What feats would a human barbarian need to duel wield a spear as well as a dagger? I'd imagine Monkey Grip would be essential no?
What's the perks of using a large short spear plus a dagger over a medium spear and a dagger?
Reach (with a longspear, but then can't throw it), an extra d2 damage, and *3 critical multiplier.
But for that you'd take -2 penalty to attack, and it would cost you a feat. Bad deal in my book.
Agreed, except that it's a martial weapon.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
You could also use a trident and call it a spear.
It's a rather small issue, but I view the inability to use spears and lances one-handed in Pathfinder as rather silly, especially if you take into account historical troop types like hoplites.
Was that style even slightly effective out of formation, though? Hoplites had swords for when their formations were broken up.
|
Was that style even slightly effective out of formation, though? Hoplites had swords for when their formations were broken up.You could also use a trident and call it a spear.
It's a rather small issue, but I view the inability to use spears and lances one-handed in Pathfinder as rather silly, especially if you take into account historical troop types like hoplites.
The point is that they were able to wield their lances one-handed. Without riding a horse. The length of the lance makes it rather awkward to use in melee, but there are much shorter spears that shouldn't have that problem.
You could also use a trident and call it a spear.
It's a rather small issue, but I view the inability to use spears and lances one-handed in Pathfinder as rather silly, especially if you take into account historical troop types like hoplites.
Not to metion gladiators, who broke that rule all the time. Bad Hoplomachus, bad!
The point is that they were able to wield their lances one-handed. Without riding a horse. The length of the lance makes it rather awkward to use in melee, but there are much shorter spears that shouldn't have that problem.Was that style even slightly effective out of formation, though? Hoplites had swords for when their formations were broken up.You could also use a trident and call it a spear.
It's a rather small issue, but I view the inability to use spears and lances one-handed in Pathfinder as rather silly, especially if you take into account historical troop types like hoplites.
Like the Roman pilum, F'rinstance.
|
I have actually seen this style in action. (I know a group of combat re-enactors) The trick is you hold the spear two handed with the dagger gripped with the rear hand pointed in the opposite direction of the spear. You can quickly shift grip to bring the dagger to bear. The person using this style would poke at opponents from reach, then close quickly if needed with the dagger. In my conversation with the woman using the style she explained that it was often taught to Norse women. This is feat I use for it my After Ragnarok setting:
Spear and Dagger Fighting
Prerequisites: BAB +1 Proficiency with spear and dagger.
The character my have a spear and a dagger prepared at the same time. While prepared in this way the regular spear is considered a reach weapon. The character also threatens all adjacent spaces with the dagger. The character may only attack with one or the other but may may drop the spear and switch to the dagger as a free action.
Two-weapon fighting could be used in combination with this.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
The point is that they were able to wield their lances one-handed. Without riding a horse. The length of the lance makes it rather awkward to use in melee, but there are much shorter spears that shouldn't have that problem.
Not just awkward. So ineffective out of formation that they carried another weapon for use in case it happened. Formation fighting really doesn't have that much in common with open field combat.
For another poster:
If you want to be a hoplomachus, use a shortspear. The game already supports that. If you're wanting to actually replicate the whole dynamic of gladiator battles in their entirety, you probably want a system that accounts for reach at a much finer level than D20-based systems do.
The monkeygrip feat allows you to use a large short spear in one hand now. So you couldn´t use it to wield a spear or long spear one handed anymore.
Where might this be written?
The point is that they were able to wield their lances one-handed. Without riding a horse. The length of the lance makes it rather awkward to use in melee, but there are much shorter spears that shouldn't have that problem.Not just awkward. So ineffective out of formation that they carried another weapon for use in case it happened. Formation fighting really doesn't have that much in common with open field combat.
Hoplites were shield and spear w/the back up bronze short-sword for in-close work.
