Modeling Spear Phalanxes

[Dervag]

For one campaign I was contemplating a few months ago, I wanted to come up with a plausible D&D mechanic for a militia of low-level infantry trained to fight in blocks with spear and shield (perhaps not quite as tight as the Greek phalanx, but close).

The problem is that there's no advantage to spears if they aren't reach weapons, and reach weapons are two-handed. The entire point of a spear phalanx is to have reach on your opponents. I know the ancient Greeks fought with eight-foot spears and shields. But I can't think of any way to give a D&D warrior an advantage that reflects the advantage a Greek phalanx had. For D&D purposes, as far as I can tell, those spears might as well be three feet long instead of eight.

Is there any way to model a classical Greek phalanx as having reach without forcing them to drop their shields?

[Inigo_Carmine]

Create a martial weapon that is a one-handed reach weapon and does 1d8 damage. The catch? Attacking is a standard action (or as part of a charge) and you don't threaten with it.

Makes it decent for masses of low level characters, because it allows many of them to gang up while having the benefits of a shield as well. High level characters won't want it because it can't be used for multiple attacks in a full attack or for AoOs.

I think this is one of the better ways to model such weapons. While great in masse when you have a spikey wall of death, they're not great weapons for combat out of formation; aside from a deliberate jab, you wouldn't be able to put enough torqe on such a long weapon with one hand to maneuver it well enough for multiple attacks or for unexpected openings (AoOs).

Also, I've seen it before but forget where, there's a feat called "formation fighting" which gives you something like +2 shield bonus when using a large shield and with 2 allies also using one right next to you. This represents the defensive aspect of a trained phalanx.

[Lemur]

There's a feat, Long Reach, from Unapproachable East (FR supplement) which gives you an extra 5 feet of reach when you fight with any spear weapon, so you can get 10 foot reach with a shortspear. Meaning that you get 10 foot reach, inclusive, with a one handed weapon.

Of course, that means another feat spent for each character to make the army work. There are some problems inherent to making effective fighting forces that imitate real life tactics in the D&D system, no matter what you do.

[Jalil]

My friend needed this once before, and we came up with the following:

Pantherian Buckler
Stats as Masterwork heavy steel shield, plus:
Resting slot: This smoothed notch on the right side allows the placment of a piercing polearm to slide back and forth. You may use either a long spear or ranseur one handed while using this shield.

It's not that hard to imagine, people use them to joust with often.
http://www.shieldsandshoes.co.uk/tn_i0186.jpg Imagine this, but more pronounced.

[JaronK]

There's a feat called Shield and Pike style, which lets you use any piercing pole arm along with a light shield. Sadly, this won't work with another feat, Phalanx Fighting, which gives extra bonuses when using a heavy shield and a light weapon.

JaronK

[kellandros]

Well, remember that the phalanx changed over time. The early ones used large shields and a pike about man height. The later ones(after Alexander the great) used spears twice as long and much smaller shields.

One is primarily a defensive formation, and the other is offensive. Now, the next stage was the Swiss, who added musketeers/crossbowmen in the middle of the formation to give it some ranged attack.

I've also seen it suggested on this board to model an entire phalanx formation as a single, very large and tough monster. It would simplify the recordkeeping quite a bit to have one creature with multiple attacks than 30+ little guys trying to figure out their reach and range.

[JaronK]

Still, there are no light spears to my knowledge, which makes Phalanx Fighting a very odd feat indeed.

JaronK

[tordenskjold]

As for simply giving soldiers in formation a 10-foot reach and shields, a heavy lance + shield combo would work. Giving them an actual advantage with this combo would be more tricky, unless you want to design your own variant of the phanalex fighting feat. Expanding it to include shield and lance instead of just light weapon and shield would do the trick.

[ZeroNumerous]

Still, there are no light spears to my knowledge, which makes Phalanx Fighting a very odd feat indeed.

JaronK

Think about it with a large shield and a short sword(see: gladius). You get it then. It's never intended for spears.

[Borogove]

Core rules-wise, a small longspear can be wielded one handed by a medium sized person with -2 to hit, and still has reach. So that might help.

[JaronK]

Think about it with a large shield and a short sword(see: gladius). You get it then. It's never intended for spears.

Except that's the problem. Romans fought with gladius and shield, but Greeks, who actually fought in a Phallanx formation, used spears and shields.

JaronK

[Jothki]

If you're trying to deal with a weapon that doesn't exist in the rules, why not just make that weapon yourself? Give it a mobility penalty or something.

[Seatbelt]

Those spears were weighted (on the end?) in such a way that it was fairly easy for a soldier to ballance the 8 foot pole in one hand and still use it. I think it calls for XWP: Phallanx Spear and then say the NPCs get it for free (throuh special non-class related training?)

[JaronK]

It's worth noting that there's a weapon in the DMG that's light with reach... Kusimi Gama or something like that? And that works with Phallanx Fighting. You could just change the name and it would work.

JaronK

[Kiero]

Except that's the problem. Romans fought with gladius and shield, but Greeks, who actually fought in a Phallanx formation, used spears and shields.

JaronK

Indeed, not only that, the Greeks didn't consider the sword one worthy of training with. As far as they were concerned, it was something a man "instinctively" knew how to do. Later Macedonian armies didn't even arm their phlanagites with swords, trusting to the invincibility of the phalanx.

The Macedonian sarissa was a 21-foot pike, not a weapon that could be used on an individual basis, not really targeted at anyone. A phalanx is a defensive formation designed to hold ground, not an offensive one. So talk of "fighting" in phalanx are a little erroneous.

[Laurellien]

I've had to do this before, I just used a variation on the Mob in Cityscape.

[Matthew]

Indeed, not only that, the Greeks didn't consider the sword one worthy of training with. As far as they were concerned, it was something a man "instinctively" knew how to do. Later Macedonian armies didn't even arm their phlanagites with swords, trusting to the invincibility of the phalanx.
What's your evidence for this assertion?

The Macedonian sarissa was a 21-foot pike, not a weapon that could be used on an individual basis, not really targeted at anyone. A phalanx is a defensive formation designed to hold ground, not an offensive one. So talk of "fighting" in phalanx are a little erroneous.
Well, it actually had a variable length and, at it's longest was 16 Cubits or 24 Feet. By the time of Polybius, that author could write that 21 Feet was the standard length, but in the time of Alexander and Philip it was probably somewhat shorter.

Dervag, short of the Dragon Magazine Spear and Pike Feat there is no way by RAW in D&D to effectively model the Greek Hoplite Phalanx and even that is very limited, being as it only applies to Light Shields.

The easiest way to model it is to House Rule the game so that Spears and Long Spears can be used in One Hand (either by virtue of a Martial or Exotic Weapon Proficiency) in combination with a Light or Heavy Shield. A lot depends on what you consider to be a 'Long Spear', but I usually think of it as being 6-9' long, which results in my envisaging a D&D Hoplite Phalanx as being conventionally equipped with Long Spears and Heavy Shields.

I believe that there is a 'Great Spear' in The Complete Warrior or somesuch book, which could be used to represent the Sarissa.

[Kiero]

What's your evidence for this assertion?

