Weapons table issues

[radja]

I thought about making the warhammer bludgeoning/piercing for the standard type with the spike on the back. Think that might work?

yeah, that'd work just fine and is a lot more historically accurate

As for the falchion, I figured that it could cover your basic heavy-bladed one-handers, your katzbalgers and kreigsmessers and dussacs and whatnot. That's why I booted it up to 2d4.

yeah, that'd work fine. Not sure about having it deal more damage than the more advanced longsword, but the reasoning is sound.

There was a staff-sling in the 2nd edition weapons table. I don't remember anybody ever using it, though. It had a crap ROF and range. I dunno how well the real one worked.

I do remember it being crap in second edition. As for the real world, the staff sling was used quite a lot, and was generally used with heavier ammo than the normal sling, giving them a comparable range. Staff slings were also used as grenade launchers, and distances up to 300m are not out of the question (current world record for the sling is over 450m). Wikipedia has a decent explanation, and there's a few demonstrations with the staff sling on youtube.

 

[triqui]

I think those dudes, like most of the folks in the fechtbuchs, qualify as martial artist showoffs for the purposes of my hyperbolic ranting.

As for my sources, I offer the entire human history of organized armed combat until about the 16th century. Sumerian phalanxes? Spear and shield. Greek hoplites? Spear and shield. Roman legions? Spear and shield. Feudal infantry? Spear and shield. Zulu impis? Spear and shield.

Yes, the spear CAN be used with two hands. So can the longsword. So can the battleaxe. I think the spear belongs in that class of basic warrior weaponry, with the rest of the 1d8 crowd.

Roman legions count as "spear and javelin" in my opinion, using your own description of pikes, spears and javelins.

Greek hoplites actually are divided between "spear and Shield" and "pike and shield". The Alexander Phalanx used a Sarissa, which is waaaaay longer than the 8' you suggest as the limit of a pike. like... double that.

Several other armies were using spears without a shield. Here you have a real reference of Almogavars:

Here you have pictures of spearmen with, and without shield, as well as other kind of soldiers

Here is picture of agincourt, were spearmen don't wear shield.

So yes, the spear and shield were widely used. Specially in the ancient (greek, babylonian, assyrian, etc), But the 2 handed spear were used as well. And once the Middle Agges started to develop, spears lost it value. Billmen, halbaldiers, and other polearms (including pikes) were developed instead, because a single hand spear thrust wasn't really able to pierce through new armor.

 

[triqui]

-the warhammer: You appear on the battlefield with a big block of iron on a stick? you're dead. it's an inferior mace. get rid of the dnd warhammer. rename the pick to a warhammer, which would be more accurate.

The problem is DND take his warhammer picture from Mjolnir. Which was used by a *god* with unhuman strength. That's not really a weapon for normal people.

Real warhammers looked like this:

This is a warhammer:

 

[mlund]

The Roman Pilum is a javelin - specifically designed to be a nasty piece of work when you threw it. It's also handy to have in formation, but it's primary function is to be thrown.

An un-chuck-able 7-to-8' 1-handed melee-only spear is a reach weapon by design.

A proper pike is a 2-handed weapon.

So I'd probably make these adjustments.

Under Basic Weapons I'd put in the following:
Short Spear 1d4 piercing ranged 30/120
Long Spear 1d6 piercing two-handed, reach

Under Martial Weapons I'd put this:
War Spear 1d6 piercing reach

These all conform to the same curve of damage as other weapons in their categories. They aren't super-realistic, but they at least show the complexity of the combat involved with them. The smaller spears are point-and-stab or point-and-throw devices. The bigger spears either require two hands to wield simply or martial training to wield one-handed effectively.

- Marty Lund

 

[Kannik]

The only folks who used spears with two hands were martial artist showoffs

Is it not the whole point of a D&D fighter is to play a martial artist showoff?

peace,

Kannik
(a martial artist showoff with a spear...)

 

[Texicles]

With this talk of spears, javelins and staff slings, I must naturally advocate the inclusion of the atlatl, a pet favorite weapon of mine.

For those not familiar with the device, it's essentially a carved stick ~2 feet long that has a notch for seating the back of a slender (~1/4 inch) "dart" or javelin ranging from 4 to 9 feet in length. The thrower places the rear of the dart in the notch and holds the shaft along the atlatl, then using a one-handed overhand motion, launches the dart. The increased length of the throwing arc greatly increases the velocity (and therefore range, power and accuracy) of the thrown dart.

