Armor Spikes as "Off-Hand" Weapon? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Armor Spikes as "Off-Hand" Weapon? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Rake
08-29-05, 12:46 AM Does that whole armor spikes + Two-Weapon Fighting thing really work?

I can't find any reason why not, but it seems a tad broken.
CatoTurk
08-29-05, 01:22 AM I dont think its really that broken, they are basicaly the martial version of spiked gauntlests so 1d6 dmg is probably fine. Though on a side note I was just wondering if armor spikes could be added to any type of army (light, medium or heavy) Always figured it was just Heavy and mediu, but I can see anything that whould stop it from being in light. Though I might draw the line at spiked padded armor
Maraxus
08-29-05, 01:47 AM Something definitly went wrong when they made this, it is broken. You should houserule this.

CatoTurk: No, the thing that makes them so bad is, that you don't need the hand for this. So you can use a greatsword as your primary weapon and the spikes as your off-hand weapon (sais the FAQ). Or you take a shield in your second hand and use the spikes for the off-hand attacks. Both these things can't be meant to be that way but as it is written, it works
CatoTurk
08-29-05, 01:55 AM oh snap. Yeah consider that houseruled.
Rowan_Whispercloak
08-29-05, 02:09 AM I've played a character that used armor spikes as his off hand weapon and a greatsword as his main. Power Attack has no affect on the spikes so I wasn't doing insane damage, it was mainly how I invisioned the character's fighting style.
Thorak
08-29-05, 08:05 AM Something definitly went wrong when they made this, it is broken. You should houserule this.

CatoTurk: No, the thing that makes them so bad is, that you don't need the hand for this. So you can use a greatsword as your primary weapon and the spikes as your off-hand weapon (sais the FAQ). Or you take a shield in your second hand and use the spikes for the off-hand attacks. Both these things can't be meant to be that way but as it is written, it works
Why can't it be meant to be that way? The FAQ explicitly says it is meant to be that way. Just because you don't happen to like it doesn't mean you suddenly have some mystical inside knowledge to how D&D is meant to be.

And for what it's worth, it's not broken. Both styles of combat have their own feats needed to max them out, and a two-handed weapon needs a high Strength for optimal performance, while TWF needs a high Dex just for the feats. The only class that has a prayer of getting the most out of this, in a standard to reasonably high powered campaign, is the Ranger. And only because he doesn't need the Dex for TWF. And for what it's worth, my definition of "reasonably high-powered" is anything up to a 40-point buy. Below that, to get both a max dex and con, you're spending almost all your points on those two stats. Meaning you are really, really weak in other areas. Or, you're going to have to sacrifice one or both of them, and not be as good at one or both styles of combat as a result.

So the only one it's concievably "broken" for is a Ranger. And they're hardly big melee beasts to begin with. I really don't see the issue.
Vaelan
08-29-05, 08:36 AM Using armor spikes and a two-handed weapon is not appreciably better than using a two-handed weapon alone.

First of all, the cost in feats is quite high. Three feats is a significant investment for any character. Second, the feats require high Dexterity, which means your Strength will likely suffer. Third, the small benefit you will get is offset by the fact that someone who fights with just a two-handed weapon isn't taking a -2 penalty for using two weapons and can thus make better use of Power Attack.

The cost is high and the benefit is minimal. It isn't exactly overpowered.
Maraxus
08-29-05, 12:34 PM Why can't it be meant to be that way? The FAQ explicitly says it is meant to be that way. Just because you don't happen to like it doesn't mean you suddenly have some mystical inside knowledge to how D&D is meant to be.

And for what it's worth, it's not broken. Both styles of combat have their own feats needed to max them out, and a two-handed weapon needs a high Strength for optimal performance, while TWF needs a high Dex just for the feats. The only class that has a prayer of getting the most out of this, in a standard to reasonably high powered campaign, is the Ranger. And only because he doesn't need the Dex for TWF. And for what it's worth, my definition of "reasonably high-powered" is anything up to a 40-point buy. Below that, to get both a max dex and con, you're spending almost all your points on those two stats. Meaning you are really, really weak in other areas. Or, you're going to have to sacrifice one or both of them, and not be as good at one or both styles of combat as a result.

So the only one it's concievably "broken" for is a Ranger. And they're hardly big melee beasts to begin with. I really don't see the issue.
The knowledge is not mystical, you could learn that, too. :D;)

There is a lot of examples, where something is, just like it is only for balancing. Balance is an important part in everything. That is why the greadsword only does twice the damage of a shortsword, that is why 2-handed weapon fighters add 1.5 times thier str. to damage and 2-weapon fighters 1 time and 0.5 times (=1.5 total).

Why do you compare the greatsword/armor spikes to a greadsword fighter? Compare it to a 2-weapon fighter. Longsword/shortsword gives up only a little critical range in the off-hand and therefor gets average 2.5 +half str damage in the primary hand (what is a lot more!).
And the drawback? There is none.
You say, that you need a high strength, to use a 2-handed weapon at optimal performance. The problem is, that even without this optimal performance it is better then the normal 2-weapon fighting.

All this counts for longsword+large shield+armor spikes, too. Compare it to an improved shield basher, the "high end" of the sword and board style. You don't need that feat and you can use a large shield without penalty for "off hand not light".

And now, let's come to the 2-handed fighter. (This goes to Vaelan, too)
What you say is like "Can my character have +5 on attack and damage for -10 Profession(cook) - There is a gain for a lose, so it is balanced."
If you compare it you see.
- Low game, 1 attack (hit 50%). With -2 to attack (-10%), this means, the greatsword will hit 20% less, reducing average damage per turn from 6.5 to 5.2. At the same time, the armor spikes deal average 2.2 damage per turn.
- Mid game (3 attacks at 75%, 50% and 25%). Additional 2 attacks: Your primary damage goes down from average (16,5 + 11 + 5.5) 33 damage to ( 14.3 + 8.8 + 3.3) 26.4 damage, while only 2 spike attacks deal average ( 9.1 + 5.6) 14.7 damage.
- End game, 4 attacks (100%, 75%, 50%, 25%) and 3 spike attacks.
Greatsword goes down from average damage (30 + 22.5 + 15 + 7.5) 90 damage to (27 + 19.5 + 12 + 4.5) 78, while the 3 spike attacks deal (16.2 + 11.7 + 7.2) 35.1 damage.
---
Low: 6.5 -> 7.4
Mid: 33 -> 41.1
High: 90 ->113.1
This damage increase with 1, 2 or 3 feats makes the feats really worth it. The character I calculated with could be about this: 1st level fighter, wood elf Str18, Dex18, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 8 (32 point buy, high power. Dex 16 should work to, to meat the requirements, if you have only 28).

My to hit-calculations are careful. If you build your character to be a save hitter, thespikes should even have a greater effect.

Overall, 2-handed weapon and armor spikes is the superior combat style. Everybody (who is a warrior-type ;)) who uses something else is stupid (okay, sword+shield+spikes has a good effect, too).

Not to forget that the spikes are great for grapples anyway. Everybody needs them! Everybody will want them! And when something is so good, then it is wrong.
Tony Vargas
08-29-05, 01:46 PM Does that whole armor spikes + Two-Weapon Fighting thing really work? Sure, armor spikes are specifically useable as off-hand weapons, when you're not already making an off-hand attack.

I can't find any reason why not, but it seems a tad broken. Only if you aply it to a two-handed weapon & armor spikes. Then, yes, it's broken, overpowering paired-weapon combos, exotic double weapons, and just about any other TWF option. The only thing that might mitigate that brokenness a little is that it makes TWF'ing into a STR- as well as DEX-intensive style, so there's a bit of 'MAD,' introduced when you go for it. In a lower-stat game (25- point build, 3d6 straight), it'd be hard to abuse the trick much, in a normal 25-28 point build game, it'd only be overpowered compared to similar options, like an exotic double weapon. In a higher stat game than that, it could become more broadly overpowered.