Xenophon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophon), commenting on how the Persians trained their forces:


I myself from my earliest childhood knew how to throw up a guard before the things that I thought were going to hit me. If I had nothing else, I would hold up my hands before me and hinder the man who hit me as far as possible. I did this not because I was taught to do it; indeed, I was even hit just for throwing my hands before me. As for knives, from the time I was a baby I grabbed at them whenever I saw them, and I never learned from anybody how to hold them either, except for nature, as I say...I promise you, I cut with my knife everything that I could without being noticed. It not only came by nature, like walking and running, but seemed to me to be pleasant as well as natural. Well then, since we are left with a sort of fighting that calls for courage rather than skill, why should not we fight with enthusiasm.

*quoted in JK Anderson, Military Theory and Practice in the Age of Xenophon (1970)

To the Greeks a sword was a mere sidearm should something happen to his spear, something he needed no special training to handle. In any case they placed far more emphasis on unit fighting than individual combat.


Well, it actually had a variable length and, at it's longest was 16 Cubits or 24 Feet. By the time of Polybius, that author could write that 21 Feet was the standard length, but in the time of Alexander and Philip it was probably somewhat shorter.

As above, even with a shorter spear (which at more than a man's height is still hardly short), the emphasis was on unit fighting, not the older heroic-individualistic model. The whole point is to have a body of men acting in unison, covering each other, and not haring off doing their own thing.

Unit-fighting is pretty much antithetical to the combat approach of D&D.

[Matthew]

That passage doesn't appear to be saying what you are. Xenephon is claiming natural aptitude with a knife / sword, but it doesn't follow that there was no training in how to fight with one. Spear and Shield are where the emphasis lay, but one shouldn't forget that Greek armies were not composed only of Hoplites. Xenephon himself recommended one type of sword over another for cavalry warfare.
There's nothing unusual in viewing the sword as a side arm, in many cultures and periods that is exactly what it was (including for Medieval Knights and Samurai). Even amongst the Romans, there were periods and troop types that carried swords as side arms weapons.

Not sure what you are refuting at the bottom of that post, but Unit Fighting is very common in D&D, just not on the part of the Player Characters and, even so, in previous editions that was not the case. The purpose of a Phalanx was both defensive and offensive. As I understand it, it certainly was not a static body, it was used to 'fix' enemy forces for other units to break. However, its function depends on what it is facing.

[Kiero]

That passage doesn't appear to be saying what you are. Xenephon is claiming natural aptitude with a knife / sword, but it doesn't follow that there was no training in how to fight with one. Spear and Shield are where the emphasis lay, but one shouldn't forget that Greek armies were not composed only of Hoplites. Xenephon himself recommended one type of sword over another for cavalry warfare.

He was criticising the Persians for wasting time training their soldiers to use the sword. That's the context in which it was written. The epitome of the Greek warrior was the hoplite; a man forced to rely on a sword or some weapon other than a shield was usually one who couldn't afford a panoply of his own, and thus something lesser.

Macedonian troops at Pydna didn't have swords, because most of the Daidochi armies didn't bother with sword-training for their phalangites. By that time they truly did believe a phalanx unbreakable.


There's nothing unusual in viewing the sword as a side arm, in many cultures and periods that is exactly what it was (including for Medieval Knights and Samurai). Even amongst the Romans, there were periods and troop types that carried swords as side arms weapons.

For most of the period in which they expanded and conquered others (circa 200BC to 200AD), the Romans' mainstay was the sword. Which was otherwise an exception to the norm that the sword was a backup weapon.


Not sure what you are refuting at the bottom of that post, but Unit Fighting is very common in D&D, just not on the part of the Player Characters and, even so, in previous editions that was not the case. The purpose of a Phalanx was both defensive and offensive. As I understand it, it certainly was not a static body, it was used to 'fix' enemy forces for other units to break. However, its function depends on what it is facing.

"Not on the part of the PCs" is exactly the point.

[BardicDuelist]

Halfling longspears (small weapons) do 1d6 damage and are one handed weapons with reach, but you take a -2 penalty on attacks with them. Theoretically, that combined with heavy shield specialization (PHB2), combat expertise, allied defense (Shining South), and shield wall (HoB), and you have a large group with reach weapons and high armor classes based on helping to defend those next to you.

A third level fighter (human) could get all of these feats and have a +8 to AC +3 for each adjacent ally and +4 more for cover, so a person at the back of a group of four people would have 31 AC at third level. Assuming a 14 stregnth, they would take no penalty.

I realize that this is not ideal, because of the low number of hits, but even reducing the penalty of the attackers at the front and they would still have a 25 AC and get +3 to attack.

[Matthew]

He was criticising the Persians for wasting time training their soldiers to use the sword. That's the context in which it was written. The epitome of the Greek warrior was the hoplite; a man forced to rely on a sword or some weapon other than a shield was usually one who couldn't afford a panoply of his own, and thus something lesser.

Macedonian troops at Pydna didn't have swords, because most of the Daidochi armies didn't bother with sword-training for their phalangites. By that time they truly did believe a phalanx unbreakable.
Well, context is everything. Still, Xenephon is a localised source. I will give it another read over, time permitting, and get back to you.


For most of the period in which they expanded and conquered others (circa 200BC to 200AD), the Romans' mainstay was the sword. Which was otherwise an exception to the norm that the sword was a backup weapon.

Yes, I know. However, you are producing far too broad a time spectrum here and neglecting the role of Auxillaries. For the Legion, the Sword was the main Melee Combat Weapon, to be used after the discharging Pila. However, there was a great deal of variety in troop types. Until Marius' reforms the third line of Roman Legionaries (The Triarii) used the Spear as their principle weapon. After the civil wars and the Julio-Claudian era the Roman Army was increasingly diversified in weapons and tactics until the late Imperial period when there appears to have been a return to uniformity.

"Not on the part of the PCs" is exactly the point.
Not really. D&D is perfectly playable as a formation versus formation game. The question is only one of style of play. Heroes of Battle and The Complete Warrior provide plenty of food for thought in that regard.

[Kiero]

Yes, I know. However, you are producing far too broad a time spectrum here and neglecting the role of Auxillaries. For the Legion, the Sword was the main Melee Combat Weapon, to be used after the discharging Pila. However, there was a great deal of variety in troop types. Until Marius' reforms the third line of Roman Legionaries (The Triarii) used the Spear as their principle weapon. After the civil wars and the Julio-Claudian era the Roman Army was increasingly diversified in weapons and tactics until the late Imperial period when there appears to have been a return to uniformity.

The triarii rarely saw any actual fighting, the mainstay of the legion was the hastati and principes, both of whom were swordsmen. Earlier on the hastati were spearmen (which is where their name comes from - the hasta is a spear), but some time around the 3rd century BC that was dropped in favour of them being swordsmen alone.

Romans built their force around their heavy infantry, so I don't think a consideration of the auxilia is relevant to my point.


Not really. D&D is perfectly playable as a formation versus formation game. The question is only one of style of play. Heroes of Battle and The Complete Warrior provide plenty of food for thought in that regard.

I know of quite a few wargamers who'd disagree that D&D is a "perfectly playable" wargame.

