Large Creature w/ 15 ft. reach########
########
########
###@@###
###@@###
########
########
########
I'm pretty sure you'd have to trim off three squares from each corner (being 20 ft away). That would reduce it to 48 squares. Please carry on.
[quote=]00####00
0######0
########
###@@###
###@@###
########
0######0
00####00
I'm pretty sure you'd have to trim off three squares from each corner (being 20 ft away). That would reduce it to 48 squares. Please carry on.
Quite possibly, they have a specific exception for creatures with 10 ft. reach (that do not lose the corner square, despite it counting as 15 ft. away if you counted it the same way you do movement) but, at least in the SRD, I couldn't find a specific rule either way for 15 ft. reach. Even if it is trimmed a bit, that's still a whole lot of squares to threaten.
EDIT: Ah Jeez, just stumbled on another tidbit, reach weapons gain 5 ft. of reach every time you increase their size, according to Savage Species. So a Spike chain user hit with enlarge person under 3.5 would have 20 ft. reach, not 15 ft. I guess Savage Species is technically 3.0 though, and were I DMing I'd shut that rule down the instant someone brought it up, so lets just leave it out of the discussion.
Another weapon that allows simultaneous reach and adjcent attacks:
The Duom (a spear with two reversed blades for adjacent attacks)
It showed up in several books including the old Arms and Equipment Guide.
Don't worry. Mr. Buhlman, and/or Mr. Jacobs have already hinted strongly that every weapon they can rewrite that has reach and adjacent attack capability - won't.
What, exactly, that means isn't quite clear, so I think it will be on a case by case basis that each weapon will lose one of those abilities.
I'm pretty sure you'd have to trim off three squares from each corner (being 20 ft away). That would reduce it to 48 squares. Please carry on.Quite possibly, they have a specific exception for creatures with 10 ft. reach (that do not lose the corner square, despite it counting as 15 ft. away if you counted it the same way you do movement) but, at least in the SRD, I couldn't find a specific rule either way for 15 ft. reach. Even if it is trimmed a bit, that's still a whole lot of squares to threaten.
Yeah, I believe the 10ft reach thing is an exception, otherwise people could charge in along a diagonal and never draw an AoO. Larger areas don't have that same problem, so I believe they use the standard distance rules.
EDIT: Ah Jeez, just stumbled on another tidbit, reach weapons gain 5 ft. of reach every time you increase their size, according to Savage Species. So a Spike chain user hit with enlarge person under 3.5 would have 20 ft. reach, not 15 ft. I guess Savage Species is technically 3.0 though, and were I DMing I'd shut that rule down the instant someone brought it up, so lets just leave it out of the discussion.
Yup. I think some of us were a bit confused, I think that is where Stephen Ede's 76 came from. I was just pointing out that 15 ft for a large creature would probably have the area I showed.
Yup. I think some of us were a bit confused, I think that is where Stephen Ede's 76 came from. I was just pointing out that 15 ft for a large creature would probably have the area I showed.
Sounds good to me, my only worry (were I DMing and deciding on a ruling on whether or not to include those corners in the area) would be that much like the loss of the corners on 10 ft. reach, it gives people an advantage based on whether or not they are positioned diagonally.
Approaching a creature with 15 ft. reach diagonally with the corners removed you only have to step through 2 threatened tiles, making it possible to use some of the same tactics against them that you can use against someone with normal 10 ft. reach. For instance, a character with a polearm could step in using a 5 ft. step, make a full attack, and never take an AOO, something that should be impossible against a foe with greater reach.
|
Again it is a move action and falls into move action. there are type type's of actions move and distraction . This one is stated as a move action.
Blame the writers if that is confusing
Edit: just to be clear playing devils advocate here. I know what ya mean but to many people they lump it as a move action as it is very clearly marked as such
So if I have an ability to cast a spell as a move action then I can cast it first, then pull the AOO by that reasoning. Nope, wrong. It is a move action but it is not moving. Moving provokes an AOO or performing a distracting action. A move action does not by definition provoke AOOs, moving does.
Damn, just lost my post I'd spent over 1/2 hour on.
In short, yes enlarge a reach user to large and they have 20' reach.
Debatable on whether or not we should be using that rule from Savage Species, but hey, works in my favor so groovy.
your numbers for the Orc trip were optimistic.
