Right now I've a bardiche-wielding Paladin. I want to know if there is any wau to threaten adjacent squares. Can it be done?
The closest thing I could find is the Dragoon Fighter class feature. Another option would be getting Improved Unarmed Strike, but unarmed strikes are not that great.
A polearm fighter can also wield a shield and a polearm. So I think he threatens adjacent squares with Shield Bash. I'm not sure, though.
Can anyone think of another way? Preferably one that does not involve multclassing.
The dwarven boulder helmet out of the ARG. Exotic weapon unless you're a dwarf, but you still technically threaten the area around you if you want to keep the wizard casting on the defensive.
Armor Spikes
Does that work? I always thought you could use them to attack, but not to threaten squares.
Another possibility that came to mind was getting an natural weapon. Eldritch Heritage might help there and is pretty awesome for Paladins.
Bite attack from half orc. Razor tusk or toothy.
All things considered, I believe Gignere nailed it. I'll get a Spiked Gauntlet too, just in case. (it's kinda coll too)
Bite attack is a nice idea. But the Paladin is human. (I feel Paladin really need the extra feat and skill points.
Can I add enhancement bonus to Armor Spikes? I believe so, but I'm not sure.
I'd like to make them at least a +1, so they can bypass DR/magic and at least scratch incorporeal creatures.
Take a level or two in monk. Pick an archetype (or several archetypes) that remove those pesky abilities that do not function in armor. Kick the shins of any who dare approach you.
It'll cost you some mobility, but you could consider blade boots, from the Adventurer's Armory.
Weapons. Scroll down to light martial weapons to find the blade boot.
Can't you use catch off guard and be considered using the shaft of the weapon as an improvised weapon. This would let you threaten with an improvised weapon in melee while still attacking with the reach part on your turn. Best of both worlds.
Hmm... This is worth considering. The problem is that Paladins are somewhat feat starved. So I'd probably only get this at 11th level.
I'll stick with Armor Spikes for now (they only cost 50 gp, anyway) and maybe get Catch Off Guard at higher levels.
Thanks for the ideas and advices, guys.
Boring7 is correct. Since you can only change grips on your turn you cannot threaten at distances of 5' and 10' if your weapons are a Spiked Gauntlet and a 10' reach weapon when it is not your turn.
Armor spikes seem to be the best route to allow a polearm user to continue to threaten at 5'.
- Gauss
|
So my inquisitor can only threaten using armor spikes taking the -4 nonproficient penalty to attack with an elbow or shoulder or something because my hands are glued to my glaive? Seems awfully convoluted to me, but oh well...
Along the same lines, could you then use a reach weapon to attack a target at 10ft and the armor spikes to attack an adjacent target, taking penalties for TWF as normal? Also, as part of iterative attacks you could attack reach weapon, gauntlet, reach weapon as part of a full attack, but not hit someone as they run past? I understand the rules are the rules, but it seems pretty nonintuitive, no?
You can either:
A) Use the reach weapon as your primary weapon and the armor spikes as a light offhand weapon (with TWF penalties)
OR
B) Use your reach weapon and armor spikes for normal iterative attacks. Choose how to distribute them. Example: +11/+6/+1 can be +11 Armor Spikes and +6/+1 reach weapon.
Here is the link to the FAQ that covers option B.
- Gauss
Raisse: correct. But you would be unable to threaten with one of them when it is not your turn.
- Gauss
Armor SpikesDoes that work? I always thought you could use them to attack, but not to threaten squares.
Another possibility that came to mind was getting an natural weapon. Eldritch Heritage might help there and is pretty awesome for Paladins.
Yes they are a weapon and are listed as such.
I prefer the Catch Off Guard feat for my polearm swingers. Lets you whack someone with the haft for 1d6. Best part is +1.5 strength.
Doomed Hero: I do not see anything there that would allow a Polearm user to change the weapon to non-reach. If you can point me to something that says that that would be awesome. (It would complete my Pushing Assault build if I can get close and reach!)
- Gauss
Boot blade does not fix everything. It screws your movement. I would much rather be able to move thank you. :)
BTW, nothing says you cannot TWF with spiked armor and a reach weapon.
- Gauss
You use the haft as an improvised weapon. You don't actually need to use the feat to bash someone with the haft. You'd just take a -4 penalty for using an improvised weapon.
Catch Off Guard negates the penalty.
BOOT BLADE, fixes everything. then again spiked armor works just as well, but you can TWF with boot blades and a reach weapon...
You can TWF reach weapons and armor spikes also.
Doomed Hero: Everything I have ever understood about how reach weapons work in 3.5/PF is that you cannot do what you are stating without specific wording to that effect. Like I said, I would love this to be true but I have never heard nor seen this interpretation. I'd love some documentation.
P.S. I realize that yes, it is idiotic that reach weapons cannot strike with the haft. It was a basic tactic for all reach weapons except the longest of them. One more D&D style inconsistency if compared to reality. *shrugs*
- Gauss
Any GM who would tell you that the haft of a reach weapon can't be used as an improvised weapon is a GM who deserves their players walking out of the game in protest of abject stupidity.
