...but then we are back into a semantic discussion with regard to how much reach a reach weapon actually has.
A reach weapon is so long that it can "not [attack] a creature in an adjacent square." Exactly what physical length that corresponds to doesn't matter to the rules. We reference real-world weapons to answer the length question.
...The feats I proposed arent superfeats. Are they?
That depends. How many people think spiked chain is inherently broken? This is worse: "If spiked chain can do it, why not other reach weapons?" Because they aren't spiked chains.
Shortshaft requires +1 BAB characters with this feat may use a move action to shorten their grip on a polearm to attack enemies at 5'. The polearm is treated as threat capable equivalent to the spiked chain.
Holding the reach weapon mid-shaft means half the length is swinging out behind, bumping into walls, floor, plants or furniture, other characters, etc. At least spiked chain can be coiled or draped to stay out of the way (mostly), the excess weight and length not needed for attacking at 5' neutralized. No feat can make the extra length and weight of shaft disappear.
Not only does the bvtt end interfere with the wielder's intents (-4 to attacks, c.f. tower shield except worse because the clumsiness is part of the weapon), you must keep track of what's behind the character to be effected by the bvtt end.
In addition, the move action required for switching between reach and shortshaft means it can't threaten both near and far. At best the character could threaten either in close (with penalties) or at reach, never both.
Precise Impalement requires Shortshaft, and weapon focus polearm characters with precise impalement may attack enemies already engaged in melee at their polearms reach range without the -4 penalty to attack and ignores cover of less the total cover.
One or the other is already stretching credulity, both is far too much.
A reach weapons is slow and clumsy. It isn't like a missile weapon that passes through to the target in a fraction of a second, the reach weapon itself occupies space before and after the strike. Not only does the wielder need to keep the weapon's head from hitting the friendly engaged with the target, the haft must also be kept out of the engaged friendly's way before, during, and afterwards.
When using a reach weapon teamed with a footman, you must stay out of the footman's way and wait for the footman's actions to open up an opportunity for the reach weapon to strike. If the target has cover (eg, the paired footman whose presence blocks some possible lines of attack) the cover penalty accounts for staying out of the footman's way and striking only when positions of both footman and target are advantageous.
For other types of cover the reach attack must still work around it, from 8-10 feet away. Again, unlike a missile attack the shaft occupies a straight line between you and your target for more than just the instant of the attack.
Stoic Spearman requires Precise Impalement and +6 BAB characters with Stoic Spearman feat may use all bonus of having set versus charge to any AoO made from AoOs due to movement.
But what if they aren't moving towards the Spearman? How does that grant set-vs-charge bonuses? Instead, have the set-vs-charge require a move action instead of a ready action. If the Spearman has an unused move action or equivalent he can use it to set vs charge for AoO, subject to all normal set-vs-charge limitations.
Homemade Feats for making polearms more formidable:
Shortshaft requires +1 BAB characters with this feat may use a move action to shorten their grip on a polearm to attack enemies at 5'. The polearm is treated as threat capable equivalent to the spiked chain.
Not bad, considering the amount of weapon abstraction that is occuring with the weapons system as written. Some folks won't like it, considering that they consider such a thing a physical impossibility with a "reach" weapon, but then we are back into a semantic discussion with regard to how much reach a reach weapon actually has. Again, I reiterate, if a dagger, unarmed, standard spear, quarterstaff, and greatsword all have 5' reach in a 360 degree arc, then I'm okay with "reach" weapons not being 13'+ pikes. Some folks aren't.
Precise Impalement requires Shortshaft, and weapon focus polearm characters with precise impalement may attack enemies already engaged in melee at their polearms reach range without the -4 penalty to attack and ignores cover of less the total cover.
Ignoring cover is cool, but I wasn't aware that you took a -4 penalty to attack for someone you threatened.
Also nice. I think this is solid, although only the longspear can benefit from this, as it is the only weapon with reach that can be set against a charge. I'd prefer something more generic which could be used with the glaive, lance, and other reach polearms.
Stoic Spearman requires Precise Impalement and +6 BAB characters with Stoic Spearman feat may use all bonus of having set versus charge to any AoO made from AoOs due to movement.
