If a monster with reach, say a dragon for example, attempts to disarm my paladin of his greatsword, he would normally provoke. However, because he has reach and I don't, I can't take advantage (he is not, according to the rules, in my threatened area--despite the fact that his bite or claw would most certainly be in my threatened area, but that's a rant for another time).
Now, let's say an anti-paladin attacked me last round with his polearm and at the start of my turn, I am still standing within range of his polearm. Can I make a sunder attempt against his polearm or can I not, because he is out of my reach (even though his polearm isn't necessarily).
Would it make any difference if I prepared an action to sunder his polearm when he attacked, to ensure that it is near enough?
I am both seeking an honest answer to the question, as well as an opportunity to point out possible absurdities in the rules.
Now, let's say an anti-paladin attacked me last round with his polearm and at the start of my turn, I am still standing within range of his polearm. Can I make a sunder attempt against his polearm or can I not, because he is out of my reach (even though his polearm isn't necessarily).Would it make any difference if I prepared an action to sunder his polearm when he attacked, to ensure that it is near enough?
I figure you can't, unless you have the Strike Back feat, since the feat would be useless otherwise.
You can strike at foes that attack you using their superior reach, by targeting their limbs or weapons as they come at you.
Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +11.
Benefit: You can ready an action to make a melee attack against any foe that attacks you in melee, even if the foe is outside of your reach.
Guess it is less absurdity and more a matter of being "training."
I figure you can't, unless you have the Strike Back feat, since the feat would be useless otherwise.
You could still use the feat on creatures with NATURAL reach, such as dragons or hydras.
In any case, what if the anti-paladin's polearm was a mancatcher, and I had been grappled by it? Would you seriously say I was unable to reach it then?
|
Here's the old thread that James commented in, directly in reply to you, Ravingdork.
I STILL think Strike Back is stupid... ask your DM
edit: link
I think this goes back to the question asked of you a few other times in other threads.
Why do you ask questions for answers you already know or have made up your mind on?
If you don't like the answer ask again repeatedly until you get the answer you like. Apparently Customer Service at WotC did have it's place?
Sure it's in a similar vein, but this is a different question entirely.
Before it was about whether or not you could attack a creature's limbs as it attacked you from a reach advantage. It was officially ruled that you could not, unless you had Strike Back and a prepared action (or reach of your own).
I'll quote it for you:
While you can ready an action to attack a foe that attacks you, you still need to have reach to that foe to attack them. You can't prepare an action to strike an attacking creature's limbs because that more or less negates the whole point of a creature having reach in the first place.
This feat lets you do just that, but it has a hefty prerequisite.
He continually refers to the creature specifically, or the creature's limbs.
Therefore, he has not answered this new question:
"Can I sunder a reach weapon without reach advantage? Why or why not?"
Before, rules logic dictated that I could not attack the creature's limbs because they WERE the creature, and the rules assume that the creature is only ever in his square. Therefore, if you cannot reach his space, you cannot attack him.
However, reach weapons =/= the creature and provide a threatened area, they do not share the creature's space in the same way that the creature himself does.
I have provided some relatively detailed scenarios above to put it into perspective.
Sure it's in a similar vein, but this is a different question entirely.
Before it was about whether or not you could attack a creature's limbs as it attacked you from a reach advantage. It was officially ruled that you could not, unless you had Strike Back and a prepared action (or reach of your own).
I'll quote it for you:
While you can ready an action to attack a foe that attacks you, you still need to have reach to that foe to attack them. You can't prepare an action to strike an attacking creature's limbs because that more or less negates the whole point of a creature having reach in the first place.
This feat lets you do just that, but it has a hefty prerequisite.
He continually refers to the creature specifically, or the creature's limbs.
Therefore, he has not answered this new question:
"Can I sunder a reach weapon without reach advantage? Why or why not?"
Before, rules logic dictated that I could not attack the creature's limbs because they WERE the creature, and the rules assume that the creature is only ever in his square. Therefore, if you cannot reach his space, you cannot attack him.
However, reach weapons =/= the creature and provide a threatened area, they do not share the creature's space in the same way that the creature himself does.
I have provided some relatively detailed scenarios above to put it into perspective.
