Post/Author/DateTime	Post
orionm42 08-18-05, 12:24 PM	An issue concerning reach weapons has just surfaced in my campaign. More specifically, a recent treasure hoard included a +1 glaive which the party’s fighter would like to make use of. As the glaive is a reach weapon, the rules indicate it cannot be used against adjacent opponents. To use such a weapon, a fighter would routinely take a five foot step before attacking. However, in the event he cannot take the step (for example, his back is against a wall or he is surrounded), what prevents the fighter from grasping the blunt end with both hands and bludgeoning an opponent with the blunt shaft. To me, it would make sense he could do so. However, just like any other improvised weapon, he would take a -4 proficiency penalty (even though a glaive is only a martial weapon) because he is using the weapon in a manner contrary to its design. Additionally, the damage would be adjusted down (to perhaps 1d6 – similar to a quarterstaff) and it would score only double damage on a critical hit. Finally, even though the wielder can attack into an adjacent square, he does not threaten it. This seems appropriate to me, but it contradicts the RAW. What is your take? Can someone point me to any other specific rules I should be aware of (I found nothing in the FAQ)? Thanks.
Illion the Red 08-18-05, 12:35 PM	I don't know of any specific rules that address using the shaft of a reach weapon as a bashing weapon, so I'm going purely on conjecture here... I would allow the player to do so, but also cause the weapon to take equivalent damage to what it deals out in such a manner. This will allow the fighter to get in a few swings, but the shaft of the weapon is not designed to take the brunt of the force in such a manner. Since it is made out of wood (assumption), allow the damage to be reduced by its hardness, but if the fighter is power attacking and basically whaling away with the shaft of the glaive, it's going to break.
Citizen Fry 08-18-05, 01:26 PM	I think a recent issue of Dragon discussed some of this, and they suggested allowing the non-business end of a polearm to be used as an improvised weapon without reach. No rules about the weapon taking damage on successful attacks (mechanically, you're already being penalized enough by the "improvised weapon" penalty).
Fixxxer 08-18-05, 01:34 PM	The polearms issue of Dragon Magazine had a feat that allows you to use your reach weapon at 5' with a -2 penalty (and you don't take improvised weapon penalties). Interestingly enough, it had another feat that allows you to add 5' to the reach of your weapon by grabbing the very butt of it to attack with, but you can only make 1 attack per round if you do so. It was a good issue.
WCH 08-18-05, 01:43 PM	There's a feat in CW called Spinning Halberd Style which gives you an extra attack with the blunt end of your halberd if you make a full attack action (and also gives a +1 to AC)... but that isn't what you're asking. Bottom line is reach weapons can't be used adjacently with anything remotely resembling ease. Try it some time... doesn't even need to be with something long enough to be a reach weapon; take a broom and swing it like a weapon (imagine it being a spear, so only one end is usable; it isn't a staff in this example). Then have your target move to right up in your face (or move right up to the object you're attacking, if you can't get a brother or someone to let you test stuff on him) and try attacking it again... doesn't work that well. Ultimately, when the enemy gets in close, your best option is to drop the reach weapon and pull out a non-reach weapon which you keep handy -- a sword works nicely, although a dagger or shortsword would be the classic choice.
orionm42 08-18-05, 05:22 PM	Ultimately, when the enemy gets in close, your best option is to drop the reach weapon and pull out a non-reach weapon which you keep handy... I agree that, if he can't move anyway, it's normally not a problem to burn a move action to draw a sheathed weapon. Additionally, I ruled he would obviously not get the +1 bonus if the weapon is used in an improvised fashion...so he would not be gaining anything over the non-magical weapons he currently carries. I was unaware of the feats discussed above...thanks for the info...I'll pass it along. As always, thanks everyone for your input!
Smiley 08-18-05, 06:03 PM	I I would allow the player to do so, but also cause the weapon to take equivalent damage to what it deals out in such a manner. This will allow the fighter to get in a few swings, but the shaft of the weapon is not designed to take the brunt of the force in such a manner. Since it is made out of wood (assumption), allow the damage to be reduced by its hardness, but if the fighter is power attacking and basically whaling away with the shaft of the glaive, it's going to break. If the shaft couldn't support itself, how on earth could it support the large metal head? It would shatter instantly if it was so weak. If it was beaten against an Iron Golem I could understand. But say, an orc or a mean ogre.. doesn't make sense really in my eyes. As it was stated above, the -4 penalty should be enough. Removing the weapon for something as ridiculous as that, from a player who earned it, is bad manners imo =/ I liked the AD&D days better, when a magic weapon was near indestructable..