D&D 5E (2024) When a 20' pole has a 10' reach...

[ragweed-1]

I'm of the opinion that the pike being on the main equipment list is just a relic of past editions. It really shouldn't be? It's a weapon that should be fielded by armies, like a trebuchet, not by adventurers in a dungeon. It's not really even a complaint about historical accuracy even, just logistics and the fact that it's redundant with the halberd.

There's even an actual historical weapon called a spontoon or 'half-pike' that would make a lot more sense as a dungeoneering weapon.

There is already a two-handed pole arm that does piercing damage (and topple) in the table - the Lance (which is literally right below Halberd in the weapons table). The problem is that they included an illustration of an overly short tournament-style lance, rather than a typical military lance, which was just a big spear that could be couched. It's also worth noting that the pike in the PHB illustration is only a little longer than the halberd or glave, which makes the 18lb weight make even less sense.

But if there were a typical 20' pike available, I wouldn't entirely mind. One of the things that seems missing to me in DND is the sense of using the right weapon for the job. If one is going up against a huge beast, you don't want to run in with a sword or dagger (though the image of a Rogue jumping on a dragon's neck and stabbing away at the back of the head is pretty epic), you want a giant pointy stick with serious reach and penetration. Going after a dragon or T-rex, I would want a couple of people with pikes to hold them at bay while the archers and spellcaster wail on them from range. Or trap it with nets and skewer it with some reach. But having that level of tactical flexibility runs into option bloat.

Personally, I would love to bring back the old pole-arm table for flavor, but keep the mechanics simplified, with dozens of options for Partisans, Billhooks, and Batwing Corsecas as Heavy, Reach, D10 weapons with either Slashing & Cleave or Piercing & Topple.

 

[ragweed-1]

Sorry for the long rant...

Over the years I've had several DMs run games where it was obvious they hate heavy armor. On a ship? Only the person in heavy armor is going overboard so they can immediately sink because some lord was crossing a river in the 15th century wearing armor and drowned. Going to the gala where you know there's going to be a fight? The monk, rogue (who of course can hide a dozen daggers) and the wizard aren't inconvenienced at all but the heavy armor wearer is stripped to their skivvies and has to grab a salad fork as an improvised weapon once the inevitable fight starts.

If there were scenarios that put everyone at a disadvantage with the same regularity (whether because of armor, inability to cast spells or something else) I wouldn't have as much of an issue with it. If you're going to add in a bunch of penalties they should happen to every type of build with about the same frequency.

I can see how the imbalance would be annoying, and not always make sense (I mean, why wouldn't Lord Fancypants have a couple of guards with Truesight and Detect Magic up to prevent invisible or disguised guests at the ball, as well as some defenses against spellcasters?).

But it also seem like a fighter should have some flexibility in response to different circumstances. Your PAM can't carry their halberd in town? But you can carry a sturdy oak walking stick that happens to be a quarter-staff and does only a couple points less damage per round. Can't wear full plate and carry your greatsword to the ball? You probably can get a chain shirt to wear under the fancy silk tunic, along with a decorative short-sword or rapier (which was typically a dress accessory and would be allowed) and a concealed dagger or two, and still be able to pump out three attacks plus action surge.

But, yes, it should not only be the heavy-armor fighter that gets nerfed. Having the wizard get their spellbook stolen, the cleric unable to use their banned holy symbol, etc. (Not sure what you can do about monks - they're kind of annoying that way Edit: one of the guards has a wand loaded with an enhanced slow spell and lots of charges, so the monk is moving 10' and getting one slow punch per round).

 

[Willie the Duck]

Sure, put that on the equipment list too.

But pike - and trebuchet, and catapult, and ballista, etc. - should also be on the equipment list for purposes of outfitting a home base, equipping an army, laying siege to somewhere, and so on; all of which are things PCs might at some point easily find themselves doing. Having them priced also helps for if-when the PCs ever find themselves trying to sell such things.

The equipment list has to serve elements of play beyond just mere adventuring.

I would certainly not mind the game having a section on 'Merchant goods and things around a castle' that had the tuns of ale and bolts of cloth and guinea hens and such, along with 'Pike*: this is a military weapon used in formation, with massively-multiple fellow soldiers similarly armed. It is not very effective in the individual combat typical of adventurers. In an emergency, [some rules about improvised weapons or breaking the thing to get a spear, etc.].'
*and then go back to 'longspear' (and not 18lbs) for the existing weapon (if even needed).

 

[Coroc]

Awesome pictures. I love the combed morion helmets. Where are those reenactors? (I tried to figure it from the background, but couldn't quite make out anything).

Got it straight from wikipedia, since they are common use i did not bother to cite the source. From the looks of it, these are reenactors, and knowing some of these guys myself, (Not these, but some guys who love posing as romans from the empires time) i know that they are very good at researching what was and what not at the time period they try to reenact. Be it clothing, armor, weaponry, foods, etc. - and of course real combat stuff.

 

[AlViking]

I can see how the imbalance would be annoying, and not always make sense (I mean, why wouldn't Lord Fancypants have a couple of guards with Truesight and Detect Magic up to prevent invisible or disguised guests at the ball, as well as some defenses against spellcasters?).

But it also seem like a fighter should have some flexibility in response to different circumstances. Your PAM can't carry their halberd in town? But you can carry a sturdy oak walking stick that happens to be a quarter-staff and does only a couple points less damage per round. Can't wear full plate and carry your greatsword to the ball? You probably can get a chain shirt to wear under the fancy silk tunic, along with a decorative short-sword or rapier (which was typically a dress accessory and would be allowed) and a concealed dagger or two, and still be able to pump out three attacks plus action surge.