The scenarios don't mean anything really, an item on a creature is considered to be part of the creature in just about every instance. The same reason the items don't take damage from AoE's unless a 1 is rolled or that the item uses the creatures Saving throws instead of the item's low saves, are the same reasons why you wouldn't be able to consider the weapon as "not part of the creature" to try and sunder it. A reach weapon is still "part" of the creature who is attacking with it as it is his/her possession.
|
|
Sure it's in a similar vein, but this is a different question entirely.
Before it was about whether or not you could attack a creature's limbs as it attacked you from a reach advantage. It was officially ruled that you could not, unless you had Strike Back and a prepared action (or reach of your own).
I'll quote it for you:
While you can ready an action to attack a foe that attacks you, you still need to have reach to that foe to attack them. You can't prepare an action to strike an attacking creature's limbs because that more or less negates the whole point of a creature having reach in the first place.
This feat lets you do just that, but it has a hefty prerequisite.
He continually refers to the creature specifically, or the creature's limbs.
Therefore, he has not answered this new question:
"Can I sunder a reach weapon without reach advantage? Why or why not?"
Before, rules logic dictated that I could not attack the creature's limbs because they WERE the creature, and the rules assume that the creature is only ever in his square. Therefore, if you cannot reach his space, you cannot attack him.
However, reach weapons =/= the creature and provide a threatened area, they do not share the creature's space in the same way that the creature himself does.
I have provided some relatively detailed scenarios above to put it into perspective.
No. They do share the space. My character with a poleaxe isn't sitting there twirling it around like a jack ass. He is going to strike and then withdraw. You don't hold a reach weapon out at max range while you are just standing there.
In any case, what if the anti-paladin's polearm was a mancatcher, and I had been grappled by it? Would you seriously say I was unable to reach it then?
Sure you can, since you get moved to an adjacent square.
Grapple: If you successfully grapple a creature that is not adjacent to you, move that creature to an adjacent open space
Mancatcher: success means you and the target are grappled, but you do not move into the same space
However, if the Mancatcher was updated to say (as they probably intended) that you do not move into the adjacent space, then it would be out of reach. Go for the strength check or get a buddy to break it.
Want some fluff? You've got huge metal bands wrapped around you, pinning your arms, and you're being jerked around on the end of a pole. Your feeble light weapon can't effectively hit the bands very well, though you could still stab a guy who is standing next to you.
Want some fluff? You've got huge metal bands wrapped around you, pinning your arms, and you're being jerked around on the end of a pole. Your feeble light weapon can't effectively hit the bands very well, though you could still stab a guy who is standing next to you.
There is nothing in the rules that says the mancatcher pins your arms. If anything, the mancatcher is far more likely to get around someone's lower torso, or neck.
The mancatcher says nothing at all about moving or not moving the target (at least, not anymore). The whole point of the mancatcher is to be able to capture someone from a distance and hold him while keeping a safe distance yourself.
The mancatcher works differently then a standard grapple. If we simply defaulted to the normal grapple rules, then there would be no reason for them to clarify that we can perform a move or damage grappled action against the target--since we could already do that. That means that we can't take other things, such as moving the target adjacent or taking other grapple actions not explicitly mentioned, for granted either.
No. They do share the space. My character with a poleaxe isn't sitting there twirling it around like a jack ass. He is going to strike and then withdraw. You don't hold a reach weapon out at max range while you are just standing there.
But surely while you are striking me your weapon is within my threatened space and can thus potentially be subject to a sunder attempt. Even if you disagree, it makes no sense to apply this logic to a mancatcher which is WRAPPED AROUND THE SUNDERER.
Do you (or your GM if you aren't) never just make judgement calls for yourself and leave it at that, like a GM should be when RAW is murky like this? You can't expect every single unlikely scenario to be covered...
The problem is, the answer has been provided and they don't like the answer. Go up and read the link provided by one of the other posters where James Jacob said "No." It isn't that RAW is murky, they just want to ignore the answer and are trying to find justification to do so.
|
|
Want some fluff? You've got huge metal bands wrapped around you, pinning your arms, and you're being jerked around on the end of a pole. Your feeble light weapon can't effectively hit the bands very well, though you could still stab a guy who is standing next to you.There is nothing in the rules that says the mancatcher pins your arms. If anything, the mancatcher is far more likely to get around someone's lower torso, or neck.
