D&D 5E Fixing the polearm and taking back its seat as generally best nonprojectile weapon from the sword.

Pretty much. Even shorter polearms without "reach" (and weapons like greataxes which are effectively similar) have an optimal range and in a duel-type situation, if someone has a shield or other method of closing the distance, a fight will often turn into a shoving match, the polearm user will pull a dagger, or it ends with the polearm user desperately backing away trying to regain distance.
- That is one of the reasons that swords were used as civilian, skirmish, or secondary battlefield weapons: They are dangerous throughout their length. Polearms (and greataxes - there isn't much distinction between many) are awkward to use against an opponent crowding you. This is also why more knights or other armoured individuals (for which poleaxes, halberds and similar weapons were designed to fight) were probably killed with daggers than the long, armour-cracking polearms.

Of course, with a whole line of polearms or other long weapons, its really hard to get your people to run into close with it because humans fear the pointy. If the entire line doesn't go in at once, the attackers just get spiked from the sides. Once you do get close, the front line will probably have to resort to swords, but the rank behind can probably bring their weapons to bear, so its still not an ideal situation to be in. :)

5e gives a bit of a penalty to reach-weapon users against opponents that are in their reach by making it harder to gain attacks of opportunity, but the combat system just isn't granular to cover individual differences in weapons like that. - Its like daggers being able to fight at the same range as longswords. D&D combat is imaginary combat in several senses and designed to appeal, and to leave most of the detail to, the imagination of its participants.

Pretty much what I was trying to say just not very well, the system being simplified does not cover all the advantages or the disadvantages of the various weapons. To me what the OP is trying to do is give polearms the advantages seen as missing but not looking at the weaknesses these weapons also have. I have no problems if he wishes to this of course but I would not like it as change in the core rules or then I do believe it could become unbalanced.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

S'mon

Legend
...or a pole-axe.

Poll Axe: "Hey! Can I axe you some questions?"
"They abolished the Poll Tacks, I'm the replacement."
"If there's any voter tampering on my watch heads will roll"
"Well, I'm sure you all appreciated by cutting remarks and sharp whit, but I have to get back to the chop…."


It's called a poll axe. You hit people on the head with it. Afaik 'pole axe' started as a mistake.
 


Remove ads

Top