I am a little bit baffled by pointy sticks in 5th (no comment on earlier editions, as I either don't remember or didn't play them).
The basic pointy stick is a spear, depending on period, length does vary quite a bit, but they can be as long as the owner likes.
Very long versions (historically only used widely from the 16thC.) are called a pike, and if you throw a short one it can be called a javelin. If you use a spear from horseback it becomes a lance (early sources don't make a distinction at all.)
So my main point when it comes to the rules, is the massive difference in damage from the different pointy sticks.
(1d6 for Javelin and spear in one hand to 1d12 for a lance in two hands, on foot.)
Technically, if you're going to throw a spear you will use one hand, otherwise spears, pikes, lances etc are used in two.
This does bring the damage a little closer together, but I do not understand why a longer spear (pike) does more damage than a shorter one, the spearhead is actually smaller most of the time, making a smaller hole.
Same goes for a lance, these don't tend to have very large heads either.
Now, these things are easy to fix in house rules, I just wanted to put these things here to mull over.
Second thing is Poleweapon master:
Why does this not work with a spear? Because it's not a martial weapon? Spears have been the mainstay of armies and scirmishes for millenia. Knights used spears as a primary weapon all the time.. If the Martial thing is to prevent non Martial proficient characters from taking this feat, then just have it as a prerequisite (Martial weapon prof.)
/rant]
theTrueEdge wrote:
Saelorn wrote:
I wouldn't get too worried over the rules regarding specific weaponry. The PHB even goes so far as to say 'hey, you want something to be something else as far as name? Go ahead," and give descriptions of using the club stats and calling it a nunchaku, or using the sicke stats and calling it a kama.
It looks like 5e got far less granular than pevious versions as far as weapons and armor are concerned -- so much so that they almost might as well had broken it down to 'little one handed, big two-handed, thing you throw, thing you shoot" and let the player add whatever fluff they want to describe it.
Historical accuracy isn't gonna fly very well with a broadly-defined set of mechanics like 5e I suspect; you'd want some other more tactical, fine-pointed system methinks if you want that level of realism in your gaming. Or a lot of house-ruling.
That said, almost no games out there ever did the poor, simple spear justice, despite it being perhaps THE most important weapon in the history of mankind. :D
SteveMND wrote:
SteveMND wrote:
I've always been puzzled by that too: the typical D&D world is swarming with giant, powerful monsters, but the weaponry is always the same stuff that was intended only for killing human beings. You'd think spears would be more popular, since you have a lot better chance of killing a huge beast by penetrating its vital organs than by slashing cuts in its hide. There's a reason why no one historically hunted tigers, lions, or boars with swords. 
I'd like to see the harpoon make a return appearance, although the rules for it could get cumbersome. Still, ranged grappling and/or entangling has some substantial benefits when you're trying to bring down a bulette or dire bear.
Direach wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Saelorn wrote: