Why the Love of Reach Weapons?

[VoxRationis]

I've seen a lot of build suggestions on these boards that show that people really like reach weapons. I'm not quite sure why this is. Obviously, there's an advantage to being able to attack first, and reach in real life is a potent advantage, but in a turn-based system with five-foot steps, I see a fight between someone with a glaive and someone with a claymore going like this:

Swordsman closes. Glaive-guy gets an attack.
Sword guy takes a 5-foot step forward and attacks.
Glaive guy steps 5 feet backwards and attacks.
Sword guy takes a 5-foot step forward and attacks.

And so forth. The glaive guy gets the first attack, but after that there's no real advantage to having reach. You have to be able to keep moving backwards indefinitely, or the swordsman pushes you into a wall where you can't use your primary weapon and then stabs you to death. You can switch to an up-close weapon, but that means you have to pay for two weapons instead of one, which gets expensive once you're sticking pluses onto them.
Now, in real-world military formations, the use of reach weapons is favored because advancing into a phalanx with anything but an equally-long weapon is extraordinarily difficult, but most D&D characters don't work in phalanges—they work alone.
Is the love of reach only for weapons that trip? Do people make longspear-wielders? The oft-lauded glaive has no special abilities besides reach.

[Xerlith]

Because you get AoOs on exiting a threatened square. So a standstill build NEEDS this reach to be effective in crowd-control.
And a bonus is the fact you stop them before they can hit you.

ALso, because there are builds that effect specifically the threatened areas and the bigger the area, the more effective you are. Take a look at some standstill and lockdown builds.

[Gildedragon]

Well the benefit of being able to hit them first on their turn is good.
You trip them (and they can't do AoO against the trip attack, because they can't rich) and then they waste a move action to stand up (provoking an attack from you and negating the possibility of a 5' step) or do a v. high tumble check to stand for free.

[Slithery D]

I see a fight between someone with a glaive and someone with a claymore going like this:

Swordsman closes. Glaive-guy gets an attack.
Sword guy takes a 5-foot step forward and attacks.
Glaive guy steps 5 feet backwards and attacks.
Sword guy takes a 5-foot step forward and attacks.

And so forth. The glaive guy gets the first attack, but after that there's no real advantage to having reach.

The glaive guy gets a free attack. He may also get the second (first regular) attack if he wins initiative. That's a lot better than just winning initiative. And if you have combat reflexes and a choke point like a dungeon corridor you can get free attacks on multiple enemies who advance. Or keep them from advancing so your party can shoot spells/arrows with impunity.

Also, you threaten a lot more space, so in a cramped dungeon environment spell casters or range combatants may be more constrained in where they can stand to avoid eating an AoO.

[eggynack]

In the example you gave, our noble reach weapon using protagonist got an extra attack. What did that extra attack cost? Maybe an extra two damage per hit, if you're transferring from guisarme to greatsword, but you're losing trip benefits as well making that shift. The cost of adding some armor spikes is relatively trivial, especially when most damage comes from strength and power attack rather than weapon type. Tripping helps even more, because just look at how that combat would go down if the opponent can't close consistently. More enemies grant yet another advantage, because you can AoO more enemies in a round, and obviously, a size boost pushes everything even further. It's a lot of stuff you're gaining, and very little that you're losing.

[Coidzor]

I've seen a lot of build suggestions on these boards that show that people really like reach weapons. I'm not quite sure why this is. Obviously, there's an advantage to being able to attack first, and reach in real life is a potent advantage, but in a turn-based system with five-foot steps, I see a fight between someone with a glaive and someone with a claymore going like this:

Swordsman closes. Glaive-guy gets an attack.
Sword guy takes a 5-foot step forward and attacks.
Glaive guy steps 5 feet backwards and attacks.
Sword guy takes a 5-foot step forward and attacks.

And so forth. The glaive guy gets the first attack, but after that there's no real advantage to having reach. You have to be able to keep moving backwards indefinitely, or the swordsman pushes you into a wall where you can't use your primary weapon and then stabs you to death. You can switch to an up-close weapon, but that means you have to pay for two weapons instead of one, which gets expensive once you're sticking pluses onto them.
Now, in real-world military formations, the use of reach weapons is favored because advancing into a phalanx with anything but an equally-long weapon is extraordinarily difficult, but most D&D characters don't work in phalanges—they work alone.
Is the love of reach only for weapons that trip? Do people make longspear-wielders? The oft-lauded glaive has no special abilities besides reach.