But, yes, it should not only be the heavy-armor fighter that gets nerfed. Having the wizard get their spellbook stolen, the cleric unable to use their banned holy symbol, etc. (Not sure what you can do about monks - their kind of annoying that way).

I accept that every PC in the game is a fantasy version of an archetype and the character so nimble they jump out of the way of the attack is one such archetype. At the same time while there are obvious limitations to armor, people wore it for good reason. So it becomes an issue of game balance, supporting archetypes that aren't very realistic - whether wearing armor all day or being able to dodge out of the way of arrows coming from multiple directions.

If my strength based fighter has to leave his armor in the closet while in town and go from plate armor to to a chain shirt they're often going from AC 18 (20 with a shield, before magic) to an AC of 12. Weapon damage - depending on choice of weapon - could be cut in half if I use a heavy weapon and certain feats. Meanwhile the dex based fighter is completely unaffected. As far as swimming and whatnot, obviously you aren't going to try to win a competition wearing armor but I've also seen videos where a guy wearing chainmail went swimming. The gambeson he wore underneath acted like a life preserver and he had no issue keeping afloat. I wouldn't expect it to last for hours, but that's not normally needed.

I ignore reality to a degree because D&D is not a reality simulator. If I enforce real world restrictions on armor in a game where unrealistic dex based and bare chested barbarian archetypes are enabled balance goes out the window. If I were playing in a game where it happens on a regular basis, I'd just switch over to a dex based PC.

 

[Thommy H-H]

[...]

This (excellent) post has just reminded me that historians aren't even 100% sure how European soldiers used swords in the medieval period. There are contemporary illustrations showing guys holding them by the blade and using the pommel as a bludgeon. It seems unlikely that was anything like a standard technique, but we can't be sure because no one bothered writing down how to fight with a sword (or if they did it didn't survive). And by the time movable type was invented (in Europe) and literacy became more widespread, everyone was fighting differently anyway.

D&D is necessarily an abstraction because we literally don't know a thing for certain. Pikes were probably used a certain way to execute certain tactics, but since their use predates the concept of an impartial press by several centuries, we can never be sure.

 

[Steampunkette]

The heaviest pikes were about 13lbs and 23ft long.

Most pikes were closer to the 4lbs and 10ft range.

 

[Coroc]

There is already a two-handed pole arm that does piercing damage (and topple) in the table - the Lance (which is literally right below Halberd in the weapons table). The problem is that they included an illustration of an overly short tournament-style lance, rather than a typical military lance, which was just a big spear that could be couched. It's also worth noting that the pike in the PHB illustration is only a little longer than the halberd or glave, which makes the 18lb weight make even less sense.

A Lance is nomenclature wise the typical lance used in mounted combat and as such i do understand it in the eweapons table.
Halberds could range from 1m80 to 2m40 IRL and they also got a pointi end so use them to keep the T-Rex at bay.

But if there were a typical 20' pike available, I wouldn't entirely mind. One of the things that seems missing to me in DND is the sense of using the right weapon for the job. If one is going up against a huge beast, you don't want to run in with a sword or dagger (though the image of a Rogue jumping on a dragon's neck and stabbing away at the back of the head is pretty epic), you want a giant pointy stick with serious reach and penetration. Going after a dragon or T-rex, I would want a couple of people with pikes to hold them at bay while the archers and spellcaster wail on them from range. Or trap it with nets and skewer it with some reach. But having that level of tactical flexibility runs into option bloat.

No prob at all with rulese being present for a 20' pike, but with an asterix that out of formation fighting it is utterly useless (so unless your party is not a bunch of fighters being soldiers withi na tertio that does not make sense ever for any PC to carry one around, not even within your portable whole

Personally, I would love to bring back the old pole-arm table for flavor, but keep the mechanics simplified, with dozens of options for Partisans, Billhooks, and Batwing Corsecas as Heavy, Reach, D10 weapons with either Slashing & Cleave or Piercing & Topple.

Well just do it, it is mostly fluff and it does not break anything at all. a bill and a halberd got many things in common, the english tended to usea bill rather than a halberd, but it also got chopping and hooking qualities as well as a mounted spike (and a back end which also could be used for tripping moves)

 

[jasper]

...I mean, its got the 18lb. weight of a 20' Pike but not the reach, so why?
What am I missing?

Pike (PHB pg. 215)
1d10 Piercing
Heavy, Reach, Two-Handed
Mastery: Push
18 lbs., 5 GP

I'm trying to give 5.x another chance, but...

Repeat after me
Gary did no research in Medieval Weapons.
Gary did no research.
2E did no research in Medieval Weapons.
2 E did no research.
3 E did no research in Medieval Weapons.
3 E did no research.
4 E did no research in Medieval Weapons.
4 E did no research.
5 E did no research in Medieval Weapons.
5 E did no research.
5.5 E did marketing research.

 

[jasper]

I mean 5e spear vs quarterstaff is also utmost broken. How can a weapon deal more damage without the pointy end than with? (I am refering to the shenanigan that you obviously could use a quarterstaff onehanded (How to do this other than a sa walking stick evades me, i bet this is just to recreate a stupid Gandalf staff and sword cameo), but on top of that use polearm mastery in conjunction with a shield.

A spear should do 1d10 twohanded and 1d8 onehanded, or the quarterstaff should do 1d6 1d4 accordingly and not be compliant with polearm master at least not onehanded.

A Quarterstaff is a deadly weapon, in the hand of a specialist like a ninja master or such, but in the hand of an untrained person like a wizard it should never be able to dish out more damage than a spear, the weapon used most commonly for untrained peoples militia, they would have handed out staffs, they are cheaper also.

Hey we can do damage by class. Wizards do d4. Thieves do a d6. Clerics d8, Fighter d10. Mutliclass takes the worse.