# One Handed Melee Reach Weapon?



## Wrathamon (Jun 28, 2007)

Are there any?


----------



## avr (Jun 28, 2007)

From Secrets of Sarlona, the spinning sword. Visually its a metal whip, mechanically it's a exotic slashing short sword which can strike at 5' or 10'.


----------



## Bad Paper (Jun 28, 2007)

Wrathamon said:
			
		

> Are there any?



a whip?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 28, 2007)

There's the kusari-gama in the DMG.

Also, if you don't mind taking the -2 on attack rolls and reduced damage, something like a Small longspear or Small glaive is considered a one-handed weapon for a Medium creature.

-Hyp.


----------



## Mistwell (Jun 28, 2007)

Whip Dagger


----------



## Wrathamon (Jun 29, 2007)

Bad Paper said:
			
		

> a whip?




whip's are ranged attacks thou.




			
				Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Also, if you don't mind taking the -2 on attack rolls and reduced damage, something like a Small longspear or Small glaive is considered a one-handed weapon for a Medium creature.





You can use Small Two handed Weapons in one hand?

EDIT: just read the srd on inappropriately sized weapons. I guess you can


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 29, 2007)

Wrathamon said:
			
		

> whip's are ranged attacks thou.




In 3E, a whip was a ranged weapon.  In 3.5, it's a melee weapon (though with some special rules).  For instance, you can use Power Attack, and you add Str bonus to damage, and you can Cleave or use Whirlwind Attack with a whip.

-Hyp.


----------



## Legildur (Jun 29, 2007)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> In 3E, a whip was a ranged weapon.  In 3.5, it's a melee weapon (though with some special rules).  For instance, you can use Power Attack, and you add Str bonus to damage, and you can Cleave or use Whirlwind Attack with a whip.



It looks to me that you are saying the 3.5 classification as a melee weapon is flawed.....


----------



## Cameron (Jun 29, 2007)

Wrathamon said:
			
		

> whip's are ranged attacks thou.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Dang... I can so see 2 small spiked chains in the cards in the near future...


----------



## Nifft (Jun 29, 2007)

Cameron said:
			
		

> Dang... I can so see 2 small spiked chains in the cards in the near future...



"What feat is that?"

"Chimp Grip!"

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Korak (Jun 29, 2007)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> There's the kusari-gama in the DMG.
> 
> Also, if you don't mind taking the -2 on attack rolls and reduced damage, something like a Small longspear or Small glaive is considered a one-handed weapon for a Medium creature.
> 
> -Hyp.




I know how much we all love the FAQ... but the June 15th revision includes a ruling that "too small" reach weapons do not grant the wielder reach.



			
				3.5 FAQ said:
			
		

> *How do reach weapons work if they are of a different
> size than the creature wielding them? Say, an ogre wielding
> a Small or Medium glaive, or a human with the Monkey
> Grip feat wielding a Large ranseur? What is the reach for
> ...


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 29, 2007)

Legildur said:
			
		

> It looks to me that you are saying the 3.5 classification as a melee weapon is flawed.....




Not at all; just different to the 3E classification.



			
				Cameron said:
			
		

> Dang... I can so see 2 small spiked chains in the cards in the near future...




Is it really worth it, for 1d6 20/x2 damage and -6 on attack rolls?  (-2 for inappropriate size, -4 for TWF with a non-light off-hand weapon)



			
				Korak said:
			
		

> I know how much we all love the FAQ... but the June 15th revision includes a ruling that "too small" reach weapons do not grant the wielder reach.




Per the PHB, a Small or Medium wielder of a reach weapon can attack at 10 feet but not 5 feet, while a Large wielder of a reach weapon of appropriate size can attack 15 or 20 but not closer.  'of appropriate size' is not a condition for the Small or Medium wielder in the reach weapon rules.

It makes complete sense to me that a Medium wielder should get reach from a Small reach weapon - if a halfling with one-foot arms can reach ten feet with a small longspear (5 feet further than normal), it seems perfectly natural that a human with three-foot arms can reach just as far (5 feet further than normal)!  Contrast this with the ogre using a Medium longspear - the spear increases the human's reach by 5 feet, why would it increase the ogre's by ten?

But it makes no sense to me that the human could not reach ten feet with a weapon the halfling could use to do so... making me happy the PHB does not prohibit it.

As it happens, though, my personal preference is to update the Savage Species system to 3.5.

-Hyp.


----------



## Korak (Jun 29, 2007)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> But it makes no sense to me that the human could not reach ten feet with a weapon the halfling could use to do so... making me happy the PHB does not prohibit it.
> 
> -Hyp.