"ineffective out of formation" is pretty much crazy-talk. They used their shields, virtually as a tower shield (ie: only eyes really peek over, and a helmet on top of that - body was fully covered, and crouched behind), and would/could approach an enemy, virtually unharmed .... OUT of formation. It's definitely not a "short spear" at all as D&D defines it (not just PF, mind you - long standing disconnect for that particular combat style. They just made a fiat by rules that you can't use the spear 1-handed.)
It's a very good combat style to use in 1 on 1, or formation (shield-walls) with a secondary row of dedicated attackers to the primary row's dedicated shield holding/bashing and stabbing w/short swords (not spears - that was for the 2nd row) anyone that hangs out too close trying to break the wall.
As for 2-wpn fighting with a dagger and spear? Why not? Matter of fact, what's wrong with using a spear 1-handed anyway? Long spear's a bad idea, IMO (anything that long needs 2 hands properly to use). However the "spear" is good for just one-handing and shield use - it can be thrown, has an ok range, and is a real good poker 1-handed for keeping people at a bit of a distance (not *reach* worthy in game terms, but perfectly effective none the less for real combat).
Personally, I'd go hoplite myself if going this rout, BUT I see no problems with one-handing a spear and dagger - essentially, I'd just house-rule it and move along.
What, at the end of the day is harmed by allowing a historically accurate combat style to be given validation in the game? The player will be happy, if he wants to be a "spear specialist" he can carry a few extra "short spears" for ranged fighting, and then always have his regular spear for up close.
:shrugs:
As a GM - I think I'm probably going to just house rule that bit about spears outright.
Like The Speaker in Dreams said I'd probably either house rule that you could do it with a spear or if I was the player and not the DM I'd just use a short spear if my DM said no. In the second case you could just pretend it's a normal spear but you're doing slightly less damage because you're using it 1 handed.
Use a small long spear, and call it a martial weapon to avoid the proficiency problems -- or just take the -2 to hit.
IMO the catch off guard and improvised weapon mastery feats handle 90% of all cases like these now.
The Speaker in Dreams hit it on the nose. Harming your enemy from a distance is the key to success/survival in combat (real). Archers > Spearman > Swordsmen. Swords were a weapon of last resort. It's simply because swords hold such iconic value that they are more potent than polearms, spears, etc in-game.
That and a sword has little value out of combat. It is a good weapon generally speaking because it is only a weapon. It's designed simply for the fight. All the other weapons developed out of tools or hunting implements.
Owning a sword was a distinction sort of thing much like plate armor but not as useful.
Honestly the best over all weapon was the flanged mace.
Perhaps in close quarters the flanged mace rules, but the best weapon is one that keeps you away from your enemy. It's all about range and reach, but that doesn't translate well into a game. Who'd want to play a game were 5 commoners with spears could eviscerate a legendary swordsman every single time.
Good point I should have pointed out in melee, and in loose or no formation.
Yes - flanged mace = TOTALLY bad ass!!
On sword vs. spear, the only real advantage I'd say a sword might have is that's it's entirely made of metal. The speak has a wooden shaft. Metal vs. wood = bad for wood (in otherwords, if kept at a distance long enough, the sword guy can easily enough just break the shaft and negate the spear as a weapon).
The sword would also have an advantage after closing in. Control of the shaft of the spear would be vital for the spearman once the swordman gets instead his preferred fighting range, while the sword is generally deadlier the entire length of the weapon and quicker to change fighting distances with.
(still prefers the spear overall)
Like the Roman pilum, F'rinstance.
That would be a heavy javelin. The pilum was intended to thrown, rather than fought with hand-to-hand.
See this thread for some house-rule pilum specific options.
Spear and Dagger FightingPrerequisites: BAB +1 Proficiency with spear and dagger.
The character my have a spear and a dagger prepared at the same time. While prepared in this way the regular spear is considered a reach weapon. The character also threatens all adjacent spaces with the dagger. The character may only attack with one or the other but may may drop the spear and switch to the dagger as a free action.Two-weapon fighting could be used in combination with this.
