PDA

View Full Version : Armor spikes/spiked gauntlet + reach weapon



jpreem
2010-08-31, 04:51 AM
In this forum i have several times sen a suggestion of using either armor spikes or a spiked gauntlet in conjunction with a reach weapon to close this 5' no-attack gap most reach weapons produce.
Im wondering how is it handled by raw- a spiked gauntlet essentially lets you have an improved unarmed attack, armor spikes allow you to make a regular melee attack or an off-hand attack as you were having a light weapon.
I guess you shouldn't be able to use spiked gauntlet with a a reach weapon like glaive because they are two handed wepons? And a gauntlet strike would be a strike with a free hand? Armor spikes don't need a free hand so they should work.
Improved unarmed strike shoulnd't work for the same reasons as for gauntlet. Except when we are dealing with a monk - ( monks unarmed strikes can be made with different parts of body).

dsmiles
2010-08-31, 04:55 AM
I don't know. I'm not a monk, and my unarmed strikes use different parts of the body. Shouldn't anybody be able to kick their opponent in the junk?

holywhippet
2010-08-31, 05:00 AM
I don't think you can do that. Spiked gauntlets are light weapons which means you can use them with either hand. But reach weapons are all two handed weapons so I don't know if you could wear a spiked gauntlet while wielding one.

hamishspence
2010-08-31, 05:06 AM
One notable one- the Kusuri-gama from DMG. Not just a one-handed reach weapon, but a light one-handed reach weapon.

I think one of the Eberron rulebooks has a one-handed reach weapon.

kaptainkrutch
2010-08-31, 05:09 AM
You could make a half-giant or goliath character for the Powerful Build racial trait. It lets you wield weapons that are one size category larger, so you could main-hand a medium-size glaive and off-hand a large-size spiked gauntlet.

Subotei
2010-08-31, 05:09 AM
Unless you're willing to take a hand off the reach weapon so you can punch freely I'd say personally you cant do it. You wouldn't have the freedom of movement to swing because of the haft of the weapon.

jpreem
2010-08-31, 05:14 AM
Thats what i thought.
But armor spikes should be doable.
To dsmiles - unfortunatly in DD 3.5 you have to be a monk to kick somebody in the junk :smallbiggrin:

Greenish
2010-08-31, 05:57 AM
I think one of the Eberron rulebooks has a one-handed reach weapon.Spinning Sword from Secrets of Sarlona.


To dsmiles - unfortunatly in DD 3.5 you have to be a monk to kick somebody in the junk :smallbiggrin:No, you don't.

Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon...http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#standardActions

Snake-Aes
2010-08-31, 06:25 AM
The rules don't forbid you from making attacks from different weapons on the same array of iteratives. You are perfectly allowed to, for example, wield a sword in each hand and still only do one array of iterative attacks without TWF penalties.
Characters with reach weapons and shields/gloves are also free to threaten with their shields/gloves and can perform attacks/AoOs with it normally.


Example: A lvl 18 fighter with the feat shield&pike style (can attack with piercing reach weapon and retain shield bonus to ac) threatens both his immediate area (shield spike) and the area 10' from him (longspear). He can do 4 attacks at 18,13,8,3 with either his shield or his spear.
Example: A lvl 13 barbarian with the feat quick draw can swing his battleaxe and throw a javelin at someone in range. He can do 3 attacks at 13,8,3 with either his battleaxe or his javelins.

Duke of URL
2010-08-31, 06:25 AM
Unless you're willing to take a hand off the reach weapon so you can punch freely I'd say personally you cant do it. You wouldn't have the freedom of movement to swing because of the haft of the weapon.

You can hold a two-handed weapon in one hand, you just can't attack with it that way. You can remove one hand to provide the somatic component of a spell, or to make an unarmed (armed) strike.

In theory, you can alternate attacks between 1-handed close and 2-handed reach on the same turn, though a reasonable ruling by the DM might be that you can only do one or the other on your turn.

Greenish
2010-08-31, 06:39 AM
Characters with reach weapons and shields/gloves are also free to threaten with their shields/gloves and can perform attacks/AoOs with it normally.I don't think you can claim AoO with spiked gloves if you ended your turn holding a weapon with both hands. Taking one hand off a two-handed weapon is a free action, but you can only do those on your own turn.

You could, conceivably, end your turn holding a reach two-hander in one hand and claim AoO from both 5' and 10', but the ones with reach would have -4 penalty for holding two-hander with just one hand.

IdleMuse
2010-08-31, 07:01 AM
My reading of the rules is that in such a situation, even though you can't make AoOs with spiked armour if you use a two handed weapon, you still threaten that area, which is useful for things like some feats or stances. You'd be perfectly entitled to an AoO, you just can't make one. Sort of similar to if you'd already made one AoO, and didn't have Combat Reflexes.