Doomed Hero: I am not saying I disagree with you in principle. I am saying the RAW does not support it. PFS is raw, certain non-PFS GMs follow RAW pretty closely.
IF what you say could be done why would they go and make an Archetype who's very first ability is to allow a fighter to do this. The ability also requires an action to change the grip.
Pole Fighting (Ex): At 2nd level, as an immediate action, a polearm master can shorten the grip on his spear or polearm with reach and use it against adjacent targets. This action results in a –4 penalty on attack rolls with that weapon until he spends another immediate action to return to the normal grip. The penalty is reduced by –1 for every four levels beyond 2nd. This ability replaces bravery.
The point is: They would not have written such an ability if anyone at any time can just whack away with the haft of a reach weapon and ignore the reach property.
They might have removed the penalties (faster rather than the slow rate they are currently removing them) and not charged the action to switch to haft.
- Gauss
I thought you only threaten with a weapon. Improvised weapons are typically tools or other objects, not weapons, so do they even threaten at all?
Wait, you're asking if an improvised weapon is a weapon?
You think someone couldn't threaten you with a screwdriver?
You think an Empty Hand monk can't make AoOs with a chair?
Whether or not something counts as a weapon depends, primarily, on how it's used. If you're using a hammer to drive nails, it's a tool. If you're swinging it at someone's head, it's a weapon.
Pole Fighting (Ex): At 2nd level, as an immediate action, a polearm master can shorten the grip on his spear or polearm with reach and use it against adjacent targets. This action results in a –4 penalty on attack rolls with that weapon until he spends another immediate action to return to the normal grip. The penalty is reduced by –1 for every four levels beyond 2nd. This ability replaces bravery.The point is: They would not have written such an ability if anyone at any time can just whack away with the haft of a reach weapon and ignore the reach property.
No, the point is that the Archetype allows you to use the actual WEAPON at -4, as opposed to what DH is suggesting which allows you to use it as an improvised weapon.
The Archetype allows you to do the full damage range etc of the weapon, as opposed to DH Feat which allows you a D6.
MASSIVE difference.
|
Wait, you're asking if an improvised weapon is a weapon?
You think someone couldn't threaten you with a screwdriver?
You think an Empty Hand monk can't make AoOs with a chair?
Whether or not something counts as a weapon depends, primarily, on how it's used. If you're using a hammer to drive nails, it's a tool. If you're swinging it at someone's head, it's a weapon.
If it was a weapon, it would just be a weapon, rather than specifically an improvised weapon.
Personally, I'd allow someone to use the haft as an improvised weapon, although I don't know of anything in the rules that explicitly supports this. I also wouldn't allow you to threaten with it as that removes one of the problems with reach weapons, in that someone can get inside your guard. That's probably in the game for a reason.
Improvised weapons are unwieldy (hence the -4) and can't be brought to bear quickly enough to make an AoO.
Improvised weapons are unwieldy (hence the -4) and can't be brought to bear quickly enough to make an AoO.
Not sure I have seen such a rule anywhere. Obviously the -4 part is undisputed though.
Can't AoO with an unarmed strike (ie a kick lacking IUS) but anything else I believe is fair game.
|
|
Improvised weapons are unwieldy (hence the -4) and can't be brought to bear quickly enough to make an AoO.Not sure I have seen such a rule anywhere. Obviously the -4 part is undisputed though.
I'm not sure whether I've seen it spelled out either way, but I think I agree with Ravingdork that you only threaten when armed with an actual weapon.
For what it's worth JJ thinks allowing haft strikes means that your GM is lenient
Rather than Threatening Adjacent squares, what are some options to avoid the enemy getting within your Threatened Area? Other than kill them first shot...
Rather than Threatening Adjacent squares, what are some options to avoid the enemy getting within your Threatened Area? Other than kill them first shot...
Stand Still can do that. Combat maneuvers too (Trip in particullar).
An improvised melee weapon is still a weapon.
Nowhere does it state an improvised weapon doesn't threaten.
Bouncing it back to James for clarification, as its either yes or no, 'lenient' means its yes - or there'd be rules cited to say otherwise.
Improvised Weapons: Sometimes objects not crafted to be weapons nonetheless see use in combat.
That implies they are not really weapons, but you can still use them in combat. I will admit that there is no verbage specifically saying they don't threaten. FAQ time I guess.
Yeah I put it back to James.
Only UNARMED strikes do not threaten (and even then there are exceptions), an 'improvised weapon' is still a weapon, albeit used as non-proficient.
Be curious to see what James says about it.
I'd love that feat were it not for the size limitation. Giving up damage is not great either, but I could deal with that.
I'm not sure whether I've seen it spelled out either way, but I think I agree with Ravingdork that you only threaten when armed with an actual weapon.For what it's worth JJ thinks allowing haft strikes means that your GM is lenient
New reply in.