I did goof on two things, I grabbed the wrong touch AC for the Orc by accident. +4 to hit against a touch AC of 10, means 1st level Bob hits on a 6 or better, not a 5 or better, my bad. As for the trip numbers, I calculated the result with Bob winning ties, so I was slightly off. Out of the 400 possible combinations of Bob's d20 roll and the Orc's d20 roll, with the Orc having a +3 to the check, and Bob having a +7, Bob would beat the Orc's total 274 times out of 400, or 66%. To see why, it's easiest just to go through each of the Orc's possible results, and total up how many of Bob's possible rolls would fail the check.
Orc .... Bob
1-4 .... No Chance of failure
5 ...... Fails on a 1
6 ...... Fails on a 1 or 2
7 ...... Fails on a 1, 2 or 3
etc.
So the number of combinations that result in bob failing is going to be 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 ... + 16 (on a natural 20, the orc would have a 23 total, and bob would fail on a 16 or less)
You can just do it all by hand, but there is a shortcut, the Sum of all numbers from 1 to n is equal to (1+N)*(N/2) or in this case, 17*8 or 136. Since there are 400 possible combinations of 2d20, the chance the orc will beat the Trip attempt is 136/400, or 34%.
straight attack had 65% chance of drop Or in single blow (2h Sword, weapon Focus).
Except that a fighter wielding a 2h sword wouldn't get a free AOO on the Orc as it closed to melee, putting him one attack down at the beginning. A better argument might be that a spike chain user would be better off making an attack against the Orc instead of tripping, as it's high Strength makes it a little harder to trip the Orc.
If that's what you're suggesting, I actually agree, but as I've mentioned several times before, that's not the point. Bob can take the one extra feat needed to completely hose smaller opponents, and still come very, very close to dealing the exact same damage against larger opponents that aren't worth tripping. It's a very small trade off for a very, very large gain.
Trip was considerably lower with a 10%+ of Bob getting disarmed, and approx 35% chance of tripping and knocking the Orc out.
It's more like a 42% chance of tripping the Orc, getting a free extra attack against it (when it gets up next turn), and stopping it from attacking this turn (since it can no longer close to melee) vs. a 60% chance of hitting the orc and possibly dropping it, or possibly just wounding it and taking a fairly painful amount of damage (2d4+4 really hurts for a 1st level character). It's not an easy decision, there are pros and cons either way, but again, an Orc is a particularly tough opponent to try this against at 1st level, high str, etc. and someone that takes Improved Trip is still going to have the option of just attacking, they lose almost nothing for a significant benefit in a lot of other fights.
Note that you can use Dex to defend against a trip
You can use Dex to defend against trip builds, yes, but again, in circumstances where tripping isn't ideal, you're still going to be very nearly as good at just attacking.
Your Barbs and Clerics will struggle to find the feats to really use Spiked Chains.
3 Feats? A human will have that by level 3, everyone else by level 6, and 2 of those feats (exotic weapon prof spike chain and combat reflexes) are pretty good on their own, improved trip just really brings out the cheesiness.
I'm been kind and not bringing in 4+ legged creatures, flyers, Sunder builds and spell casters that laugh at trip builds.
Sunder hurts any melee combatant that uses a weapon.
Fliers hurt any melee combatant.Spellcasters screw any close combatant (though they actually screw Spike chain users less, since they can get close and keep the caster from withdrawing.)
And for 4 legged creatures, once again, with emphasis that's great, but since you're only really down one or two feats, you can still just attack them almost as well as a character that didn't grab a spiked chain and improved trip.
If you want the exact caculations say and I'll do them again when I wake up.
No thanks, done already.
I'll warn you now you won't come out ahead. The best you can hope for is a draw, and that involves ignoring all the situations where Trip doesn't work.
Well seeing as, counting back over all the posts, I've already addressed that point ohhhh, six or seven times, and since you haven't answered any of the other points I made (extremely large threatened area, action advantage from forcing opponents to stand vs. your full attacks, etc.) I'm not that worried about "a draw" at this point.
Well seeing as, counting back over all the posts, I've already addressed that point ohhhh, six or seven times, and since you haven't answered any of the other points I made (extremely large threatened area, action advantage from forcing opponents to stand vs. your full attacks, etc.) I'm not that worried about "a draw" at this point.