Greenish
2010-08-31, 07:05 AM
My reading of the rules is that in such a situation, even though you can't make AoOs with spiked armour if you use a two handed weapon, you still threaten that area, which is useful for things like some feats or stances. You'd be perfectly entitled to an AoO, you just can't make one.Well, if the spiked gauntlets do threaten, you could claim the AoO with unarmed strike, though then you'd provoke AoO from the target unless you had IUS (and if you had IUS, the point would be moot since you could threaten with that).

(I assume you mean spiked gauntlets, since I don't see anything stopping one from using spiked armour for the AoO.)

Subotei
2010-08-31, 07:06 AM
You can hold a two-handed weapon in one hand, you just can't attack with it that way. You can remove one hand to provide the somatic component of a spell, or to make an unarmed (armed) strike.

Yes


In theory, you can alternate attacks between 1-handed close and 2-handed reach on the same turn, though a reasonable ruling by the DM might be that you can only do one or the other on your turn.

I would be tempted to rule that as TWF myself, with similar penalties.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-31, 07:13 AM
Yes



I would be tempted to rule that as TWF myself, with similar penalties.

It's not TWF until you claim the second array of iterative attacks.

KillianHawkeye
2010-08-31, 07:15 AM
You could, conceivably, end your turn holding a reach two-hander in one hand and claim AoO from both 5' and 10', but the ones with reach would have -4 penalty for holding two-hander with just one hand.

There is no rule allowing you to wield a two-handed weapon in one hand at a -4 penalty. You can only hold (but not wield) a two-handed weapon in one hand. Taking a hand off your weapon is a free action, but it can only be done on your turn as someone already mentioned.

Jornophelanthas
2010-08-31, 07:25 AM
If you are wearing a spiked gauntlet while using both hands to wield a two-handed reach weapon, you are not wielding the gauntlet at the same time. Conversely, if you are wieldiing a spiked gauntlet in one hand, you may hold a two-handed reach weapon in the other, but you may not wield it with only one hand.

Switching between wielding the reach weapon and wielding is a free action, which can only be done on your turn. I do not believe any rule ever mentioned this being allowed as an immediate action (which can take place outside of your own turn). Therefore, at the end of your turn, you must choose whether you are wielding (and thus threatening with) either the gauntlet or the two-handed reach weapon.

KillianHawkeye already beat me to this.

Amphetryon
2010-08-31, 07:26 AM
I would be tempted to rule that as TWF myself, with similar penalties.
My reading of the general consensus is that, even if you imposed the TWF penalties, the important thing is being able to threaten adjacent squares. Odds of success are a secondary concern to being able to threaten with lethal damage, preventing cocky spellcasters from bamphing inside the doughnut-shaped hole in your attack range in order to hit you with touch spells with impunity and nary a second thought. The Armor Spikes/Spiked Gauntlet force the enemy to think more carefully about tactics and adapt to you, rather than you needing to adapt to them.

Yes, I know Spectral Hand (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/spectralHand.htm) makes a portion of that moot. However, it's not generally available to CoDzillas, not always prepared/learned by those that can, and requires an additional spell expenditure.

panaikhan
2010-08-31, 07:29 AM
I think the -4 has appeared out of the Bastich* Sword description.
Wielded two-handed, it is a martial weapon.
Wielded one-handed, without exotic WP, it is at -4

*desperately trying to stop the forum censoring me...

Snake-Aes
2010-08-31, 07:32 AM
Where does it say free actions can only be performed in your turn? What I see is that you can perform them while performing some other action. This means that while you can't threaten and do AoOs with your spiked gauntlet unless you end your turn declaring you released the gloved hand from the 2hander, a shield can still be used to threaten and AoO out of your turn.

KillianHawkeye
2010-08-31, 07:33 AM
I think the -4 has appeared out of the Bastich* Sword description.
Wielded two-handed, it is a martial weapon.
Wielded one-handed, without exotic WP, it is at -4

That is the standard nonproficiency penalty. The fact that a bastard sword can be wielded in either one hand or two doesn't mean that any two-handed weapon can be wielded in one hand. That is a special rule about bastard swords (and also dwarven war axes). Normally, a two-handed weapon requires two hands to wield. Period.

AslanCross
2010-08-31, 07:37 AM
You could make a half-giant or goliath character for the Powerful Build racial trait. It lets you wield weapons that are one size category larger, so you could main-hand a medium-size glaive and off-hand a large-size spiked gauntlet.

It doesn't work that way---this confusion is a holdover from 3.0, where each weapon had its own size category independent of the wielder's size category. (A medium longsword was medium and a medium greatsword was large, go figure)

In 3.5, a weapon's size is tied to its wielder. Powerful Build or Strongarm Bracers would only allow a character to wield a Large one-handed weapon in one hand--that is to say, a shortspear (a one-handed weapon) in one hand.
While the shortspear deals 1d8 as a large weapon (same as the medium standard spear), it does NOT have the same critical multiplier (x2 as opposed to the standard spear's x3)
The distinction only gets really blurry with regard to the short sword, longsword, and greatsword because they scale damage in a linear fashion. (and perhaps other weapons that use the same damage scale)

The short sword is a light weapon. The Goliath can wield large short swords as light weapons. Large short swords deal 1d8 damage. That does not mean the goliath can offhand Medium longswords (Despite their size, Large short swords deal PIERCING damage, mind you; longswords deal slashing.).

