Druids, shafted again?

[Fenris]

OK, so a Druid can use a 6' shaft of wood with a sharp tip, an 8' shaft of wood with a sharp tip, but not a 10' shaft of wood with a sharp tip?

Why, oh why can Druids not use a long spear? It is still a simple weapon. It still has the same material composition that the spear does and thus doesn't violate thier byzantine weapons restrictions (less metal than a scimitar).

Apparently size does matter and a spear that large has no place for a druid. Two extra feet of wood would obviously casue permanent harm to the cycle of forest succession that the removal of this young sapling would cause. Or can some one provide some rational explanation as to this cause.

And, while yes, I am aware that everyone has their own little tweaks that they add to the druid list, which are well warranted, I am trying to fathom Core rationale.

Thanks.

Fenris

 

[3d6]

Is taking Simple Weapons Proficiency really that onerous a burden for a druid?

 

[Dross]

My thoughts are:
the longspear cannot be thrown and has reach, unlike both the other spears.

Is it the reach factor that the designers did not want a druid to have longspear proficiency?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Why, oh why can Druids not use a long spear? It is still a simple weapon. It still has the same material composition that the spear does and thus doesn't violate thier byzantine weapons restrictions (less metal than a scimitar).

Druids can use a longspear. They don't have any weapon restrictions to violate.

They just take a -4 penalty unless they gain proficiency somehow.

-Hyp.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I would imagine that the historical inspiration for the class is a factor- most spears of the British Isles during what we could call the "druidic" era of culture would have been less than 8' in length.

However, size, the reason for its reach, is probably the key.

Longspears are a little trickier to use than their shorter counterparts.

One trick is keeping the thing on target- the longer and heavier the pole, the harder the mass at the end is to control. That's physics.

Another factor is that it requires a bit more skill to keep your foes from chopping the tip off.

Then there's that extra 2'- it may seem insignificant out on the plains, but fighting with the thing in enclosed spaces like a heavily wooded area with undergrowth will prove problematic.

 

[Mr Jack]

Because Long Spears are hideously impractical to carry or use in woodland?

 

[EyeontheMountain]

Maybe because the longspear is a weapon of war? Sure in D&D people carry around all sorts of ridiculous weapons (Huge greatswords, anyone) but in any sense of reality, the longspear would be a joke without 100 friends with their own longspears lined up on either side of you.

 

[Li Shenron]

I am trying to fathom Core rationale.

The rationale is simply the average member of a certain character concept.

Based on the concept chosen to design the druid class, the average "druid apprentice" (level 1) should be proficient in those weapons because that's what typically druids use. Everything else (new proficiencies) must be gained by spending some of your character advancement "credits" (feats in this case).

The 3.0 weapons restrictions (and the armors) are also based on a certain concept.

If you don't like how a class work, it's 99% of the times because you have a different concept in mind, even if only very slightly different. There's nothing you can do: either ask your DM (or allow your player) for a modification of the class, or try to see if you can work to fit concept better with additional material, or forget about your concept.

So for example if you don't like the weapons/armors restrictions because in your setting druids have no such ethos, there is no problem in removing them outright [maybe, if you assume that they also contributed to the class' balance, you might prefer to replace them with alternative restrictions].

If you want druids (or a group of druids) in your setting to be by default adept at using the longspear, change the class proficiency to all druids (or to those of that group). Double-check for balance if you think the modification needs a compensation.

You may also allow the customization on a character basis. Just be sure that the compensation is appropriate.

But there is not much about complaining with the original character concept behind a class. It was chosen to be that way, it could have been chosen to be different, but someone else would always have thought that the different version needed adjustments.

 

[Storyteller01]

OK, so a Druid can use a 6' shaft of wood with a sharp tip, an 8' shaft of wood with a sharp tip, but not a 10' shaft of wood with a sharp tip?

Why, oh why can Druids not use a long spear? It is still a simple weapon. It still has the same material composition that the spear does and thus doesn't violate thier byzantine weapons restrictions (less metal than a scimitar).

Apparently size does matter and a spear that large has no place for a druid. Two extra feet of wood would obviously casue permanent harm to the cycle of forest succession that the removal of this young sapling would cause. Or can some one provide some rational explanation as to this cause.

And, while yes, I am aware that everyone has their own little tweaks that they add to the druid list, which are well warranted, I am trying to fathom Core rationale.

Thanks.

Fenris

Ever try to move full speed in a dense forest with a 10 ft pole?

Question; which weapon is the 8 ft pole?

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Maybe because the longspear is a weapon of war? Sure in D&D people carry around all sorts of ridiculous weapons (Huge greatswords, anyone) but in any sense of reality, the longspear would be a joke without 100 friends with their own longspears lined up on either side of you.

I think that is the most likely reason. The javelins and other spears are hunting weapons.