What are the ramifications of this Houserule on Reach Weapons?

[Coidzor]

Alright, I think my question got a bit garbled by my earlier rambling, sorry about that.

So I've been thinking about changing up the Reach Weapon rules after having encountered several different versions of them both in 3.5 itself, in Pathfinder, and when I was first experimenting with 4e during a time where I couldn't find anyone to play 3.5 or PF with.

Most recently I have considered having 3 standard forms of reach weapons instead of the single current type and the notable exceptions to it such as Whips and Spiked Chains and the various feats that modify the paradigm.

1. Standard Reach weapons with the change that they take a penalty(currently thinking -3) to attack within the user's natural reach.

2. "Lunging" weapons where the user takes a penalty when using it as a Reach weapon but no penalty when attacking within their natural reach. (Some weapons that are standard style reach weapons would become "Lunging" instead)

3. Weapons with reach that threaten within the natural reach but don't threaten outside of it, making attacking with a readied action or as part of one's turn the only ways to normally be able to make use of the expanded reach option. Right now mostly thinking this would apply to Spears and Halberds(piercing only) and possibly tweak Whips and Whip-Daggers so that they are like this as well.

This would possibly also necessitate some additional moves such as banning Spiked Chain/Kusari-Gama type weapons, requiring an additional feat beyond EWP: Spiked Chain to unlock full use of Spiked Chains, or having a feat to eliminate the penalties of using Reach or Lunging weapons so that they have parity with the single EWP: Spiked Chain feat.

I feel there's probably something really obvious as well as something not so obvious that would happen as a result of this change that I'm missing here.

This would, I think, make Reach weapons more appealing where they already are quite appealing. Possibility it might make them ubiquitous to the point where reach weapon lockdown builds cease to function as well as they currently do.

tl;dr What if all Reach weapons were like Spiked Chains with a moderate penalty to-hit?

So, I've been exposed to a couple of different rules for Reach weapons over the years and I was wondering what sort of effect it might have to actually have these different rules in play in the same game but for different weapons.

1. Standard 3.5 Reach: Doubles natural reach but can't attack inside of natural reach, and threatens everywhere they can attack.

2. 3.5 Spiked Chain Reach: Doubles natural reach and can attack inside of natural reach, and threatens everywhere they can attack.

3. 3.5 Duom Reach: Doubles natural reach, but take a penalty for attacking inside of natural reach, and threatens everywhere they can attack. (or was it take a penalty if attacking both inside natural reach and outside natural reach in the same round, counting both one's turn and subsequent AoOs together?)

4. 4e Reach: Doubles natural reach (or just adds 1 square/5'), but only threatens within natural reach.

5. 3.5 Whip Reach: Triples(?)/Adds 10' to natural reach but cannot threaten. Provokes AoOs like a ranged attack.

6. Pathfinder Lunge Feat Reach: Take a penalty any round in which you use your Reach, but when activated doubles natural reach and can attack within natural reach as well, but doesn't threaten outside of natural reach.

Spiked Chain style Reach would still be the hardest to come by and might be the only one that requires an Exotic weapon proficiency to acquire, and I'm thinking of doing a mix of introducing lower damage die variants of existing weapons that have one of the styles of reach not standard to 3.5 and giving non-standard Reach variants to certain weapons.

For instance, I'm thinking of giving 4E style reach where they can attack or ready an action to attack outside of their natural reach but can't threaten those squares to Spears, Halberds, and maybe Tridents(provided Tridents are wielded in two hands) and then something like Lunge-style reach to Rapiers or their Elven X-Blade equivalents where they take a penalty to hit and possibly to damage when they extend their reach.

Not sure if what I think of as Duom style reach where they're like spiked chains but take a penalty when attacking inside the user's natural reach would be an alternative or adjustment to Short Haft or if I'd just apply that to most of the standard polearms, possibly with a minor penalty to hit and a reduction in damage die such as 1d8 > 1d6.