[Matthew]

Kiero, you have been grossly misinformed. The Triarii acted as a reserve, but they saw plenty of combat. As for Auxillaries, they constituted roughly half the man power of the Roman Army at any one time, so I think you would do well to consider them when discussing the Roman Army. Indeed, there is a school of thought that proposes that by Trajan's time the Auxillaries did all the hard fighting and the Legions hardly any.

Perhaps we ought to up stakes and head for the Real Weapons and Armour Thread at this point, as we're significantly derailing Dervag's Thread.

I never said D&D was a perfectly playable 'wargame' (though you will find many posters here that consider it to be exactly that), what I said was that it is perfectly possible to play it in a style that emphasises the importance of formation fighting.

[Edit] Hasta actually means Spear in same generic sense that it does in English. It could equally be a Javelin as a Pike, as far as I am aware.

[Hurlbut]

For one campaign I was contemplating a few months ago, I wanted to come up with a plausible D&D mechanic for a militia of low-level infantry trained to fight in blocks with spear and shield (perhaps not quite as tight as the Greek phalanx, but close).

The problem is that there's no advantage to spears if they aren't reach weapons, and reach weapons are two-handed. The entire point of a spear phalanx is to have reach on your opponents. I know the ancient Greeks fought with eight-foot spears and shields. But I can't think of any way to give a D&D warrior an advantage that reflects the advantage a Greek phalanx had. For D&D purposes, as far as I can tell, those spears might as well be three feet long instead of eight.

Is there any way to model a classical Greek phalanx as having reach without forcing them to drop their shields?8 foot spear? Let me see, in D&D, a standard medium humaniod occupy one single five foot square, and with normal weapons, threaten 1 five foot square radius. It's not a big stretch to assume that they have Lunging Strike, or whichever feat that allow you to threaten one additonal five foot square.

[Dervag]

Well, remember that the phalanx changed over time. The early ones used large shields and a pike about man height. The later ones(after Alexander the great) used spears twice as long and much smaller shields.I'm trying to model the early version, not the late one.


One is primarily a defensive formation, and the other is offensive. Now, the next stage was the Swiss, who added musketeers/crossbowmen in the middle of the formation to give it some ranged attack. I'm thinking of adding crossbowmen to my militia, too.


I've also seen it suggested on this board to model an entire phalanx formation as a single, very large and tough monster. It would simplify the recordkeeping quite a bit to have one creature with multiple attacks than 30+ little guys trying to figure out their reach and range.Well, I wouldn't ever try to throw one of these phalanxes up against a single large opponent or a party of PCs and roll the results. Large battles with these militia involved would be a backdrop for rolled combats, instead. The only situation where these guys would ever make attack rolls I'd have to keep track of is when there aren't very many of them. But to do that, I have to have weapons that allow them to fight like classical Greek (pre-Macedonian) phalanxes. In other words, a one-handed spear with reach.


As for simply giving soldiers in formation a 10-foot reach and shields, a heavy lance + shield combo would work. Giving them an actual advantage with this combo would be more tricky, unless you want to design your own variant of the phanalex fighting feat. Expanding it to include shield and lance instead of just light weapon and shield would do the trick.The lance was my first idea, but the rules as written in the SRD indicate that a lance can only be used one-handed from horseback.

These guys exist to fight large groups of low-level opponents; their advantage comes from being able to attack enemies once before those enemies get into melee range and from being able to have the front rank fight with short swords while the rear rank stabs into the melee with their spears. So if they fight a bunch of orcs with swords and axes, for instance, they will be able to attack each orc along their front twice for each attack the orc gets against their frontline soldier.

Of course, this advantage is nullified if the orcs outflank the phalanx, but that's always been a problem and the guys running the militia have figured out some ways to deal with it.


Core rules-wise, a small longspear can be wielded one handed by a medium sized person with -2 to hit, and still has reach. So that might help.Yeah, but the -2 to hit, combined with the fact that the militiamen are mostly going to be 1st or 2nd level warriors, is going to make them very ineffective attackers.


Those spears were weighted (on the end?) in such a way that it was fairly easy for a soldier to ballance the 8 foot pole in one hand and still use it. I think it calls for XWP: Phallanx Spear and then say the NPCs get it for free (throuh special non-class related training?)There's an idea, but I'd rather not require a specific feat just to use this thing. Or if I do, I'd like to be able to fold it into a generic feat that enables the entire technique (Formation Fighting, for instance). These guys only get two feats apiece.


It's worth noting that there's a weapon in the DMG that's light with reach... Kusimi Gama or something like that? And that works with Phallanx Fighting. You could just change the name and it would work.

JaronKIt is impossible for me to imagine a phalanx of soldiers fighting with kusari-gamas, and I do not want my militia to be armed with kusari-gamas.


The Macedonian sarissa was a 21-foot pike, not a weapon that could be used on an individual basis, not really targeted at anyone. A phalanx is a defensive formation designed to hold ground, not an offensive one. So talk of "fighting" in phalanx are a little erroneous.No, it isn't. I'm not talking about the sarissa-armed phalanxes of the Macedonians from 350 BC onwards. I'm talking about the earlier classical Greek phalanx, armed with an eight-foot spear and not a 21-foot pike. Those were the phalanxes that fought in the Peloponnesian War, the ones that defeated the Persians at Marathon, the ones that stood at Thermopylae, and the ones that made the March of the Ten Thousand.

I'm not fully duplicating the Greek phalanx, because my militia will have light armor instead of medium-to-heavy, and because many of them will be trained with crossbows. But I'm trying to find a way to make a phalanx-esque style of spear-and-shield warfare implementable in D&D.


Halfling longspears (small weapons) do 1d6 damage and are one handed weapons with reach, but you take a -2 penalty on attacks with them. Theoretically, that combined with heavy shield specialization (PHB2), combat expertise, allied defense (Shining South), and shield wall (HoB), and you have a large group with reach weapons and high armor classes based on helping to defend those next to you.

A third level fighter (human) could get all of these feats and have a +8 to AC +3 for each adjacent ally and +4 more for cover, so a person at the back of a group of four people would have 31 AC at third level. Assuming a 14 stregnth, they would take no penalty.

I realize that this is not ideal, because of the low number of hits, but even reducing the penalty of the attackers at the front and they would still have a 25 AC and get +3 to attack.OK. That sounds like a pretty good build, especially for the intended purpose of fending off large numbers of low-level mooks who will mostly have low armor classes in their own right.

If I want to implement the Spartans at Thermopylae or some other highly trained group of elite phalanx fighters, this is a great way for me to do it. For example, the Royal Guard of the nation that forms these militia might be made up of people with a build like this.

Unfortunately, I am instead implementing a bunch of weekend warriors who train on days grabbed from farming time, like the Massachusetts minutemen of the American Revolution. These warriors are first and second level. They are not fully trained fighters, though their leaders might be. Therefore, I can't give them that many feats.


It's not a big stretch to assume that they have Lunging Strike, or whichever feat that allow you to threaten one additonal five foot square.That's a good idea. However, I don't have the book Lunging Strike is found in. Can you tell me either what its prerequisites are or (if it is not released content), where I can find a book that can tell me?

[Hurlbut]

That's a good idea. However, I don't have the book Lunging Strike is found in. Can you tell me either what its prerequisites are or (if it is not released content), where I can find a book that can tell me?
PHB2, you would need a fighter 6 or any other class with same BAB as it to get the feat.