FWIW, I don't claim to have read every post you've made on the subject over the last several years, but from what I have read, I tend to share your line of reasoning and conclusions on all weapon sizing and usage related questions.  I am just gearing up to start playing Living Greyhawk again, so I am paying more attention than usual to the FAQ since it is canon for LG.


----------



## Wrathamon (Jun 29, 2007)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> In 3E, a whip was a ranged weapon.  In 3.5, it's a melee weapon (though with some special rules).  For instance, you can use Power Attack, and you add Str bonus to damage, and you can Cleave or use Whirlwind Attack with a whip.
> 
> -Hyp.





it is funky... it provokes like a ranged weapon and doesnt threaten... so  you cant take AoO's with it or get a flank bonus.

it also cant deal any non-lethal damage with anyone with armor pretty much.

I am not sure what the whip is good for besides disarms and trips.


I will have to run the small spear past my DM and the the DMG weapon.


----------



## epochrpg (Jun 29, 2007)

Yes-- a Kusari-Gama, which is in the DMG.  It is like the spiked chain, but only does a d6 dmg and is one handed.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 29, 2007)

Wrathamon said:
			
		

> it is funky... it provokes like a ranged weapon and doesnt threaten... so  you cant take AoO's with it or get a flank bonus.




You can _get_ a flanking bonus (since you're making a melee attack); you can't _grant_ a flanking bonus (since you don't threaten).

In order to gain a flanking bonus, character A must be making a melee attack while character B (his ally) threatens the same opponent from directly opposite.  With a whip, you can be character A, but you can't be character B.

-Hyp.


----------



## Wrathamon (Jun 29, 2007)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> You can _get_ a flanking bonus (since you're making a melee attack); you can't _grant_ a flanking bonus (since you don't threaten).
> 
> In order to gain a flanking bonus, character A must be making a melee attack while character B (his ally) threatens the same opponent from directly opposite.  With a whip, you can be character A, but you can't be character B.
> 
> -Hyp.




That's good to know my Kenku Bard/Marshall shall be pleased to know that or I should say his allies.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 29, 2007)

Wrathamon said:
			
		

> That's good to know my Kenku Bard/Marshall shall be pleased to know that or I should say his allies.




No, the Kenku.  His allies don't benefit, so they won't care 

-Hyp.


----------



## mvincent (Jun 29, 2007)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> 'of appropriate size' is not a condition for the Small or Medium wielder in the reach weapon rules.



That does not seem like a truism.



> It makes complete sense to me that a Medium wielder should get reach from a Small reach weapon - if a halfling with one-foot arms can reach ten feet with a small longspear (5 feet further than normal), it seems perfectly natural that a human with three-foot arms can reach just as far (5 feet further than normal)!



Agreed that this certainly _seems_ to make sense from one angle (not that this is a requisite for many D&D rules), but there is also the possibility that holding the weapon with two hands allows the halfling to hold the weapon farther back, while a human holding it that far back with _one_ hand would cause the long weapon to be horribly unbalanced (possibly the reason why D&D humans don't have normal, one-handed reach weapons of their _own_ size).

Aren't you the one that normally preaches literalism? Here you seem to be applying common sense (i.e. RAI) to a rule that _may_ not require it (and one in which the FAQ weighted in on).


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 29, 2007)

mvincent said:
			
		

> Aren't you the one that normally preaches literalism? Here you seem to be applying common sense (i.e. RAI) to a rule that _may_ not require it (and one in which the FAQ weighted in on).




How so?

The rules say that a Small or Medium wielder of a reach weapon threatens X, and that a Large wielder of an appropriately-sized reach weapon threatens Y.

What are the conditions for a Small or Medium creature to threaten X?
a. He is wielding a reach weapon.

What are the conditions for a Large creature to threaten Y?
a. He is wielding a reach weapon.
b. The weapon is appropriately-sized.

Now, it happens that I think common sense agrees with the rules as written in this case, but my initial interpretation comes from what's written in the PHB.

-Hyp.


----------



## Cameron (Jul 2, 2007)

Nifft said:
			
		

> "What feat is that?"
> 
> "Chimp Grip!"
> 
> Cheers, -- N



I was thinking "Helicopter Whirl!" And then relegating the character to pre-teen status and kiboshing it


----------



## Diirk (Jul 2, 2007)

3.5 FAQ said:
			
		

> A reach weapon doubles its wielder’s natural reach, but
> only if the weapon is at least of an appropriate size for the
> wielder. Wielding a “too-small” reach weapon grants no reach.
> An ogre (Large) wielding a Medium or smaller reach
> ...