The longsword is a one-handed weapon. The Goliath can wield Large longswords. Large longswords deal 2d6 damage. Conceivably, the line is blurry here---a Large longsword is completely equivalent to a medium Greatsword statwise.

This does not mean that a character with Powerful Build, or a Large character, for that matter, can wield a glaive in one hand. A Small glaive is two-handed. A Medium Glaive is two-handed. A Large Glaive is two-handed. There are no provisions for effectively wielding it one-handed.

As mentioned above, one CAN hold a glaive in one hand and can thus effectively TWF with a spiked gauntlet, albeit suffering from the penalties. It's the same reason why casters wielding two-handed weapons can cast spells without dropping their weapons. Taking one's hand off the weapon is a free action.

FelixG
2010-08-31, 07:53 AM
Where does it say free actions can only be performed in your turn? What I see is that you can perform them while performing some other action. This means that while you can't threaten and do AoOs with your spiked gauntlet unless you end your turn declaring you released the gloved hand from the 2hander, a shield can still be used to threaten and AoO out of your turn.

Im pretty sure you can do a Free action any time. I think people are confusing it with swift/immediate actions.

If one says free actions are not allowed on enemy turns am I suddenly gaged when an enemy starts to move? I cant talk? 0.o

ghost_warlock
2010-08-31, 08:05 AM
Isn't this what spiked gauntlets are intended to be used for? :smallconfused:

Greenish
2010-08-31, 08:11 AM
Where does it say free actions can only be performed in your turn?"Free actions don’t take any time at all, though there may be limits to the number of free actions you can perform in a turn."

Speaking is implied to be an exception by the SRD text, and more clearly pointed out in Rules Compendium table "actions in combat" (RC pg. 9).

What I see is that you can perform them while performing some other action.And where do you see that?


Now, the -4 when using a two-hander with just one hand comes is either the penalty for using improvised weapons or the penalty for using weapons too large for you (since a size larger character could use it in one hand). Take your pick. It's not RAW, but a reasonable interpretation.

[Edit]: Ah yeah, wrong sized weapon is just -2.

Duke of URL
2010-08-31, 08:18 AM
Im pretty sure you can do a Free action any time. I think people are confusing it with swift/immediate actions.

If one says free actions are not allowed on enemy turns am I suddenly gaged when an enemy starts to move? I cant talk? 0.o

Technically, yes. The only actions specifically allowed not on your turn are immediate actions, attacks of opportunity, and readied actions. While it's not completely unreasonable for it to be houseruled that you can take free actions not on your turn, the fact that there specific cases that allow actions to be taken out-of-turn strongly implies that all other actions must be taken on your turn.

As for the immersion factor, turn-based mechanics kind of violate that to start with, so suspend disbelief accordingly and move on.

Greenish
2010-08-31, 08:22 AM
The only actions specifically allowed not on your turn are immediate actions, attacks of opportunity, and readied actions.And talking (SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#freeActions), RC pg. 9). So that would be "technically, no".

Snake-Aes
2010-08-31, 08:27 AM
"Free actions don’t take any time at all, though there may be limits to the number of free actions you can perform in a turn."

Speaking is implied to be an exception by the SRD text, and more clearly pointed out in Rules Compendium table "actions in combat" (RC pg. 9).
And where do you see that?
That is an actual discrepancy between the phb/srd and the rc then.


Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free.

hamishspence
2010-08-31, 08:28 AM
And where do you see that?

Here, it suggests whenever you take another action, you can take free actions:


Free Action
Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free.

EDIT: Swordsage-ed.

Jornophelanthas
2010-08-31, 08:32 AM
This means that while you can't threaten and do AoOs with your spiked gauntlet unless you end your turn declaring you released the gloved hand from the 2hander, a shield can still be used to threaten and AoO out of your turn.

You can threaten and do attacks of opportunity with your spiked gauntlet, as well as your shield, as long as you are not wielding a two-handed weapon at the same time.

At the end of each of your turns, you have to decide that you'll be either wielding a spiked gauntlet or shield to make attacks of opportunity with, or wielding a two-handed (reach) weapon. This decision stands until the start of your next turn.

Of course, you can wield a one-handed weapon along with a shield, a gauntlet or an off-hand weapon. In that case, you can make an attack of opportunity with either hand and only need to decide on that when making the attack of opportunity. (Although as DM I would always assume the main hand is used if the player does not specifically say otherwise. Takebacks not allowed after the die roll.)

Greenish
2010-08-31, 08:34 AM
That is an actual discrepancy between the phb/srd and the rc then.

Here, it suggests whenever you take another action, you can take free actions:Interesting, though I'd love to hear where "here" actually is before I start digging up my PHB.

It also means that Mercurial Strike is a complete waste of paper, too.

hamishspence
2010-08-31, 08:39 AM
That was the SRD on Free Actions- same page as was linked to in the earlier post which mentioned Talking. (It's at the top of the page, under Action Types). What does the PHB say?