Ok.. I was a bit of a jerk there, and you have my apologies. In my defense I was provoked! But lets try and keep the nerd-rage between us to a dull simmer. Hopefully the interplay between our opposing views will turn out to be useful to someone, somewhere, and if we start sniping it's just going to fall apart into hyperbole and ad hominem attacks.
|
|
Let's remember that it's:
EWP- spiked chain
Combat Expertise (with the appropriate prereqs)
Improved Trip
Combat reflexes
Weapon finesse
So 5 feats to be able to trip well plus splitting up ability scores to cover the 13 int for Combat Expertise, a great dex to be able to hit with it and do the Combat reflexes thing, and hopefully a couple points in strength for damage. Of course a meleeist needs Con also.....
Now you've invested an awful lot into something too accomplish a certain activity. It isn't the easiest road to follow with a ton of feats necessary and spreading out of precious abilities, a mostly Dex based AC for a meleeist, and not a great constitution which lowers potential Hit points.
If I invest nearly that much of my PC, or my players do, then they deserve a bit of payout.
Let's remember that it's:
EWP- spiked chain
Combat Expertise (with the appropriate prereqs)
Improved Trip
Combat reflexes
Weapon finesseSo 5 feats to be able to trip well plus splitting up ability scores to cover the 13 int for Combat Expertise, a great dex to be able to hit with it and do the Combat reflexes thing, and hopefully a couple points in strength for damage. Of course a meleeist needs Con also.....
Now you've invested an awful lot into something too accomplish a certain activity. It isn't the easiest road to follow with a ton of feats necessary and spreading out of precious abilities, a mostly Dex based AC for a meleeist, and not a great constitution which lowers potential Hit points.
If I invest nearly that much of my PC, or my players do, then they deserve a bit of payout.
I agree, if you invest that much, to quote Micky you should be "Eating Lightning and Crapping Thunder".
If your DEX is significantly higher than your STR, then Weapon Finesse is nowhere near a wasted feat.
Reach + Adjacent is worth the EWP even if you weren't going for the Trip route.
If you have Finesse, then you're likely going to stop at 12 strength - 3 ability points for +1 damage is likely not worth it, and after that it gets even more expensive for even less return.
Your CON doesn't need to be quite as high due to your dex bonus giving you a solid AC, and 13 INT isn't too hard to find the points for unless you're doing a low-fantasy buy.
Let's remember that it's:
EWP- spiked chain
Combat Expertise (with the appropriate prereqs)
Improved Trip
Combat reflexes
Weapon finesse
Quite right on the Combat Expertise, I did forget that one, as for Weapon Finesse though, just because a spike chain is finessable doesn't mean you should, especially if you're building for trip attempts. The extra AOO's from Combat Reflexes and a high dex are nice, but not required, even a moderate dex will give you more than enough once you start adding items to the mix.
So 5 feats to be able to trip well
4 feats, 2 of which are pretty nice and worth taking anyways, and 1 of which (Combat Expertise) can be situationally useful.
plus splitting up ability scores to cover the 13 int for Combat Expertise, a great dex to be able to hit with it and do the Combat reflexes thing, and hopefully a couple points in strength for damage. Of course a meleeist needs Con also
The 13 Int does cost a bit, that's 5 points that could have gone elswhere. On the other hand you're probably going to want a couple skills, so it's not entirely wasted.
Dex 12 or 14 is more than enough, like I said, going the finesse route is sub optimal. If I was really wanting to min-max this I'd stick with 12 dex, put 16 in str, 14 in con, and 13 in int. Taking the 13 int down to 8 would let you bump con up to 16, true, but one extra hitpoint vs. losing 3 skill points per level is not the greatest deal in the world.
Now you've invested an awful lot into something too accomplish a certain activity. It isn't the easiest road to follow with a ton of feats necessary and spreading out of precious abilities, a mostly Dex based AC for a meleeist, and not a great constitution which lowers potential Hit points.
If I invest nearly that much of my PC, or my players do, then they deserve a bit of payout.
Except it's not that much of an investment.