Though supported by the FAQ, the option seems a little wrong-headed on a number of counts. The TWF rules don't address the possiblity of using a Two-handed weapon at all, for instance and thereare a few lines of thought involving the buckler that seem to insist that using a THW counts as using your off-hand to attack (see PH rules on bucklers, and frequent discussions on Improved Buckler Defense). House-ruling the option away is a reasonable thing to do. It doesn't kill any concepts - since a character can still use armor spikes and two-handed weapons if he wants, just not to gain the extra TWF attack with the spiks - and can be simply implemented by considering 'two handed' weapons to require 'all' the character's 'effort' to weild, not just a specific number of 'hands,' thus banishing the problem not just with armor spikes, but with all 'hands free' attack options.
Tony Vargas
08-29-05, 01:48 PM Overall, 2-handed weapon and armor spikes is the superior combat style. Everybody (who is a warrior-type ;)) who uses something else is stupid (okay, sword+shield+spikes has a good effect, too). Don't forget TWH+ArmorSpikes+Buckler(w/Improved Buckler Defense) or just an animated shield...
Willie the Duck
08-30-05, 10:59 AM Why can't it be meant to be that way? The FAQ explicitly says it is meant to be that way. Just because you don't happen to like it doesn't mean you suddenly have some mystical inside knowledge to how D&D is meant to be.

It is an easthetically displeasing, farfetched combo that appears to be more of a poor confluence of wording than anything intended by the game designers. No one is pretending to be prescient or telepathic with regards to the game designers, but we can use what is before us and make reasoned judgements. The weight of the opinions I've seen seem to fall into the "huh, that looks unintended and rediculous, but it's in the books and it isn't that overpowering, so who cares?" category.

As to the faq and sage confirmation, we know. All that means is that someone asked the question and the sage looked in the books and said, "huh, I guess it is possible." That he ruled that way shows he's more concerned with clarifying the RAW than with any kind of "judicial activism" to make the game resemble designer intention.
Lord Schpungus
08-30-05, 11:46 AM How is it aesthetically displeasing? Big guy in huge spiked plate armor, swinging a giant sword and kicking things in with his armored greaves. Hella cool, if you ask me.
Maraxus
08-30-05, 12:11 PM @aesthetically displeasing: I guess, Willie is a mathematican, too? ;)

By the way, can you, by the holy RAW, use the same armor spikes for both, primary and off-hand attacks, in the same round? I see nothing that stops it and it would mean a lot of money-saving. :)
ShinAkuma2
08-30-05, 12:23 PM No, same reason you can't take a single dagger and switch hands with it in mid-attack to TWF.
Tony Vargas
08-30-05, 12:35 PM By the way, can you, by the holy RAW, use the same armor spikes for both, primary and off-hand attacks, in the same round? I see nothing that stops it and it would mean a lot of money-saving. :) You can use armor spikes as a primary weapon, and you can use them as a secondary weapon, as long as you aren't already making an off-hand attack, so, yeah, technically (and logically), you should be able to use armor spikes as both primary and secondary attacks, much like you could when wearing a pair of spiked gauntlets.

Allowing a player to do so, however, would be inconsistent with the way other weapons - like double-weapons - are priced. One reasonable solution would be to price masterwork and magical armor spikes like double-weapons. An equally valid, but rather abstract and arbitrary, one would be to rule that you can't use armor spikes as both a primary and secondary weapon in the same round - if you wanted to do something like that, you could use a spiked gauntlet, as well as armor spikes, perhaps, or maybe even install armor spikes on your armor /twice/. :rolleyes:

...

BTW, if it's starting to seem to you like allowing armor spikes to be used as melee weapons at all gets pretty complicated, you're right. Another sensible house rule is to simply have armor spikes useable only in grapples (reach 0, effectively), not as weapons.
Rialto
08-30-05, 01:21 PM Why isn't this in the "Equipment and Combat" forum?
ShinAkuma2
08-30-05, 04:50 PM much like you could when wearing a pair of spiked gauntlets.

That's a little different, as a pair of spiked gauntlets is legitimately two weapons. The listed costs, weight, etc, are for one gauntlet.
kalstrand
08-30-05, 06:41 PM I never really thought about it before because it has never come up in any games I've been in but I think you should have to enter the opponents square to attack with armor spikes thus taking an AoO.
Lord Schpungus
08-30-05, 08:37 PM I don't think so. You're "In Contact" with an opponent at melee range (5 ft).

