armor spike and glaive = 10 ft reach and threath?

[Ketiara]

So im now using a glaive and pawning everything and its fun! But then a mob gets into an adjacent square and im like, well its no prop, ill just hit it with my armor spike... (im thinking with me using both hands to grip my glaive I use my shoulder/albow/knee whatever...)

then a guy says... hmm then I reckon you have unarmed strike? me: no.
me: what part of my body can I use to use my armor spikes?
him: none! without unarmed combat.... unless you have spiked gauntlets?!
me: whats the diffrence? ... and this is where im being lost...

Ive been led to belive that with a glaive and some spikes(where) I could threath 5ft and 10ft wich would be almoste like a spiked chain without the feat :D
someone needs to explain it to me in a way I can understand it, and use the arguments later on... and yes im not that bright.

please please... what am I missing?

[Deophaun]

What's there to understand? It's clearly and concisely laid out in the SRD:


Armor Spikes

You can have spikes added to your armor, which allow you to deal extra piercing damage (see Table: Weapons) on a successful grapple attack. The spikes count as a martial weapon. If you are not proficient with them, you take a -4 penalty on grapple checks when you try to use them. You can also make a regular melee attack (or off-hand attack) with the spikes, and they count as a light weapon in this case. (You can’t also make an attack with armor spikes if you have already made an attack with another off-hand weapon, and vice versa.)

Point him towards the PHB entry. If he's playing RAW, you're good. If not, well...

[Kazyan]

Armor Spikes do not require an unarmed strike, or whatever they're trying to say. Armor Spikes are a martial weapon that have this quirk where you're not wielding them with your hands. When you carry a glaive and have armor spikes, both of them are available to make your attacks with.

[Amidus Drexel]

Since we're on the topic of armor spikes, can you use the AC bonus from the defending enhancement and then not attack with them in a given round?

[The Glyphstone]

Since we're on the topic of armor spikes, can you use the AC bonus from the defending enhancement and then not attack with them in a given round?

Technically yes, in 3.5, though it is regarded as rather cheesy, and typically only seen in the moderate ends of TO and upwards.

[Ketiara]

Technically yes, in 3.5, though it is regarded as rather cheesy, and typically only seen in the moderate ends of TO and upwards.

well this part he agrees on...

regarding the RAW in the PhB... can you direct me to an exact page? And what when im holding a glaive? and as its a 2hand weap I use two hands to hold it.

[Kazyan]

Since we're on the topic of armor spikes, can you use the AC bonus from the defending enhancement and then not attack with them in a given round?

Reading carefully, Defending only works if it's applied to a sword. It's very much in "ask your DM" territory.

[Ketiara]

Reading carefully, Defending only works if it's applied to a sword. It's very much in "ask your DM" territory.

but this part is good to go... I just need to spend the gold on the enchant... (at lvl 8 im far away from that as its still an expensive armor bonus.)

[Deophaun]

The entry for armor spikes is on page 124 in the PHB.

[Amidus Drexel]

Reading carefully, Defending only works if it's applied to a sword. It's very much in "ask your DM" territory.

That's some odd wording, to be sure.

[ericgrau]

Works fine but only problem is you have to pay double for weapons. What you might one to do on top of this is grab the TWF feat so you can TWF + THF. You can 5 foot step in the middle of a full attack so regardless of where foes are standing you can still use all your attacks 98% of the time. And you threaten all around you and deal nice damage in a grapple. I might even make them two different metal types for DR. It'll be an interesting build to be sure.

Lol if someone tries to be overly literal about defending and tries to use it on weapons you don't attack with you can be overly literal and disallow it on non-swords. But seriously I believe the intent is to allow it for weapons you actually attack with. I wouldn't even suggest that a DM allow two at once but I could understand if someone else would.

[GenghisDon]

I'm doubtful 2W combat is worthwhile to actively seek for the character, but if they already have dex 15+ for some reason, it's not so bad an idea. I'd focus more on the combat reflexes line of feats first, myself. It's a fun fighting style in large part because it can be focused in so many different ways.

[Amidus Drexel]

Lol if someone tries to be overly literal about defending and tries to use it on weapons you don't attack with you can be overly literal and disallow it on non-swords. But seriously I believe the intent is to allow it for weapons you actually attack with. I wouldn't even suggest that a DM allow two at once but I could understand if someone else would.

