Flamboyant Arcana with a Reach Weapon? (DM Advice?)

[BlueWitch]

Flamboyant Arcana is a Magus Arcana that lets you parry an attack by sacrificing an Attack of Opportunity Attempt.

You roll opposed Attack Rolls and if the Magus' is higher, he deflects the attack.

-

So my question is, can he still parry a Melee attack against him if he's wielding a Reach Weapon? (Like a Kusarigama or Longspear for example)

Nothing says you can't. But realistically speaking it seems a little off.
I suppose technically you don't need a weapon's attacking point to "parry". (So he'd be using the spears handle? or Kusarigama's chain)

How would you rule it?

[Kurald Galain]

I suppose technically you don't need a weapon's attacking point to "parry".
That's exactly it. And yes, by RAW it works.

If you want to argue "realistically speaking", then note that the rule that reach weapons cannot hit an adjacent enemy is very silly and unrealistic.

[TheStranger]

I’d allow it. As you said, there’s nothing in the rules to prohibit it, and it could be fluffed as using the haft of the weapon. However, I wouldn’t let him riposte if he doesn’t threaten the attacker.

Personally, I’m usually in favor of letting players use the tricks they’ve invested in being able to do unless it’s just too broken or cheesy. Which this is not, IMO.

Why is a Magus using a reach weapon, though? Spell Combat only works with one-handed weapons unless there’s an archetype I’m forgetting. If your player is giving up his best class feature in favor at a reach weapon, letting him have this trick won’t unbalance anything.

[Psyren]

Parrying an attack has nothing to do with reach, because you're not attacking that opponent (despite making an attack roll).

[BlueWitch]

Seems like we've got a good consensus here. Thanks for weighing in you guys! ^^

[Aracor]

Besides - doesn't it actually seem pretty stylish, appropriate, and cinematic to be wielding a spear, and spin it and/or swing it and catch the attack on the shaft in order to keep yourself from being clobbered?