This bit doesn't make sense either; if a human wielding an appropriately sized longspear  can attack at 10' but not 5', then when an ogre picks up the same weapon why can he use it to attack at 5' ?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 2, 2007)

Diirk said:
			
		

> This bit doesn't make sense either; if a human wielding an appropriately sized longspear  can attack at 10' but not 5', then when an ogre picks up the same weapon why can he use it to attack at 5' ?




Well, this is why I prefer the Savage Species system, personally.  But I can picture the ogre holding the spear up higher/further back than the human can to attack an adjacent square with it.


----------



## Cameron (Jul 2, 2007)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Well, this is why I prefer the Savage Species system, personally.  But I can picture the ogre holding the spear up higher/further back than the human can to attack an adjacent square with it.



The SS variant is the +x reach variant, isn't it? So a Medium/Small reach weapon gives a +5 reach (or 10ft reach for Small/Medium and 15ft for Large)?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 2, 2007)

Cameron said:
			
		

> The SS variant is the +x reach variant, isn't it? So a Medium/Small reach weapon gives a +5 reach (or 10ft reach for Small/Medium and 15ft for Large)?




Effectively, it 'shifts' a creature's natural reach outwards.

If you picture a creature as threatening a certain number of concentric rings - a Small or Medium creature threatens one ring, a Large creature two, and a Huge creature three.  With a reach weapon of appropriate size, the Small or Medium creature still threatens one ring, but it's shifted outwards by one ring.  The Large creature still threatens two rings, but they're the third and fourth, not the first and second - his reach is shifted outwards by two rings.  And the Huge creature's three-ring reach is shifted outwards by three.

So, now consider a reach weapon of a certain size to shift a creature's natural reach by a fixed number of rings.  A Small or Medium reach weapon shifts reach outwards by one ring, whether the wielder is Small, Medium, Large, or Huge.  So the Large creature with a Medium longspear threatens two rings, shifted by one... he thus threatens 10 feet and 15 feet, but not 5 feet.  A Large reach weapon shifts by two... so the human using a Monkey-Gripped Large longspear threatens one ring, shifted out by two - 15 feet, but not 5 or 10 feet.

Tiny reach weapons have no effect for a creature with a reach greater than 0, but for the Tinys, it permits them to threaten adjacent squares (instead of their own square).

-Hyp.


----------



## Cameron (Jul 2, 2007)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Effectively, it 'shifts' a creature's natural reach outwards.
> 
> If you picture a creature as threatening a certain number of concentric rings - a Small or Medium creature threatens one ring, a Large creature two, and a Huge creature three.  With a reach weapon of appropriate size, the Small or Medium creature still threatens one ring, but it's shifted outwards by one ring.  The Large creature still threatens two rings, but they're the third and fourth, not the first and second - his reach is shifted outwards by two rings.  And the Huge creature's three-ring reach is shifted outwards by three.
> 
> ...



Yep. That is the variant I was thinking of. I tend to use it myself.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 2, 2007)

Cameron said:
			
		

> Yep. That is the variant I was thinking of. I tend to use it myself.




It was, of course, expressed differently in Savage Species, since the 3E weapon sizing system considered the size of the weapon, rather than the size of the intended wielder.  But the above is, I think, a reasonable translation of the spirit of the system to the 3.5 weapon sizing rules.

-Hyp.


----------



## Wrathamon (Jul 2, 2007)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> No, the Kenku.  His allies don't benefit, so they won't care
> 
> -Hyp.




Oh they will with my marshal aura


----------



## Dross (Jul 3, 2007)

To come at it spellwise:
The Magic of Faerun 4th level spell Thunderlance creates a huge longspear that is weilded in one hand giving the caster a natural reach of 20 feet plus other abilities.

Your DM might/may/probably not      allow a magic items that uses the spell.


----------



## Nyaricus (Jul 3, 2007)

IS there not a feat someplace which allows you to make a single attack with a one-handed non-reach weapon which adds +5 to your reach.

I'm not sure if it's WotC - I know it was in Dragon Compendium though.

cheers,
--N


----------



## Diggus Rex (Jul 3, 2007)

Lunging Strike in PHB2 lets ya reach as a full attack.


----------



## Wrathamon (Jul 3, 2007)

Diggus Rex said:
			
		

> Lunging Strike in PHB2 lets ya reach as a full attack.




you only get one attack out of it and you cant do it on AoO's correct?


----------



## Darklone (Jul 3, 2007)

Lunging Strike is usually useless. If you can 5ft step and full attack, Lunging Strike doesn't really help... if you can move and attack, you still get one attack with tumble.

And it does not give you reach nor AoOs.


----------



## Diggus Rex (Jul 4, 2007)

Yeah Lunging strike isnt the greatest by far, but it seems to be the feat Nycarius was thinking of.


----------