It makes Reach more accessible, which may have some more effect on the game beyond making reach lockdown builds less effective, especially since a 4e style Reach weapon is anathema to a 3.5 style Reach weapon, being able to attack the 3.5 Reach user without provoking an AoO for trying to move past their threatened squares and still being able to attack with the 4e Reach user's primary weapon if they entered an adjacent square through cornering the 3.5 Reach user and 5-foot stepping or tumbling.

I also know it'd make Small and Medium sized melee have more options for weapons for dealing with Large(Tall) or Huge(Long) sized foes without eating an AoO.



Anything else that I'm glaringly overlooking? Such as rather than making Reach lockdown builds less effective this would completely destroy them (unless only a tiny number of weapons were modified/added)?



Also, as a semi-separate idea floating around, would letting standard 3.5 Reach weapons attack within the user's natural reach at a -2 to -4 penalty do more to buff Reach in general or just to reduce the appeal of gaining proficiency with spiked chains or one of their variants?

[J-H]

There's a Long Reach type feat in Unapproachable East (3.5) that lets you use spear-type weapons as reach weapons, and still as normal-range weapons as well.

[Taveena]

In Dragon #310, there's also the Rope Dart and Spiked Chain, which are 15 ft reach, threaten everything in the area, and can attack adjacent. Exotic trip monk weapons, 1d4 2x/20, two hand, yadda yadda. Trading 1d4 of the spiked chain for 5 ft extra reach, basically.

[Hamste]

Doesn't the lunge feat from pathfinder just add a static 5 ft?

[Killer Angel]

Doesn't the lunge feat from pathfinder just add a static 5 ft?

But if I remember correctly, you cannot use it for AoO.

[Hamste]

But if I remember correctly, you cannot use it for AoO.

Correct I think, the reach only lasts to the end of your round. Unless you make your opponent provoke on your turn there is no way to get the extra reach from it for AoO purposes.

[Coidzor]

I don't think my question was quite clear, so I've amended the OP to reflect my intention a bit better. Or at least I hope it is a bit clearer now.

Modifications to and alternate forms of reach are something I find interesting, though, so thank you to all of you who've shared those with me.


Doesn't the lunge feat from pathfinder just add a static 5 ft?

Ah, so it does. It looks like I remembered it incorrectly in terms of the penalty for doing so as well. I thought it was a -2 to attack but it's actually a -2 to AC.


But if I remember correctly, you cannot use it for AoO.

I remembered that part, though. :smallconfused:


In Dragon #310, there's also the Rope Dart and Spiked Chain, which are 15 ft reach, threaten everything in the area, and can attack adjacent. Exotic trip monk weapons, 1d4 2x/20, two hand, yadda yadda. Trading 1d4 of the spiked chain for 5 ft extra reach, basically.

Ah, yeah, I forgot about those entirely. Not sure if I'd keep them (as is) or not.


There's a Long Reach type feat in Unapproachable East (3.5) that lets you use spear-type weapons as reach weapons, and still as normal-range weapons as well.

Still not as good as EWP: Spiked Chain since it's only on the character's turn, but it does have a few corner cases where giving 10' to 15' reach with a Longspear would be useful. Thanks for the heads up about it, though I wasn't really looking for other feats or weapons that play around with reach per se.

[Hamste]

Also Deformity(tall)

I don't see much problem with the suggestions myself though standard reach weapons would be better than lunging most of the time (Because AoO and where they most likely happen). I would say make it a feat to remove the penalties rather than make it a feat to get the full potential from a spiked chain if a feat really needs to be in there though it wouldn't be a very good feat (A static +3 to hit in certain circumstances that most of the time you can negate by good positioning). There are enough feat walls as it is.

[ericgrau]

1. Ok. Won't hurt anything. Won't get used often either except for attacks of opportunity (if allowed).

2. Likewise. And changing some standard reach weapons to lunging is a nerf because the reach won't often get used for reach and these weapons tend to have slightly lower damage than non-reach weapons.