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Rake 08-29-05, 12:46 AM	Does that whole armor spikes + Two-Weapon Fighting thing really work? I can't find any reason why not, but it seems a tad broken.
CatoTurk 08-29-05, 01:22 AM	I dont think its really that broken, they are basicaly the martial version of spiked gauntlests so 1d6 dmg is probably fine. Though on a side note I was just wondering if armor spikes could be added to any type of army (light, medium or heavy) Always figured it was just Heavy and mediu, but I can see anything that whould stop it from being in light. Though I might draw the line at spiked padded armor
Maraxus 08-29-05, 01:47 AM	Something definitly went wrong when they made this, it is broken. You should houserule this. CatoTurk: No, the thing that makes them so bad is, that you don't need the hand for this. So you can use a greatsword as your primary weapon and the spikes as your off-hand weapon (sais the FAQ). Or you take a shield in your second hand and use the spikes for the off-hand attacks. Both these things can't be meant to be that way but as it is written, it works
CatoTurk 08-29-05, 01:55 AM	oh snap. Yeah consider that houseruled.
Rowan_Whispercloak 08-29-05, 02:09 AM	I've played a character that used armor spikes as his off hand weapon and a greatsword as his main. Power Attack has no affect on the spikes so I wasn't doing insane damage, it was mainly how I invisioned the character's fighting style.
Thorak 08-29-05, 08:05 AM	Something definitly went wrong when they made this, it is broken. You should houserule this. CatoTurk: No, the thing that makes them so bad is, that you don't need the hand for this. So you can use a greatsword as your primary weapon and the spikes as your off-hand weapon (sais the FAQ). Or you take a shield in your second hand and use the spikes for the off-hand attacks. Both these things can't be meant to be that way but as it is written, it works Why can't it be meant to be that way? The FAQ explicitly says it is meant to be that way. Just because you don't happen to like it doesn't mean you suddenly have some mystical inside knowledge to how D&D is meant to be. And for what it's worth, it's not broken. Both styles of combat have their own feats needed to max them out, and a two-handed weapon needs a high Strength for optimal performance, while TWF needs a high Dex just for the feats. The only class that has a prayer of getting the most out of this, in a standard to reasonably high powered campaign, is the Ranger. And only because he doesn't need the Dex for TWF. And for what it's worth, my definition of "reasonably high-powered" is anything up to a 40-point buy. Below that, to get both a max dex and con, you're spending almost all your points on those two stats. Meaning you are really, really weak in other areas. Or, you're going to have to sacrifice one or both of them, and not be as good at one or both styles of combat as a result. So the only one it's concievably "broken" for is a Ranger. And they're hardly big melee beasts to begin with. I really don't see the issue.
Vaelan 08-29-05, 08:36 AM	Using armor spikes and a two-handed weapon is not appreciably better than using a two-handed weapon alone. First of all, the cost in feats is quite high. Three feats is a significant investment for any character. Second, the feats require high Dexterity, which means your Strength will likely suffer. Third, the small benefit you will get is offset by the fact that someone who fights with just a two-handed weapon isn't taking a -2 penalty for using two weapons and can thus make better use of Power Attack. The cost is high and the benefit is minimal. It isn't exactly overpowered.
Maraxus 08-29-05, 12:34 PM	Why can't it be meant to be that way? The FAQ explicitly says it is meant to be that way. Just because you don't happen to like it doesn't mean you suddenly have some mystical inside knowledge to how D&D is meant to be. And for what it's worth, it's not broken. Both styles of combat have their own feats needed to max them out, and a two-handed weapon needs a high Strength for optimal performance, while TWF needs a high Dex just for the feats. The only class that has a prayer of getting the most out of this, in a standard to reasonably high powered campaign, is the Ranger. And only because he doesn't need the Dex for TWF. And for what it's worth, my definition of "reasonably high-powered" is anything up to a 40-point buy. Below that, to get both a max dex and con, you're spending almost all your points on those two