** spoiler omitted **
The mancatcher says nothing at all about moving or not moving the target (at least, not anymore). The whole point of the mancatcher is to be able to capture someone from a distance and hold him while keeping a safe distance yourself.
The mancatcher works differently then a standard grapple. If we simply defaulted to the normal grapple rules, then there would be no reason for them to clarify that we can perform a move or damage grappled action against the target--since we could already do that. That means that we can't take other things, such as moving the target adjacent or taking other grapple actions not explicitly mentioned, for granted either.
No. They do share the space. My character with a poleaxe isn't sitting there twirling it around like a jack...
See now you are getting to be ridiculous. It went from "a reach weapon" to a very specific reach weapon with hardness and durability IN ITS DESCRIPTION. There is nothing that says you can't "try" and break a Man Catcher, but the rules for grapple status are clearly written in the book.
For someone who loves to argue and make moot points about useless crap you sure know how to read the book when its something you need.
If You Are Grappled: If you are grappled, you can attempt to break the grapple as a standard action by making a combat maneuver check (DC equal to your opponent's CMD; this does not provoke an attack of opportunity) or Escape Artist check (with a DC equal to your opponent's CMD). If you succeed, you break the grapple and can act normally. Alternatively, if you succeed, you can become the grappler, grappling the other creature (meaning that the other creature cannot freely release the grapple without making a combat maneuver check, while you can). Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that requires only one hand to perform, such as cast a spell or make an attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach, including the creature that is grappling you. See the grappled condition for additional details. If you are pinned, your actions are very limited. See the pinned condition in Conditions for additional details.
It says right in there that you have ONE HAND to make an attack with a light or one handed weapon. Seeing as the Man Catcher is what is grappling you then you have every right to make an attack on it.
Is this me saying you can sunder a creature's weapon that attacks you with a polearm? No. No its not. Don't infer that. I still stand by the fact that you can not sunder a reach weapon in the middle of another creature's reach attack.
It says right in there that you have ONE HAND to make an attack with a light or one handed weapon. Seeing as the Man Catcher is what is grappling you then you have every right to make an attack on it.
Is this me saying you can sunder a creature's weapon that attacks you with a polearm? No. No its not. Don't infer that. I still stand by the fact that you can not sunder a reach weapon in the middle of another creature's reach attack.
So you would allow someone to sunder the mancatcher, but you wouldn't allow someone to sunder a polearm. A mancatcher IS a polearm. Do you not see the contradiction in your own words?
|
|
So you would allow someone to sunder the mancatcher, but you wouldn't allow someone to sunder a polearm. A mancatcher IS a polearm. Do you not see the contradiction in your own words?It says right in there that you have ONE HAND to make an attack with a light or one handed weapon. Seeing as the Man Catcher is what is grappling you then you have every right to make an attack on it.
Is this me saying you can sunder a creature's weapon that attacks you with a polearm? No. No its not. Don't infer that. I still stand by the fact that you can not sunder a reach weapon in the middle of another creature's reach attack.
I am not going to dignify your posts with any more.
I bid you a good day, and a happy trolling.
So you would allow someone to sunder the mancatcher, but you wouldn't allow someone to sunder a polearm. A mancatcher IS a polearm. Do you not see the contradiction in your own words?It says right in there that you have ONE HAND to make an attack with a light or one handed weapon. Seeing as the Man Catcher is what is grappling you then you have every right to make an attack on it.
Is this me saying you can sunder a creature's weapon that attacks you with a polearm? No. No its not. Don't infer that. I still stand by the fact that you can not sunder a reach weapon in the middle of another creature's reach attack.
Are you being intentionally ignorant? There is a world of difference between a grapple and attacks from a reach weapon. Not the least of which is the fact that one is wrapped around you constantly. Whether or not it is a pole arm is irrelevant...
Sure there's a world of difference between a grapple and attacks from a reach weapon, so which one is the mancatcher?
It's some weird pseudo combo of the two. All I want to know is (1) how to run it properly and (2) if I can sunder it when somebody uses it on me from 10 feet away (and if not, why?).
|
So you would allow someone to sunder the mancatcher, but you wouldn't allow someone to sunder a polearm. A mancatcher IS a polearm. Do you not see the contradiction in your own words?
In the above scenario, the mancatcher is grappled with your character, not simply making a stabby attack against your character. Since your character and the mancatcher are grappled, you can make an attack against the thing grappling you as per the grapple rules.