XD I'll be using it for attacks of opportunity, mostly. I have to have some sort of attack when I'm waiting for my returning throwing axes to get back to me. If it gives me an AC boost, so much the better.

[Deophaun]

But seriously I believe the intent is to allow it for weapons you actually attack with.
I don't see why. If you look at combat expertise, it's clear that WotC knew at the time how to phrase an ability to work the way you describe (you can't use combat expertise if you aren't attacking). Yet they chose a phrasing here that does not tie the ability to the attack. I'm left to conclude they did so deliberately.

I think you'd have a better shot arguing RAI that armor spikes may only be used as a melee weapon while in a grapple. The convention of paragraphs assumes that a paragraph only talks about a single idea, and that paragraph begins by talking about dealing damage in a grapple.

[Mithril Leaf]

Technically yes, in 3.5, though it is regarded as rather cheesy, and typically only seen in the moderate ends of TO and upwards.

I'd argue that using magic weapon on a set of +1 Defending armor spikes is the cheesy bit. So long as you require that the weapon actually possess the bonus you're using, it's 72,000gp for a +5 to your AC. Not bad, but not amazing either.

[ericgrau]

I think you'd have a better shot arguing RAI that armor spikes may only be used as a melee weapon while in a grapple. The convention of paragraphs assumes that a paragraph only talks about a single idea, and that paragraph begins by talking about dealing damage in a grapple.



Spiked Armor
You can outfit your armor with spikes, which can deal damage in a grapple or as a separate attack. See Armor for details.

Looks pretty simply like 2 options. It's also listed under light melee weapons. And the armor rules are even more clear about how they can be used with regular attacks, even going as far as making them usable as an off-hand attack which is never allowed in a grapple.


I don't see why. If you look at combat expertise, it's clear that WotC knew at the time how to phrase an ability to work the way you describe (you can't use combat expertise if you aren't attacking). Yet they chose a phrasing here that does not tie the ability to the attack. I'm left to conclude they did so deliberately.

I'm sure they also know how to word it without "swords". It seems more like an arbitrary variance in wording. It even contains the phrase "before using the weapon" implying that you'll use the weapon that turn. It's more about what actually makes sense than piecing apart the literal meaning of every word to look for loopholes that only a thousand page airtight legal document might cover.

I don't think the intent was to make it strictly better for every high level armored character bar none to use defending armor spikes (and most strictly for defense). Even without GMW the first +1 is 8000 gp which is cheaper than upgrading armor from +4 to +5, or cheaper than upgrading an amulet of natural armor from +2 to +3.

It is possible that sometimes the wording is only an example and there are other options, but here the alternative is silly. And lack of restrictive wording does not imply that the alternative does or doesn't exist; it only means that the wording isn't that specific and doesn't say so you have to figure it out.

[Keld Denar]

The issue with Glaive/Spikes is that Armor Spikes are a light weapon. No PA with them. No 1.5x +Str bonus with them. Base damage is low. So anyone who gets into your dead zone is only afraid of being love tapped.

For the most part, you are best off just taking a 5' step back and giving them the full length of the blade. The times when something like the Spiked Chain pays off over the Glaive/Spikes combo is when you are trying to control foes (like with Standstill) or when you are constantly enlarged (via Enlarge Person or similar magic). Glaives are fun for the most part because of the free attacks you get from AoOs, and because you don't suffer AoOs when you close to melee with something that also has reach, like an Ogre or other large/tall foe.

[nedz]

Defending

A defending weapon allows the wielder to transfer some or all of the sword’s enhancement bonus to his AC as a bonus that stacks with all others. As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon’s enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the effect to AC lasts until his next turn.

Moderate abjuration; CL 8th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, shield or shield of faith; Price +1 bonus.

Thought I would just quote the text from the SRD.
There's no footnote in the Table in the DMG restricting this enhancement in any way - other than being for a melle weapon.

[GenghisDon]

I don't see why. If you look at combat expertise, it's clear that WotC knew at the time how to phrase an ability to work the way you describe (you can't use combat expertise if you aren't attacking). Yet they chose a phrasing here that does not tie the ability to the attack. I'm left to conclude they did so deliberately.

