Spears and Shields
Fiendish_Warrior
Member Posts: 309
Is there a good reason why (all) spears are two-handed? One of the things that annoys me most about the BG series is that I can't equip both, a spear and a shield. This isn't an uncommon setup. From Greek hoplites wielding shields and spears or pikes to jousters with shields and lances, there are plenty of historical examples to show it can be effectively done. I would love to create a dragon-slayer type character, but it feels all wrong to have a spear without a rather sizeable tower shield. It's like heading out to work without your pants.
11
Comments
That said, we are talking about a fantasy world, so it is theoretically possible for people to wield spear and shields like the Spartans in 300 (cool movie, HUGELY inaccurate historically speaking), so I wish the option was there for people to use spears one handed.
But those were just off-hand examples. I believe there are other examples of light one-handed, extensive spear use with shields. I've heard about Irish Spearfighters and Vikings using them, but that's out of my comfort zone and I could be totally wrong.
Regardless, when it comes down to it, you're right. It's fantasy and thus should be made possible. Obviously not anything should go, but...when I think about dragon slaying, I think shields and spears. *shrug*
Sidenote: I had to laugh when I came across the Dragonslayer Spear. I mean...what kind of warrior goes into battle against dragons without a shield or a deathwish? Unless of course you're Conan, in which case you probably have as little care as Crom for your own well-being but more than make up for it by being the greatest of all time.
Now that you mention it (throwing), I'm surprised they have throwing axes and daggers but not javelins. It might stretch the imagination wondering where one would be carrying all of those javelins, but no more than carrying 50+ throwing axes.
I should make "Machete" and carry nothing but daggers and throwing daggers.
I should think it might be possible to use their method to make spears 1hand. There might even be a 1h spear mod out there somewhere. So with a little tweaking you could have your dragonslayer yet!
I think the craft beer metaphor won me over. I live in a craft-beer-crazy town that has more breweries than I can keep track of. I think there could have been an argument made at development to implement it even. Didn't mean to sound aggressive if I did.
I'm posting on my lunch break so I feel like I'm rushing through my words a bit, haha. Even back to your original post, I think it would have been awesome for it to just be standard.
Empires tend to exaggerate the prowess and threat of enemies when they suffer an expected defeat, to excuse the setback and to gain greater political capital from future victories.
Bullet-proof shields? That sounds like a myth to me. If I remember correctly the British defeat in the Battle of Isandlwana occurred because:
1) British troops were heavily outnumbered by a determined enemy.
2) The British army was divided, allowing their enemy to attack sections of it piecemeal.
3) The British army was in marching formation, and unprepared for an engagement.
So really the defeat occurred as a result of poor leadership as well as Zulu courage and prowess.
Where British troops were able to defend a viable position, they were able to defeat vastly greater numbers of Zulus, for example at Rorke's Drift. It's hard to beat guns with spears.
On topic:
I am no expert on Zulu martial techniques, but if the movies are accurate, it looks like they are basically light skirmish infantry with light/short spears, and use them almost like javelins. When I think "spear", I tend to think of heavy 7ft+ pole arms designed to pierce armour and take down cavalry. (Pikes are even longer).
I did suddenly remember a pretty cool depiction of a spear+shield fight in a movie, though as you can see, the spears are pretty short, and they both end up drawing swords...
Sidenote: You have to love how IMDB credits Homer with the writing!!!
The one-handed spear could be used as either a melee or short range throwing weapon. Much of the combat was one on one according to Greek heroic tradition (is this accurate or ancient literary tradition? I don't think anyone knows for sure). But typically the spear would be used until it broke; it was a sturdy weapon with a big reach advantage over the sword. The sword was more of a last ditch, emergency weapon.
Keep in mind this is very early technology; 300 is set 700 (? Trojan War dates are conjectural. From 1000 - 1200 BC) years later. Armor was likely studded leather or Ring; a few elites may have had Dendra style full bronze plate. Helmets were laminated boars tusk. All weapons were bronze.
Functionally this is pre-historic. No contemporary accounts exist. Some art is that old. But the Iliad is the oldest account and it was an oral account for many years before being written down. And it's obviously fantasy.
REALLY fun stuff and fascinating. But any definite conclusions are hard to draw.
One big issue with fighting with a bronze sword that is sometimes forgotten is that they bend and twist easily. Enough that fighting with one would be complicated, and a shield barer and spear boy were extremely important. The shield barer was mostly there to protect the warrior, and the boy was there mostly to pass weapons to replace broken/bent or thrown ones. If you think of each warrior requring ongoing maintenence, heroic combat starts becoming much more reasonable. Different cultures had different systems though, but many put much stock in a 'Champion', their best warrior. It was a huge morale blow if an enemy could beat your best fighter in combat, hence the Biblical story of David vs Goliath. If a single Israelite could defeat what was seen as the greatest warrior of all time, morale collapse was inevitable.
Many societies used variations of heroic combat after its original form was displaced; think of how medieval knights would trample peasant levies to get to one another, or how Samurai sought out 'equal' opponents to behead. Killing commoners or ashigeru was like a speedbump.
Metallurgy played a role too... remember bronze bends more easily? Well, Shorter swords could be made sturdier, and thrusting vs lightly armoured enemies would have likely bent bronze less, so spears used only for thrusting were reliable, and combination chopping/thrusting swords needed less in battle maintenence. Some armies did use bigger bronze swords, but you couldn't fight the same way with them. Until you could work with something sturdier than bronze, slashing weapons were pretty impractical. I would expect any one on one spear and shield fights to be extremely reliant on footwork though, as you would be vulnerable if you attacked. Those shields could probably tangle up a spear too, Ajax used oxhide for example. If your spear was caught, the counter attack would be deadly. Think of how Retarius gladiators, who used a trident in one hand often relied heavily on mobility. Still, eventually armies that did not rely on the spear as a primary weapon won out, so mechanically, spear and shield was not as effective. Romans carried and used spears for example, but the primary weapon of a legionare was his gladiua. Well, maybe his shield boss, but he used the gladius too.
Assegai used by Shaka were short handled usually, and had long spearheads capable of slashing, so this fighting style would be pretty different I wager vs Greek spears.
Baldur's Gate models the Spear, which is two-handed without reach. Though you could make an argument that it's kind of like the Longspear, having greater reach than a longsword.