stats. Meaning you are really, really weak in other areas. Or, you're going to have to sacrifice one or both of them, and not be as good at one or both styles of combat as a result. So the only one it's concievably "broken" for is a Ranger. And they're hardly big melee beasts to begin with. I really don't see the issue. The knowledge is not mystical, you could learn that, too. :D;) There is a lot of examples, where something is, just like it is only for balancing. Balance is an important part in everything. That is why the greadsword only does twice the damage of a shortsword, that is why 2-handed weapon fighters add 1.5 times thier str. to damage and 2-weapon fighters 1 time and 0.5 times (=1.5 total). Why do you compare the greatsword/armor spikes to a greadsword fighter? Compare it to a 2-weapon fighter. Longsword/shortsword gives up only a little critical range in the off-hand and therefor gets average 2.5 +half str damage in the primary hand (what is a lot more!). And the drawback? There is none. You say, that you need a high strength, to use a 2-handed weapon at optimal performance. The problem is, that even without this optimal performance it is better then the normal 2-weapon fighting. All this counts for longsword+large shield+armor spikes, too. Compare it to an improved shield basher, the "high end" of the sword and board style. You don't need that feat and you can use a large shield without penalty for "off hand not light". And now, let's come to the 2-handed fighter. (This goes to Vaelan, too) What you say is like "Can my character have +5 on attack and damage for -10 Profession(cook) - There is a gain for a lose, so it is balanced." If you compare it you see. - Low game, 1 attack (hit 50%). With -2 to attack (-10%), this means, the greatsword will hit 20% less, reducing average damage per turn from 6.5 to 5.2. At the same time, the armor spikes deal average 2.2 damage per turn. - Mid game (3 attacks at 75%, 50% and 25%). Additional 2 attacks: Your primary damage goes down from average (16,5 + 11 + 5.5) 33 damage to ( 14.3 + 8.8 + 3.3) 26.4 damage, while only 2 spike attacks deal average ( 9.1 + 5.6) 14.7 damage. - End game, 4 attacks (100%, 75%, 50%, 25%) and 3 spike attacks. Greatsword goes down from average damage (30 + 22.5 + 15 + 7.5) 90 damage to (27 + 19.5 + 12 + 4.5) 78, while the 3 spike attacks deal (16.2 + 11.7 + 7.2) 35.1 damage. --- Low: 6.5 -> 7.4 Mid: 33 -> 41.1 High: 90 ->113.1 This damage increase with 1, 2 or 3 feats makes the feats really worth it. The character I calculated with could be about this: 1st level fighter, wood elf Str18, Dex18, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 8 (32 point buy, high power. Dex 16 should work to, to meat the requirements, if you have only 28). My to hit-calculations are careful. If you build your character to be a save hitter, thespikes should even have a greater effect. Overall, 2-handed weapon and armor spikes is the superior combat style. Everybody (who is a warrior-type ;)) who uses something else is stupid (okay, sword+shield+spikes has a good effect, too). Not to forget that the spikes are great for grapples anyway. Everybody needs them! Everybody will want them! And when something is so good, then it is wrong.
Tony Vargas 08-29-05, 01:46 PM	Does that whole armor spikes + Two-Weapon Fighting thing really work? Sure, armor spikes are specifically useable as off-hand weapons, when you're not already making an off-hand attack. I can't find any reason why not, but it seems a tad broken. Only if you aply it to a two-handed weapon & armor spikes. Then, yes, it's broken, overpowering paired-weapon combos, exotic double weapons, and just about any other TWF option. The only thing that might mitigate that brokenness a little is that it makes TWF'ing into a STR- as well as DEX-intensive style, so there's a bit of 'MAD,' introduced when you go for it. In a lower-stat game (25- point build, 3d6 straight), it'd be hard to abuse the trick much, in a normal 25-28 point build game, it'd only be overpowered compared to similar options, like an exotic double weapon. In a higher stat game than that, it could become more broadly overpowered. Though supported by the FAQ, the option seems a little wrong-headed on a number of counts. The TWF rules don't address the possiblity of using a Two-handed weapon at all, for instance and thereare a few lines of thought involving the buckler that seem to insist that using a THW counts as using your off-hand to attack (see PH rules on bucklers, and frequent discussions on Improved Buckler Defense). House-ruling the option away is a reasonable thing to do. It doesn't kill any concepts - since a character can still use armor spikes and two-handed weapons if he wants, just not to gain the extra TWF attack with the spiks - and can be simply implemented by considering 'two handed' weapons to require 'all' the character's 'effort' to weild, not just a specific number of 'hands,' thus banishing the problem not just with armor spikes, but with all 'hands free' attack options.