NICE! Yoink
Like the Roman pilum, F'rinstance.That would be a heavy javelin. The pilum was intended to thrown, rather than fought with hand-to-hand.
See this thread for some house-rule pilum specific options.
Pilum is IN the new Pathfinder Armory book... for official support
I came up with a Spear Master feat for my campaigns.
Spear Master
benefit: You may use a spear as a one-handed weapon at no penalty. You may use the butt end of a spear or short spear as a weapon that deals bludgeoning damage equal to the damage the other end (1d8 for a spear, 1d6 for a short spear) that criticals on 20 for x2. You can alternate between the ends at will.
This makes a spear or short spear a double weapon as well.
I don't think it's broken to have a d8 with two damage types in one hand. Morning Stars are ok, right?
The point is that they were able to wield their lances one-handed. Without riding a horse. The length of the lance makes it rather awkward to use in melee, but there are much shorter spears that shouldn't have that problem.Not just awkward. So ineffective out of formation that they carried another weapon for use in case it happened. Formation fighting really doesn't have that much in common with open field combat.
For another poster:
If you want to be a hoplomachus, use a shortspear. The game already supports that. If you're wanting to actually replicate the whole dynamic of gladiator battles in their entirety, you probably want a system that accounts for reach at a much finer level than D20-based systems do.
You are thinking of the late Macedonian phalanx with their laughably long million foot spears, which were indeed completely useless outside of formation. Classical Greek hoplites were still capable of using their spears if formations got broken up (and did, often, since every victorious battle included a phase of the formation breaking up and you going off to chase running enemies and stab them in the backs... with your spear).
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I came up with a Spear Master feat for my campaigns.
Spear Master
benefit: You may use a spear as a one-handed weapon at no penalty. You may use the butt end of a spear or short spear as a weapon that deals bludgeoning damage equal to the damage the other end (1d8 for a spear, 1d6 for a short spear) that criticals on 20 for x2. You can alternate between the ends at will.This makes a spear or short spear a double weapon as well.
I don't think it's broken to have a d8 with two damage types in one hand. Morning Stars are ok, right?
At first glance, it seems a touch on the overpowered side, but after further analysis, it's not so bad. The double-longsword is an exotic weapon which deals a d8 on both ends with a 19-20/x2 crit. You would need to burn a feat to gain proficiency in the double-longsword, but you would also need to burn one to gain your Spear Master feat, so that's a wash. The only real thing that sets them apart is that this feat would allow someone with only simple weapon/spear proficiency (such as a cleric or druid) to gain access to a one-handed d8/x3 weapon (equivalent to a battleaxe) that can also be thrown short distances. I don't think that's really game-breaking though, but maybe a bit on the "powerful" side. Personally, though, I'd make the blunt end deal a d6 regardless of whether it was a spear or a shortspear simply because that's the damage of a quarterstaff and that's effectively what it would be on the other end. Spear hafts aren't usually any bigger around or harder than shortspear hafts, after all. :)
At first glance, it seems a touch on the overpowered side, but after further analysis, it's not so bad...
I appreciate the feedback.
The only real thing that sets them apart is that this feat would allow someone with only simple weapon/spear proficiency (such as a cleric or druid) to gain access to a one-handed d8/x3 weapon (equivalent to a battleaxe) that can also be thrown short distances. I don't think that's really game-breaking though, but maybe a bit on the "powerful" side.
I bet there is some exotic weapon out there that does the same thing. One feat accomplishes the same effect in either case.
Personally, though, I'd make the blunt end deal a d6 regardless of whether it was a spear or a shortspear simply because that's the damage of a quarterstaff and that's effectively what it would be on the other end. Spear hafts aren't usually any bigger around or harder than shortspear hafts, after all. :)
Though I think this is a fair suggestion, I have a replica spear and it has a small metal ball with a spike on the other side which I assume is for balance and setting it for a charge. I used this as part of my inspiration. I think it's slightly more damaging than a quarterstaff, but your comment is sound in its reason.