According to Wiki, we're talking speeds approaching 100mph and ranges approaching 850 feet! Sure the darts are harder to carry than a sack of rocks, but it's one hell of a weapon system.

The atlatl has been used by many, and disparate cultures, and it's just interesting. Therefore, I am offering this entry as an amendment.

Martial Missile Weapon
Atlatl      2sp      1d6 pierce          2lb.      Range 150/600      Sling
                     1d4 bludgeon        2lb.                         Mace

In defense of my numbers:
Cost - It's a piece of friggin' wood!
Damage (ranged) - More than a hand-thrown dart, less than a longbow seemed right.
Damage (melee) - see cost.
Range - I didn't want to step on the toes of composite longbows.
Type (ranged) - Easier to borrow the term "sling" than make up a new type.
Type (melee) - Once again, see cost.


/soapbox

 

[JoeCrow]

Well, I was seeing the pike as including all the pointy-bit-on-a-stick weapons that're longer than your basic melee spear, like 9'+. Yeah, that might be a bit more general than some folks are looking for, but we're already edging toward 15-different-types-of-pole-arm city here, guys.

I'd like to have the base spear at 1d8, just for parity with the rest of the core warrior tools.

So, what's the feeling on my Reach mechanic? The whole "Reach: Adds 5 ft to range, attacks within 5 ft have disadvantage and drop die type"? I'd have to adjust that if I wanted to give the base spear Reach. Maybe make the spear a special case, "Has Reach if used two-handed"?

As for the Short Spear, we've already got a Javelin. Maybe list that into straight Martial weapons instead of under Martial Missile weapons. I don't think I'd knock it down to 1d4, that's dagger-damage territory.

You know, the temptation is very strong to just go all WFRP on this thing and say "Here's your weapon selection: 1-handed Melee Weapons do 1d8, 2-handed Melee Weapons do 1d10, 1-handed Tools do 1d6, 2-handed Tools do 1d8, call it whatever you want."

 

[triqui]

Well, I was seeing the pike as including all the pointy-bit-on-a-stick weapons that're longer than your basic melee spear, like 9'+. Yeah, that might be a bit more general than some folks are looking for, but we're already edging toward 15-different-types-of-pole-arm city here, guys.

I'd like to have the base spear at 1d8, just for parity with the rest of the core warrior tools.

So, what's the feeling on my Reach mechanic? The whole "Reach: Adds 5 ft to range, attacks within 5 ft have disadvantage and drop die type"? I'd have to adjust that if I wanted to give the base spear Reach. Maybe make the spear a special case, "Has Reach if used two-handed"?

As for the Short Spear, we've already got a Javelin. Maybe list that into straight Martial weapons instead of under Martial Missile weapons. I don't think I'd knock it down to 1d4, that's dagger-damage territory.

You know, the temptation is very strong to just go all WFRP on this thing and say "Here's your weapon selection: 1-handed Melee Weapons do 1d8, 2-handed Melee Weapons do 1d10, 1-handed Tools do 1d6, 2-handed Tools do 1d8, call it whatever you want."

I dont think spears should be as good as swords. The only,reason they were common in army is because they were cheap, easy to learn, and work in formations. Any fighter that could afford wore a sword, until plate became dominant and warhammer and flagelled warmaces started to take their place.

You could say how poor a viking was, based on his gear. Poorer ones used spears. Middle class used axes. And the jarls and rich ones used swords. Same happened with almogavars, ronins or other small bands of mercenaries, which are closed related to adventurers in dnd.
Armies are a different thing, they have other needs. A pikemen or a pavise arbalester have no place outside war formations and sieges.

 

[Kobold Stew]

As I said ... a soon as the Quaterstaff is actually usefull there is an outcry about it! And who cares about the money, after the first Adventure no one cares about mundane Equipment-Cost anymore.

True enough, but there are other ways to make it effective.

1d8 for staff (= longsword) seems too much for me.

What would be fun, though, would be 1d6, but able to be used with dual-wielding. That's existed in the past, and is easy enough to houserule now, but it would be nice if it were explicit.

two-handed finesse weapon, 1d6, able to be used for two (half-damage) attacks with dual-wielding.

 

[Dausuul]

I think weapons should be stronger or weaker depending on the situation. Against goblins, you want a quick slashing blade (scimitar, longsword). Against an ogre, you want a weapon with plenty of reach (spear, pike). Against a stone golem, you want something that bashes good (mace, warhammer). Et cetera.

The tricky thing is figuring out how to implement this without making the rules monstrously complicated.