[Ulzgoroth]

I like the suggestion of letting spear/longspear be used one handed as Martial weapons. It appropriately requires some training, but I think that one-handing a spear is at least as fundamental a martial skill as being able to use all of glaives, guisarmes, ranseurs, and war scythes...

[Dervag]

PHB2, you would need a fighter 6 or any other class with same BAB as it to get the feat.Well, then I'm afraid that's out. Sorry; it's a good idea.

[Kiero]

Kiero, you have been grossly misinformed. The Triarii acted as a reserve, but they saw plenty of combat.

Problem is, no one is able to verify exactly how the quincunx actually worked. But given their role in the reserve, and the phrase "down to the triarii" to describe a desparate venture, they only saw action when things were really bad.


As for Auxillaries, they constituted roughly half the man power of the Roman Army at any one time, so I think you would do well to consider them when discussing the Roman Army. Indeed, there is a school of thought that proposes that by Trajan's time the Auxillaries did all the hard fighting and the Legions hardly any.

Except they're not what I was talking about. Auxiliaries varied a great deal from one location to another, but there was something like consistency to the "Roman" core of a legion.

[Matthew]

Moved Discussion to the Real Life Weapons and Armour Thread to prevent rampant derailing

I don't see why the Hoplite Spear shouldn't get Reach. I think it would make sense in a Ancient Greek Dungeons & Dragons context (though not a mythological Illiad or Odyssey inspired one, as Spears are generally thrown prior to closer combat in those sources).

[JaronK]

To use the normal D&D weapon creation, one could create a one handed spear that's 1d8 damage, reach, and a martial weapon, or 1d8 damage, reach, X3 critical, exotic.

Not too shabby.

The other option is to create a simply better version of the shield and pike style feat, allowing for a heavy shield and a spear.

Or perhaps better yet, make an Improved Phalanx Fighting feat, with the prerequisits of Phalanx Fighting and Shield and Pike Style, that lets both feats work with a heavy shield and a piercing polearm.

JaronK

[Dervag]

The other option is to create a simply better version of the shield and pike style feat, allowing for a heavy shield and a spear.

Or perhaps better yet, make an Improved Phalanx Fighting feat, with the prerequisits of Phalanx Fighting and Shield and Pike Style, that lets both feats work with a heavy shield and a piercing polearm.

JaronKThe problem with this is that it doesn't serve the need I have. The people making up this phalanx aren't 3rd-level fighters. I can't pile on several feats to give these guys functionality with their weapons.

I think I'm just going to have to rename the longspear the pike and define a 'longspear' with the stats I'm looking for.

[Matthew]

Well, this suggestion goes against the convention, but consider ruling that Spears and Long Spears can be used one handed, but with a reduced Damage Die (1D6). There is no real precedent for this in D&D 3.x, but I have found it very workable, as it puts Spears into the same Damage Range as Short Swords when used One Handed.
Otherwise just grant Characters with the Martial Weapon Proficiencies Feat the ability to use Spears and Long Spears One Handed. Don't forget that there is already a 'Great Spear' out there somewhere (The Complete Warrior?) or so I am told.

[Ulzgoroth]

It's in CW, and it's a two-handed exotic weapon. There are a ton of 'biggest imaginable weapon of its type' weapons in that book.

[Matthew]

Yes, the Great Bow is also located there, so I hear (also an Exotic Weapon). It seems to me that the Great Spear would do a good job of representing the Sarissa, Proficiency being granted as a Regional Bonus Feat or part of a Template (Macedonian Phalanx Soldier) or something. As I understand it, it has Extended (15'?) Reach, which makes for three ranks of Pikes.

[Ulzgoroth]

Yes, the Great Bow is also located there, so I hear (also an Exotic Weapon). It seems to me that the Great Spear would do a good job of representing the Sarissa, Proficiency being granted as a Regional Bonus Feat or part of a Template (Macedonian Phalanx Soldier) or something. As I understand it, it has Extended (15'?) Reach, which makes for three ranks of Pikes.
Sorry, no. The CW greatspear is just a heavier, exotic Longspear that does 2d6. Oddly, despite being 'heavy' it weighs the same 9 lb. as the ordinary Longspear. You'll have to look elsewhere or homebrew for a pike.

[Matthew]

Bummer. I wonder where I read about the Extended Reach Pike, it must just be overflow from my own House Ruled Weapon Tables:

Martial Weapons (Alternative) (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31788)
Simple Weapons (Alternative) (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31637)

[JaronK]

The problem with this is that it doesn't serve the need I have. The people making up this phalanx aren't 3rd-level fighters. I can't pile on several feats to give these guys functionality with their weapons.

I think I'm just going to have to rename the longspear the pike and define a 'longspear' with the stats I'm looking for.

A first level human fighter has three feats... spend them on that feat and the prereqs and you're good to go.

JaronK

[Matthew]

Okay, checked into it. The D&D Awl Pike (another poorly named weapon) is what I was thinking of from Dragon #331. It has 15' Reach, 1D8 20/x3 Damage and is Two Handed Exotic.

[BardicDuelist]

For a first and second level phalanx-esque style:

If human, or fighter: Shield wall, Weapon Focus (to make the penalty only -1)
or Shield Specialization (to focus more on defense)

If human and fighter: all three above (combat expertise and allied defense are only good when you have some BAB to back you up)

If niether: Shield Wall

Using Halfling Short Spears, and possibly coming up with a feat to get rid of the -2 penalty would work, would be the best way to do it. RAW, weapon focus is the best way to get rid of the penalty.

1d6 x2 with a 10 foot reach doesn't seem overpowered at all, though if you just want to get rid of the penalty completely.

We have a house rule that so long as a weapon isn't very small (such as a human with a small dagger) or very large (halfling with a greatsword) you can use it without penalty.

[Closet_Skeleton]

Once again I am reminded of just how screwed over DnD shield rules are.

[Dervag]

A first level human fighter has three feats... spend them on that feat and the prereqs and you're good to go.

JaronKThese guys don't have the dedicated training level that I feel is required to qualify as a fighter. They're 1st and 2nd level warriors. I need a build that uses a maximum of two feats.


1d6 x2 with a 10 foot reach doesn't seem overpowered at all, though if you just want to get rid of the penalty completely.

We have a house rule that so long as a weapon isn't very small (such as a human with a small dagger) or very large (halfling with a greatsword) you can use it without penalty.I would house rule much the same thing.

I think your ideas are good, and I'll probably use those.

[Jothki]

If they're 1st level warriors, why are they even on a battlefield, especially if they're in an army organized enough to use phalanxes?

[Dervag]

If they're 1st level warriors, why are they even on a battlefield, especially if they're in an army organized enough to use phalanxes?Because they're fighting large numbers of 1HD monsters.

If bigger, scarier monsters show up, they pull back and let the tougher, higher-level officers handle it. If wizards show up, they scatter, fall back, and start taking potshots with their crossbows. There are also going to be low-level clerics dispersed through their ranks; they're not a purely mundane force.

Even so, they aren't going to be able to handle anything of medium-to-high CL, but they aren't designed to. Remember that fact.