KillianHawkeye
2010-08-31, 08:43 AM
Now, the -4 when using a two-hander with just one hand comes is either the penalty for using improvised weapons or the penalty for using weapons too large for you (since a size larger character could use it in one hand). Take your pick. It's not RAW, but a reasonable interpretation.

[Edit]: Ah yeah, wrong sized weapon is just -2.

I don't think the rules for improvised weapons apply to ACTUAL weapons that you simply don't know how to use properly. And while a larger character can use a two-handed weapon in one hand, there is no additional penalty beyond the inappropriate weapon size penalty.

NOTE: The penalty for wielding an inappropriately sized weapon is -2 per size category. So if a halfling tries to use dagger sized for an ogre, not only is he forced to use both hands, but he also takes a -4 penalty for 2 sizes of difference. If the halfling was a Commoner and didn't choose dagger as his one weapon proficiency (for example), he takes an additional -4 penalty.

Jornophelanthas
2010-08-31, 08:43 AM
Responding to two posts that were entered while I was typing out my previous post.


Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free.

This could mean that, yes, you may perform a free action at the time that you receive an attack of opportunity. Still, you can't threaten with both a pole-arm and a spiked gauntlet at once, since you can only wield one at a time.

This means that you have to decide whether you threaten at either 5 ft range, or at 10 ft range (but not at 5 ft range). If you wield the gauntlet and someone would have provoked an attack of opportunity at 10 ft if you had wielded the polearm, they don't provoke an attack of opportunity because you are not threatening with the polearm. If they provoke an attack of opportunity at 5 ft, you may switch to the polearm as a free action, either before or after the attack. (Note, however, that if you switch before the attack, you no longer threaten the enemy, so you can't attack them with the polearm.)

Conversely, if you wield the polearm and someone would have provoked an attack of opportunity at 5 ft (but not at 10 ft) if you had wielded the gauntlet, they don't provoke an attack of opportunity because you are not threatening with the gauntlet. If they provoke an attack of opportunity at 10 ft, you may switch to the gauntlet as a free action, either before or after the attack. (Note, however, that if you switch before the attack, you no longer threaten the enemy, so you can't attack them with the gauntlet.)

Person_Man
2010-08-31, 08:52 AM
The FAQ (for what it's worth) addresses this directly.

Short Version: You can switch between armor spikes, spiked gauntlets, natural weapons, and any weapons you are holding as a free action. You can make attacks (including AoO) with any of them during the same round, within the limits of their respective threatened areas.

Pg 50

Is a character wielding a two-handed reach weapon (such as a longspear) and wearing spiked armor threatening all squares within 10 feet? Assuming he has Combat Reflexes, can he make an attack of opportunity with his longspear and then with his armor spikes in the same round?

A character wearing spiked armor threatens all squares within his normal reach (5 feet away). If he also wields a longspear, he would also threaten all squares 10 feet away. Any time a character wielding more than one weapon is allowed an attack of opportunity, he can use any weapon that threatens the opponent who has provoked the attack. In this case, imagine an enemy who charged the character and then tried to disarm him. The charge attack would provoke an attack of opportunity from the longspear as the enemy moved out of a threatened square (in order to move adjacent to the character and deliver the charge attack). Then, the disarm attempt would
provoke another attack of opportunity (assuming the enemy didn’t have Improved Disarm). This attack of opportunity could be made only with the armor spikes, since the longspear doesn’t threaten an adjacent enemy.

pg 53


Just how and when can you use armor spikes? If you’re using two weapons already, can you use armor spikes to make a second off-hand attack? What if you’re using a weapon and a shield? Can you use the armor spikes for an off-hand attack and still get a shield bonus to Armor Class from the shield? What if you use a two-handed weapon? Can you wield the weapon in two hands and still make an off-hand attack with the spikes? What are your options for using armor spikes in a grapple? Can you use them when
pinned? If you have another light weapon, can you use that and your armor spikes when grappling?

When you fight with more than one weapon, you gain an extra attack. (Improved Two-Weapon Fighting and greater Two-Weapon Fighting give you more attacks with the extra weapon.) Armor spikes are a light weapon that can be used as the extra weapon.

If you attack only with your armor spikes during your turn (or use the armor spikes to make an attack of opportunity), you use them just like a regular weapon. If you use the full attack action, you can use armor spikes as either a primary light weapon or as an off-hand light weapon, even if you’re using a
shield or using a two-handed weapon. In these latter two cases, you’re assumed to be kicking or kneeing your foe with your armor spikes.

Whenever you use armor spikes as an off-hand weapon, you suffer all the penalties for attacking with two weapons (see Table 8–10 in the PH). When using armor spikes along with a two-handed weapon, it is usually best to use the two-handed weapon as your primary attack and the armor spikes as the offhand weapon. You can use the armor spikes as the primary weapon and the two-handed weapon as the off-hand attack, but when you do so, you don’t get the benefit of using a light weapon in your off hand.