In the scenario where your character readies an action to sunder a polearm wielded by a non-adjacent opponent, sunder states that you sunder in place of a melee attack, but makes no mention of whether or not it resolves as a melee attack. So, we have to default to the "Performing A Combat Maneuver" rules that state when performing a combat maneuver, you "...make an attack roll..." However, you can't make a melee attack against an opponent you don't threaten. There are no rules (that I'm aware of) that state that an attended object occupies any square other than the square of its owner.
That's how I see it.
-Skeld
Sure there's a world of difference between a grapple and attacks from a reach weapon, so which one is the mancatcher?
It's some weird pseudo combo of the two. All I want to know is (1) how to run it properly and (2) if I can sunder it when somebody uses it on me from 10 feet away (and if not, why?).
What is the weird pseudo combo? You've already been told the answer is "No, you cannot attack it" when it makes the attack against you, regardless of what it is, as it has reach and you don't.
Once the grapple is in effect:
If You Are Grappled: If you are grappled, you can attempt to break the grapple as a standard action by making a combat maneuver check (DC equal to your opponent’s CMD; this does not provoke an attack of opportunity) or Escape Artist check (with a DC equal to your opponent’s CMD). If you succeed, you break the grapple and can act normally.
So, you can't attack once you are grappled. Assuming you succeed you could break the grapple and step forward to close the distance between you and the person with the mancatcher as you don't have reach.
I don't see the problem nor the confusion. Looks simple and straight forward to me.
|
|
Sure there's a world of difference between a grapple and attacks from a reach weapon, so which one is the mancatcher?
It's some weird pseudo combo of the two. All I want to know is (1) how to run it properly and (2) if I can sunder it when somebody uses it on me from 10 feet away (and if not, why?).
IMHO, when they make their attack roll against your character, you can't make a sunder attempt. However, once they grapple you, it should be fair game.
-Skeld
So it's a gray area then? I really hate those.
However, you can't make a melee attack against an opponent you don't threaten. There are no rules (that I'm aware of) that state that an attended object occupies any square other than the square of its owner.
That's how I see it.
I think you're probably right. I can't find any rules sayiing an object is anywhere but it's owner's square either. I'll probably make a ruling on that basis.
If anyone else wants to contribute their interpretation or some more rules quotes, or even try to get an official answer to the matter, I would be most grateful for it.
Sure there's a world of difference between a grapple and attacks from a reach weapon, so which one is the mancatcher?
It's some weird pseudo combo of the two. All I want to know is (1) how to run it properly and (2) if I can sunder it when somebody uses it on me from 10 feet away (and if not, why?).
IMHO, when they make their attack roll against your character, you can't make a sunder attempt. However, once they grapple you, it should be fair game.
-Skeld
Once you are grappled you cannot attack, you have 2 choices, grapple check to break or escape artist to get away. Technically once you succeed on the grapple you can choose to grapple them, but as they aren't within reach that isn't possible with the mancatcher.
Once you are grappled you cannot attack, you have 2 choices, grapple check to break or escape artist to get away. Technically once you succeed on the grapple you can choose to grapple them, but as they aren't within reach that isn't possible with the mancatcher.
This is how it worked in 3.5 but it has changed substantially in pathfinder. You can do essentially anything you can do with 1 hand , including hitting someone next to you (with a -2 penalty because of your grappled condition) and making full attacks.
Don't grapple the monk.
Don't grapple the alchemist.
If You Are Grappled: If you are grappled, you can attempt to break the grapple as a standard action by making a combat maneuver check (DC equal to your opponent's CMD; this does not provoke an attack of opportunity) or Escape Artist check (with a DC equal to your opponent's CMD). If you succeed, you break the grapple and can act normally. Alternatively, if you succeed, you can become the grappler, grappling the other creature (meaning that the other creature cannot freely release the grapple without making a combat maneuver check, while you can). Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that requires only one hand to perform, such as cast a spell or make an attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach, including the creature that is grappling you. See the grappled condition for additional details. If you are pinned, your actions are very limited. See the pinned condition in Conditions for additional details.
That still has a contradiction with the spellcasting rules copypasted from 3.5
|
|
Once you are grappled you cannot attack...