Ah, but how does Mr. Claymore get within reach without taking an Attack of Opportunity(and giving Mr. Glaive an extra attack on him) or sacrificing the ability to charge and setting himself up for a full-attack or charge from Mr. Glaive? Does Mr. Claymore invest usually limited skill points into Tumble and forgo his ability to charge for his first attack? Does he invest resources into being able to make a Tumbling Charge? Does Mr. Claymore eat the AoO and rely upon his strength or magical flight to keep him from being tripped or luck to avoid being made unable to finish closing with Mr. Glaive?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Spike Chain Guy has Improved Trip, so anyone who tries to get adjacent to him provokes an AoO and gets tripped trying to exit the threatened space at the extent of his reach, so they never make it to that adjacent square. Spike Chain Guy can full attack and then 5-ft. step back, there are now two squares between him and his prone opponent. His opponent can stand up, and try to move in again, but the same thing will happen again.

Glaive Guy has Stand Still (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#standStill) so an opponent who tries to get adjacent to him is stopped in their tracks. He can then full attack and 5-ft. step back, there's now two squares between him and his opponent, same situation but the opponent isn't prone and it has a significantly lower feat investment.

In the above situations, the opponent who doesn't have reach can try moving into his threatened space but leaving a space between them so they don't provoke an AoO, expecting to 5-ft. step adjacent the next round, but he can attack and 5-ft. step back as though he stopped them with Stand Still. Opponents with tumble or any other means of avoiding an AoO could get adjacent, but most opponents have no such capabilities.

Versus opponents with reach, you put yourself on even ground. How fun is it to be a 3rd level character who charges an Ogre, provokes an AoO for 9-23 damage so you can make one attack against it, then get smashed for another 9-23 damage whenever its turn comes? Or maybe you move up to within its threatened space so you don't provoke, it smashes you on its turn and 5-ft. steps back or even moves to a more advantageous position since it's not threatened, and you're in the same situation but haven't even hit it. Using a reach weapon completely avoids all of this, so they're almost necessary against bigger opponents.

A 1st level character makes one attack per round. A 1st level character with Combat Reflexes and a reach weapon may end up making three or four times as many attacks in a given round, and at that level it typically only takes a single hit to kill an opponent. Even if those opponents act first, you end up killing them before they can even hurt anyone!

[Twilightwyrm]

You are forgetting one major element of an adventurer's life: monsters. While many humanoid opponents will only have a 5 foot reach, adventurers are often fighting large or larger opponents, opponents that can levitate of fly, and many others. That extra reach, in addition to potentially giving the first attack against an opponent with 5 foot reach, means larger monsters also get less attacks of opportunity against you. Further, if you've boosted your jump bonus, the extra reach from a glaive means you might be able to hit that flying opponent that stayed too close to the ground with a jumping charge.
As for the popularity of the Glaive, put simply, it is the polearm with the highest damage dice that is still a martial weapon. Some people favor Guisarmes for the tripping ability, but if that is not a major factor for you, Glaive is the way to go.

[Slithery D]

In addition to the defensive/AoO/lockdown benefits, it's an easy way to avoid an AoO from an opponent with reach if you're going to move to attack him first. You don't need to worry about tumble, Spring Attack, or other options, just pick up a longer weapon.

[Necroticplague]

Easy: reach is very useful. At higher levels, he who hits first, wins. And since AoO only occurs when you move out of a square, reach allows you to AoO people who try and charge you. In addition, reach allows you to have a wider variety of options, to to greater area of influence. Plus, most reach weapons are also 2-handed, which is an extra bonus.Having reach lets you stop charges by smacking them before they get to you, and with reach, you can do lockdown builds that don't get to 5-foot step next to you.

[aleucard]

Here's another benefit of reach weapons that actually doesn't get much airtime; Cleave. Two of the biggest issues with the Feat and its derivatives/relatives is the level of difficulty in getting more than 1 or 2 targets in range and how open that leaves you to flanking and similar. With reach, you not only have nearly twice the area covered (16 squares instead of 9, and some weapons include those 9 too), but also have the ability to punish opponents attempting to flank you and/or prevent it altogether if they don't have reach themselves.