3. Likewise a nerf.

This would make reach weapons less appealing because you have fewer good options. Those that fall under #1 would only be slightly more appealing.

I've done a lot of damage-per-round calculations. I think people who don't do this underestimate a -1, and think it's only a -1. If you made the penalty a -2 then the option could be a little more worthwhile. Still to be avoided when possible, but more often worth it without hurting your damage too terribly. A -1 would make the option used much more often, but still avoided when convenient. Again, this is for those who understand the loss of damage whether through math or experience. For others it could be a trap if not well explained that a -2 or -3 is significant. For reach weapons changed to lunging it's still a slight nerf at -2, but it's not that bad. -1 lunging could be a small boost to these weapons. The other option would be to make lunging weapons -2 but have them go up a die in damage (e.g. d10 => d12) to make up for it. Then non-reach weapons won't look as good, but that seems to be your goal.

Against significant foes you lose about 7% damage on a single attack and 10% damage on a full attack per -1. Against melee boss monsters you lose more than that depending on how strong. At low level with power attack you lose more too; as much as 15% per -1. The power attack feat itself is only a 10-15% boost to damage at low level and less at high level until you add on shock trooper to negate attack roll penalties, then it gets crazy good.

[Telok]

What you could also do is make a list of weapons that have feats baked in to them. Say that the halberd and short spear always allow the lunge feat for anyone, long spear and another have the short haft feat for anyone, and others have the haft strike (?) feat. Then let anyone with the matching feat ignore the ac/hit penalties for using that feat with that weapon.

Did that make sense? I'm not yet through my morning coffee, might be garbly.

[Doc_Maynot]

So, with this, basic reach weapons become like the Duom?

[Coidzor]

So, with this, basic reach weapons become like the Duom?

Essentially, yeah. That probably would've been a better way to initially phrase it.


What you could also do is make a list of weapons that have feats baked in to them. Say that the halberd and short spear always allow the lunge feat for anyone, long spear and another have the short haft feat for anyone, and others have the haft strike (?) feat. Then let anyone with the matching feat ignore the ac/hit penalties for using that feat with that weapon.

Did that make sense? I'm not yet through my morning coffee, might be garbly.

There are some feats that I've read and felt they seemed like something that should just be part of the basic weapon/combat system yeah. I've been ruminating over that and will continue to do so.

I guess that'd head off having someone double-dip for a lunging weapon for +5' reach and then use the lunge feat for another +5' on top of that without having to add a disclaimer that lunging weapons don't stack with the Lunge feat.


1. Ok. Won't hurt anything. Won't get used often either except for attacks of opportunity (if allowed).

2. Likewise. And changing some standard reach weapons to lunging is a nerf because the reach won't often get used for reach and these weapons tend to have slightly lower damage than non-reach weapons.

3. Likewise a nerf.

This would make reach weapons less appealing because you have fewer good options. Those that fall under #1 would only be slightly more appealing.

I've done a lot of damage-per-round calculations. I think people who don't do this underestimate a -1, and think it's only a -1. If you made the penalty a -2 then the option could be a little more worthwhile. Still to be avoided when possible, but more often worth it without hurting your damage too terribly. A -1 would make the option used much more often, but still avoided when convenient. Again, this is for those who understand the loss of damage whether through math or experience. For others it could be a trap if not well explained that a -2 or -3 is significant. For reach weapons changed to lunging it's still a slight nerf at -2, but it's not that bad. -1 lunging could be a small boost to these weapons. The other option would be to make lunging weapons -2 but have them go up a die in damage (e.g. d10 => d12) to make up for it. Then non-reach weapons won't look as good, but that seems to be your goal.