This assumes that there was one writer/editor called WOTC that made the game, instead of a gaggle of people, often channelling ideas 2-3 generations old to boot.

There is a good reason "sword" is mentioned under "defending"; the idea/mechanism comes from earlier game's "sword +4 (or +5), defender", that could spend it's + on offense or defense in combo desired (up to +4 or 5).

The sword is also an obvious choice, it is an excellent weapon for both offense & defense. The same isn't actually true of many other weapon types.

One can demand the defender weapon be used to attack, one can also/alternatively simply demand the weapon be capable of effective defense while attacking with some other weapon. One could easily rule that armor spikes, shield spikes, spiked gauntlets or gauntlets cannot have the defender property. A DM had to either place item X or OK it's creation. DM's need to have the word "NO" in their vocabulary to have long term success, despite what some may say.

BTW, in the real world, armor spikes make armor LESS effective, which is, of course, why they weren't used outside occassional display/entertainment combat. Armor spike users best be happy their DM doesn't apply a -1 penalty to their armor's AC bonus for their troubles.:smalleek:

[Knaight]

The sword is also an obvious choice, it is an excellent weapon for both offense & defense. The same isn't actually true of many other weapon types.

Basically every melee weapon is used for both offense and defense, inasmuch as those are even two separate spheres of combat. The idea of medieval weapons that could only attack is a Renaissance conception, and about as valid as the Renaissance conception of medieval swords as "sharpened clubs". In the case of D&D weapons, there are a few where that conception actually works, largely because these weapons are completely ridiculous (armor spikes as a viable weapon, the gyrspike, the spiked chain as currently portrayed, most of the double weapons). With that said, it is true that most ranged weapons weren't exactly viable for defending one's self in melee - there are a handful of larger javelins and thrown axes that are, but good luck trying that with a sling or a bow.

[GenghisDon]

I didn't say only, & I stand by the implication I made that some weapons are better suited towards offense or defense & that swords are generally good for both. It's a fact. I wasn't thinking of a Renaissance conception either, but rather a Chinese one.

You list some fine bans for defender property there BTW. I tend to ban the goofier weapons outright, but to each their own.

[Knaight]

I didn't say only, & I stand by the implication I made that some weapons are better suited towards offense or defense & that swords are generally good for both. It's a fact. I wasn't thinking of a Renaissance conception either, but rather a Chinese one.

You list some fine bans for defender property there BTW. I tend to ban the goofier weapons outright, but to each their own.

Said Chinese conception refers specifically to the jian, as jianshu is a relatively defensive option. Daoshu also refers to what is notably a sword (among other things), and it is far less defensive than a whole host of other weapons, most notably the spear and staff. Bangshu as practiced with a short staff, which is essentially a club is at least as defensive. Stating that swords are categorically good at both offense and defense based on the Chinese conception doesn't hold up.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

The issue with Glaive/Spikes is that Armor Spikes are a light weapon. No PA with them. No 1.5x +Str bonus with them. Base damage is low. So anyone who gets into your dead zone is only afraid of being love tapped.This.

Furthermore, if you start getting size increases (never a bad idea), you start developing a true dead zone. For example, if you are Large, your Glaive hits at 20', your spikes hit 5' and 10', and you can't hit at 15'.


For the most part, you are best off just taking a 5' step back and giving them the full length of the blade. The times when something like the Spiked Chain pays off over the Glaive/Spikes combo is when you are trying to control foes (like with Standstill) or when you are constantly enlarged (via Enlarge Person or similar magic). Glaives are fun for the most part because of the free attacks you get from AoOs, and because you don't suffer AoOs when you close to melee with something that also has reach, like an Ogre or other large/tall foe.

Spiked Chains are also better for AoO's because it can AoO closer.

[lsfreak]

So im now using a glaive and pawning everything and its fun!

You're selling everything for cash?
/nitpick

[Mithril Leaf]

You're selling everything for cash?
/nitpick


Clearly he's got an enveloping pit, mountain tomb strike and is looting the entire dungeon, walls and all.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Clearly he's got an enveloping pit, mountain tomb strike and is looting the entire dungeon, walls and all.