You cannot, however, use your armor spikes to make a second off-hand attack when you’re already fighting with two weapons. If you have a weapon in both hands and armor spikes, you can attack with the weapons in your hands (and not with the armor spikes) or with one of the weapons in your hands and the armor spikes (see the description of spiked armor in Chapter 7 of the PH).

When grappling, you can damage your foe with your spikes by making a regular grapple check (opposed by your foe’s check). If you succeed, you deal piercing damage to your foe (see Table 7–5 in the PH) rather than the unarmed strike damage you’d normally deal when damaging your foe with a grapple check. Since you can use armor spikes as a light weapon, you can simply use them to attack your foe. You suffer a –4 penalty on your attack roll when attacking with a light weapon in a grapple (see page 156 in the PH), but if your foe is bigger or stronger than you, this might prove a better
tactic than trying to deal damage through a grapple check because there is no opposed roll to make—you just have to hit your opponent’s Armor Class. You can’t attack with two weapons when grappling, even when one of those weapons is armor spikes (see the section on grappling in Chapter 8 of the
PH).

You can’t attack and damage your foe if he has you pinned. If you break the pin and avoid being pinned again, you can go back to attacking your foe. If your attack bonus is high enough to allow multiple attacks, you might break the pin and then use your remaining attack to damage your foe. To accomplish this, you must first use an attack to break the pin. You can break a pin using the Escape Artist skill, but trying to do so is a standard action for you; once you use the standard action to attempt escape, you can’t make any more attacks during your turn.

Pg 97

Can a creature make a slam or claw attack when both his hands are used for something else, such as holding a two-handed weapon?

As long as the creature can easily let go with one hand, yes. A two-handed weapon requires two hands to wield in combat, but not to hold. A frost giant could choose to make a slam attack instead of a greataxe attack without having to drop the greataxe.

On the other hand, a frost giant carrying a heavy weight in both arms doesn’t have a free hand to use for a slam attack. He’d have to drop the object (a free action) before making a slam attack.

Amphetryon
2010-08-31, 08:57 AM
Is it bad that this discussion is making me want to build an Exotic Weapon Master with a Whip Dagger, Kusari-Gama, and Armor Spikes? :smallamused:

Snake-Aes
2010-08-31, 08:58 AM
That was the SRD on Free Actions- same page as was linked to in the earlier post which mentioned Talking. (It's at the top of the page, under Action Types). What does the PHB say?


Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort, and over the span of the round, their impact is so minor that they are considered free. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, the DM puts reasonable limits on what you can really do for free. For instance, calling out to your friends for help, dropping an object, and ceasing to concentrate on a spell are all free actions
It says the same thing.

KillianHawkeye
2010-08-31, 09:02 AM
Is it bad that this discussion is making me want to build an Exotic Weapon Master with a Whip Dagger, Kusari-Gama, and Armor Spikes? :smallamused:

If you play a creature with 3 or more hands, you can take Multiweapon Fighting instead of Two-Weapon Fighting and attack with all of them in the same turn! (Using TWF, you can only use a single off-hand weapon at a time.)

jpreem
2010-08-31, 09:06 AM
Looks like Person Man has answered my question according to armor spikes.
( And natural attacks)
I guess the spiked gauntlets could be ruled the same as those. ( fire giants slam attack vs. a guy slamming a spiked fist in someones face - why not)
Also thanks to greenish and dsmiles - looks like I was wrong abount unarmed strikes and monks. Probably got the confusion from the flurry of blows description or something.
So Improved unarmed strike could also be an asset for a reach weapon fighter. ( Or anyone who can spare a feat)

Greenish
2010-08-31, 09:18 AM
That was the SRD on Free Actions- same page as was linked to in the earlier post which mentioned Talking. (It's at the top of the page, under Action Types).Ah, there. I was looking on what it actually said in the Free Actions entry, instead of the summary.

I don't think the rules for improvised weapons apply to ACTUAL weapons that you simply don't know how to use properly.What about using weapons you know how to use improperly? :smalltongue:

Keld Denar
2010-08-31, 11:30 AM
So Improved unarmed strike could also be an asset for a reach weapon fighter. ( Or anyone who can spare a feat)

2 things. First, someone mentioned using a medium sized polearm in one hand. This doesn't work. On top of the size penalty issues, if you are using a reach weapon that is SMALLER than what is designed for you, you do not benefit from reach. If a halfling uses a small glaive, he gets reach. If a human uses the same small glaive, he can not benefit from reach. This does not apply if a weapon is larger than you, such as if you are using Strongarm Bracers to wield a large glaive.

Second, if you are gonna drop a feat on Imp Unarmed Strike, you'd be MUCH better served spending a feat on EWP: Spiked Chain or similar. This not only saves you enchanting costs (over using Armor Spikes), it also increases the damage of your adjacent attacks. Whats the point in taking an AoO if you can't apply the PA penalty you took last round, only get half your strength bonus, and don't have all of your shiney weapon enhancements like Wounding or Collision? And thats not even mentioning DR avoiding materials like Adamantine or Cold Iron. I'm talking a difference in damage of 20-30 points of damage difference between the hits with your primary reach weapon and your secondary close combat weapon. This is especially crucial if you are say...a mage slayer and are relying on the damage you do with the AoO to trigger an unmakable Conc check, or you have Standstill and you are trying to keep said mage within your 10' circle of doom. A DC10 Ref save isn't hard to make, but a DC 30-40 Ref save is nearly impossible.