If you're optimizing this, you don't want a ton of Dex, you want a high strength and enough Dex to get by until you can get items/buffs, which is exactly what melee characters want anyways (usually at least). You have to lose a bit of Con or str for int, true, but it's not a gamebreaking amount.Combat Reflexes is good anyways, the player is already getting a benefit out of that. Exotic Weapon Prof Spiked Chain was very good in 3.5, even without tripping. Combat Expertise is so so, but it also opens up some other feats that are decent, and it can be very useful in some circumstances. The only feat you have to take that's really costing you a ton is improved trip, since it's ONLY ever useful for tripping.
So in exchange for losing 2 con and taking a couple feats that only moderately help when you can't trip, you're gaining 3 skill points per level and the option of using a very nasty combat tactic that lets you significantly control a lot of fights. Tripping by itself, not too bad. Spike chain by itself, a little too good compared to other exotics, but acceptable. Put the two together and you start seeing some really huge issues.
|
|
Quite right on the Combat Expertise, I did forget that one, as for Weapon Finesse though, just because a spike chain is finessable doesn't mean you should, especially if you're building for trip attempts. The extra AOO's from Combat Reflexes and a high dex are nice, but not required, even a moderate dex will give you more than enough once you start adding items to the mix.
Fake Healer wrote:
So 5 feats to be able to trip well
4 feats, 2 of which are pretty nice and worth taking anyways, and 1 of which (Combat Expertise) can be situationally useful.
Fake Healer wrote:
plus splitting up ability scores to cover the 13 int for Combat Expertise, a great dex to be able to hit with it and do the Combat reflexes thing, and hopefully a couple points in strength for damage. Of course a meleeist needs Con also
The 13 Int does cost a bit, that's 5 points that could have gone elswhere. On the other hand you're probably going to want a couple skills, so it's not entirely wasted.
Dex 12 or 14 is more than enough, like I said, going the finesse route is sub optimal. If I was really wanting to min-max this I'd stick with 12 dex, put 16 in str, 14 in con, and 13 in int. Taking the 13 int down to 8 would let you bump con up to 16, true, but one extra hitpoint vs. losing 3 skill points per level is not the greatest deal in the world.
Fake Healer wrote:
Now you've invested an awful lot into something too accomplish a certain activity. It isn't the easiest road to follow with a ton of feats necessary and spreading out of precious abilities, a mostly Dex based AC for a meleeist, and not a great constitution which lowers potential Hit points.
If I invest nearly that much of my PC, or my players do, then they deserve a bit of payout.Except it's not that much of an investment.
If you're optimizing this, you don't want a ton of Dex, you want a high strength and enough Dex to get by until you can get items/buffs, which is exactly what melee characters want anyways (usually at least). You have to lose a bit of Con or str for int, true, but it's not a gamebreaking amount.Combat Reflexes is good anyways, the player is already getting a benefit out of that. Exotic Weapon Prof Spiked Chain was very good in 3.5, even without tripping. Combat Expertise is so so, but it also opens up some other feats that are decent, and it can be very useful in some circumstances. The only feat you have to take that's really costing you a ton is improved trip, since it's ONLY ever useful for tripping.
So in exchange for losing 2 con and taking a couple feats that only moderately help when you can't trip, you're gaining 3 skill points per level and the option of using a very nasty combat tactic that lets you significantly control a lot of fights. Tripping by itself, not too bad. Spike chain by itself, a little too good compared to other exotics, but acceptable. Put the two together and you start seeing some really huge issues.
I was addressing all the talk about how the spiked chain is broken. A lot of that talk included how broken weapon finessing a spiked chain and having combat reflexes with high dex was. If you want to trivialize those points that's up to you, but a lot of people were using those as a significant amount of fuel to the flaming of the spiked chain. A 14 dex is the minimum needed to gain any benefit from Combat reflexes with higher scores making the payout higher, especially if you plan to control the battlefield. 14 Dex means other lower stats. A 13 intelligence, which is sometimes a dump for melee-types, means other lower stats. The Chain fighter probably doesn't care much about Charisma, but dumping wisdom is a DM's dream for mind control and stuff so now you have a fighter that needs at least a 14 DEX, 13 INT, not a negative in WIS, STR of some sort, CON in a decent supply since you are primarily a meleeist, and only CHA as a true dump stat.