[Jay R]

I don't know the rules of 3E and 4ED, so take this with a grain of salt. I have, however, fought with spear, glaive and halberd in the SCA. And in a 1-on-1 fight, you're more-or-less correct. The purpose to a reach weapon, however, comes out when you have allies. The glaive should stand behind the shield wall, where he is impregnable unless the other side also has pole arms. Since he isn't also dodging blows, he has much better aim.

[eggynack]

I don't know the rules of 3E and 4ED, so take this with a grain of salt. I have, however, fought with spear, glaive and halberd in the SCA. And in a 1-on-1 fight, you're more-or-less correct. The purpose to a reach weapon, however, comes out when you have allies. The glaive should stand behind the shield wall, where he is impregnable unless the other side also has pole arms. Since he isn't also dodging blows, he has much better aim.
I think it's kinda the opposite, actually. 3.5 doesn't really have tanks, for the most part, because it's very difficult to force an enemy to focus on you as opposed to your caster counterparts. One of the closest things the game has to a tank is a character with a reach weapon, tripping, and a bunch of AoO's. Thus, the guisarme guy doesn't stand behind the shield guy (particularly because shields are bad in this game). Instead, he stands a reasonable distance in front of the caster, who has even more reach. The essential idea is the same, except with the reach weapon guy acting as the shield wall, and the caster acting as the reach weapon guy. .

[Rubik]

There's also the strategy of size-boosting to cover more of the battlefield. Let's say you have a level 1 psychic warrior who takes the Expansion power. With a greatsword, he normally threatens adjacent spaces, and when he manifests Expansion, he threatens out to 10'.

But when wielding a guisarme or glaive, that 10' suddenly becomes 20'. A whole 20' which he can use to perform AoOs.

I don't know about you, but I find the ability to cover an area 45' across pretty darned impressive.

And that area only goes up if the psywar is already Large, or if he manages to augment Expansion to make him Huge (or even Gargantuan, if he starts out Large).

[Ghen]

I think it's kinda the opposite, actually. 3.5 doesn't really have tanks, for the most part, because it's very difficult to force an enemy to focus on you as opposed to your caster counterparts...

I know that "for the most part" is the key phrase here, but the knight from the PHB II is somewhat tanky, if your looking for that.

[eggynack]

I know that "for the most part" is the key phrase here, but the knight from the PHB II is somewhat tanky, if your looking for that.
I would tend towards crusader instead, though they do often tend towards the AoO style of tankery, owing to stuff like thicket of blades.

[RedMage125]

There's also the strategy of size-boosting to cover more of the battlefield. Let's say you have a level 1 psychic warrior who takes the Expansion power. With a greatsword, he normally threatens adjacent spaces, and when he manifests Expansion, he threatens out to 10'.

But when wielding a guisarme or glaive, that 10' suddenly becomes 20'. A whole 20' which he can use to perform AoOs.

I don't know about you, but I find the ability to cover an area 45' across pretty darned impressive.

And that area only goes up if the psywar is already Large, or if he manages to augment Expansion to make him Huge (or even Gargantuan, if he starts out Large).

Wouldn't that be 50' square? If he's Large and has a reach weapon? It's 20' (4squares on a grid) in each direction from his space (which is 10x10 itself). So 4 squares out in each direction, forming a square for his total threatened reach (because reach disregards the "every other diagonal is 2 squares" thing), making his overall threatened and occupied area a 10square by 10 square, or 50'x 50' area.

[Rubik]

Wouldn't that be 50' square? If he's Large and has a reach weapon? It's 20' (4squares on a grid) in each direction from his space (which is 10x10 itself). So 4 squares out in each direction, forming a square for his total threatened reach (because reach disregards the "every other diagonal is 2 squares" thing), making his overall threatened and occupied area a 10square by 10 square, or 50'x 50' area.Right you are. Sorry; I've had a tiring week.

[Ghen]

I don't understand why the lance doesn't get more love. It's a great reach weapon, pretty much the best if you're mounted (2x damage on a successful charge and can be wielded one-handed whild mounted). It's true that it pierces, and so cannot be used to cleave, but still...

[Rubik]

I don't understand why the lance doesn't get more love. It's a great reach weapon, pretty much the best if you're mounted (2x damage on a successful charge and can be wielded one-handed whild mounted). It's true that it pierces, and so cannot be used to cleave, but still...Mounts are too fragile to bother with, unless you're a druid, and how many druids are mounted combatants?