Heh, your right, I was thinking or ranged attacks into melee , not reach. Oops (back to this later)
I dpnt see whay you couldnt set the rest of the reach polearms versus charge attacks. Most of them are just spears with blades or pokey bits running off the sides. Even the Glaive has a piercing point in the fron tof it.
http://www.archers.org/default.asp?section=militarylife/weapons&page=po learms
this page has nice illustrations of all the ones found in the PF RPG. They all look at least as effective as a spear or trident to me. I would allow it if I were GM.
...but then we are back into a semantic discussion with regard to how much reach a reach weapon actually has.A reach weapon is so long that it can "not [attack] a creature in an adjacent square." Exactly what physical length that corresponds to doesn't matter to the rules. We reference real-world weapons to answer the length question.
Partially agreed, but you have already agreed that you can slap at an enemy with the shaft of a polearm, wielded at full "quarterstaff" grip, somewhat ineffectively. I still consider this to be "threatening an opponent", particularly if the polearm is nimble enough to strike both opponent A and opponent B below:
A_X_B
which you have already admitted is not a reasonable action to undertake with a ~13' pike, which makes any comparison to real world equivalents moot.
In fact, with such a pike, it may be easier to butt strike opponent B in the following scenario:
A_XB_
Therefore, the 3.5 "reach" weapon is an entirely artificial construct. Ergo, Short Haft is no more absurd than cross checking an opponent without having to take a disadvantage as being unarmed, or almost so (spiked gauntlet, armor spikes). Allowing someone to take a draw a weapon action (which is a better Shortshaft feat mechanic) to reposition from quarterstaffing to halfstaffing is fairly reasonable, when we accept that the 3.5 reach weapon is technically impossible.
"If spiked chain can do it, why not other reach weapons?" Because they aren't spiked chains.
I actually dont think there is anything like the spiked chain in the real world. Not the nagegama or the hui-tho. Even the kyoketsu-shogi didnt look like the spiked chain as illustrated in the phb. So since we're using made-up weapons to play a made-up game then it isnt that much of a stretch to say that a character can grip midway along a shaft and swing.
Besides most bull-whips measure about 2.5m but they have a reach of 15' in the game. Most pikes exceeded 3m but only reach 10'. So we're pretty much in make believe land as far as archaic weapons go.A typical guisarme was 2 1/2m long. That's only about 7 to 7 1/2'. So you think it is just way out of this world that you can chop someone appx. 5' away without that tail end (2 feet) swinging around just all crazy like??? (hint it's not even going to extend into the square behind the guy swinging)
A reach weapon is so long that it can "not [attack] a creature in an adjacent square." Exactly what physical length that corresponds to doesn't matter to the rules. We reference real-world weapons to answer the length question.
Partially agreed, but you have already agreed that you can slap at an enemy with the shaft of a polearm, wielded at full "quarterstaff" grip, somewhat ineffectively.
I also pointed out that an opponent can easily block or even grab the weapon once inside the Reach. We could add rules for "Grab of Opportunity" to counter new guidelines for "haft-slapping." Or we just say the Reach weapons can't attack and don't threaten adjacent tiles. Leave any other details to on-the-spot GMing. That milage may vary, but it's a case of no rule being better than a bad rule.
I still consider this to be "threatening an opponent", particularly if the polearm is nimble enough to strike both opponent A and opponent B below:
A_X_B
which you have already admitted is not a reasonable action to undertake with a ~13' pike, which makes any comparison to real world equivalents moot.
Nimble enough to strike, with a move action, perhaps. But not to threaten. If X is facing A (at least on the corner) he must make some kind of move action to fully see, much less strike at, B, and thus B cannot provoke AoO (and any reasonable GM would likely rule so on the spot). Further, changing focus to make an attack on B would be a move action that could provoke an AoO.
In fact, with such a pike, it may be easier to butt strike opponent B in the following scenario:
A_XB_
I have no contention against being able to butt-strike in that situation, but would contend that B is not threatened by X. A sword-and-board fighter could likewise backhand-bash B with his shield, but it would be tedious to try to invent Feats and other rules to codify every possibility. Again, no rule is better than a bad rule.
Therefore, the 3.5 "reach" weapon is an entirely artificial construct. Ergo, Short Haft is no more absurd than cross checking an opponent without having to take a disadvantage as being unarmed, or almost so (spiked gauntlet, armor spikes). Allowing someone to take a draw a weapon action (which is a better Shortshaft feat mechanic) to reposition from quarterstaffing to halfstaffing is fairly reasonable, when we accept that the 3.5 reach weapon is technically impossible.