This is a large kingdom with a relatively small standing army. The standing army may very well be made up of 3rd or 4th level fighters. However, for the current emergency which is the thing the campaign begins with, the kingdom has also raised peasant levies. This particular province has a relatively well trained and well equipped militia as its levy, good enough that they're not going to fall over unless they get heavily battered with fairly powerful magic or lots of big monsters.

These militiamen are the counterpart to the orc war parties and goblin raiders that we see as stock material in so many campaigns. They fight in something approximating a Greek phalanx because the kingdom believes that to be the best way to engage normal enemies in melee combat. They are in fact trained to use different tactics against enemies who are not normal and engaging in melee combat, though those tactics will be of limited effectiveness.

[Hurlbut]

Aha! here where we have a problem.
The standard Greek Hoplite as we know, is tough (physically and mentally) and well disciplined. He is the heavy infantryman. He was well off enough to own his own equipment.
The Greek Hoplite is not the militiaman, not at least the defination we know. He is militia but he is well armed and armoured, not to mentioned well trained although not frequenty drilled together as the Spartans did. He is drawn from the middle class.

So we are looking at either a couple of fighter levels or several warrior levels to represent their discipline since the Hoplite usually represent the most promiment citizens of a city-state. For example, that standing army you mention may represent a crack hoplite unit supported by the militia in forms of cavalry, light troop, and missle troop, using the unit as the anvil/backbone. The militia can still add to the hoplite unit abliet with lesser hoplite warriors (lesser armour or no armour and such to represent the poor class).

Also, the shield of the Hoplite may be better represent by buckler shield, since light shield and buckler provide equal protection. If you wanted the hoplite's shield to be emulated by heavy shield, one can argue that the hoplite's shield's larger surface area may qualify for it to have the same base AC as the heavy shield.

If you're using Greek Hoplite's equipments as is, you should know that these soldiers usually grew their beards and hairs long to act as cushions for their helmets.

[Matthew]

Actually, the problem is once again in calibrating our expectations. Warrior 1 is perfectly suitable for representing the rank and file of Hoplites (except maybe the Spartans), it all depends on what you consider the relative opposition to be.

I don't think Buckler is particularly suitable for a Hoplite Shield (they weighed anywhere from 10-20 lbs after all). Heavy Shield is a better candidate, as far as I can see.

[Hurlbut]

As I mentioned, one can argue for the Hoplite's shield to be a bigger buckler, easier to do than making the spear/longspear one handed.

Warrior 1 is what I would expect of light troop, skirmisher, or missile troop in a militia, but with Hoplite, a well disciplined soldier, I would expect to have several warrior levels or at least 2 fighter levels. Bear in mind a NPC class warrior 4 is STILL behind a PC class Fighter 4, by a long shot.

[Matthew]

Yes, but what exactly does a Fighter 5 represent in comparison to the 'Real World'? That's the thing. Is a Warrior 1 not a competent and well trained Soldier? What role do Attributes play? What constitutes a Veteran? An Elite? If you haven't seen it already, there was a very interesting article about this a few weeks ago: D&D Calibrating your Expectations ( http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html) and a lengthy Thread discussing its merits as a viewpoint Alexandrian's Calibration Article (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37561). Dervag seems fairly clear here that the majority of opponents and the part time soldiers / levy / Hoplites are expected to be 1 Hit Die / Warrior 1.

I see what you're saying about the Buckler, but it seems like an odd way to get around the mechanic. Surely, just creating a One Handed Hoplite Spear would be easier?

[Hurlbut]

Yes, but what exactly does a Fighter 5 represent in comparison to the 'Real World'? That's the thing. Is a Warrior 1 not a competent and well trained Soldier? What role do Attributes play? What constitutes a Veteran? An Elite? If you haven't seen it already, there was a very interesting article about this a few weeks ago: D&D Calibrating your Expectations ( http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html) and a lengthy Thread discussing its merits as a viewpoint Alexandrian's Calibration Article (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37561). Dervag seems fairly clear here that the majority of opponents and the part time soldiers / levy / Hoplites are expected to be 1 Hit Die / Warrior 1.

I see what you're saying about the Buckler, but it seems like an odd way to get around the mechanic. Surely, just creating a One Handed Hoplite Spear would be easier?
It's more common to support the spear with two hands, although it can be thrust with one hand (which is what you would do some of time when using spear or longspear in addition to thrusting them both handed).

[Dervag]

So we are looking at either a couple of fighter levels or several warrior levels to represent their discipline since the Hoplite usually represent the most promiment citizens of a city-state. For example, that standing army you mention may represent a crack hoplite unit supported by the militia in forms of cavalry, light troop, and missle troop, using the unit as the anvil/backbone. The militia can still add to the hoplite unit abliet with lesser hoplite warriors (lesser armour or no armour and such to represent the poor class).That is approximately correct. The Life Guards (the royal regiment) is trained to fight as a cross between spear phalanx and legionnaire, without the javelins but with spears that can be dropped in favor of the short sword at any time.

The kingdom has a strong heavy cavalry component too; this is arguably as important than the Life Guards but only arguably. Missile components are integral to the standing army rather than being secondary auxiliaries; archers primarily.

The militia units vary wildly from typical medieval foot levies (on the one hand) with padded armor and clubs to these militiamen, who are trained on essentially the same scheme as the Life Guards but to a lower standard of equipment and training.


Also, the shield of the Hoplite may be better represent by buckler shield, since light shield and buckler provide equal protection. If you wanted the hoplite's shield to be emulated by heavy shield, one can argue that the hoplite's shield's larger surface area may qualify for it to have the same base AC as the heavy shield.That makes sense.


If you're using Greek Hoplite's equipments as is, you should know that these soldiers usually grew their beards and hairs long to act as cushions for their helmets.They don't wear metal armor; they can't afford it and they don't have the time to train in something that heavy and grow fully accustomed to it. The crossbows are expensive enough as it is.

These guys wear studded leather armor or something along those lines. They carry large-surface-area wooden shields to compensate for the lack of heavy body armor.

Frankly, if they're going to be 2nd level or higher I'd make their first level a level of commoner or expert to reflect the fact that they really are a peasant militia of weekend warriors.

[Hurlbut]

I dunno, getting a metal helmet is easier than getting a body armour. The helmet may not even provide full protection like Corinth type Helmet (for Greek Hoplite) does, but perhap in the simplest form; a metal cap (refer to the legionaire's helmet in early periods before it took on extensive cheek and neck guards).

Of course I'm a little baised since I play Rome Total War where militia hoplites worn no armour save for a simple metal cap helmet alongside their shield&spear.


That is approximately correct. The Life Guards (the royal regiment) is trained to fight as a cross between spear phalanx and legionnaire, without the javelins but with spears that can be dropped in favor of the short sword at any time. Actually that is pretty much defined a Greek Hoplite; once their spears were broken or closed to point blank range they brought out their short swords.

[Dervag]

I dunno, getting a metal helmet is easier than getting a body armour. The helmet may not even provide full protection like Corinth type Helmet (for Greek Hoplite) does, but perhap in the simplest form; a metal cap (refer to the legionaire's helmet in early periods before it took on extensive cheek and neck guards).That's also plausible. These guys (the militia) may very well have a 'metal pot' helmet to go with the studded leather armor (I'm not actually sure what the armor looks like but it stats like studded leather). On the other hand, they might not; I don't know.