[eggynack]

I don't understand why the lance doesn't get more love. It's a great reach weapon, pretty much the best if you're mounted (2x damage on a successful charge and can be wielded one-handed whild mounted). It's true that it pierces, and so cannot be used to cleave, but still...
It sees love if you're pursuing mounted combat, but mounted combat isn't necessarily the best way to go. You get a lot of damage, sure, but you sacrifice even more resources than normal in order to be successful. If you're not mounted, then other options are obviously better.

[Doc_Maynot]

When it comes to reach, I prefer the Duom (DMC). It's possible to attack adjacent targets at a -2 penalty, but it's better than dropping a feat on Spiked Chain.
Mix that with Combat Reflexes, Stand Still and Thicket of Blades and you can do some decent BFC on top of your damage.

[ArqArturo]

Sometimes it can go poorly (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0216.html).

[Eldariel]

Reach + AoOs is also stronger the more enemies you have. That horde of Goblins? You can kill them all without spending a single action attacking them if you have reach. Of course, Enlarged it just gets better; no more 5' stepping in even if you're both enlarged (since the threatened area is 10' and 5' step only covers 5'), let alone Tripping or Stand Still or whatever.

Bottomline tho, only way to do more than what you have actions for as melee is to take AoOs and reach weapons are vastly superior for purposes of taking AoOs. In effect, an AoO character takes about two turns to every one of a non-AoO melee warrior (the more opponents exist, the better AoO builds get). AoOs are also the best for making life hard for ranged enemies and caster enemies (with Mage Slayer-feat), particularly in cramped quarters. Again, reach weapon is all but necessary in order to prevent enemy from simply 5' stepping away and casting/shooting.

[Eliana Solange]

Spike Chain Guy has Improved Trip, so anyone who tries to get adjacent to him provokes an AoO and gets tripped trying to exit the threatened space at the extent of his reach, so they never make it to that adjacent square. Spike Chain Guy can full attack and then 5-ft. step back, there are now two squares between him and his prone opponent. His opponent can stand up, and try to move in again, but the same thing will happen again.

Why step back? Why not stay 10 feet from the tripped guy and hit or trip him again as an AoO when he tries to get up. Standing from prone provokes and AoO.

[eggynack]

Why step back? Why not stay 10 feet from the tripped guy and hit or trip him again as an AoO when he tries to get up. Standing from prone provokes and AoO.
You can't trip on the AoO from standing up. The AoO is taken upon your foe's attempted action, rather than after the action is complete, so you'd be taking them from prone to prone, which is meaningless.

[Rubik]

You can't trip on the AoO from standing up. The AoO is taken upon your foe's attempted action, rather than after the action is complete, so you'd be taking them from prone to prone, which is meaningless.But this is still a viable idea. He moves into your 10' space and attempts to move out; you trip and attack. He uses his other move action to stand, you AoO. Then on your turn, you trip-full-attack and 5' step away. Repeat.

[Techwarrior]

Why step back? Why not stay 10 feet from the tripped guy and hit or trip him again as an AoO when he tries to get up. Standing from prone provokes and AoO.


You can't trip on the AoO from standing up. The AoO is taken upon your foe's attempted action, rather than after the action is complete, so you'd be taking them from prone to prone, which is meaningless.

What he said. The real trick is to combine tripping, a Reach weapon, Thicket of Blades, and Standstill so that they can't do anything fun in your reach without being denied actions or simply told 'no.'

[VoxRationis]

I hadn't seen the Stand Still feat before; I don't play with psionics and therefore hadn't really opened that section of the SRD. Why is that in psionics anyway? It has nothing to do with it.

[Snowbluff]

I just wanted to point out that you can attack from further away, and you can attack more squares.

8 squares versus 12.

[Terazul]

I hadn't seen the Stand Still feat before; I don't play with psionics and therefore hadn't really opened that section of the SRD. Why is that in psionics anyway? It has nothing to do with it.

Because the book it was released in was the Expanded Psionics Handbook. Like most books, it came with a number of General feats (like Stand Still) along with all the Psionic ones catering to its focus. But, came from the book (and not the PHB), so in that section it goes.

[Gildedragon]

20 with a spiked chain or its ilk. If you whirlwind attack... that is a lot of mooks to hit!

[Snowbluff]

20 with a spiked chain or its ilk. If you whirlwind attack... that is a lot of mooks to hit!

Mhm. Have more squares you can hit means more AoOs and tactical options.

[Eliana Solange]

You can't trip on the AoO from standing up. The AoO is taken upon your foe's attempted action, rather than after the action is complete, so you'd be taking them from prone to prone, which is meaningless.

I was thinking a trip attempt as an AoO when rising from prone would basically knock them back down again. But I can see that it might not be possible to trip someone who is not already standing all the way up (as they'd be more stable when rising).


But this is still a viable idea. He moves into your 10' space and attempts to move out; you trip and attack. He uses his other move action to stand, you AoO. Then on your turn, you trip-full-attack and 5' step away. Repeat.

Wait, how do I get to trip *and* attack on the AoO I get when he tries to move from 10' away to 5' away? Is that a feat? Or is an attack of opportunity a full-round attack? (I was thinking it was just a standard action.) And what do you mean by trip-full-attack? Do you mean that at a high enough level to have multiple attacks per round, I trip for the first one and attack for the rest?

[Teron]

I don't understand why the lance doesn't get more love. It's a great reach weapon, pretty much the best if you're mounted (2x damage on a successful charge and can be wielded one-handed whild mounted). It's true that it pierces, and so cannot be used to cleave, but still...
You can use Cleave just fine with a piercing weapon.

[eggynack]

I was thinking a trip attempt as an AoO when rising from prone would basically knock them back down again. But I can see that it might not be possible to trip someone who is not already standing all the way up (as they'd be more stable when rising).
It's not a matter of stability, but one of timing. The foe in question hasn't even really begun to stand up when you take your AoO, and their standing action hasn't even occurred yet. Thus, you "knock them prone", I suppose, and then they finish getting up, and proceed with their turn. I don't know if it's a legal maneuver in the first place, but even if it is, it doesn't do much.




Wait, how do I get to trip *and* attack on the AoO I get when he tries to move from 10' away to 5' away? Is that a feat?
Improved trip, or knock-down, or both.

[Slithery D]

Wait, how do I get to trip *and* attack on the AoO I get when he tries to move from 10' away to 5' away? Is that a feat? Or is an attack of opportunity a full-round attack? (I was thinking it was just a standard action.) And what do you mean by trip-full-attack? Do you mean that at a high enough level to have multiple attacks per round, I trip for the first one and attack for the rest?

You trip on your AoO when he moves out of your 10' reach square. Then (if you have combat reflexes) you get a second AoO when he tries to stand up. I don't think an AoO is technically a standard action, it's a special (single) attack action.

By trip full attack I think he means trip on your first attack, strike for damage on your iteratives, when the prone bonus offsets your cumulative -5 on the attack rolls.

[Rubik]

Wait, how do I get to trip *and* attack on the AoO I get when he tries to move from 10' away to 5' away? Is that a feat? Or is an attack of opportunity a full-round attack? (I was thinking it was just a standard action.) And what do you mean by trip-full-attack? Do you mean that at a high enough level to have multiple attacks per round, I trip for the first one and attack for the rest?Improved Trip. And yes.

[Eliana Solange]

Improved trip says:


If you trip an opponent in melee combat, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn't used your attack for the trip attempt.

Does that also apply if you trip on an AoO?

[Dread_Head]

Yes. White text of posting

[Ghen]

You can use Cleave just fine with a piercing weapon.

Oops! Say, have you ever used a house rule so much that you forget it is a house rule and not RAW? My bad, forget I said anything.

[VoxRationis]

Where does it say you can trip on an attack of opportunity?

[eggynack]

Where does it say you can trip on an attack of opportunity?
AoO's allow you to make a melee attack. A trip is a melee attack, which is a term defined in the PHB glossary as, "A physical attack suitable for close combat." Seems simple enough to me.

[Rubik]

Where does it say you can trip on an attack of opportunity?You can trip as a[n unarmed] melee attack. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#trip)

Since you can make a trip attack as an attack, you can trip any time you would normally make a melee attack.

It also says here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm) (at the end of the page in the table) that a trip can be substituted for a melee attack, including (explicitly) as an AoO.

[NoACWarrior]

Back on the topic of having reach being actually helpful - knight 3 ability bulwark is pretty powerful with reach. I think its stronger than thicket of blades in that nothing can move without taking an AoO - not just from you if you have another front liner. 5 ft adjusts are not a combat action when going up against a knight 3 crusader x with standstill.

Also helpful for reach is the ability to get iterative attacks before your enemy can get iterative attacks - unless the enemy is using a pounce build.