I have actually seen this style in action. (I know a group of combat re-enactors) The trick is you hold the spear two handed with the dagger gripped with the rear hand pointed in the opposite direction of the spear. You can quickly shift grip to bring the dagger to bear. The person using this style would poke at opponents from reach, then close quickly if needed with the dagger. In my conversation with the woman using the style she explained that it was often taught to Norse women. This is feat I use for it my After Ragnarok setting:
Spear and Dagger Fighting
Prerequisites: BAB +1 Proficiency with spear and dagger.
The character my have a spear and a dagger prepared at the same time. While prepared in this way the regular spear is considered a reach weapon. The character also threatens all adjacent spaces with the dagger. The character may only attack with one or the other but may may drop the spear and switch to the dagger as a free action.Two-weapon fighting could be used in combination with this.
That's awesome man and just what I'm looking for. The PC who I want to use the style is a self-styled "wolf princess" Kellid barbarian.
Question though. With that feat combined with Monkey Grip, Two-Weapon Fighting, and Improved Two-Weapon fighting as well as a Str of 16 and a Dex of 18, what would my NPC's Base Atk be if she was a Barbarian 4/Ranger 10 and wielding a medium spear and a medium dagger?
Also, Can we get a Paizo expert to take a look at this feat and see if it works to pathfinder standards? While I believe the feat says you can in fact prepare both the spear and the dagger, I don't know if it takes the size of the spear (aka a two-handed weapon) into account. Is it worded right? Can we get a cool name for it (aka like a fighting style feat name {such as Thunder and Fang}])?
At first glance, it seems a touch on the overpowered side, but after further analysis, it's not so bad...I appreciate the feedback.
The only real thing that sets them apart is that this feat would allow someone with only simple weapon/spear proficiency (such as a cleric or druid) to gain access to a one-handed d8/x3 weapon (equivalent to a battleaxe) that can also be thrown short distances. I don't think that's really game-breaking though, but maybe a bit on the "powerful" side.I bet there is some exotic weapon out there that does the same thing. One feat accomplishes the same effect in either case.
Personally, though, I'd make the blunt end deal a d6 regardless of whether it was a spear or a shortspear simply because that's the damage of a quarterstaff and that's effectively what it would be on the other end. Spear hafts aren't usually any bigger around or harder than shortspear hafts, after all. :)Though I think this is a fair suggestion, I have a replica spear and it has a small metal ball with a spike on the other side which I assume is for balance and setting it for a charge. I used this as part of my inspiration. I think it's slightly more damaging than a quarterstaff, but your comment is sound in its reason.
That metal ball is called a pommel, and it's called the same thing on every weapon. The pommel on a spear wasn't usually used histroically, since the spear head was so light. I would still want one, since after using a halberd with a pommel I ain't never going back. It could also be used as a weapon itself in case the spear was chopped away (Which was fairly hard, two-handed swords were mostly used to try and clear them prior to a maneuver and break some on a lucky hit). In general, using one spear one or two-handed against a guy with a sword is always advantageous, even in a duel. You guarantee that he'll be tired from deflecting jabs by the time he gets to you as you keep backing up, and his sword won't do him much good. Setting the polearm up against a charge was usually done when the polearm was the sole thing held by the soldiers.
As far as the game rules go I think it's fine. More importantly, if the pole end of your spear gets enchanted, does that mean you have a +1 magic butt?
As far as the game rules go I think it's fine. More importantly, if the pole end of your spear gets enchanted, does that mean you have a +1 magic butt?
It would be treated like any other double weapon, meaning that each end must be enchanted separately.
Thanks for the feedback.
Wait, so Monkey Grip doesn't let you duel wield a medium spear (not a short spear/long spear but a regular spear) and a dagger at the same time if combined with Two-Weapon Fighting?
Nope.