Remember that for my purposes the militia are more important than the Life Guards, not less. The Guards are cooler, but they're only backdrop for the foreseeable part of the campaign. It's the county militia that the party will be spending time with.


Actually that is pretty much defined a Greek Hoplite; once their spears were broken or closed to point blank range they brought out their short swords.Yes, but for the hoplites the sword was very much a sidearm. For the Life Guards, the sword is as important as the spear (or as important for the bow if you're in an archer company). If I had to choose a real-world example of the sword they use, I'd pick something like a Roman spatha, something where I'd have to give real thought to the question of whether to call it a long sword or a short sword.

Part of that is because the Life Guards also train in small unit tactics, because somebody may dispatch a squad of them to take care of a couple of rampaging ogres or something. They're tough enough to engage the ogres, but they can't just form a two-by-four 'phalanx' and expect to do well. A spear phalanx that small would be ridiculous. So they learn to fight with swords, and to fight rather well with them. They also learn to mix sword and spear tactics.

The Life Guards are long-service professional military, chosen on a meritocratic basis from a large population base. Think of the US Marines. They spend most of their time when they're not on campaign doing fairly extensive training routines, except for the king's personal guard, and they're rotated from the line companies. They're about as tough as can reasonably be expected from medieval infantry; they'd give an equal number of Spartans a run for their money.

[Wehrkind]

I rather like the idea of adding a feature to the long spear that says it can be used as a reach weapon one handed as a standard action (with full AoO). Using a long spear one handed in single combat is really awkward, but when you are just stabbing at things coming in en masse, it isn't bad at all. That would give your phalanxes good defense as enemies come in, and a decent offense that doesn't get crazy when they are static (though at ECL 1-3 it won't get crazy anyway, but for PCs it might become an issue.)

[Matthew]

It's more common to support the spear with two hands, although it can be thrust with one hand (which is what you would do some of time when using spear or longspear in addition to thrusting them both handed).
Er, what? In the Macedonian Sarissa Phalanx, yeah, but in the Hoplite Phalanx? I can't think of a single depiction that shows this to be the case. Same goes for Medieval Spear and Shield tactics, it's the other way around. The Spear was used primarily One Handed and the Shield occasionally slung to enable two handed use, which you can see clearly on the Bayeux Tapestry. I would have to see some significant evidence to be convinced that it was otherwise.

[Dervag]

I rather like the idea of adding a feature to the long spear that says it can be used as a reach weapon one handed as a standard action (with full AoO)Right. The attack of opportunity is important- the idea is that charging a line of these guys is dangerous even in mass (two spearmen get attacks of opportunity if they're in fully closed ranks), and suicidal for an individual (six attacks of opportunity).

[Diggorian]

Been following the thread cause I'll be running a Classical era D&D game soon, this will likely come up.

Among the new weapons I'm adding will be the pike based on Bardic's idea. It's stats:

EDIT: Did some research that inspired revision.

Martial Weapon
One-handed Melee Weapon

Doru[reach] 3gp; 1d4(s)/1d6(m); x2; 10ft range increment; 6lbs; piercing

A Doru is like a short spear but long enough to have reach, yet lighter than a longspear. You can strike opponents 10 feet away with it, but you can’t use it against an adjacent foe. If you use a ready action to set a Doru against a charge, you deal double damage on a successful hit against a charging character.

[Umarth]

Thanks to an earlier suggestion on this thread here's the rule I implemented in my homebrew world:
Long spear: A Long spear has reach. You can strike opponents 10 feet away with it, but you can’t use it against an adjacent foe. If you use a ready action to set a Long spear against a charge, you deal double damage on a successful hit against a charging character. A Long spear wielded in two hands is a Standard weapon while a Long spear wielded in one hand is a Ponderous weapon.

I do use weapon speeds though (changes itterative attacks standard =6/1 and Ponderous is 9/1) rather than making an attack with it a standard action.

[The Gilded Duke]

First Line of the Phalanx
lvl 1 warrior/commoner: Feat Tower Shield Profeciency
Equiped with Tridents and Tower Shields.

In the event of a deadly mass charge, or arrow volley they give up their attacks and use their Tower Shields to gain full cover. (As the attackers are outside the formation this also gives full cover to everyone inside the phalanx)

If the threat of a charge seems less severe they will ready an action to attack with their tridents, they do not get bonus damage against charges but the long spears and exotic spears do.

Second row uses long spears, third row uses the exotic spears mentioned.

Additional tactics use caltrops.
After arriving at a set posistion the first row uses a standard action to place caltrops in the 5 foot square in front of them. If a caltrop succeeds on it's attack roll any charge or run is interupted and the target has to move at half speed.

All members of the phalanx wear shoes.

When moving to a new posistion they move at half their movement speed to avoid attacks from caltrops.

The second row is equipped with Tanglefoot bags for disabling more difficult opponents. Even on a successful reflex save the target is entangled and can only move at half speed.

[Matthew]

Nah, you want three rows of 15' projecting Awl Pikes.

15' Readied Attack, Attack of Opportunity,
10' Readied Attack, Attack of Opportunity,
5' Readied Attack - Ahaha, finally!

[Hurlbut]

Nah, you want three rows of 15' projecting Awl Pikes.

15' Readied Attack, Attack of Opportunity,
10' Readied Attack, Attack of Opportunity,
5' Readied Attack - Ahaha, finally!
Awl pike would make the unit a pike phalanx rather than a spear/hoplite phalanx.

[Matthew]

Did you see what was just posted? Tower Shields, Tridents, Long Spears and Great Spears... it was already well beyond modelling Hoplites...

[kellandros]

If you want to make a militia(low level fighting force), how about splitting up the roles. The first rank only carries tower shields(no weapons wielded). The next 2 ranks are wielding pikes with both hands, sticking out between the front rank soldiers. Any people beyond that can be carrying crossbows or backup shields and spears in case someone falls.

This should eliminate almost all the required exotic feats, and let you keep them lower level. Whatever you want to add back in then is just helpful, not required.

And just applying aid another rolls, it should be pretty competent.

[The Gilded Duke]

I was trying to get close to it without modifying the rules too much.

The reason for the tower shields is to give it a defence ranged attacks, higher level characters, and lance charges.

As far as defence against magic, probably be best to have a few sorcerors at the center using countermagic.

[Hurlbut]

Did you see what was just posted? Tower Shields, Tridents, Long Spears and Great Spears... it was already well beyond modelling Hoplites...
Long spears are possible with buckler shield. Great spear is an exotic weapon. Trident is something a coastal region would use. Tower Shield is well, not really something you can give the militia.

[Matthew]

I was trying to get close to it without modifying the rules too much.

The reason for the tower shields is to give it a defence ranged attacks, higher level characters, and lance charges.

As far as defence against magic, probably be best to have a few sorcerors at the center using countermagic.
Yes, I know. I just hate D&D Tower Shields. Also, Dervag appears to be only intending these forces to be depployed against 1 Hit Die enemies. Awl Pikes are the way to go for this sort of thing. Tower Shields may or may not work, dpending on how much of an obstruction the DM ruled them to be to the rearmost ranks.

