combine staff and spear proficiencies
![[Deleted User]](https://forums.beamdog.com/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 0
The user and all related content has been deleted.
1
Comments
I want the original Baldur's Gate proficiencies back!
(Seriously though, why is that controversial?)
Long and short swords are more similar than the long and great sword. Technically, v2 rules split the bastard sword into 1-H and 2-H implementation, and this should also apply to the uchigatana (aka katana).
I fully agree that the spear and quarterstaff should share proficiency. by the way.
A quarterstaff is a true two-handed weapon, and requires serious skill to use well - it needs more specialisation than most other weapons. However, in expert hands, it's arguably the most powerful of all melee weapons, having more defensive effectiveness (i.e. blocking the other guy's blows) than other weapons, being very fast-striking because you can use both ends of the staff, and having pretty good reach and striking power as well.
A spear is generally either a one-handed weapon or a thrown weapon, not normally a two-handed weapon at all. Yes, a really big spear is two-handed ... but then you're talking about something more like a pike than a spear. A pike is a special-purpose weapon which enables stationary massed infantry to stand against cavalry, but it's too cumbersome for effective use in fluid melee. Obviously there is no cavalry in BG, so the sorts of spear which are appropriate to the campaign setting are the one-handed types (and maybe thrown types as well).
If the game really wanted to model the reality of these weapons, quarterstaves should have their defensive advantages recognised (say by adding +1 AC bonus when the user has Weapon Specialisation or better, maybe +2 AC for Grandmastery) and should be given a better speed factor (probably 1 as standard and 0 for a special staff), but are otherwise about right as they are. On the other hand, spears should be changed to one-handed (and allow a shield or offhand weapon in the other hand), which would obviously be quite a drastic change in how they're used in play.
On the other hand, I don't necessarily think there's any need for the game to be trying to model reality too closely, I'm just saying this is how it ought to be IF realism were the main objective. I'm mostly content with the existing weapon proficiency classes.
However, a change like merging the proficiency classes for staff and spear would be completely wrong, going even further away from reality for no good reason.
If I were going to advocate any change in the categories, then firstly I'd say that Clubs, Maces and Morningstars are all variants of the same thing and are used similarly, so they ought to be one proficiency, but Flails are a different weapon and should remain a separate category. Secondly, I think I'd agree that the lumping-together of Scimitar/Wakizashi/Ninja-to is misconceived. Historically, training with katanas and wakizashis went together (a samurai would always carry both), but the wakizashi is primarily a thrusting weapon not too different in use from a western-style short sword, and it was mostly an offhand weapon, so it'd make more sense to classify it under Short Swords or even Daggers. I might leave the ninja-to under the Scimitar proficiency, however, since it's a slashing weapon.
As for the 1-handed use of a spear, I agree that BG doesn't support this particular use and should. Perhaps what is needed is one proficiency for spear/quarterstaff (2H weapon) and another called one-handed spear. If you arm a shield and don't have pips in this, you get the THAC0 reduction for non-proficiency.
While I'd like this, I doubt that the game engine can work that way. If it could, I'd also ask for the different damage for bastard swords being used one or two-handed per PNP rules.
The term "quarterstaff" first comes from quarter of a tree from which the staff is fashioned, only later adopting the name because of the hand positioning (which lends itself to great ranged thrusting and swinging, and defensive stances are very different to the Bo staff (except for level guards, which is what you would most often see in martial arts choreography, where the staff is held horizontally).
Unfortunately, the quarterstaff actually requires more skill to be used effectively than the spear. The spear itself was a weapon designed for mostly thrusting at range in critical joints to ensure damaging hits, where sword blows would be deflected off armour if your arm wasn't perfect. Furthermore, spears could be thrown as javelins across longer ranges if a sword was kept as a backup, leading to a multi-faceted use of the most common weapon in history.
If we were to combine weapon proficiencies, it would actually be the halberd and quarterstaff. The spear would have to remain on its own, and perhaps pick up a ranged weapon that carries the same proficiency. On that note, we could break down the three melee ranged weapons into slashing/missile, piercing/missile and crushing/missile with the throwing dagger, javelin and throwing axe respectively (even though realistically all of them just pierce).
Maces and Morning Stars and Clubs should all be in the same category. It is incomprehensible to me that they're not. I'd posit that it makes sense all round and would aid in both gameplay and immersion.
Bastard Swords and Long Swords should be in the same category for the same reasons (assuming the 2-handed mechanic is not implemented). 3 inches of extra handle makes little difference to technique and any differences in effect are well enough represented by the differences in damage dice if you ask me.
Spears should be included with Halberds - "Polearms", for gameplay reasons rather than realism.
"My brother is a +5 Laundry drying pole"
"I'll show you post traumatic stress disorder"
-something about pole position.