The Spear

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I'm a big fan of Bernard Cornwell. He writes historical fiction, and his heroes have included archers, riflemen (in the Napoleonic era), swordsmen (the Viking Saga, which actually has a different name) and the Warlord Saga (about King Arthur). In the latter, the main character is a spearman. He never seems to use it, instead using a sword. A fight involving a sword is long and detailed, a fight with a spear is short and to the point (no pun intended).

I think people just think spears aren't that cool (regardless of stats). Being able to draw a sword as an aggressive gesture works wonders into a social into combat situation.

 

[haakon1]

With the right feats, a spearman can actually be viable in 3.5e. If you made some of these feats "normal features" of the longspear, it would go a long way to making it a popular weapons. Also, I think swords are popular because they are more often found in treasure. If your PC's discover magic weapons are common in the campaign, but magic swords are not, it may change what they favor.

From Net Book of Feats:
RANK FIGHTING [General: Offense]
You are trained to strike past friends using reach weapons
Prerequisite: Weapon proficiency with a reach weapon
Benefit: You can ignore the normal 50% cover provided by a friend in between you and your opponent when striking with a reach weapon. You make such attacks with no penalty.
Normal: A friend in the way of a reach weapon attack provides 50% cover, and thus gives a +4 bonus to the target's AC. The intervening creature takes no damage if struck instead. See 'Cover and Reach Weapons' in the Player's Handbook, page 132.
RANK FIGHTING Copyright 2001, Carl Cramér
Balance: 5.00 (Purp 5.00, Pow 5.00, Port 5.00, Comp 5.00, Rule 5.00)

SPEAR AND SHIELD [General: Defense]
You have trained in the use of a two-handed spear and shield together
Prerequisite: Shield Proficiency
Benefit: You can use a spear two-handed together with a large shield, despite the fact that such weapons normally can't be used together.
Notes: This feat is right at home in ancient Greece, where Hypaspists used it. The shield is slung over the shoulder and maneuvered with the offhand that simultaneously holds the spear.
SPEAR AND SHIELD Copyright 2001, Carl Cramér
Balance: 4.00 (Purp 4.00, Pow 4.50, Port 3.50, Comp 4.00, Rule 4.00)

NEAR AND FAR [General, Fighter]
Your skill with long weapons is extraordinary.
Benefit: When using a weapon with reach, you may attack adjacent foes as well as those within the reach of your weapon.
NEAR AND FAR Copyright 2001, Michael J. Kletch
Balance: 4.25 (Purp 4.50, Pow 4.00, Port 4.00, Comp 4.75, Rule 4.00)

 

[Empirate]

I am no expert by any means but I would think that the fact that spears remained a weapon for peasant levies etc suggests it was not a particularly advantageous weapon.
Like the mace the fact that it was rarely used in combat suggests it was not a particularly effective weapon.

And where do you get this from? Maces were most definitely used in combat, as were spears. In fact, between the mid-15th century and the 30 Years War, large pike formations reigned supreme on the battlefield, only slowly being replaced by musketeers (for a long time still with a pike backbone). Pikes are basically spears.

 

[Bluenose]

Now you're talking game mechanics, not history (which I was going on about). Historically, no fighting style ever developed - as far as I'm aware - which made use of very long weapons in duel situations.

There are descriptions of polearm-duels in medieval fighting manuals. One British writer favoured sword against long bill, short bill against sword, and long bill against short bill, at least if I'm remembering it correctly. Although you'd probably be better off looking at far eastern sources. Guan Yu and his Green Dragon Crescent Blade would probably be the most famous example from China; there are a lot of naginata duelists in Japan.

 

[Celebrim]

Thoughts?

Spearmen are quite powerful in D&D as it is. Short handled spears evolve toward swords. The short handled spear has no real advantage over the sword as a weapon and is obslete by the primary D&D era. But the long handled spear, roughly 9' shaft, doesn't really become obselete whether wielded Hoplite style (with a suitable feat) or else wielded two-handed.

In D&D the mechanic is pretty simple. Assume to low level fighters. The spear wielder can take a 5' step back each round to maintain his distance and still attack. On the swordsman's turn, he must step through the spears reach - recieve an oppurtunity attack - each round that he attacks. The the spearman gets two attacks to the swordsman's one. The spear is therefore still a highly important battlefield weapon.