Long spears are possible with buckler shield. Great spear is an exotic weapon. Trident is something a coastal region would use. Tower Shield is well, not really something you can give the militia.
Tridents? Come on, your stretching things a bit here aren't you? I can't say I have ever seen a Hoplite bearing a Trident outside of depictions of Neptune... Gladiators, well that's another matter... D&D Spears and Long Spears just don't cut it the way they are currently presented either really... Bucklers are fine for Macedonian Phalanxes, but not for Hoplites. Modifying them to be larger and heavier just ignores that fact that they were gripped.

[Dervag]

First Line of the Phalanx
lvl 1 warrior/commoner: Feat Tower Shield Profeciency
Equiped with Tridents and Tower Shields.

In the event of a deadly mass charge, or arrow volley they give up their attacks and use their Tower Shields to gain full cover. (As the attackers are outside the formation this also gives full cover to everyone inside the phalanx)

If the threat of a charge seems less severe they will ready an action to attack with their tridents, they do not get bonus damage against charges but the long spears and exotic spears do.

Second row uses long spears, third row uses the exotic spears mentioned.

Additional tactics use caltrops.
After arriving at a set posistion the first row uses a standard action to place caltrops in the 5 foot square in front of them. If a caltrop succeeds on it's attack roll any charge or run is interupted and the target has to move at half speed.

All members of the phalanx wear shoes.

When moving to a new posistion they move at half their movement speed to avoid attacks from caltrops.

The second row is equipped with Tanglefoot bags for disabling more difficult opponents. Even on a successful reflex save the target is entangled and can only move at half speed.This is a cool idea, but it isn't remotely like what I'm looking for. Tanglefoot bags are too expensive to issue to these troops; and this phalanx has no ability to attack the squares beyond the ones immediately in front of the front rank, which defeats the purpose. I can take a 5 ft. step into the area the phalanx threatens, take no attacks of opportunity, and hammer the front line into the dirt. Or if I have a reach weapon of my own I can flatten them from beyond the effective range of their own weapons.


Yes, I know. I just hate D&D Tower Shields. Also, Dervag appears to be only intending these forces to be depployed against 1 Hit Die enemies. Awl Pikes are the way to go for this sort of thing. Tower Shields may or may not work, dpending on how much of an obstruction the DM ruled them to be to the rearmost ranks.It's a little more complicated than that.

I'm not trying to design a force with no weaknesses here; they have weaknesses their enemies can exploit and the in-game history that led to them being the way they are isn't perfectly optimal.

First of all, they're trained the way they are because the count who first formed them was looking to make an economy version of the royal Life Guards. The catch is that the Life Guards are extensively trained and could give the Spartans a run for their money, man for man. A weapon mix that works great for a phalanx of 3rd-5th level fighters doesn't work so well for the county militia.

For the Life Guards, it would be stupid to give half or a third of the men tower shields, because each Guardsman is supposed to be an individually effective warrior. Tower shields would reduce the overall amount of attack power each Guard unit could bring to bear, because the shieldbearers would have greatly reduced offensive effect. It would also reduce the number of Guardsmen viable for release on independent missions.

Therefore the Life Guards don't use tower shields for anything other than siege warfare; therefore the county militia don't either, even if that would be a smart tactic for them.

A similar argument applies to Awl Pikes. They're only useful in a pitched battle, and the Life Guards do much of their actual fighting in small-unit actions. Therefore they don't use Awl Pikes; therefore the county militia don't either even though that would probably be a good idea.

Secondly, the county militia are meant to face 1 HD monsters by their creator. I may throw whatever I like at them for dramatic purposes.:smallbiggrin:

[Harkone]

Create a martial weapon that is a one-handed reach weapon and does 1d8 damage. The catch? Attacking is a standard action (or as part of a charge) and you don't threaten with it.

Makes it decent for masses of low level characters, because it allows many of them to gang up while having the benefits of a shield as well. High level characters won't want it because it can't be used for multiple attacks in a full attack or for AoOs.

I think this is one of the better ways to model such weapons. While great in masse when you have a spikey wall of death, they're not great weapons for combat out of formation; aside from a deliberate jab, you wouldn't be able to put enough torqe on such a long weapon with one hand to maneuver it well enough for multiple attacks or for unexpected openings (AoOs).

Also, I've seen it before but forget where, there's a feat called "formation fighting" which gives you something like +2 shield bonus when using a large shield and with 2 allies also using one right next to you. This represents the defensive aspect of a trained phalanx.

This is a good idea, like the Macedonian pikemen of Alexander or the 15th century Swiss pikemen.

That feat you mentioned is from Lords of Darkness (maybe elsewhere too), and it's called "Phalanx Fighting," ironically. It grants a +1 AC bonus when wielding a light weapon and heavy shield, and +2 more AC and +1 on reflex saves when adjacent to another character similarly armed who also has the feat. The idea it seems is more the Roman phalanx than the Greek.

Edit: I just realized that all of this had been pretty much covered in this thread already. Oops.

[kellandros]

I can take a 5 ft. step into the area the phalanx threatens, take no attacks of opportunity, and hammer the front line into the dirt. Or if I have a reach weapon of my own I can flatten them from beyond the effective range of their own weapons.

Okay, then just drop the shields altogether. Everyone just uses a 2 handed reach weapon, and they expect anyone to be dead before they can hit back. If you are expecting only 1 HD monsters, threatening 10 feet means that a 2 rank deep line should have 8 people to make an AoO on a single attacker. If they are packed tighter together(not five feet apart, the normal distance on a combat grid), the number just goes up. Now if the enemy come in waves, then the pikemen could be in trouble(expended their AoO already, so next couple would be able to hit back). This would require no feats altogether(but some would help), and could be done with level 1 NPC warriors.

Main thing to remember is to have someone competent in charge. Use the terrain to your advantage- line up about 10 feet back from a small river or other obstruction to slow down anyone thinking of charging. Never ever stand in the middle of a field, or get surrounded.

[Dervag]

Okay, then just drop the shields altogether. Everyone just uses a 2 handed reach weapon, and they expect anyone to be dead before they can hit back. If you are expecting only 1 HD monsters, threatening 10 feet means that a 2 rank deep line should have 8 people to make an AoO on a single attacker.

Main thing to remember is to have someone competent in charge. Use the terrain to your advantage- line up about 10 feet back from a small river or other obstruction to slow down anyone thinking of charging. Never ever stand in the middle of a field, or get surrounded.Aand you've recreated the Swiss pike phalanx. This would be very effective, but it isn't what I want.

The pike phalanx has very exaggerated strengths and weaknesses. It's practically invulnerable in the areas where it is strong (joint defense against melee attack from the front). It's practically unsurvivable in the areas where it is weak (attacks from the flank, from missile weapons, from opponents who just stand there outside the reach of the pikes and taunt their enemy mercilessly, etc.).

I'm looking for something that trades a little of that raw invulnerability against frontal attack for a little more flexibility. Shields make the individual warriors more flexible, because they can either protect themselves or form a wall and protect the entire group against missile fire.

[Matthew]

In that case, you might consider using Javelins, Heavy Shields and an inexpensive Hand Weapon. The only other option is as Hurlbut has suggested [i.e. Spears, Long Spears or Awl Pikes with Bucklers]. Of course, these two options model the Roman Phalanx and the Macedonina Phalanx respectively, but neither model the Hoplite Phalanx. The only reasonable option with them, by RAW, is to go with a Short Spear (or even a renamed Trident) and Heavy Shield. Why can't you use a House Ruled Spear / Long Spear, though?