Sounds like you need to spread around the abilities like a monk, and still invest a bunch of feats into it. Is it strong? Yes. Is an Evoker/Fire mage with Arcane thesis: Fireball or Firebolt, Fiery Spell, Searing Spell and an empowered spellshard strong? Yes. And they both deserve to be if they invest all that into the character. Toss out some dudes with energy resistance or immunity and the mage is reduced in power for that encounter, toss out some 4-legged or huge creatures (there's lots!) and the chain-tripper is reduced in power for that encounter.These are conditional players that invest a lot into being great for a good amount of the time, which makes them focused. Sometimes those tactics don't work and that is some of the risk. At higher levels the tripper can trip more but he runs up against more untrippable stuff.
I was addressing all the talk about how the spiked chain is broken. A lot of that talk included how broken weapon finessing a spiked chain and having combat reflexes with high dex was. If you want to trivialize those points that's up to you, but a lot of people were using those as a significant amount of fuel to the flaming of the spiked chain.
Fair enough, and I'll actually go with you on this, in the hands of someone that focuses on dexterity instead of strength, a spike chain isn't going to be game breakingly awesome. But that doesn't mean it was balanced either, that just means dex based chain fighters were less than optimal. The onus is on you to prove that it was balanced, not that a particular argument for why it was broken was wrong.
A 14 dex is the minimum needed to gain any benefit from Combat reflexes with higher scores making the payout higher, especially if you plan to control the battlefield.
12 Dex, Combat Reflexes allows you to "make a number of additional attacks of opportunity equal to your Dexterity bonus."
Admittedly, at 12 Dex it's not a huge payout, until you start getting magic items added to the mix, and suddenly that 12 dex is a 16 or an 18 instead. Higher Dex is better of course, but for most battles, 2 to 4 AOO's per round (Dex 12 to Dex 16) is going to be enough to handle 2-3 opponents, and if you're in a fight where each party member needs to handle more than 2 or 3 opponents, they're probably so individually weak it's not worth tripping them anyways.
14 Dex means other lower stats.
Except you don't need high Dex, which was my point. It makes a good straw man, that some other people unfortunately set up by arguing for finesse as the broken point of spike chain, but it's not the finesse part of things that really makes spike chain go off the rails, that's just a nice perk.
A 13 intelligence, which is sometimes a dump for melee-types, means other lower stats.
True, and in a point buy build, that's going to lower one of your physical stats by 1-2 points, which I accounted for in my example.
The Chain fighter probably doesn't care much about Charisma, but dumping wisdom is a DM's dream for mind control and stuff so now you have a fighter that needs at least a 14 DEX, 13 INT, not a negative in WIS, STR of some sort, CON in a decent supply since you are primarily a meleeist, and only CHA as a true dump stat. Sounds like you need to spread around the abilities like a monk, and still invest a bunch of feats into it. Is it strong? Yes. Is an Evoker/Fire mage with Arcane thesis: Fireball or Firebolt, Fiery Spell, Searing Spell and an empowered spellshard strong? Yes. And they both deserve to be if they invest all that into the character. Toss out some dudes with energy resistance or immunity and the mage is reduced in power for that encounter, toss out some 4-legged or huge creatures (there's lots!) and the chain-tripper is reduced in power for that encounter.
These are conditional players that invest a lot into being great for a good amount of the time, which makes them focused. Sometimes those tactics don't work and that is some of the risk. At higher levels the tripper can trip more but he runs up against more untrippable stuff.
And this is one of the main problems with the arguments people are making for why spike chain was balanced, they're listing a lot things (like upping wisdom to keep charm spells from tooling a fighter) that are common costs whether or not you use a spike chain then arguing that those costs are so high that spike chain deserves to be overly awesome.
