VirgilCaine
First Post
It is my understanding that a weapon must be of LARGE size and be MARTIAL to have reach. Of course, 3.5's "reach weapons double a creatures natural reach" stuff makes this inanity possible.
Halflings with Large sized spears.
![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
The weapon that got the shaft
- Thread starter Staffan
- Start date
It is my understanding that a weapon must be of LARGE size and be MARTIAL to have reach. Of course, 3.5's "reach weapons double a creatures natural reach" stuff makes this inanity possible.
Halflings with Large sized spears.
GandhitheBFG
First Post
What do you think about the quarterstaffiness of a spear in CQ though, using the shaft-splat feat? usable as a double weapon, as the quarterstaff? One end slashing, one bludgeoning?
doghead
thotd
A few of my characters are using them. The "throw and draw hand weapon" tactic is quite useful, as is the fact that Str mods add to damage. But I think Tulon has a point. One factor contributing to the wide spread use of Spears was that they were cheap.
How long are Shortspears, Spears and Longspears respectively? I had it in mind that short spears are about 6ft, similar to a quarterstaff. But looking at the weapon tables again, maybe that is the length of a Spear.
How long are Shortspears, Spears and Longspears respectively? I had it in mind that short spears are about 6ft, similar to a quarterstaff. But looking at the weapon tables again, maybe that is the length of a Spear.
Elder-Basilisk
First Post
3.5 made the longspear a simple weapon--to the joy of clerics and rogues everywhere who now have a reach weapon that costs them no feats. That, in itself is good enough for the longspear to be a good and viable weapon in the D&D scheme.
However the ordinary spear is still a neglected weapon.
However the ordinary spear is still a neglected weapon.
Sir Whiskers
First Post
Nifft said:A Phalanx was a spear-and-shield formation, right?
Most non-Elite halflings can't have Power Attack, since they take a -2 to Str. Yes, fear the elite halfling shieldless phalanx, though.
-- N
The longspear and shield works in a phalanx, but a lone spearman with a shield wouldn't last long against a reasonable opponent. The other would outmaneuver him, get inside his weapon's reach, and skewer him. The use of the spear by a solitary person was most common when hunting, at which time it was used two-handed (who ever brought a shield to hunt wild boars? - okay, maybe the zulus, but you get my drift...)
Spears were used because they were cheap, easy and quick to manufacture, had a short learning curve, were used in hunting (and, therefore, were generally already on-hand), and worked well en masse - where their reach could be decisive. But keep in mind that the phalanx, even Alexander's, was awfully inflexible. It was no fluke that the Roman legions chewed up most every phalanx they faced. In general, spear and shield was not common because it was the best option, but the easiest.
Tulon
First Post
Well, in that case it should be mentioned that the romans also used a shield+spear tactic, or more accurately, several tactics.
First, the standard Roman Legionnaire carried not only one, but two (veterans even three) spears, a short one and a long one. However, the short one (pilum) was just for throwing. The long one could have been thrown or used as a one-handed spear. When the situation afforded it, they changed to short swords.
Just one of the reasions why it is said that the Roman Legionnaire was relatively the best infantryman of all times.
Roman Auxilary forces, however, used a long spear as their main weapon, thus not throwing it.
Well, in the end it could be noted, that - when it goes to military usage - spears are only effective in groups. That rule goes for almost any shaft-weapon, like halberds as well as pikes.
TBE ("The Black Eye", or in it's german original, "Das Schwarze Auge") has some rules in it's 4th edition for special bonuses, like "formation", which allows a minimum of three characters to help each other parrying enemy attacks. There's even a rule for two characters using the same one shaft weapon (only selectable when using a really long pike). The attack only works, when both characters succeed in their dice-throws - but then the weapon does double damage. This Feat can also be coupled with the "Storm Attack" maneuvre, etc...
Damn, just be careful that you don't put too many rules in your game. It is really hard to preserve one's overview with 4.th edition TBE, which has about two or three Feats/Maneuvres per weapon(!).
First, the standard Roman Legionnaire carried not only one, but two (veterans even three) spears, a short one and a long one. However, the short one (pilum) was just for throwing. The long one could have been thrown or used as a one-handed spear. When the situation afforded it, they changed to short swords.
Just one of the reasions why it is said that the Roman Legionnaire was relatively the best infantryman of all times.
Roman Auxilary forces, however, used a long spear as their main weapon, thus not throwing it.
Well, in the end it could be noted, that - when it goes to military usage - spears are only effective in groups. That rule goes for almost any shaft-weapon, like halberds as well as pikes.
TBE ("The Black Eye", or in it's german original, "Das Schwarze Auge") has some rules in it's 4th edition for special bonuses, like "formation", which allows a minimum of three characters to help each other parrying enemy attacks. There's even a rule for two characters using the same one shaft weapon (only selectable when using a really long pike). The attack only works, when both characters succeed in their dice-throws - but then the weapon does double damage. This Feat can also be coupled with the "Storm Attack" maneuvre, etc...
Damn, just be careful that you don't put too many rules in your game. It is really hard to preserve one's overview with 4.th edition TBE, which has about two or three Feats/Maneuvres per weapon(!).
