Contributor
|
Is there any RAW option that allows a character to use a reach weapon to attack enemies in an adjacent square?
I'm working on a concept (not an optimized concept, just an idea) for a character that uses the glaive, due to her worship of Shelyn.
My problem is that the concept does not call for her to be a "reach combattant" who uses the glaive to stab or slash at opponents from ten feet away.
Instead, my vision of the character is that she is using the glaive as more of a "twirling blade of death"...more like the Asian style wherein the glaive is usually about four or five feet long, rather than seven feet long per the core rules description.
My question is whether there is something (feat, trait or special ability?) that would allow her to use the glaive on foes who are closer to her.
I'm thinkingCatch Off-guard might be an option, since she would effectively be improvising a reach weapon as a close-in melee weapon. It is a non-standard, non-RAW use of the feat, but it's the closest way I can think of to "pay" for using the weapon in a way that better fits the character concept.
The alternate option would be to pay for melee weapon proficiency to use a "glaive-like" weapon that is smaller. I'd rather not do that, though, since I don't want to create a "new" weapon. I'd much rather use the materials that currently exist within the rules.
Thanks in advance for any and all help.
The polearm fighter archtype allows you to shorten the grip on a reach polearm, at a -4 penalty (I think the penalty goes down with levels).
Alternatively, you could use a spiked gauntlet against adjacent foes.
|
Contributor
|
The polearm fighter archtype allows you to shorten the grip on a reach polearm, at a -4 penalty (I think the penalty goes down with levels).
Alternatively, you could use a spiked gauntlet against adjacent foes.
Hmm...that's an option I hadn't thought of. I shouldn't have ignored the fighter archetypes. I'll definitely look into those. Thanks!
If you go with Armor Spikes you keep both hands on the polearm. But besides that, I agree that using a reach weapon adjacently would make it count as improvised.
I think the easiest thing to do would be use a halberd stats and envision it as the glaive you desire.
If you want to be able to keep the reach but not use it often, then there was the feat in PHB II called short haft that let you switch a reach weapon to melee or back as a swift action, but I don't think paizo approves of its balance.
|
|
As a GM, I'd probably just allow it. At most, I'd require a feat.
If you've trained to fight one-on-one with a polearm, you've probably learned to use both ends, up close and at distance. I've had very limited training (one afternoon) with them, and an enemy being inside my reach would not be an issue. The fact that I've only had one afternoon of training might, however. ;)
I think the easiest thing to do would be use a halberd stats and envision it as the glaive you desire.
Unless the character is a cleric getting free proficiency in glaive, this would be the easiest method. I really like the Catch Off Guard idea though - sounds like a perfectly appropriate use of the feat as well.
A later Dragon magazine had a whole slew of pole-arm feats, including a short-haft type one. Probably in the #320's - #340's.
If you go with Armor Spikes you keep both hands on the polearm. But besides that, I agree that using a reach weapon adjacently would make it count as improvised.
Like that option as well, but people tend to forget that they are weapons, not just armor accessories.
|
Contributor
|
Thanks for all the feedback. My idea is based on the cleric/inquisitor issue of deity-specific weapon proficiency. The character is a worshiper of Shelyn, which means that I have to go with an actual glaive.
Given the fact that taking 2 levels of fighter with the polearm master archetype only allows you to use the polearm on adjacent foes with a -4 penalty, it seems like taking the Catch Off-guard feat by itself isn't the RAW way to go.
Thematically, I've always allowed players to use slashing and piercing melee weapons as bludgeoning weapons by taking a -4 penalty. For creatures with DR X/bludgeon, it gives everyone an opportunity to use what they have in a nonstandard way. So, for me, using a weapon in a nonstandard way would almost always yield a -4 penalty. I also like the idea of allowing the Catch Off-guard to provide a way to get around those penalties.
I find it interesting that polearm masters have to have this capability spelled out as a class feature that replaces bravery.
If you go with Armor Spikes you keep both hands on the polearm. But besides that, I agree that using a reach weapon adjacently would make it count as improvised.Like that option as well, but people tend to forget that they are weapons, not just armor accessories.
Indeed! They are enchanted separately and in addition to the armor they are attached to. An armor +4 can have spikes +2 attached or whatever is desired/available.
They can also be used as an off-hand attack for someone using a two handed weapon. Some frown upon the power of this, but who can't imagine a halforc first chopping with his Falchion, then bodyslamming with his spikes and finally lunging a bite at the artery of his prey? :-)
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Since polearms are pretty useless up close, I allow them to deal damage as a quarterstaff with no improvised weapon penalty if proficient with the quarterstaff. Can only make one attack with Str modifier added to damage or use it for TWF, normal rules. No weapon enhancements or special abilities are included.
A glaive is essentially just a big axe at the end of a pole. If all you are really after is the aesthetic of the glaive head, you could probably just as easily give the character a nice, big axe, and just sketch a picture of the head of it looking like that of the glaive you want.
Instead, my vision of the character is that she is using the glaive as more of a "twirling blade of death"...more like the Asian style wherein the glaive is usually about four or five feet long, rather than seven feet long per the core rules description.
2 level dip of Monk (if you don´t want to focus on the Inquisitor)? Your WIS should give good synergies for AC and your unarmed strikes would be stronger than armor spikes.
Otherwise in most cases you may just take a 5ft step back and continue with a full attack without further feats.
Honestly,
If it were my game, I'd let you take a feat such as this.
Whirling Polearm : When fighting with a reach weapon, you may instead of using the reach component, treat the weapon as a double weapon. The haft of the weapon does damage as a quarterstaff, while the striking end does damage normally. Two-weapon-fighting penalties apply normally. The haft of the weapon must be enchanted separately from the striking end, as is usual for double weapons.
Done. You get the 'whirling staff' style from Dynasty Warriors, as well as the ability to use it as a reach weapon, just not at the same time.
If you also want to be able to attack every grunt in range (like Guan Yu in mosou mode), you also need whirlwind attack.
Thanks for all the feedback. My idea is based on the cleric/inquisitor issue of deity-specific weapon proficiency. The character is a worshiper of Shelyn, which means that I have to go with an actual glaive.
Given the fact that taking 2 levels of fighter with the polearm master archetype only allows you to use the polearm on adjacent foes with a -4 penalty, it seems like taking the Catch Off-guard feat by itself isn't the RAW way to go.
Thematically, I've always allowed players to use slashing and piercing melee weapons as bludgeoning weapons by taking a -4 penalty. For creatures with DR X/bludgeon, it gives everyone an opportunity to use what they have in a nonstandard way. So, for me, using a weapon in a nonstandard way would almost always yield a -4 penalty. I also like the idea of allowing the Catch Off-guard to provide a way to get around those penalties.
I find it interesting that polearm masters have to have this capability spelled out as a class feature that replaces bravery.
Sounds like your best bet here is just seeing if your DM will give you the go ahead to use a shorter glaive. I would.