Hey, considering I've seen dungeons whose walls were made of Adamantine... that can be more lucrative than the treasure the mod designer intended you to collect. Much more.

[Mithril Leaf]

Hey, considering I've seen dungeons whose walls were made of Adamantine... that can be more lucrative than the treasure the mod designer intended you to collect. Much more.

Indeed it can. Why do you think he's having so much fun with it? :smallwink:

[KillianHawkeye]

Furthermore, if you start getting size increases (never a bad idea), you start developing a true dead zone. For example, if you are Large, your Glaive hits at 20', your spikes hit 5' and 10', and you can't hit at 15'.

Incorrect. A glaive wielded by a Large creature threatens at 15' and 20'. These is no ring of safety around the character such as you are describing.

[GenghisDon]

Said Chinese conception refers specifically to the jian, as jianshu is a relatively defensive option. Daoshu also refers to what is notably a sword (among other things), and it is far less defensive than a whole host of other weapons, most notably the spear and staff. Bangshu as practiced with a short staff, which is essentially a club is at least as defensive. Stating that swords are categorically good at both offense and defense based on the Chinese conception doesn't hold up.

{{scrubbed}}
A club is slower/heavier than a short staff. It's not as good defensively.

Staves are generally excellent defense-wise, but much less so offensively, esp vs armored foes.

Spears are pretty good weapons indeed, although they are usually vulnerable to "sunder" type attacks or a mobile opponent getting past the point, whereupon their value pretty much plummets.

What makes a good weapon? Reach, Control, Damage, Ease of Use? One can argue which is more important, or which weapons score well across the board, but let's not & say we did.

[Gwendol]

Note that the spikes are off-hand weapons which means they get half strength bonus, not + STR bonus. Also they take the off-hand penalty to hit. Spiked chain is superior to glaive + armor spikes, even if it's a silly looking weapon.

[GenghisDon]

silly AND it costs a feat

[Gwendol]

Considering you get to apply PA + 1.5 STR bonus to it, while not having to worry about off-hand attacks and possibly TWF rules and penalties I'd say it's a feat worth taking.
If not just stick with the glaive and use spiked gauntlets or something, removing one hand from a 2H weapon is a free action, so unless you have a fear of grapplers there is no need for armor spikes.

[Knaight]

You want to argue over stupidity, fine. A club is slower/heavier than a short staff. It's not as good defensively.

Allow me to clarify - a short staff is, effectively, a type of club. Most well made clubs in many areas were essentially some variety of short staff, particularly in China. There are certainly examples of clubs that don't fit in that category, and most of them aren't as great from a personal defense standpoint (e.g. stone headed clubs), but because the short staff can be counted as a club that essentially widens the set of weapons every bit as "defensive" as a sword.

As for the spear tangent - the "get past the point" argument that always gets trotted out portrays getting past the point as far better than it is. Yes, it puts the spear wielder at a disadvantage. However, they can pull the head back by choking up on the spear, which leaves a whole bunch of room to block with and compensates fairly well for the reduced mobility. It isn't ideal, but it is still very much an effective weapon, and the lunge is even nastier from that range. The utility does not, by any stretch of the imagination, plummet. Now, if you're using a pike of some variety, then yes, choking up isn't going to happen and plummeting is a fair description. Similarly, if you're using a spear in one hand and somehow don't have a rank behind you backing you up and dealing with the person who closed, and somehow don't have somebody behind said closing person worth stabbing at, then plummeting is also a fair description.

Bringing this back to the original description, that indicates that the "defending sword" verbiage is sloppy, which weakens the argument that WotC language is particularly trustworthy for conveying what was actually meant.

[only1doug]

Note that the spikes are off-hand weapons which means they get half strength bonus, not + STR bonus. Also they take the off-hand penalty to hit. Spiked chain is superior to glaive + armor spikes, even if it's a silly looking weapon.

or take the Short Haft feat and hit them at any range with your Glaive.

[Gwendol]

And give up reach until you can expend another swift action? Spending that feat on the spiked chain is still better.

[Keld Denar]

Congrats, you just spent a feat (same as the spiked chain guy), but now you have to spend a swift action to choak up on your pole arm AND you suffer a -2 to hit while doing it.

Sounds like a pretty crappy feat to me.