The Reach combat mechanic is no more artificial than any other aspect of any RPG rules you can cite. Why bother with reality at all: go Wuxia and swing it around overhead to whirlwind-attack all twenty-four tiles.
Remember: polearms dominated the battlefield for thousands of years, but only in formations. The shorter hand weapon also played its part when the fight devolved into open melee.
I actually dont think there is anything like the spiked chain in the real world. Not the nagegama or the hui-tho. Even the kyoketsu-shogi didnt look like the spiked chain as illustrated in the phb. So since we're using made-up weapons to play a made-up game then it isnt that much of a stretch to say that a character can grip midway along a shaft and swing.
If polearms could be used as you've described, why would anyone bother with shorter weapons? If whips and chains were the awesome weapons described in d20/PF, why was everybody using polearms and swords and stuff for five thousand years? Why weren't the Spanish Conquistadores doing it Indiana Jones style?
Besides most bull-whips measure about 2.5m but they have a reach of 15' in the game. Most pikes exceeded 3m but only reach 10'. So we're pretty much in make believe land as far as archaic weapons go.
A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows its wielder to strike at targets that aren't adjacent to him or her. Most reach weapons double the wielder's natural reach, meaning that a typical Small or Medium wielder of such a weapon can attack a creature 10 feet away, but not a creature in an adjacent square.
That would mean that some might be longer than double the reach, no? Most pikes were more like 6m and I posit wouldn't be able to attack at 5' or 10', only at 15'. It could mean that some reach weapons are shorter than double the reach, but it gives no guidelines to how an intermediate length would fit in the rules.
A typical guisarme was 2 1/2m long. That's only about 7 to 7 1/2'. So you think it is just way out of this world that you can chop someone appx. 5' away without that tail end (2 feet) swinging around just all crazy like??? (hint it's not even going to extend into the square behind the guy swinging)
As I've said before, most surviving examples of polearms are those that had been stored in castles for defense inside the walls, and are shorter than open-field versions. They made the pole as long or short as needed. IF it is long enough to qualify as a Reach weapon as defined, it is too long to attack adjacent foes normally, and so short-shaft use would have major penalties and associated problems.
Again, I've said there needs to be a second class of polearm that can attack but not threaten at 10', and these would be useable short-shaft or half-staff with minor penalties.
"If spiked chain can do it, why not other reach weapons?" Because they aren't spiked chains.I actually dont think there is anything like the spiked chain in the real world. Not the nagegama or the hui-tho. Even the kyoketsu-shogi didnt look like the spiked chain as illustrated in the phb. So since we're using made-up weapons to play a made-up game then it isnt that much of a stretch to say that a character can grip midway along a shaft and swing.
Besides most bull-whips measure about 2.5m but they have a reach of 15' in the game. Most pikes exceeded 3m but only reach 10'. So we're pretty much in make believe land as far as archaic weapons go.
A typical guisarme was 2 1/2m long. That's only about 7 to 7 1/2'. So you think it is just way out of this world that you can chop someone appx. 5' away without that tail end (2 feet) swinging around just all crazy like??? (hint it's not even going to extend into the square behind the guy swinging)
Ok, first of all, the shaolin monks train with a chain-weapon that is almost practically the spike chain, except....it isnt spiked.
Length, size, the way its held and used...thats all the sameBut yes someone out there has fought with it for centuries.
A "Bull whip" could mean alot of things.
You are most likely thinking about a whip for training lions.
The "driving whip" used by those who drove carriages or wagons driven my horses or oxen is easily as long as the one in the game.
Look at movies like Van-Helsing, The Run Down and even Quigley down under, for examples of that very whip being used. (the Run down even has dual whip wielders using the weapon in combat, where as in the other movies you can just see hwo long it is and its reach capability.)
Even Indiana Jone's Whip, technically a"bull whip" as in lion trainer whip seemed longer for parts of the movie (swinging) than it did for other parts of the movie (magic whip?)
But he used it in fights as well, and if you included the few feet of his arm, plus the length of his whip (just from watching the movies where he uses the whip in fights) yeaa....aybe its about 15 feet, max.
Again, I've said there needs to be a second class of polearm that can attack but not threaten at 10', and these would be useable short-shaft or half-staff with minor penalties.
It'd be nice, but it is not something we are likely to see, since Lunge, which simulates this, already, exists, along with the halberd, spear, and scythe. Sword and Board has gotten a raft of feats to simulate some actual shield fighting techniques already. I am not averse to the idea as a house rule in any game, and would be happy to drop the lance, guisarme, halberd, glaive, partisan, spear, et al into that group, and don't think any penalty is really necessary, and leave the longspear as the lone true reach weapon. That royally borks backwards compatability, though.
I didn't see Lunge in the Beta or SRD, but that would be a general feat for any weapons, I assume. This would be an inherent feature of use for intermediate polearms.
Ok, first of all, the shaolin monks train with a chain-weapon that is almost practically the spike chain, except....it isnt spiked.
Exactly my point. It's not the spiked chain of RPGs. So we're discussing the qualities of a fictional weapon.
Ok, first of all, the shaolin monks train with a chain-weapon that is almost practically the spike chain, except....it isnt spiked.Exactly my point. It's not the spiked chain of RPGs. So we're discussing the qualities of a fictional weapon.
why is it fictional, because it has spikes on it?
Theoretically, if the monks wanted to couldnt they put a few spikes on it?I think that would cause the weapon to snag and get caught, on things or opponents flesh, and I doubt the spikes would really "add" to the versatility or usefulness of what they use the chain for.
Would the weapon be better if it were just "chain"?
Ok, first of all, the shaolin monks train with a chain-weapon that is almost practically the spike chain, except....it isnt spiked.Exactly my point. It's not the spiked chain of RPGs. So we're discussing the qualities of a fictional weapon.why is it fictional, because it has spikes on it?
Theoretically, if the monks wanted to couldnt they put a few spikes on it?I think that would cause the weapon to snag and get caught, on things or opponents flesh, and I doubt the spikes would really "add" to the versatility or usefulness of what they use the chain for.
Would the weapon be better if it were just "chain"?
Well since the whole point is what is realistic and what is not is undermined by the fact that the weapon we are comparing to polearms never existed.
Well since the whole point is what is realistic and what is not is undermined by the fact that the weapon we are comparing to polearms never existed.Ok, first of all, the shaolin monks train with a chain-weapon that is almost practically the spike chain, except....it isnt spiked.Exactly my point. It's not the spiked chain of RPGs. So we're discussing the qualities of a fictional weapon.why is it fictional, because it has spikes on it?
Theoretically, if the monks wanted to couldnt they put a few spikes on it?I think that would cause the weapon to snag and get caught, on things or opponents flesh, and I doubt the spikes would really "add" to the versatility or usefulness of what they use the chain for.
Would the weapon be better if it were just "chain"?
polearms wernt really used to trip like they are in this game either.
polearms wernt really used to trip like they are in this game either.Well since the whole point is what is realistic and what is not is undermined by the fact that the weapon we are comparing to polearms never existed.Ok, first of all, the shaolin monks train with a chain-weapon that is almost practically the spike chain, except....it isnt spiked.Exactly my point. It's not the spiked chain of RPGs. So we're discussing the qualities of a fictional weapon.why is it fictional, because it has spikes on it?
Theoretically, if the monks wanted to couldnt they put a few spikes on it?I think that would cause the weapon to snag and get caught, on things or opponents flesh, and I doubt the spikes would really "add" to the versatility or usefulness of what they use the chain for.
Would the weapon be better if it were just "chain"?
Neither were swords. But they are.
What I find to be the real crime is that you will hold up anctual historical weapon to realistic expectations while a fictional weapon behaves totally how we imagine it to. And when someone presumes to suggest that a feat be created to lessen the disparity between the two people throw up protectionist arguments like realism, or why do we have a spiked chain in the first place just for the sake of status quo.You do realise that most times people offered up an idea to use polearms vs adjacent people it was with afeat? That would make it mechanically equivalent to the spiked chain. The difference being textual flavor, and requirements to the proposed feats (for which there are none for spiked chain).
See what I'm getting at? I'mnot asking for some kind of brand new wizz-bang thing here. Mechanically it is already in the game, just in the form of a totally fictional weapon. One weapon + one feat = 2 squares.
If you struck an opponent in the knee with a polearm you would trip him. He'd probably have a broken/dislocated knee and be crippled IRL, but in this game mystical hit points protect him from that effect. So there ya go.
If you struck an opponent in the knee with a polearm you would trip him. He'd probably have a broken/dislocated knee and be crippled IRL, but in this game mystical hit points protect him from that effect. So there ya go.
Lol