Ah, but you can attack the grappler, provided you do so with a light or 1-handed weapon. [Edit: In the mancatcher case, you have to be willing to overlook that the rule below says "creature" and assume the intent was to allow you to attack "the thing grappling you."]
If You Are Grappled: If you are grappled, you can attempt to break the grapple as a standard action by making a combat maneuver check (DC equal to your opponent's CMD; this does not provoke an attack of opportunity) or Escape Artist check (with a DC equal to your opponent's CMD). If you succeed, you break the grapple and can act normally. Alternatively, if you succeed, you can become the grappler, grappling the other creature (meaning that the other creature cannot freely release the grapple without making a combat maneuver check, while you can). Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that requires only one hand to perform, such as cast a spell or make an attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach, including the creature that is grappling you. See the grappled condition for additional details. If you are pinned, your actions are very limited. See the pinned condition in Conditions for additional details.
It's pretty much the same in the 3.5 SRD as well.
Attack Your Opponent
You can make an attack with an unarmed strike, natural weapon, or light weapon against another character you are grappling. You take a -4 penalty on such attacks.
-Skeld
|
|
So it's a gray area then?
Although it's not how I would choose to play it (as GM), I can see an argument for allowing a sunder attempt against a polearm.
Provided you have to play loose with the "weapons don't occupy squares" part of my above argument. If you willing to do that, your character could ready an action to sunder a polearm attack. When the attack occurs, you attempt to sunder, which gives the attacker an attack of opportunity (assuming you don't have Improved Sunder). If he hits and deals damage, your sunder attempt takes a penalty equal to the damage dealt. It also requires you give up any iterative attacks you'd normally get if you just 5' stepped up and full-round attacked.
Again, not the way I'd run it, but I can see someone allowing that.
-Skeld
Once you are grappled you cannot attack, you have 2 choices, grapple check to break or escape artist to get away. Technically once you succeed on the grapple you can choose to grapple them, but as they aren't within reach that isn't possible with the mancatcher.
This is how it worked in 3.5 but it has changed substantially in pathfinder. You can do essentially anything you can do with 1 hand , including hitting someone next to you (with a -2 penalty because of your grappled condition) and making full attacks.
Don't grapple the monk.
Don't grapple the alchemist.
If You Are Grappled: If you are grappled, you can attempt to break the grapple as a standard action by making a combat maneuver check (DC equal to your opponent's CMD; this does not provoke an attack of opportunity) or Escape Artist check (with a DC equal to your opponent's CMD). If you succeed, you break the grapple and can act normally. Alternatively, if you succeed, you can become the grappler, grappling the other creature (meaning that the other creature cannot freely release the grapple without making a combat maneuver check, while you can). Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that requires only one hand to perform, such as cast a spell or make an attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach, including the creature that is grappling you. See the grappled condition for additional details. If you are pinned, your actions are very limited. See the pinned condition in Conditions for additional details.
That still has a contradiction with the spellcasting rules copypasted from 3.5
Apparently you missed the point, they don't have a reach weapon and cannot attack the person grappling them. That leaves you two choices, break grapple in the two ways I stated.
It's pretty much the same in the 3.5 SRD as well.
Well there's no -4 penalty, and you can attack anyone: thats very important. If an ogre and his mind controlling master are standing next to me and the ogre grapples me, i can still whackawizard.
There's also no grapple check to pull your own weapon, or a wand or a potion (gaseous form, the new freedom of movement)
Ah, but you can attack the grappler, provided you do so with a light or 1-handed weapon. [Edit: In the mancatcher case, you have to be willing to overlook that the rule below says "creature" and assume the intent was to allow you to attack "the thing grappling you."]-Skeld
If by "overlook" you mean ignore RAW, thanks but no thanks. Whenever I'm on the boards in the RULES SECTION, I don't do that nor do I try to make things up just so they make sense to me. If they want to change it and put it in a FAQ that it is supposed to be possible, RAW works for me until then, it isn't a problem.
If by "overlook" you mean ignore RAW, thanks but no thanks. Whenever I'm on the boards in the RULES SECTION, I don't do that nor do I try to make things up just so they make sense to me. If they want to change it and put it in a FAQ that it is supposed to be possible, RAW works for me until then, it isn't a problem.
So when your monsters are killed, do they fall down?