Dueling with polearms was done during the early modern era. Some of the leading duelists of the day - particularly those of a British origin - argued that the polearm was simply superior to the sword in a straight up fight. However, their reasoning was complex (it had to do with timing and wieldiness, what they called 'tempo') but for the purposes of pole arms it came down to having the superior reach. A polearm without reach is simply an unwieldy version of a some other weapon. Note that 'reach' in the real world is measured more in strides (yards) than 5' intervals, but for D&D purposes reach is something longer than 3-4' in additional reach - say a 6' shaft topped with a blade, for example.

 

[dante_121]

And where do you get this from? Maces were most definitely used in combat, as were spears. In fact, between the mid-15th century and the 30 Years War, large pike formations reigned supreme on the battlefield, only slowly being replaced by musketeers (for a long time still with a pike backbone). Pikes are basically spears.

Pikes, halberds etc are different. Spears are primarily designed as a throwing weapon. The mace information was told to me by a tour guide at the Tower of London. They were used a little but the lack of cutting and piercing ability as well as a lack of defensive usage meant the sword was always the most common weapon.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

In D&D the mechanic is pretty simple. Assume to low level fighters. The spear wielder can take a 5' step back each round to maintain his distance and still attack. On the swordsman's turn, he must step through the spears reach - recieve an oppurtunity attack - each round that he attacks. The the spearman gets two attacks to the swordsman's one. The spear is therefore still a highly important battlefield weapon.

I disagree. The spearman only gets one additional attack, not one per round (admittedly a big deal at 1st-level, when they don't have many hit points...). After the swordman, whom I will call Mr. Sword, gets to the spearman (Mr. Spear) and attacks him once, he can 5-foot step every turn to keep up with Mr. Spear, which does not provoke an AoO. Mr. Spear needs to either take a 5 foot step back, stay still, actually move (which gives Mr. Sword an attack) or withdraw, which means Mr. Spear is not making a standard action attack (but will get an AoO).

Now of course there may be feats to give Mr. Spear some advantages, but they're not in the core rules, and Mr. Spear will need to gain levels to take those feats.

If Mr. Spear attacks first, he's actually giving up an advantage (if he gets close enough to hit Mr. Sword, Mr. Sword can then 5-foot step and gut him). Mr. Spear needs to ready actions and stay back at least 15 feet. (I think Mr. Spear could get a readied action and an attack of opportunity this way, pretty much simultaneously!)

 

[Water Bob]

The spear wielder can take a 5' step back each round to maintain his distance and still attack. On the swordsman's turn, he must step through the spears reach - recieve an oppurtunity attack - each round that he attacks.

Not quite, if the same rules are used in D&D as Conan (and I assume they are in this case). Stepping back 5 feet does not provoke an Attack of Opportunity for the spearman, steeping 5 feet outside of the threatened range of the swordsman, but the reverse is true, too. The swordsman does not provoke an Attack of Opportunity if he only takes his five foot step.

To provoke AoO's, the distance must be two squares or more, in which case, the spearman would provoke an AoO when he moved back out of the swordman's threat range.

You don't provoke an Attack of Opportunity walking into a threatened space, so in order for the spearman to get an AoO on the swordsman, he'd have to have a reach weapon that he couldn't use in base-to-base contact--therefore the swordsman moves through the threat range (and out of it) to get to the spearman.

I describe how it would work in Post #7 above.

 

[Celebrim]

I disagree. The spearman only gets one additional attack, not one per round (admittedly a big deal at 1st-level, when they don't have many hit points...). After the swordman, whom I will call Mr. Sword, gets to the spearman (Mr. Spear) and attacks him once, he can 5-foot step every turn to keep up with Mr. Spear, which does not provoke an AoO.

Doh! You are of course right. Brain fart on my part.

Nonetheless, in general I find reach weapons to be quite powerful in the D&D 3.X rule set. I don't think they need a lot of rules changes.

 

[haakon1]

In high school, I was in a Chamber Choir (Renaissance music). At Christmas, we did an elaborate production, including a sword dance, so we had wooden swords, which of course we used to play around with.

Once after school, I used a long aluminum pole (used for opening upper windows, about 10 ft. long) against a guy with a wooden sword. I was able to hold him off at first, but eventually he got in close and I was done.

So yeah, my "real life" experience is pretty close to what Celebrim said/3e reach weapon rules.