Using "some people are immune/resistant to trips" as a balancing point isn't a great argument either, unlike a fire mage, a chain tripper that is properly built is still going to be very, very good at just dealing straight damage. A specialist fire mage facing a fire immune creature has a drastic drop in power in comparison to other non-fire mages, a cost for their power gain in other battles, a chain tripper facing a creature that's hard to trip is still 95% as effective as a non-chain tripping melee character. That's the problem, it's not conditional, it's just all cake on top of already being a great melee damage dealer, for the fairly low cost of a few sub-par feats.
|
|
How is a chain fighter doing their damage even close to the greatsword barbarian doing 2-3 times that damage all the time? I disagree totally with the "still 95% effective" part mostly. I've seen some good control from the chain guys I've seen/played but they don't even come close to the damage of a Barb with a 2-handed weapon unless they ignore a lot of the optimization options for the chain, which is a sub-optimal choice IMO. Perhaps your idea of optimizing a chain fighter is different from mine but by no means is either the 'One True Way' to optimize a chain fighter. The difference is what you wish to accomplish with your optimization, control or damage. I opt for control with a control weapon, You seem to opt for damage with a better-than-martial reach weapon that cost a feat just to use.
Usually I see a 2-handed barb doing 100 damage while the chain-fighter does 30-40 and trips his foe. The fact is that using feats for the chain tricks takes them away from the damage output tricks and leaves them lagging in the damage output range. Having a trick is the bonus for sacrificing increased damage.
|
How is a chain fighter doing their damage even close to the greatsword barbarian doing 2-3 times that damage all the time? I disagree totally with the "still 95% effective" part mostly. I've seen some good control from the chain guys I've seen/played but they don't even come close to the damage of a Barb with a 2-handed weapon unless they ignore a lot of the optimization options for the chain, which is a sub-optimal choice IMO. Perhaps your idea of optimizing a chain fighter is different from mine but by no means is either the 'One True Way' to optimize a chain fighter. The difference is what you wish to accomplish with your optimization, control or damage. I opt for control with a control weapon, You seem to opt for damage with a better-than-martial reach weapon that cost a feat just to use.
Usually I see a 2-handed barb doing 100 damage while the chain-fighter does 30-40 and trips his foe. The fact is that using feats for the chain tricks takes them away from the damage output tricks and leaves them lagging in the damage output range. Having a trick is the bonus for sacrificing increased damage.
To be 100% fair, you should add the damage that the chain-wielder's allies will deal with their AoO when the prone target stands up, as it is damage they would never have dealt otherwise.
How is a chain fighter doing their damage even close to the greatsword barbarian doing 2-3 times that damage all the time? I disagree totally with the "still 95% effective" part mostly. I've seen some good control from the chain guys I've seen/played but they don't even come close to the damage of a Barb with a 2-handed weapon unless they ignore a lot of the optimization options for the chain, which is a sub-optimal choice IMO.
Now that's just silly, 2-3 times the damage? If the chain fighters you've seen are dealing that little damage they are nowhere near optimized, and 95% as effective isn't an exaggeration, here, I'll do by best to prove it.
All I had to work with was the SRD, but meet Hanz and Franz..
Franz, Barbarian 12, Greatsword
Str:29 (16 Base, +3 from levels, +6 Rage, +4 Belt of Giant Strength)
Dex:14 (12 Base, +2 Gloves of Dexterity)
Con:24 (16 Base, +6 Rage, +2 Amulet of Health)
Int:8
Wis:8
Cha:8
HP: 12d12+84 (168 hp)
AC: 24 (10 + 10 Armor + 2 Dex + 1 Deflection -2 Rage +1 Dodge)
BAB: +12/+7/+2
Saves
Fort +17 (+8 base, +7 Con, +2 Resistance)
Ref +8 (+4 base, +2 Dex, +2 Resistance)
Will +8 (+4 base, -1 Wis, +3 Raging, +2 Resistance)
Skills (48 skill points)
Handle Animal +11, Intimidate +11, Listen +11, Survival +11
Feats (6)
1st.....Weapon Focus (Greatsword)