Sure, IUAS is useful if you are disarmed, but really, only at really low levels. If you are disarmed at high levels against a CR appropriate encounter, your UAS damage is only gonna make it mad. You be best off finding an improvised 2hander like a 2x4 or a coat rack or a fire poker or something and sucking up the penalty. At least you can PA with it...

Duke of URL
2010-08-31, 11:34 AM
Is it bad that this discussion is making me want to build an Exotic Weapon Master with a Whip Dagger, Kusari-Gama, and Armor Spikes? :smallamused:

Don't forget a Braid Blade -- even at -4 for non-proficiency. An extra attack is always a good thing, especially if you're relying primarily on bonus damage.

jpreem
2010-08-31, 01:06 PM
to keld kenar
The main point of this thought exercise that im thoroughlly disgusted by having to take the spiked chain every single time if i wanna make a core reach using dude without suffering 5' no-hit area.
(Every time I ask a question in a vein like: "How would you interpret these rules concerning these situations in melee?",somebody will make a post: "Well this is not at all relevant you should just take a spiked chain and power attack to the MAXX)

ericgrau
2010-08-31, 01:20 PM
They are simply melee weapons that don't require a free hand. As for the suggested tactic of combining it with a reach weapon, it doesn't actually work except at low levels. At mid to high levels you can't afford to enchant two weapons without gimping yourself. At higher levels you can devote a minimal budget to your spike gauntlet so you aren't totally screwed, but for anything more than a hit or two you're better off withdrawing.

Keld Denar
2010-08-31, 01:33 PM
My advise is primarily if you are trying to be a controller. Its hard to control when your methods of control are based on damage (Standstill and Mage Slayer) and your damage is crappy.

Now, if you are a primary damage dealer, in general, you can 5' step and continue full attacking. The reach weapon is there to do 2 things. One is to provide you with a situational free swing when someone approaches you, and secondly to defeat large reach of various mid level foes. This is primarily for
classes like Duskblades and non-dip-Barbarians who have no interest in control.

If you don't like the fluff behind a Spiked Chain, refluff it. Call it a polearm with a spiked forgrip that can be used for striking/slashing. Whatever. Just saying, mechanically, EWP: Spiked Chain is a stronger choice for a controller than IUAS, Short Haft, Shorten Grip, or any of the other feats you could spend. Either don't spend the feat (pole arm + armor spikes, don't worry about control), or spend the better feat.

Fax Celestis
2010-08-31, 01:42 PM
I would be tempted to rule that as TWF myself, with similar penalties.

Why? The TWF penalties are taken for receiving extra attacks. You can fight with two weapons without even having the TWF feat as long as you don't exceed your normal number of attacks in a round. Having BAB +20/+15/+10/+5 and wielding a flaming dagger +3 in one hand and a shocking dagger +3 in the other hand means you can go flaming dagger +23/shocking dagger +18/flaming dagger +13/shocking dagger +8 with no issues.


Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.

The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks.

If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.
Note how the full attack action does not even imply that fighting with two weapons requires the Two-Weapon Fighting feat.


Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a -6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a -10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways:

* If your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. (An unarmed strike is always considered light.)
* The Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.
Also note the text in the two-weapon fighting special attack that clearly states you can obtain an extra attack, but you suffer a penalty for fighting in that fashion.

Keld Denar
2010-08-31, 01:57 PM
And thus the whole crux of my arugement why monks can TWF with their UAS. The rules say that monks don't normally have an offhand, just like a fighter with a sword in each hand isn't normally TWFing either, UNLESS in either case, the character claims additional attacks using the TWFing rules. Then the TWFing rules overrule the standard rules for offhands.

But thats a thread from a different day, or for a different day, or for hopefully, no day at all.

Thinker
2010-08-31, 01:57 PM
Why?

Because you are obviously distracted and off balance by merely holding a second weapon. Think about it logically for a minute. If you're holding a big clunky sword in one hand and a slightly less clunky sword in the other, are you going to be as efficient as you might be if you only had the one clunky sword? I don't think so. I would definitely give you the -6 penalty (maybe the -4 if I'm feeling nice) to all of your attacks that round. I could see a case for making a spell that lets you do this though (probably around 3rd level so that power gamers can't just dip wizard to get it).

Snake-Aes
2010-08-31, 02:06 PM
Because you are obviously distracted and off balance by merely holding a second weapon. No, you aren't.
And if you rule as such, characters take TWF penalties for wearing shields. Or using spell component pouches.