Wait, so Monkey Grip doesn't let you duel wield a medium spear (not a short spear/long spear but a regular spear) and a dagger at the same time if combined with Two-Weapon Fighting?
Which is kinda retarded. It'll allow you to wield a large shortspear as a one handed weapon though. Which is absolutely identical to a medium spear, with the exception of the critical multiplier. Basically the Monkey Grip feat works upwards, not downwards.
If there's a feat that will allow you to treat weapons as one category lighter, that'd be great.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
If there's a feat that will allow you to treat weapons as one category lighter, that'd be great.
Except that would allow people to use TWF combinations like falchion/scimitar or greatsword/longsword, which is just crazy. I hate Monkey Grip enough as it is. Don't exacerbate the problem, IMO.
|
|
If there's a feat that will allow you to treat weapons as one category lighter, that'd be great.Except that would allow people to use TWF combinations like falchion/scimitar or greatsword/longsword, which is just crazy. I hate Monkey Grip enough as it is. Don't exacerbate the problem, IMO.
The base damage of the weapon is pretty irrelevant when TWFing. If a player wants to burn a feat to use scimitars instead of kukris, why not? One feat for a +1 damage (but -1 on attack rolls) seems pretty wasteful to me.
If there's a feat that will allow you to treat weapons as one category lighter, that'd be great.Except that would allow people to use TWF combinations like falchion/scimitar or greatsword/longsword, which is just crazy. I hate Monkey Grip enough as it is. Don't exacerbate the problem, IMO.
More importantly, it would let you finesse a bastard sword, which is just totally unrealistic (/sarcasm).
Honestly if you're flipping out about people fighting with two weapons after burning TWO feats to fight at a -4 each, son, I have a few other feats we don't use anymore to introduce you to called Shock Trooper and Leap Attack.
So, thematically, right? This fighter, he just runs up to an enemy and completely forgoes his defenses, but retains his accuracy, and SOMEHOW this makes his foes explode with gigatons of damage. But he does this most effectively when using a two-handed weapon. How? I dunno. My answer was to ban the feats after much deliberation, since clearly WotC tested them extensively to make sure they were balanced. CLEARLY MUCH PLAYTESTING OF THIS OCCURED. CLEARLY COMPLETE WARRIOR WAS JUST MADE WITH BALANCE IN MIND.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Honestly if you're flipping out about people fighting with two weapons after burning TWO feats to fight at a -4 each, son, I have a few other feats we don't use anymore to introduce you to called Shock Trooper and Leap Attack.
First of all, I'm hardly "flipping out." I never said I didn't allow Monkey Grip in my games, I just said that I hated it because it breaks my suspension of disbelief. Your mileage may vary.
Yes, TWF and Monkey Grip combine to make you even more useless than most TWFers already are. That's not the point. I don't want to empower players to make more ridiculous character choices than the given rules already allow for. :) If your players want to finesse bastard swords and TWF with greatswords and longsword, by all means, create the feat for your own games. I really don't want to see anything like that worm its way into the core ruleset, though.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I have a house rule I call "bastard spears": Spears (not longspears) can be used 1-handed as a martial weapon. That way your commoners, clerics, sorcerers, etc. still use them 2-handed, but your warriors, fighters, etc. can go all hoplite without burning a feat.
I have a house rule I call "bastard spears": Spears (not longspears) can be used 1-handed as a martial weapon. That way your commoners, clerics, sorcerers, etc. still use them 2-handed, but your warriors, fighters, etc. can go all hoplite without burning a feat.
Very nice take!
:-D
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I have a house rule I call "bastard spears": Spears (not longspears) can be used 1-handed as a martial weapon. That way your commoners, clerics, sorcerers, etc. still use them 2-handed, but your warriors, fighters, etc. can go all hoplite without burning a feat.
I like it. I may steal that, especially since one-handed spears aren't really any much more powerful than longswords. They can be thrown short distances, but I probably wouldn't allow them to use the "brace" ability if they were being wielded in one hand in order to help balance up a bit.