Tilla the Hun (work)
First Post
Spearmen, even en masse, were not commonly deployed as an offensive troop on the medieval battlefield. Their most common use was to anchor a line in a defensive fashion. They could hold their own against anything short of archers and/or heavy cavalry charges - provided they were only holding the line instead of advancing. I would be interested in references where the Romans advanced a spear line against a foe.
DnD accurately reflects this if you stack two rows of 2 to 4 spearmen in a confined space. Any attacker finds themselves fighting 1 on 4 if the spearmen are fighting from a defensive position.
However, PC's tend to be skirmishers, not line holders. Archers, swordsmen, and the like are what you drift toward as a PC fighter, not halberd, long spear, guisarme types unless it's a specific character concept. Who wants to go hiking through the woods with a 8-10' spear sticking up???
Your mention of hunting with a spear is in reference to the short spear or hunting spear or boar spear, right? None of those exceeded 6' in reach.
Ever see paintings of a spearman company on the march? They've got those long wooden poles sticking up about twice as tall as themselves.
The Romans proved that spearmen were relatively ineffective against ranged attackers and decently trained infantry men who stepped up to the 10' range and hacked the steel tips of the spears.
In medieval armys, spearmen were upgraded to pikemen whenever possible due to improved performance vs infantry and cavalry. Spear and Shield tactics, even en masse, were relatively rare by the end of the medieval period.
Spears serve a purpose in DnD, however, for the tactically minded party advancing down a corridor. Similar to equipping everyone with a ranged wpn for open area combat, it simply improves net performance if your front rank has swords, your second rank has spears (or halberds, pikes, etc), and your third rank has bows. Anything trying to close has to fight everyone at the same time. When your party, even at 3rd level, gets 6 attacks per round on one creature, it makes a huge difference.
Bottom line: I don't see anything wrong with the spear rules as written. Perhaps someone could enlighten me as to what you precisely see wrong with them?
DnD accurately reflects this if you stack two rows of 2 to 4 spearmen in a confined space. Any attacker finds themselves fighting 1 on 4 if the spearmen are fighting from a defensive position.
However, PC's tend to be skirmishers, not line holders. Archers, swordsmen, and the like are what you drift toward as a PC fighter, not halberd, long spear, guisarme types unless it's a specific character concept. Who wants to go hiking through the woods with a 8-10' spear sticking up???
Your mention of hunting with a spear is in reference to the short spear or hunting spear or boar spear, right? None of those exceeded 6' in reach.
Ever see paintings of a spearman company on the march? They've got those long wooden poles sticking up about twice as tall as themselves.
The Romans proved that spearmen were relatively ineffective against ranged attackers and decently trained infantry men who stepped up to the 10' range and hacked the steel tips of the spears.
In medieval armys, spearmen were upgraded to pikemen whenever possible due to improved performance vs infantry and cavalry. Spear and Shield tactics, even en masse, were relatively rare by the end of the medieval period.
Spears serve a purpose in DnD, however, for the tactically minded party advancing down a corridor. Similar to equipping everyone with a ranged wpn for open area combat, it simply improves net performance if your front rank has swords, your second rank has spears (or halberds, pikes, etc), and your third rank has bows. Anything trying to close has to fight everyone at the same time. When your party, even at 3rd level, gets 6 attacks per round on one creature, it makes a huge difference.
Bottom line: I don't see anything wrong with the spear rules as written. Perhaps someone could enlighten me as to what you precisely see wrong with them?
nikolai
First Post
I like Hoplite Style. I think a feat for a one-handed 1d8/x3 weapon you can set against a charge and throw (or use with reach) is fair, it would be a valuable option in a Greek-style campaign.
Is Shaft Strike needed? Isn't it just a case of changing the hold on a weapon (which you can argue is a free action, from other bits of the rules which involve weapons switching hands) and then using the weapon as an improvised club, which is already in the rules?
Is Shaft Strike needed? Isn't it just a case of changing the hold on a weapon (which you can argue is a free action, from other bits of the rules which involve weapons switching hands) and then using the weapon as an improvised club, which is already in the rules?
Last edited:
Aaron2
Explorer
Tulon said:
From Polybius "The same style of armament also applies to the principes and triarii, except that instead of javelins, the triarii carry long thusting spears." The Triarii were the only romans of the republic or imperial army that used long thrusting spear. The pilum is a throwing weapon more akin to javelin that D&D spears.
I've never seen mention of Romans using pilum as spears (except for the pilum muralis which is a different weapon). Here's a quote from Ceasar's De Bello Gallico. In book 1 (paragraph 52) the romans are face to face with some gauls ...
"the enemy so suddenly and rapidly rushed forward, that there was no time for casting the javelins at them. Throwing aside [therefore] their javelins, they fought with swords hand to hand."
Notice how they threw away their pilum rather than try to use them in hand-to-hand. The latin of this last line is "Relictis pilis comminus gladiis pugnatum est." So we are for sure talking about pilum and gladius.
This is even true of later (post 3rd century) roman army as a whole, although the later roman soldier sometimes carried javelin instead of spear when raiding.
Aaron
Similar Threads
Level Up (A5E)
What would you do to simplify A5E and/or speed up combat?