Fax Celestis
2010-08-31, 02:07 PM
Because you are obviously distracted and off balance by merely holding a second weapon. Think about it logically for a minute. If you're holding a big clunky sword in one hand and a slightly less clunky sword in the other, are you going to be as efficient as you might be if you only had the one clunky sword? I don't think so.
Are you going to be as efficient with a sickle as you are with a longsword if you've been trained as a knight all the time? The rules are there for system balance, not for thematic purpose, which is why martial weapon proficiency is as broad as it is, and why two-weapon fighting doesn't make physical sense (with or without the feat) but is still possible. Please indicate where in the rules it talks about being thrown off balance by clunky weaponry and weapon efficiency.

Thinker
2010-08-31, 02:13 PM
No, you aren't.
And if you rule as such, characters take TWF penalties for wearing shields. Or using spell component pouches.
That would be a decent house rule for shields. Maybe make a feat to negate this? Fighters get enough feats as it is so having to take an extra one won't hurt them. I don't see a spell component pouch as being a problem.


Are you going to be as efficient with a sickle as you are with a longsword if you've been trained as a knight all the time? The rules are there for system balance, not for thematic purpose, which is why martial weapon proficiency is as broad as it is, and why two-weapon fighting doesn't make physical sense (with or without the feat) but is still possible. Please indicate where in the rules it talks about being thrown off balance by clunky weaponry and weapon efficiency.
I prefer the weapon groups found in Unearthed Arcana to the "vanilla" rules for weapon proficiencies. I also think that characters should only get up to 3 weapon groups for the most martial classes. Knights shouldn't use sickles because that doesn't make a lot of sense. I'd probably give the guy a -2 penalty if he hasn't used a weapon from that group in a few sessions and a larger one if he hasn't used one ever.

The rules don't need to outline balance and form because that's just common sense. Why bother having a DM if we're just going to run it like a computer? It says that the DM should rule 0 things he doesn't like so feel free to penalize them for that.

Keld Denar
2010-08-31, 02:16 PM
That would be a decent house rule for shields. Maybe make a feat to negate this? Fighters get enough feats as it is so having to take an extra one won't hurt them.

Yes...because imposing MORE feat taxes on low tier classes (and the LOWEST archtype of that class) "just because they can afford to pay it" sounds like a GREAT idea to me...:smalleek:

Fax Celestis
2010-08-31, 02:24 PM
The rules don't need to outline balance and form because that's just common sense. Why bother having a DM if we're just going to run it like a computer? It says that the DM should rule 0 things he doesn't like so feel free to penalize them for that.

And Rule 0 is a perfectly valid argument. However, it also makes things impossible to discuss. Using the rules as they are (or even the rules as they make sense, if you demarcate that in your argument) is the only way to have a consistent baseline of conversation.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-31, 02:25 PM
The rules don't need to outline balance and form because that's just common sense. Why bother having a DM if we're just going to run it like a computer? It says that the DM should rule 0 things he doesn't like so feel free to penalize them for that.
Of course the dm should do whatever he wants, but if the dm himself is either inconsistent or using illogic logics, he's just going to lose players.
Also, the rules are a common ground. If you just decide to undo all rules, then you don't have anything useful to say in discussions that are based on the rules.
Your way of thinking does not match the rules and so you change it. Go ahead you have all the rights to do so, but make it clear that it is your exclusive opinion.

Thinker
2010-08-31, 02:33 PM
Wow. Talk about being ganged up on.


And Rule 0 is a perfectly valid argument. However, it also makes things impossible to discuss. Using the rules as they are (or even the rules as they make sense, if you demarcate that in your argument) is the only way to have a consistent baseline of conversation.
Why wouldn't you use rules that make sense? If you do that you don't have to worry about "balance" or anything. Everything just works. I don't feel that anyone should have to tell everyone that they're using Rule 0 because it's already in the rules. If the players complain because they somehow weren't aware you can penalize them (take their stuff, dock levels or XP) or kick them from your group.


Of course the dm should do whatever he wants, but if the dm himself is either inconsistent or using illogic logics, he's just going to lose players.
Also, the rules are a common ground. If you just decide to undo all rules, then you don't have anything useful to say in discussions that are based on the rules.
Your way of thinking does not match the rules and so you change it. Go ahead you have all the rights to do so, but make it clear that it is your exclusive opinion.

Maybe the players who don't want to play what the DM is running shouldn't show up to begin with?
Rule 0 is in the rules. Players should know this. I am discussing the rules, just like everyone else.
I shouldn't have to clarify that I'm using Rule 0. It should be apparent. I'm more shocked that you're not using it.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-31, 02:38 PM
Rule 0 is in the rules. Players should know this. I am discussing the rules, just like everyone else.
I shouldn't have to clarify that I'm using Rule 0. It should be apparent. I'm more shocked that you're not using it.
But when someone comes here and asks about a rule, that someone wants to know about THAT rule, not the generic "dm says all". Rule 0 is specific to the game being played, which is not your game. Thus yes, if you want to come and say you don't use a game's rule, you have to tell us so.

