Weapon size question- greek style phalanx

[shilsen]

A marital weapon with 15' reach?

That's disgusting.

-Hyp.

Damn, you beat me to it

 

[TheDarkLord]

The spears in the phalanx that Alexander the great used were thick heavy 20 foot long skewering blades. They were inferior in hand to hand combat per say, but fro breaking charges they couldnt be beat. The first 5 rows of soldiers held their spears straight forward with "One" hand. They were mainly used to skewer charging horsemen for the most part. The farther back in the rank you were you held your spear slightly elevated. and the men in the very back rows held their spears straight up. Doing so allowed you to deflect incoming javalin attacks and the like with the spears, while protecting the men from attacks of volleys of arrows.

The shields the hoplights carried were neither very big nor very heavy, if anything they were there only to deflect arrows, a sword for the most part could sunder the shield. I don't think it would be a very good martial weapon just because it's primary use was a charge breaker and when that happened the men in the back ranks used their spears to jab those who did close with the front ranks. Brutal way of fighting but effective.

 

[aurance]

The fact that most historical pre-gunpowder armies used spears as their main weapons should tell you something. Spears are a lot cheaper to make than axes (don't even need iron for the spearhead), hence, mass distribution is possible with spears. So yeah, I'd say it's a better weapon for an army.

That's fine, but making spear one-handed martial weapons makes battleaxe inferior in every way, not just for an army or formation fighting.

 

[Hypersmurf]

That's fine, but making spear one-handed martial weapons makes battleaxe inferior in every way, not just for an army or formation fighting.

Well, spears can't be used to Sunder; they don't beat Zombie DR; and they can't be made Vorpal...

-Hyp.

 

[Starglim]

That's fine, but making spear one-handed martial weapons makes battleaxe inferior in every way, not just for an army or formation fighting.

Historically, weren't late Dark Age warband-type armies a mix of sword-and-shield fighters with two-handed axe wielders, in D&D terms, greataxes? I wonder if the D&D one-handed battleaxe deserves protecting, at the cost of nerfing spear fighting.

 

[Saeviomagy]

The shields the hoplights carried were neither very big nor very heavy, if anything they were there only to deflect arrows, a sword for the most part could sunder the shield. I don't think it would be a very good martial weapon just because it's primary use was a charge breaker and when that happened the men in the back ranks used their spears to jab those who did close with the front ranks. Brutal way of fighting but effective.

If this is indeed the case, then it's a simple matter to have hoplites armed with bucklers and two-handed longspears.

 

[Darklone]

The spears were not only used against charging opponents,... the hoplites managed to charge while staying in formation in some battles (e.g. battle of Marathon). All this while holding a 20ft spear and a shield without hitting your buddies over the head

Some historians think that they supported the spear with the shieldhand.

 

[billd91]

A marital weapon with 15' reach?

That's disgusting.

-Hyp.

I don't see it being a particularly big deal. If you faced off against a lone pikeman, once you get inside 15' the pike is no good. Against a formation of pikers, then it's quite formidable... as it should be.

 

[aurance]

I don't see it being a particularly big deal. If you faced off against a lone pikeman, once you get inside 15' the pike is no good. Against a formation of pikers, then it's quite formidable... as it should be.

You missed the joke

Well, spears can't be used to Sunder; they don't beat Zombie DR; and they can't be made Vorpal...

Those are good points - makes the axe a niche weapon which is fine, but not completely better than the martial spear. Hm.