Against significant foes you lose about 7% damage on a single attack and 10% damage on a full attack per -1. Against melee boss monsters you lose more than that depending on how strong. At low level with power attack you lose more too; as much as 15% per -1. The power attack feat itself is only a 10-15% boost to damage at low level and less at high level until you add on shock trooper to negate attack roll penalties, then it gets crazy good.

This is exactly the sort of thing where I know I'm a bit lacking and was hoping to get feedback on, so thank you. :smallsmile: I figured a -4 was probably harsh enough that the spiked gauntlet + reach combo would be preferable, but I wasn't quite sure where between -1 to -3 the right place might fall since I tend to reach the 5% vs. 10% vs 15% alteration in chance to hit, assuming one wasn't already only hitting on a nat 20 anyway, and then not be able to quite fully penetrate past that stage.

I was thinking about switching things up to have a normal > lunging > reach hierarchy of base weapon damage in addition, though I know that's tricky to do in a way that's truly meaningful without some very drastic changes which would have a ripple effect for HP themselves.

So far I've only added lunging to spears, tridents(when wielded in two hands), and halberds which didn't have it previously after considering rapiers but deciding to mull that one over a bit more first. Of the core reach weapons in 3.5, so far I'm only considering converting lances to lunging. So far the only other weapons I'm actively entertaining converting from reach to lunging are the 2 or 3 reach weapons that exist purely for the purpose of grappling other characters without counting as being grappled one's self. IIRC one of them is the man-catcher and another is, of all things, of kuo-toan origin Really should remember their names by now or have hunted them down... Ahh, distractions!

[Doc_Maynot]

Essentially, yeah. That probably would've been a better way to initially phrase it.

Then I really don't see a problem with it, as it is basically giving reach users a free feat (Short Haft) but another feat I'm curious about if there'd be any changes with is something like Combat Patrol (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/combat-patrol-combat)

[ericgrau]

You could try this then:
1. Standard reach weapons take a -2 to attack within natural reach.
2. Lunging have no penalty within normal range (5 feet) and a -1 to use them with reach. These may use reach for attacks of opportunity (at a -1 to hit).
3. Some weapons have no penalty for normal range nor reach, but they may not use reach for attacks of opportunity.

That would make all 3 types of weapons slightly more appealing than current reach weapons. Suggest to players that they use standard reach weapons close up only when they must. Suggest to players that they use lunging weapons for reach whenever it is convenient, but if you're sure there's no tactical drawback to using them close up (no lost attacks of opportunity, etc.) then you may as well use them close up.

[Coidzor]

Then I really don't see a problem with it, as it is basically giving reach users a free feat (Short Haft) but another feat I'm curious about if there'd be any changes with is something like Combat Patrol (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/combat-patrol-combat)

Hmm. I suppose I'd generally have Combat Patrol require movement in order to actually make attacks that aren't inside one's natural reach or the reach of one's weapon rather than merely having the option to move within one's threatened area.

Because it seems weird that the wording allows you to attack people 30 feet away without moving any closer to them when it's not your turn at level 20 if you can't attack them from 30 feet away on your turn. :smallconfused:


You could try this then:
1. Standard reach weapons take a -2 to attack within natural reach.
2. Lunging have no penalty within normal range (5 feet) and a -1 to use them with reach. These may use reach for attacks of opportunity (at a -1 to hit).
3. Some weapons have no penalty for normal range nor reach, but they may not use reach for attacks of opportunity.

That would make all 3 types of weapons slightly more appealing than current reach weapons. Suggest to players that they use standard reach weapons close up only when they must. Suggest to players that they use lunging weapons for reach whenever it is convenient, but if you're sure there's no tactical drawback to using them close up (no lost attacks of opportunity, etc.) then you may as well use them close up.

Hmm. Yeah, I think I'll go with that. 3. was basically what I was envisioning in my head, basically whips without the annoying "provoke AoOs when you attack" clause. Unless I've been misremembering how whips normally work this whole time.

Thank you. :smallsmile: