also think this is a good option. Having the ability to (2handed) power attack with one hand would be a huge improvement. (and please don't make a "it will make rogues even better" argument lol, they don't have the attack bonus to spare, at least in my experience.)
I for sure wasn't going to argue that, vis-a-vis rogues. I would argue that larger weapons are NOT automatically better than smaller ones, although the game rules seem to be written that way. A person can kill a lot more effectively with a battleaxe than with a monster greataxe (that he has to choke way up to even hold in one hand); the 1-handed greataxe swing would be incredibly awkward and the damage minimal, if it could even inflict an injury at all.
That said, I'd probably increase the 1-handed power attack damage for all weapons, not just ridiculously oversized ones.
Yes, I know that the game isn't very realistic, nor should it be, but there comes a point when "streamlined for good play and to hell with realism" eventually becomes "so silly that only Warner Brothers cartoons or Anime can be simulated using these rules."
|
|
What is missing from all of this is the element of weapon speed. We used to factor that in once, not anymore. Now the dagger and the two-handed sword attack at the same speed (read number of attacks per round). That is the root problem. Other than the damage a weapon does and the crit multiplier there isn't any significant difference between a dagger, a short sword, longsword or a two-handed sword.
Unless your planning to let the two handed weapon still be treated as a two-handed weapon for purposes of strength bonus and power attack damage. Then deffinitely keep the -2
Where's the logic in that? Well DnD-books aren't the standard reference books for logic anyway, but swinging a two-handed weapon with one hand giving the damage boost for wielding it with two fails in my opinion. And it's unbalanced...
I'd rather see a feat like this:
Iron Grip
Prereq.: Str 13
Benefit: You can wield a weapon with reach in one hand, which is not your off-hand. Every attack made with the weapon suffers a -2 penalty. Apply your STR-bonus to the damage.
Anime Grip
Prereq.: Str 13
Benefit: You can wield a two-handed weapon, that has no reach, in one hand, which is not your off-hand. Every attack with the weapon suffers a -1 penalty, but you gain +2 on Intimidate checks made when wielding the weapon ready to attack. Apply only your STR-bonus to the damage.
I was shooting for spear and shield combos and the like.I agree, it's totally absurd that a spear can't be used with a shield -- insofar as, historically, that's how spears were most often used! I'd correct that in the spear rules, though (and open the benfits to everyone), rather than by adding a feat that potentially applies to two-handed poleaxes.
You already can. It's called a Shortspear. I'm not sure why people have a problem with this.
And Jason has already added the Lunge feat, allowing reach with short weapons, such as the spear.
This is far more believable to be lunging a bit forward and getting reach with a 6' spear, than to be holding a 15' spear in one hand effectively. It's not even a weight/strength issue, it's a balance issue... unless you can make your hand cover a 3 foot length of the weapon (where your two hands would have been, spaced apart). At which point, you'd be a giant and would already have reach, so you'd effectively be using your version of a shortspear. See where I'm going with this?
.
As for the "Set for charge" factor... try setting that up with a 6' long pole in real life (like, put the base at your foot and hold it with both hands at a 45 degree angle or so). Notice how the spear tip is now practically at your hands? You can't do anything effective with a weapon that short, set in that way.
That's why the 15' long spear is the one that lets you set for charge, you have the ability to attack into a 5' square ahead of you while set like that, and hit your charging target. The holding the base at your foot vs the charging target's momentum is what gives you the extra damage.
.
How about this as an alternative... a +1 weapon enhancement that allows you to resize your weapon. So you can make your Shortspear into a Longspear as a swift action, and set for a charge, then go back to using it onehanded when making your full attacks.
I agree, it's totally absurd that a spear can't be used with a shieldYou already can. It's called a Shortspear. I'm not sure why people have a problem with this.
How about this as an alternative... a +1 weapon enhancement that allows you to resize your weapon. So you can make your Shortspear into a Longspear as a swift action, and set for a charge, then go back to using it onehanded when making your full attacks.
