Community

Thanks for the comments! I've reworded Versatile to make it clearer.  I also eliminated my clumsy attempt to ban versatile weapon-users from also carrying a buckler and a thrown weapon in the free hand.  If the language is awkward, it's because I'm trying to word things in a way to preserve the rules in the event a future race is introduced with multiple hands (like a thri-kreen).

As for reach weapons, I think "reach" needs to be in the "hand" section, not the family, becaue polearms should be able to utilize the quality of the family to which it belongs.  That was a halberd acts differently from a pike, glaive, or a bec de corbin, while also having the qualities of a reach weapon.

As for the d12 for reach weapons, I would like to keep it.  First, it's a +1 damage from a two-handed weapon, which I think is manageable.  Second, I like keeping the "hand" damage progression consistent.  It makes things easier to describe and keeps things pretty intuitive.  Third, I really like the dodecahedron, and think it gets short shrift!  If that d12 seems too powerful, I'd rather balance it out by giving reach weapons a bit more weakness in some other area.

Right now, the difference between two-handed weapons and reach weapons are:

• Reach weapons do +1 damage thanks to the increased damage size
• Reach weapons get reach, allowing you to keep foes without reach from making melee attacks against you.
• In the basic rules, reach weapons cannot be used improvised
• In the module, reach weapons get a -3 damage penalty against adjacent targets (thus converting it into a one-handed weapon with the at bay ability)

Oct 5, 2012 -- 7:40AM, kadim wrote:

Keeping people at bay inside a reach weapon's guard doesn't make sense to my brain 'cause at that point you've failed to keep them at bay.  I'd probably keep it exactly as it is but remove that when they're inside your weapon's reach.

I was thinking that as people get in reach you just "choke up" on your pole arm a bit and treat it like a two-handed weapon, at bay and all.

You could expand the notion of getting inside someone's guard to include all weapons though. Like close-quartered fighting could give similar penalties to all weapons that are larger than half-hand which would scale it down to the damage of a half-hand weapon and also remove any advantages (at bay, versatile) in the process.

That seems complicated.  I like the close quarters rules we have... with one change (see below).

That'd be a bit more forgiving on players who really just love their two handed swords while still preserving small weapons as optimal for close quarters combat.

Close quarters and at bay sit in equipoise.  Close quarters should be terrifying for folks with two-handed weapons and reach.  They have no shields and they can't use their main weapon, relegated to drawing a dagger, or punching folks with their fists.  That's why it's so important to keep enemies at bay.  It also makes swarming humanoids like kobolds and goblins terrifying in dungeons.  You're already surrounded by walls on one side and now you've got kobolds charging you.  If they get around you, you're stuck.  It's scary.

What about AC bonuses from 1 handed shields or larger in close quarters? Just hit me, do we lose those or have some kind of penalty imposed for using them? Or would that actually be a defensive advantage but it'd hose your attacks?

Good point.  I made it clear that you can't attack with large weapons.  So you still get your shield defenses.  That is another bonus versatile weapon-users have over two-weapon and reach users; they've got a shield to protect them in close quarters, or a free hand to draw a different weapon with.

I'm also curious as to how a small sized two handed sword would interact with a large sized two handed sword. Would the small one be able to keep the large one at bay?

Ug.  I hate differently sized weapons.  Just tell small creatures that they can't use reach weapons and can only use hand-and-a-half weapons two handed, but when doing so, they are treated as two-handed weapns for any rules that require them, other than "at-bay".  Done.

I believe bows should get a damage bonus from Dexterity OR Strength.

Crossbows can't benefit from a harder draw. They alway provide the same force to the bolt.

Arrows are fired on the draw of the archer. A taller/stronger archer can get a deeper draw.