I like it. I may steal that, especially since one-handed spears aren't really any much more powerful than longswords. They can be thrown short distances, but I probably wouldn't allow them to use the "brace" ability if they were being wielded in one hand in order to help balance up a bit.
Actually, "spears" can't be used for bracing anyway - that's Longspears only. ;-)
Is this any good?
Spiked Fang (Combat)
You have mastered the ancient Ulfen fighting style of Spiked Fang, a style often utilized by warrior maidens from the Land of the Linnorm Kings. As you penetrate distant foes with your short spear, you then slash foes who make it past your reach with your dagger.
Prerequisites: Str 13, Dex 13, Two-Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus (dagger), Weapon Focus (short spear)
Benefit: As long as you are fighting with a short spear and a dagger (and you make attacks with your dagger as your offhand attack), you may treat the short spear as if it had the brace and reach special features and may threaten all adjacent squares with the dagger.
Special: A fighter may select Spiked Fang as one of his fighter bonus feats.
Is this any good?
Spiked Fang (Combat)
You have mastered the ancient Ulfen fighting style of Spiked Fang, a style often utilized by warrior maidens from the Land of the Linnorm Kings. As you penetrate distant foes with your short spear, you then slash foes who make it past your reach with your dagger.
Prerequisites: Str 13, Dex 13, Two-Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus (dagger), Weapon Focus (short spear)
Benefit: As long as you are fighting with a short spear and a dagger (and you make attacks with your dagger as your offhand attack), you may treat the short spear as if it had the brace and reach special features and may threaten all adjacent squares with the dagger.
Special: A fighter may select Spiked Fang as one of his fighter bonus feats.
But you already threaten all adjacent squares with the short spear...
You could have it let you make an AoO with the dagger against foes who close. With that three-feat qualifier I'd allow it in a heartbeat. To make it good, let this be done with a full-size spear used in one hand.
@Fatespinner If you hate Monkey Grip (I'm no fan of it either, especially since melee is now good) then just disallow it. It's not core anymore. I've disallowed every WotC book in my games and stick to core pathfinder and a few homebrewed feats to give the fighters and monks more options. Hell, most of the people who take that feat are fighters, give them a "extra power attack" feat for a -1 to hit for normal power attack extra damage. Same effect (Better IMO) with less of a penalty, AND it eats a feat same as monkey grip, AND the subtraction for this is optional, so you don't get the fighter missing with every other attack.
One guy in my game is going to be using his greatsword one-handed (Basing the character off of Guts from Berserk) and I just plan on giving him the two-handed bonus anyway provided his other hand is free, since it does exactly as much good there as on his weapon. Giving the player what they want without it being dumb is just a matter of repackaging it. They only want a big weapon for the Cloud factor and what else...? DAMAGE. The same thing all Fighters strive for.
To make it good, let this be done with a full-size spear used in one hand.
Is that allowable with Two-Weapon fighting? I still don't understand how a Earthbreaker can be treated as being wielded by one hand under Two-Weapon Fighting (especially since it's considered a two-handed weapon)!
|
|
Is this any good?
Spiked Fang (Combat)
You have mastered the ancient Ulfen fighting style of Spiked Fang, a style often utilized by warrior maidens from the Land of the Linnorm Kings. As you penetrate distant foes with your short spear, you then slash foes who make it past your reach with your dagger.
Prerequisites: Str 13, Dex 13, Two-Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus (dagger), Weapon Focus (short spear)
Benefit: As long as you are fighting with a short spear and a dagger (and you make attacks with your dagger as your offhand attack), you may treat the short spear as if it had the brace and reach special features and may threaten all adjacent squares with the dagger.
Special: A fighter may select Spiked Fang as one of his fighter bonus feats.But you already threaten all adjacent squares with the short spear...
Not if it gained the reach ability, which it does from the feat.