Reach Weapons: Glaives, guisarmes, lances, longspears, ranseurs, and whips are reach weapons. A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows its wielder to strike at targets that aren't adjacent to him. 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. A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away.
I always wondered why a character wielding a reach weapon cannot use it to attack adjacent foes (or more preciscely, targets within his "natural reach") - I would imagine that you can use such a weapon against such enemies by simply holding the weapon at a position more toward its damage dealing end or you could knock the weapon's haft cross-wise into the enemies face.
For a houserule I propose the following:
You can switch between using your reach weapon do either attack foes as per the normal reach-weapon rules or to attack foes within your natural reach. This is a move-action.
When attacking foes within natural reach, you treat the reach weapon as an improvised weapon (a character using an improvised weapon in combat is considered to be nonproficient with it and takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls). A hit deals the weapons normal damage, but a critical is changed to 20/x2). You can also not benefit from a weapon's disarm or trip special abilities.
Anything to take into consideration?
|
Reach Weapons: Glaives, guisarmes, lances, longspears, ranseurs, and whips are reach weapons. A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows its wielder to strike at targets that aren't adjacent to him. 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. A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away.I always wondered why a character wielding a reach weapon cannot use it to attack adjacent foes (or more preciscely, targets within his "natural reach") - I would imagine that you can use such a weapon against such enemies by simply holding the weapon at a position more toward its damage dealing end or you could knock the weapon's haft cross-wise into the enemies face.
For a houserule I propose the following:
You can switch between using your reach weapon do either attack foes as per the normal reach-weapon rules or to attack foes within your natural reach. This is a move-action.
When attacking foes within natural reach, you treat the reach weapon as an improvised weapon (a character using an improvised weapon in combat is considered to be nonproficient with it and takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls). A hit deals the weapons normal damage, but a critical is changed to 20/x2). You can also not benefit from a weapon's disarm or trip special abilities.Anything to take into consideration?
Reach weapons are built to deal damage at their maximum reach. A whip deals damage at it's tip (normally a knot or shard of glass or something - and the tip is the last few feet of it, watch a movie with someone getting flogged in it).
For pole arms the increased distance gives them extra force. Holding a pole arm near the tip would not only mess up balance but you couldn't jab as good.
Granted they should deal something (half damage maybe?) but only at their intended range can they act as made.
A long spear would become nothing more then a dagger with a rod off the back which would make holding and jabing difficult (what if a wall or another character is behind you?)
The PHB II (for 3.5) has a feat to cover this. That seems like the best approach to keep them balanced. I could see treating them as improvised weapons if used up close without the feat (so less damage and suffering attack roll penalties).
|
It might be a little silly to keep them only at 10ft. Quite a bit of that comes from massed polearm tactics, it seems.
Since Spiked Chain got the nerf I'd be disinclined to allow them to strike adjacent, but I used to let my pcs strike with one as an improvised club at 5ft. Geuss somebody already said that though.
Not being able to attack adjacent foes (at all) with a reach weapon has always bothered me. Based on some of the suggestions in this thread, here is what I suggest.
--------------------------------------------
Attacking Adjacent Foes with a Reach Weapon
As a standard action, you may attack foes adjacent to you with a reach weapon whose reach would not normally allow you to attack them. Your attack suffers a -4 improvised weapon penalty and the weapon damage is treated as one size less (i.e. a medium weapon would do small weapon damage).
--------------------------------------------
Players who want to master the art of attacking adjacent foes with their reach weapon could then take Catch Off-Guard and Improvised Weapon Mastery feats to negate these penalties. With taking these feats, the only penalty they would suffer is only being able to attack once as a standard action.
I've never really like the mechanics of having to decide where you are holding the reach weapon (hold it close to attack close, or hold it normally to attack at a range). Although my rule limits iterative attacks, I think it simplifies the rules and accounts for more than just hand placment, but also body placement (such as leaning back).
The Dragon Compendium has a feat that allows a reach weapon to be used against adjacent foes with a -2 penalty to the attack roll. A suggestion has been made to require a BAB of +6 before allowing this feat. Also, consider if your PC is wearing armor that provides gauntlets that he is never unarmed and can strike with the gauntlet at adjacent foes.
Just my 2 cp.
EDIT: BTW, the feat is called Short Haft.