Tony Vargas 08-29-05, 01:48 PM	Overall, 2-handed weapon and armor spikes is the superior combat style. Everybody (who is a warrior-type ;)) who uses something else is stupid (okay, sword+shield+spikes has a good effect, too). Don't forget TWH+ArmorSpikes+Buckler(w/Improved Buckler Defense) or just an animated shield...
Willie the Duck 08-30-05, 10:59 AM	Why can't it be meant to be that way? The FAQ explicitly says it is meant to be that way. Just because you don't happen to like it doesn't mean you suddenly have some mystical inside knowledge to how D&D is meant to be. It is an easthetically displeasing, farfetched combo that appears to be more of a poor confluence of wording than anything intended by the game designers. No one is pretending to be prescient or telepathic with regards to the game designers, but we can use what is before us and make reasoned judgements. The weight of the opinions I've seen seem to fall into the "huh, that looks unintended and rediculous, but it's in the books and it isn't that overpowering, so who cares?" category. As to the faq and sage confirmation, we know. All that means is that someone asked the question and the sage looked in the books and said, "huh, I guess it is possible." That he ruled that way shows he's more concerned with clarifying the RAW than with any kind of "judicial activism" to make the game resemble designer intention.
Lord Schpungus 08-30-05, 11:46 AM	How is it aesthetically displeasing? Big guy in huge spiked plate armor, swinging a giant sword and kicking things in with his armored greaves. Hella cool, if you ask me.
Maraxus 08-30-05, 12:11 PM	@aesthetically displeasing: I guess, Willie is a mathematican, too? ;) By the way, can you, by the holy RAW, use the same armor spikes for both, primary and off-hand attacks, in the same round? I see nothing that stops it and it would mean a lot of money-saving. :)
ShinAkuma2 08-30-05, 12:23 PM	No, same reason you can't take a single dagger and switch hands with it in mid-attack to TWF.
Tony Vargas 08-30-05, 12:35 PM	By the way, can you, by the holy RAW, use the same armor spikes for both, primary and off-hand attacks, in the same round? I see nothing that stops it and it would mean a lot of money-saving. :) You can use armor spikes as a primary weapon, and you can use them as a secondary weapon, as long as you aren't already making an off-hand attack, so, yeah, technically (and logically), you should be able to use armor spikes as both primary and secondary attacks, much like you could when wearing a pair of spiked gauntlets. Allowing a player to do so, however, would be inconsistent with the way other weapons - like double-weapons - are priced. One reasonable solution would be to price masterwork and magical armor spikes like double-weapons. An equally valid, but rather abstract and arbitrary, one would be to rule that you can't use armor spikes as both a primary and secondary weapon in the same round - if you wanted to do something like that, you could use a spiked gauntlet, as well as armor spikes, perhaps, or maybe even install armor spikes on your armor /twice/. :rolleyes: ... BTW, if it's starting to seem to you like allowing armor spikes to be used as melee weapons at all gets pretty complicated, you're right. Another sensible house rule is to simply have armor spikes useable only in grapples (reach 0, effectively), not as weapons.
Rialto 08-30-05, 01:21 PM	Why isn't this in the "Equipment and Combat" forum?
ShinAkuma2 08-30-05, 04:50 PM	much like you could when wearing a pair of spiked gauntlets. That's a little different, as a pair of spiked gauntlets is legitimately two weapons. The listed costs, weight, etc, are for one gauntlet.
kalstrand 08-30-05, 06:41 PM	I never really thought about it before because it has never come up in any games I've been in but I think you should have to enter the opponents square to attack with armor spikes thus taking an AoO.
Lord Schpungus 08-30-05, 08:37 PM	I don't think so. You're "In Contact" with an opponent at melee range (5 ft).