I know that specific weapons allow reach, like a spear, but what if you use a weapon 1 size category larger? Like a Large Greatsword, that by itself gives considerable reach.
I know that specific weapons allow reach, like a spear, but what if you use a weapon 1 size category larger? Like a Large Greatsword, that by itself gives considerable reach.
No. Think of it this way. An ogre using a large greatsword can attack 5' or 10' away. The same ogre using a large dagger can also attack 5' or 10' away. Heck, if the ogre makes an unarmed strike it can attack 5' or 10' away. The greatsword doesn't increase the ogre's reach. Likewise it wouldn't increase a medium creature's reach as well.
@ BBT
You can wield a large sized Bastard sword in two hands.... assuming you have the EWP for it. (Just to clarify)
Medium PCs cannot wield large sized two handed weapons at all.
There is no way to do it.
Currently. (assuming you do not allow back compatible material)
A medium PC with Strongarm Bracers can wield a large two-handed weapon with no penalty. A powerful build character can also do so.
A medium PC with Strongarm Bracers can wield a large two-handed weapon with no penalty. A powerful build character can also do so.
This item is not in Pathfinder currently.
It doesn't matter if you could wield it or not - reach really has nothing to do with weapon size category. A reach weapon simply doubles the wielders natural reach. Even if you somehow found a way to wield a colossal longspear, you would still only have 10' reach as a medium creature.
A medium PC with Strongarm Bracers can wield a large two-handed weapon with no penalty. A powerful build character can also do so.
Well, Strongarm Bracers aren't from Pathfinder, and Powerful Build is 3rd party. I'm not sure if there has been a rules clarification on this yet, but there is an alternate Tiefling ability from Bastards of Erebus that states "You have over-sized limbs, allowing you to use Large weapons without penalty". I could see it either meaning you simply do not take the -2 penalty for an inappropriately sized weapon (but still can't use a 2h weapon a size category larger), but it's also possible that "without penalty" means with no restrictions or issues, allowing a medium character to wield a large 2h weapon. This interpretation is somewhat supported by the text of the Massive Weapons ability from the Titan Mauler class, which specifically calls out "The attack roll penalty for using weapons too large for her size", as opposed to simply saying "with no penalty", and it also seems somewhat closer to what is intended by having "over-sized limbs". Either way, wielding a large falcata two-handed is pretty scary.
It doesn't matter if you could wield it or not - reach really has nothing to do with weapon size category. A reach weapon simply doubles the wielders natural reach. Even if you somehow found a way to wield a colossal longspear, you would still only have 10' reach as a medium creature.
Well, I believe this interpretation is only one direction anyway. I don't believe if a medium sized humanoid held a longspear sized small in one hand that they would still get the reach benefit. Now if they should or if it would be overpowered (it isn't, due to the -2 penalty) is another issue.
Generally the argument for not being able to go down comes from the following:
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.
... and Powerful Build is 3rd party.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you say "3rd party", but it is in the original OGL material.
Design Manager
|
Well, I believe this interpretation is only one direction anyway. I don't believe if a medium sized humanoid held a longspear sized small in one hand that they would still get the reach benefit.
Why not? A small-sized creature wielding a longspear woud have 10ft reach, why would the weapon suddenly not have reach when wielded by a taller, longer-limbed person?
Why not? A small-sized creature wielding a longspear woud have 10ft reach, why would the weapon suddenly not have reach when wielded by a taller, longer-limbed person?
Well, I believe this interpretation is only one direction anyway. I don't believe if a medium sized humanoid held a longspear sized small in one hand that they would still get the reach benefit.
Good question, sadly I can't really answer it because I agree with you, but that is not the typical argument made by those with more authority on such matters.
I could see saying you only get as much additional reach as it would give the correct sized wielder. So an ogre using a medium sized longspear can attack 15 feet away (additional 5 ft), but not 5' & 10' (ogre's normal reach area) or even 20' away (something they could do with a large sized longspear).
Essentially, if you want your big weapon to grant reach, get bigger!
A potion of Enlarge Person is only 50gp
Or if you get your hands on Monstrous Physique or Giant Form Spells, that'll do it for sure
A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows it's 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 creature 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.
Just because no one had actually quoted the rule here, for simplicity's sake.
I know my commentary is coming late to this post, but it seems to me that the reason a large character can use, say, a large spear in his entire normal reach is because he has long enough limbs to be able to pull it back far enough to be able to strike an adjacent creature with the pointy end.
This same weapon would be esentially be a really thick-hafted lonspear for a medium creature in my opinion, imposing a -2 penalty for inappropriate size, but granting the medium character reach. This doesn't seem broken to me as the medium creature would be able to attack creatures 10 feet away, but would take the -2 size penalty for the weapon & lose the ability to attack adjacent creatures.
Same thing if it were to wield a large bastard sword or great sword (assuming this were possible), or any other already large weapon for that creature. Given the penalties involved, this really doesn't seem overpowered, IMHO.
Thoughts?
This same weapon would be esentially be a really thick-hafted lonspear for a medium creature in my opinion, imposing a -2 penalty for inappropriate size, but granting the medium character reach.
A giant using a spear (not a longspear) can hit any creature within it's natural reach. The spear doesn't allow him to stab anyone that he couldn't already, say, headbutt.
So given that the weapon doesn't increase his reach in any way, why would it increase the reach of a smaller creature?
Well, considering that a medium spear is 5 ft long & a medium longspear is 8 ft long, the sheer doubling of the weapon's size. A large spear ought to be anywhere from 8 to 10 ft long, while a large longspear should be about 12 to 15 ft long.
It seems to me, while it might be a bit unwieldy, an 8 ft large spear could be used similarly to an 8 ft medium longspear.
It just might be less effective for the medium sized character than getting a hold of a medium longspear with an appropriately sized haft to negate the -2 size penalty. Is this an unreasonable argument?
Is this an unreasonable argument?
If a weapon lets a medium creature hit things five feet beyond it's reach, why would it not also do so for a large creature?
Well, if you look at the threads concerning small reach weapons, it should. Many of those threads say that, more as an exploit, a medium character could dual wield two small reach weapons as one handed weapons gaining all the benefits of reach while only suffering the twf and size penalties.
But if we're talking practicality, I would guess the balance of such a weapon would limit it to being used the same as a thinner version of the most similar large weapon, in this case a medium long spear being used as a large spear by a large character, albeight at the standers -2 penalty for an inappropriately sized weapon due to the proportionally more "delicate" haft of the weapon.
Any thoughts? This issue is not actually addressed anywhere that I can find, and I'm really interested in what people might think.
Should a medium character wielding an 8 to 10 ft long large spear be able to wield it as an 8 ft medium long spear with reach, albeit at a -2 penalty for inappropriate sizing?
Is this at least a reasonable application of the mechanics they were emulating when the rules were written, or is it a pointless argument?
This should maybe shift to the house rules forums for balance/advice. I was just curious as to how being taller made you less able to reach someone with the same implement.
In real life, it shouldn't. If you've ever actually sparred with a spike, spear, & long spear, you notice that as the weapon scales up, so does your reach. & even when fighting with a long spear you can still attack people next to you, it's just not quite as effective because you end up using the blunt haft instead of the sharp point & you lose leverage.
But in PF the weapons have to fit into set categories with reach being handled in 5 ft increments and negating attacks against adjacent opponents.
I'd just like to know if people find this to be a reasonable application of those more discrete variables. But I might just attempt posting this in house rules as you suggest, as this apparently lacks enough core material to reference as background.