1st.....Power Attack
3rd.....Improved Initiative
6th.....Combat Reflexes
9th.....Dodge
12th....Mobility
Equipment (65k gold)
Belt of Giant Strength +4 (16k)
Gloves of Dexterity (4k)
Amulet of Health (4k)
+3 Greatsword (18k)
Ring of Protection +1 (2k)
+2 Mithral Full Plate (14.5k)
Cloak of Resistance +2 (4k)
Bag of Holding Type 1 (2.5k)
Combat
+3 Greatsword, +25/+20/+15, 2d6+16 (avg. 23)
w/ power attack for 6, +19/+14/+9, 2d6+28 (avg. 35)
Hanz, Barbarian 12, Spiked Chain
Str:28 (16 Base, +2 from levels, +6 Rage, +4 Belt of Giant Strength)
Dex:14 (12 Base, +2 Gloves of Dexterity)
Con:22 (13 Base, +1 from levels, +6 Rage, +2 Amulet of Health)
Int:14
Wis:8
Cha:8
HP: 12d12+72 (156 hp)
AC: 21 (10 + 10 Armor + 2 Dex + 1 Deflection -2 Rage)
BAB: +12/+7/+2
Saves
Fort +16 (+8 base, +6 Con, +2 Resistance)
Ref +8 (+4 base, +2 Dex, +2 Resistance)
Will +8 (+4 base, -1 Wis, +3 Raging, +2 Resistance)
Skills (84 skill points)
Climb +18, Handle Animal +11, Intimidate +11, Listen +11, Ride +14, Survival +11, Swim +18
Feats (6)
1st.....Exotic Weapon Prof. Spiked Chain
Bonus...Power Attack
3rd.....Weapon Focus (Spiked Chain)
6th.....Combat Expertise
9th.....Improved Trip
12th....Combat Reflexes
Equipment (65k gold)
Belt of Giant Strength +4 (16k)
Gloves of Dexterity (4k)
Amulet of Health (4k)
+3 Spiked Chain (18k)
Ring of Protection +1 (2k)
+2 Mithral Full Plate (14.5k)
Cloak of Resistance +2 (4k)
Bag of Holding Type 1 (2.5k)
Combat
+3 Spike Chain, +25/+20/+15, 2d4+16 (avg. 21)
w/ power attack for 6, +19/+14/+9, 2d4+28 (avg. 33)
Hanz (spike chain) vs. Franz (greatsword)
Hanz has 12 fewer HP from Con (92.9%)
Hanz loses 1 AC from lack of feats (95.5%) On the other hand...
Hanz can use Combat Expertise to up his AC by 4 over Franz when needed (118%)
Hanz takes -1 to his Fort Save from Con (94%)
Hanz has +36 skill points from Int (175%) Of course, Franz and Hanz both can afford the really important core skills, so this isn't that big a deal.
Hanz loses an average of 2 damage from base die type (94.3%)
Now those all vary a bit between 92% and 95% as effective, tack on reach to that and the various bonuses to maneuvers and I'd say you're pretty damn close to 95% as effective at dealing straight damage. Add in the damage party members get to deal against fallen foes as they try and stand and the lowered AC plus tons of flanking opportunities against immobile opponents for rogues, and you're probably dealing more damage than the standard hulk smasher. Oh, and the more bonuses you tack on, Bardic Song, cleric buffs, etc. the more the gap narrows between Hanz and Franz.
Perhaps your idea of optimizing a chain fighter is different from mine but by no means is either the 'One True Way' to optimize a chain fighter.
Fair enough, on the other hand, the point we're all going back and forth on was whether or not Spike Chain was too good. If either of our methods of optimization can produce a game breaking character, then Spike Chain was too good, whether or not the other method succeeds.
The difference is what you wish to accomplish with your optimization, control or damage. I opt for control with a control weapon, You seem to opt for damage with a better-than-martial reach weapon that cost a feat just to use.
Ah, but my point is that you don't have to sacrifice damage to gain excessive amounts of control with a spike chain. At least in 3.5, once you had Power Attack, you had the biggest damage boost you were ever going to see covered and most other feats were minor at best in comparison (which was probably part of why Power Attack was changed.) Sure, you still can sacrifice a ton of damage to go completely over the top with the control, but you don't have to, and there's a fairly wide band where you only have to make a moderate investment to get massive returns in effectiveness that are out of all proportion with what you're putting in.
Ironically, with the change to power attack, and the much, much longer list of feats that can add to a 2h weapons damage, the old spike chain might actually be much more balanced in Pathfinder than it was in 3.5 (at least, if it weren't for the faster feat progression, lunge, armor training, etc.)
I'm wondering why Chelaxians call a spiked chain a "long arm" when it no longer has reach...
I'm wondering why Chelaxians call a spiked chain a "long arm" when it no longer has reach...
Same reason you call a fat guy "slim".