That'll teach me to post before looking things up. My mistake; I'd been thinking that the shortspear was listed as a 2-handed weapon. That said, your proposal on a "resizing" weapon property is one I've used before, which the players really liked (I seem to recall that Gygax's character Melf (of "acid arrow" fame), from the old Greyhawk setting, had a spear that would do that).
|
|
Just in case anyone has missed it, there are 3 spears on the weapons list. Short spear, spear and long spear. Short spear = 6' long, one-handed, throwable but not able to be set versus charge. Long spear = 15' long, two-handed, not throwable but able to be set versus charge. Spear = ?' long, two-handed, throwable and able to be set versus charge. Who throws a spear two-handed? ;)
Regardless the feat suggestion still stands. It is not entirely predicated on use with a spear. Like I said earlier, it could also allow for a little damage boost for fighters and is really just a variation on the theme of the "Monkey Grip" feat. It was just a thought.
Cheers.
|
|
How about this as an alternative... a +1 weapon enhancement that allows you to resize your weapon. So you can make your Shortspear into a Longspear as a swift action, and set for a charge, then go back to using it onehanded when making your full attacks.
I like it. Reminds me of the villainous elf in Hellboy 2. Of course it could go from short spear to spear and back again if you wanted. ;)
Isn't this NWN2 Monkey Grip ?
No, Monkey Grip lets you use a weapon one size larger than normal with a -2 penalty to hit just like you would normally use it. With it you could use a large greatsword as a two handed weapon for a medium creature .
This feat lets you use a standard issue two handed weapon as a one handed weapon at a -2 penalty to hit.
|
|
I think I would like to amend the feat to read:
IRON GRIP [General]
You are able to use two-handed weapons with one hand.
Prerequisite: BAB +6, Strength 13
Benefit: You can use two-handed melee weapons one-handed with a -2 to your attack roll. The weapon must be of your size category (ie. A medium creature could not use a Large Greataxe one-handed with this feat). You cannot use this feat in your off hand or use it with a double weapon.
Normal: You cannot wield two-handed weapons one-handed.
What about a martial shortspear?
The Trident has better damage, but otherwise similar stats to the shortspear.
Why not have a shortspear with a deadlier tip, similar to a ranseur?
Range increment within the same handedness and proficiency seems to be more about aesthetics than anything else. If it seems like an inferior weapon for throwing, then it gets 10'. A trident has three prongs, vs a single tip, which would lead to 10' increment.
So something like this:
Battlespear
Damage
1d6 20/x3 -
Effects
20' range increment -
+2 disarm, can drop to prevent being disarm on failure -
Basically, it is to the Ranseur, as the Shortspear is to the Longspear.
I think I would like to amend the feat to read:
IRON GRIP [General]
You are able to use two-handed weapons with one hand.
Prerequisite: BAB +6, Strength 13
Benefit: You can use two-handed melee weapons one-handed with a -2 to your attack roll. The weapon must be of your size category (ie. A medium creature could not use a Large Greataxe one-handed with this feat). You cannot use this feat in your off hand or use it with a double weapon.
Normal: You cannot wield two-handed weapons one-handed.
Just on size category could a Medium creature use a Large Creatures One handed weapon ?
|
|
Just on size category could a Medium creature use a Large Creatures One handed weapon ?
That is exactly what the "Monkey Grip" feat covers. So the answer is no. This feat is a variation on MG, but it is not meant to overlap per se. That being said I guess one could take both feats and then a medium creature could theoretically use a Large great sword one-handed.
Funny, Monkey Grip always pissed me off, but I like the Iron Grip feat. I guess it was the munchkin builds people came up with that soured me on Monkey Grip.
I think any feat that helps to balance the 2-handed power attacker is needed in the new rules.
There should be a clear note that this can NOT be combined with any feat that requires a two handed weapon, or a weapon in two hands. Also, perhaps something about not working with reach weapons might be needed, or else a new wave of spike chain/ tower shield fighters are going to pour out of the wasteland.
Can it be set versus a charge?
My thoughts were no.. unless you mean can you set for charge by using two hands. Then I really don't care either way.
However, that would be cumbersome to do while using a shield (unless it was a buckler).