[Knaight]

Congrats, you just spent a feat (same as the spiked chain guy), but now you have to spend a swift action to choak up on your pole arm AND you suffer a -2 to hit while doing it.

Sounds like a pretty crappy feat to me.

It still compares favorably to armor spikes. If anything, this is a testament to how the spiked chain is an unreasonable weapon, as Short Haft seems fairly reasonable in most respects.

[Keld Denar]

Again, it depends a lot on what you are doing. There is no ubiquitous "best". If you are mostly using a reach weapon because you get a couple free swings per combat and don't spend much time Enlarged, then it is a great combo. No feat spent, no waste. Most of the time, you just take a 5' step back and keep full attacking. If, however, you are trying to control the space around you, especially via feats like Standstill and Imp Trip, you want that spiked chain. Period. Any other option is sub par. If you find yourself pinned against a wall where you can't step back, your best bet is either to swing with your spikes or drop your polearm and draw a greatsword or something.

Short Haft is bad because it is either very subpar to EWP or mostly unneeded and a waste of a feat.

[Deophaun]

I'm sure they also know how to word it without "swords". I made no comment on whether limiting it to swords was RAI, so this statement is a non sequitur.

It seems more like an arbitrary variance in wording. It even contains the phrase "before using the weapon" implying that you'll use the weapon that turn.
It implies no such thing. You simply infer it. If I use the defending property on round 1, I have used it before I make my melee attack, even if I make my first melee attack on round 3.

If, however, I have multiple actions to make at the beginning of my turn, and one of those is an attack, I must use the defending property of the weapon before I make the attack.

You can enter a real chicken or the egg problem if you require an attack on that turn for the defending property to come into play. If I activate my defending weapon at the start of my turn, move through a giant's threatened range so I can the attack him and get tripped, that means I don't get to make the attack, and so couldn't have used the property at the beginning of my turn. That means I should have known my action would have failed before I did it.

I don't think the intent was to make it strictly better for every high level armored character bar none to use defending armor spikes (and most strictly for defense).
Why not? We have multiple people on these boards that will tell you AC is a poor defense at higher levels as monsters outpace conventional armor bonuses.

Even without GMW the first +1 is 8000 gp which is cheaper than upgrading armor from +4 to +5, or cheaper than upgrading an amulet of natural armor from +2 to +3.And throwing on a +1 sacred bonus to armor is even cheaper. Point?

It is possible that sometimes the wording is only an example and there are other options, but here the alternative is silly. And lack of restrictive wording does not imply that the alternative does or doesn't exist; it only means that the wording isn't that specific and doesn't say so you have to figure it out.
The wording also doesn't save I have to be riding a polar bear when using it. So, I must have to ride a polar bear to use it.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Considering you get to apply PA + 1.5 STR bonus to it, while not having to worry about off-hand attacks and possibly TWF rules and penalties I'd say it's a feat worth taking.
If not just stick with the glaive and use spiked gauntlets or something, removing one hand from a 2H weapon is a free action, so unless you have a fear of grapplers there is no need for armor spikes.

Armor spikes are a Light weapon which is not Unarmed. You can't Power Attack with it. You get all the penalties, but none of the bonuses. In other words: the worst of both worlds.

[Gwendol]

Again, it is made clear that sticking with the glaive and carry a back-up weapon for close combat is better than trying to get spiked anything.
And that using the chain is the better choice for those looking to make a lockdown build.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Again, it is made clear that sticking with the glaive and carry a back-up weapon for close combat is better than trying to get spiked anything.
And that using the chain is the better choice for those looking to make a lockdown build.

Can't switch to a backup weapon when it isn't your turn... plus it would mean enchanting up to your usual standard yet another weapon. Expensive.

I'd just say Spiked Chain and be done.

[Keld Denar]

Well, the best option would always be to take a 5' step and attack. There are very few situations where a 5' step isn't possible, such as when you are enlarged or when you are backed up to a wall. Those situations are generally not enough to warrant spending a feat on. For the very few situations where you can't use your polearm, then either use your spikes or switch to a backup weapon. Person_Man advocated enchanting your spikes with Brutal Surge so that you can use your first attack to knock back your foe into normal full attack range.

[nedz]

I prefer Guisarme+Improved Trip myself, but its not for everyone.