Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Felix" data-source="post: 4103116" data-attributes="member: 3929">Tetsubo comes down pretty hard on the Spiked Chain in particular, and the artwork seems to have as much, if not more, to do with his displeasure than the mechanics. Since at the gaming table the visuals I get come from my imagination and the DM's descriptions, I don't see why the PHB picture has to be that much of a sticking point.As depicted? Oh, yeah. Totally. But he seemed mollified by the idea of calling the spiked chain, and drawing the thing like, a Spiked Manrikigusari. And the mechanics of the Spiked Chain could make sense for a Spiked Manrikigusari. So if the mechanics aren't terribly objectionable, and the real world provides a reasonable visual substitute for that silly thing in the PHB, can't the weapon be accepted?Spears were weapons of choice for a very long time because it gave poorly trained and poorly armored conscripts a cost-effective way of being a significant presence on the battlefield. But a party of PCs is exactly *not that*: relative to the great majority of the population, the PCs are very well trained and very well equipped. There may be a big difference to the treasurer of a kingdom between arming the rank and file with spears instead of ranseurs, but those economies of scale won't be realized by the PCs because they are individuals instead of massed units.That being said, spears should have a place in the game. They're cheap and rudimentary; primitive societies are going to have spears as a weapon of choice. Peasants will have pole-arms to fight with that they'd otherwise be using for agricultural purposes. Guardsmen will have spears at castle doors. You'll see spears in D&D everywhere that their Simple Weapon status and their 5gp cost matters to whomever is paying for them to be made.</blockquote>

Verification