If by "overlook" you mean ignore RAW, thanks but no thanks. Whenever I'm on the boards in the RULES SECTION, I don't do that nor do I try to make things up just so they make sense to me. If they want to change it and put it in a FAQ that it is supposed to be possible, RAW works for me until then, it isn't a problem.
So when your monsters are killed, do they fall down?
Off topic much? (and fixed your messed up quote)
Off topic much?
The point is that there are a lot of things that the raw doesn't cover because they're obvious: like the fact that dead people fall over and go prone. The rules dont , can't and shouldn't try to cover everything. This gets particularly problematic with interactions between things already in the game and new things being introduced. I don't think the mancatcher was being considered when they made the rules for not being able to attack something with reach unless you had a feat and a readied action.
There is a giant piece of metal wrapped around your torso. It is not quickly being shoved at you and pulled back, its not there for a mere moment.. its there the entire time. The idea that you can't sunder something that is digging into your kidney because its too far away is absurd. Its a new item, it breaks some aspects of previously established rules , its going to come into conflict with others.
(and fixed your messed up quote)
Now you're just getting snippy for its own sake.
|
|
Dear Forum Readers/Posters,
If you will take the time to read ALL of the posts prior to yours then you shall see the answers you are providing have been stated earlier and you are only feeding the troll.
The rules on grappling were already posted with how the Man Catcher works, and a writer has already commented on being able to attack a reach weapon. Regardless of whether it is part of a Dragon or a Ranseur the rule is still the same.
Weapons are extensions of the user and therefore you do not threaten that character's extensions.
Due to the fact that everyone isn't reading everything thoroughly the thread has gone from one question to being warped to whatever is necessary to propogate further argument.
The rules on grappling were already posted with how the Man Catcher works...
Oh really?
If the mancatcher is so clear and easy to understand, and there is no room for misunderstanding whatsoever, perhaps you wouldn't mind answering a few questions about it:
1) When does the damage take place? After you make the touch attack? Only when you successfully take the damage grapple action? Or must you make a normal attack and not a grapple attack to deal the damage (effectively giving the weapon two types of attack)--and if so, is the damaging attack also a touch attack?
2) Do bonuses from my mancatcher (such as the enhancement bonus from being magic/masterwork, or the bonus from Weapon Focus) apply to grapple checks made with the mancatcher?
3) If I feint successfully before attempting a grapple with the mancatcher, does the target lose their Dexterity modifier against the touch attack? Or both the touch attack AND the grapple check?
4) If someone successfully attacks (and grapples) me from 10 feet away with a mancatcher, can I attempt to sunder the mancatcher even though my opponent is outside my reach?
5) Do I get to add x1.5 my strength modifier to damage for the mancatcher being a two-handed weapon even though it utilizes touch attacks?
6) Can I still use Power Attack with a mancatcher if I choose to forgo the touch attack and make a normal attack roll?
7) Making multiple attacks with a mancatcher means that the attack rolls get progressively lower with multiple attacks. Can a high level fighter really attempt to grapple someone 4 times with this weapon, over double what even a greater grapple fighter can get in one round? If so, do the grapple checks for each progressive attack take the penalties as though they were iterative attacks? CMB checks often face the same penalties as attack rolls after all.
8) A mancatcher cannot be used to capture a creature of the wrong size, but can it be used to damage a creature of the wrong size? If so, is it a touch attack or a normal attack?
9) The mancatcher says "you do not move into the same space," however, it was my understanding that you don't do this in a normal grapple (instead you move your target adjacent to you). Being a reach weapon that was (in the real world) was designed to grapple people while leaving the attacker at a relatively safe distance, does the in-game mancatcher leave the opponent at his original location (10 feet away) or draw him in adjacent to me once I've successfully grappled him?
10) Many people, for lack of better understanding of the mancatcher rules, often default to the normal grapple rules. Are the "move a grapple" and the "damage grapple action" the ONLY actions you can take against your target? Or can you take other kinds of grapple actions against him, such as pin? In otherwords, are the grapple attack forms mentioned in the weapon entry exclusive?
...and a writer has already commented on being able to attack a reach weapon.
I don't know how you can even claim such a thing. The writer in question never even mentioned a reach weapon in his answer (nor was it mentioned in the question he was answering).
I am not a troll, and this is not a problematic thread. If you truly believe it to be otherwise, please report me and/or the thread and leave. You certainly aren't contributing to the discussion by calling me names.