It's not that we don't change the rules in our games. It's not that it's wrong to do so. It's that what you consider to "Make sense" is not what everyone else thinks.

jpreem
2010-08-31, 03:21 PM
Yes...because imposing MORE feat taxes on low tier classes (and the LOWEST archtype of that class) "just because they can afford to pay it" sounds like a GREAT idea to me...:smalleek:

Got to agree with Keld Denar. The idea for giving a penalty to a sword and shield user, made me cry a little bit.
As for my previous comments. I was irked a bit - because well I already know that spiked glove/armor plus reach weapon is woefully inadequate compared to spiked chain. But well it just was not the question I asked - I just asked will a guy be allowed to make attacks in the 5' with such a combo. But well ehh whatever - as we are now discussing sword and board fighters and what not then just let this thread roll wherever it wants especially as I already got my answer from here- ( it should indeed be possible according to the FAQ at least).

hustlertwo
2010-08-31, 03:24 PM
The way it was resolved in the Arena is that spiked gauntlets won't work with a reach weapon (unless it was a lance, and you were mounted and thus able to wield it in one hand), but armor spikes do indeed allow you to threaten adjacent while you have a reach weapon to threaten 10 feet away. Basically makes spiked chains a tad irrelevant.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-31, 03:26 PM
Got to agree with Keld Denar. The idea for giving a penalty to a sword and shield user, made me cry a little bit.
As for my previous comments. I was irked a bit - because well I already know that spiked glove/armor plus reach weapon is woefully inadequate compared to spiked chain. But well it just was not the question I asked - I just asked will a guy be allowed to make attacks in the 5' with such a combo. But well ehh whatever - as we are now discussing sword and board fighters and what not then just let this thread roll wherever it wants especially as I already got my answer from here- ( it should indeed be possible according to the FAQ at least).
The answer is yes :p

jpreem
2010-08-31, 03:30 PM
to hustlertwo
Well as Keld Denar said.
Its easier to magic up one weapon. You can two-handed power attack the chain and the trip bonus and the disarm bonus and the damage dice are all boni on the armor spikes.

( And at the same time it kinda makes me cringe :smallbiggrin:(g*d*amn the forker is even finessable, it's a small wonder that it doesn't do double damage on a charge!))

I just have to get me some armor spikes. Then I must tell my DM that as i use my both hands for glaive I'll have to attack the nearest enemy by pelvic thrust. ( Probably I will at some time use my move actions to take a step to the left and a step to the right)

Ormagoden
2010-08-31, 03:42 PM
The FAQ (for what it's worth) addresses this directly.

Short Version: You can switch between armor spikes, spiked gauntlets, natural weapons, and any weapons you are holding as a free action. You can make attacks (including AoO) with any of them during the same round, within the limits of their respective threatened areas.
<snip>
[/B]

I've always worked it out this way.

Keld Denar
2010-08-31, 04:11 PM
You know, even my spiked chain wielding fighter from Living Greyhawk HAD armor spikes. You never know when you are gonna get grappled or swallowed whole, and you might not have access to the teleportation you need to get out of that predicament. Every character should have armor spikes. Its so cheap and practical and ensures that you are never truely disarmed in combat. This goes doubly true for any Initiator class, since you can initiate strikes just fine with armor spikes, and most of the damage/effect comes from the strike rather than the base weapon.

My point still stands though. If you are focusing on control, you SHOULD get the chain. Its simply the best option because it gives you the most flexability, best damage/dollar economy, and best results period when using damage based control.

I know I'd feel like a tool if my mage slayer badass had a little squishy wizard within the range of my big bad polearm, got to take an AoO against him, and only hit for 12 damage with my spikes, against which the wizard makes the concentration check easily, and he dominates my ass, literally and figuratively. This won't happen with the chain, all other things being equal.

Harris the Ford
2010-09-01, 03:48 PM
What about a spiked sabaton instead og a spiked gauntlet. You can still threaten and do the better unarmed strike without having to take your hands off your shaft polearm. Plus, there are few things more painful than a giant spike-covered steel boot to the groin(given your anatomy of course)

Greenish
2010-09-01, 03:50 PM
What about a spiked sabaton instead of a spiked gauntlet.You can ask your DM, but by the rules Blade Boot is an exotic weapon that also penalizes your move speed when flicked out.

Harris the Ford
2010-09-01, 04:48 PM
You can ask your DM, but by the rules Blade Boot is an exotic weapon that also penalizes your move speed when flicked out.

I guess you could day its just like any other sabaton, just covered in spikes... dont fail a balance check, ever, OR ELSE.

Keld Denar
2010-09-01, 04:51 PM
Mechanically, it would be no different than Armor Spikes, so that should work. Sabatons are, in fact, a part of full plate armor. Who ever said the spikes only exist on the pauldrons, vambraces, and greaves?

Harris the Ford
2010-09-01, 08:30 PM
Mechanically, it would be no different than Armor Spikes, so that should work. Sabatons are, in fact, a part of full plate armor. Who ever said the spikes only exist on the pauldrons, vambraces, and greaves?

yeah I forgot about that.