[Hurlbut]

In that case, you might consider using Javelins, Heavy Shields and an inexpensive Hand Weapon. The only other option is as Hurlbut has suggested [i.e. Spears, Long Spears or Awl Pikes with Bucklers]. Of course, these two options model the Roman Phalanx and the Macedonina Phalanx respectively, but neither model the Hoplite Phalanx. The only reasonable option with them, by RAW, is to go with a Short Spear (or even a renamed Trident) and Heavy Shield. Why can't you use a House Ruled Spear / Long Spear, though?
Erm, what I suggested is to houserule a heavy version of buckler shield. It's not that hard to use the same strap system on a heavy shield, especially if it's a concave, round shield which allow you to rest and hang the top edge on your shoulder. There you have it, the hoplite shield in a nutshell. Basically, just bump the buckler shield bonus by +1 and that's it, no proficiency or additional rules needed for wielding polearms one hand.

[Matthew]

Yeah, I know, but that doesn't model a Hoplite Shield. Hoplites did not conventionally use their Spears two handed nor did they use a Buckler type Shield. The Hoplite Shield was gripped, which can be plainly seen on the period iconography. If you have evidence to the contrary, I would be interested to see it. Why House Rule the Shield when the Spear is the problem? If you have a Light or Heavy Buckler (i.e. Shield that is not gripped) and Spear, then you have something that resembles the Macedonian Phalanx, not the Hoplite.

[Edit 1] Hmmn, actually I could be wrong about this. The Wiki Article image suggests that they did, but this is quite the first time I have ever seen anything like that. Have to check into it.

[Edit 2] Nope, checking into the Wiki Talk page, somebody keeps posting up these pictures of Hoplons /Aspis strapped to the forearm and Spears used Two Handed, much to the bemusement of everyone else. Will have to look into correcting that.

Phalanx (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_formation)
Hoplite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoplite)
Doru (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doru)
Aspis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspis)

Re-enactment Sources:

4Hoplites (http://www.4hoplites.com/index.htm)
The Spartans (http://www.spartanwarband.com/index.php)

Ancient Greek Military History and Archaeology at RomanArmyTalk (http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewforum.php?f=19&sid=1eb7078bc8ac44656de0ce45deb9cce1)

Now, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe there is some evidence I am lacking. Maybe you aren't even trying to model Hoplites and I got the wrong end of the stick. If so, though, I would still maintain that the Shield is not the problem, rather it is the rules that govern D&D's Spear and Long Spear that need to be addressed (as the One Handed Spear is a common 'real life' weapon). Indeed, creating a Buckler that is as good as a Heavy Shield is fraught with its own perils...

[Edit 3] Maybe you are thinking of the Ox Hide Figure Eight Shield that seems to have been usual in Homer's time?

[Hurlbut]

The shortspear is really the best one, Core wise. A shortspear just mean a spear light enough to wield in one hand. Spear is twice the weight, twice the the cost, yet give no better reach than the shortspear. Just go with the shortspear and heavy shield, create a feat that grant one single, additional 5-foot square threatened by the character. Although personally, if you directly translate a Hoplite warrior to the D&D, he'll probably only cover 5 foot radius from his personal space; giving 10 foot coverage or 7.5 if you go from the center point of the personal space all with a simple melee weapon with no extended reach.

[Hurlbut]

[Edit 3] Maybe you are thinking of the Ox Hide Figure Eight Shield that seems to have been usual in Homer's time?
For freeing up both hands? Perhap, but the shield the Hoplite regularly used did and could be rested on their left shoulder because of its shape.

[Dervag]

The only reasonable option with them, by RAW, is to go with a Short Spear (or even a renamed Trident) and Heavy Shield. Why can't you use a House Ruled Spear / Long Spear, though?That's actually about what I'm going to do. I'm planning to houserule the lance.

[kellandros]

Why would a phalanx/pike square worry about being flanked? All that means is the people on the side being attacked start pointing their spears that way as well.

If I recall, the biggest disadvantage a phalanx had was moving over broken terrain. It made it practically impossible to stay in formation, exposing dangerous gaps.


I'm looking for something that trades a little of that raw invulnerability against frontal attack for a little more flexibility. Shields make the individual warriors more flexible, because they can either protect themselves or form a wall and protect the entire group against missile fire.

Well, D&D doesn't let shields offer much extra effectiveness against ranged attacks short of the tower shield(which was rejected earlier, and messes with the whole use of reach weapons anyway). Just remember that in medieval times peasant levies were gathered from the fields, with maybe quilted armor from their families and given spears or other simple weapons that were around. Anyone who is not normally a warrior will most likely be poorly armed. And most of them are going to get killed out there no matter what.

At the least I hope this would make them effective against low HD enemies, cheap and quick to make, and not overshadow the other units/heroes. Any military unit is going to suffer from some tactical weaknesses. You can always send the heroes/other groups in to provide cover for them.

[Matthew]

I'm not clear on the nitty grity of it, but Phalanxes are by reputation vulnerable to being flanked. It wouldn't effect it in D&D terms, though.

Shields can be very useful against Ranged Attacks in combination with the Block Arrow Feat. Unfortunately, this potentially opens up a whole new world of problems with regards to Meta Game knowledge.

Blanket statements about the role of Medieval peasants in warfare are unwise. It varied with regards to period, individual and locale. The Anglo Saxon Fyrd, for instance, constituted a semi professional body of Soldiers very similar to what might have been raised in Ancient Greece (not every Hoplite wore Body Armour!). Actual examples of Peasant levies are interesting, but I cannot think of one off the top of my head. I get the impression that they weren't very common outside of desperate circumstances, but I'm not familiar with every example!

[Hurlbut]

I'm not clear on the nitty grity of it, but Phalanxes are by reputation vulnerable to being flanked. It wouldn't effect it in D&D terms, though.
Probably, but I would say it has to do with the fact that the phalanx formation while very strong is somewhat inflexible. While in formation it's difficult for the formation to change its facing quickly. It's not a surprise since you needed a densely packed unit in order to be an effective phalanx. I guess some examples could be found in the battles between the Romans and Greeks, there should be a few ones where the Romans used a looser unit formation. I do know that while in formation, generally you avoid anything that would break up the ranks, though it's inevitable after even a short march, only the Spartans avoided that by being highly disciplined than most greeks. This rule out a fast march, so the phalanx is slow as well being somewhat inflexible. However, I do like it for that you can use it as a solid core to base your army around.

[Dervag]

Why would a phalanx/pike square worry about being flanked? All that means is the people on the side being attacked start pointing their spears that way as well.Because it isn't actually a square unless you have a LOT of men (most of whom contribute nothing to the battle), or unless you use a hollow square.

Hollow squares are practically immobile, and non-hollow squares require too many soldiers. Real pike and spear formations tend to form long, relatively thick rectangles, which are extremely vulnerable to flank attacks.


If I recall, the biggest disadvantage a phalanx had was moving over broken terrain. It made it practically impossible to stay in formation, exposing dangerous gaps.That was one of its biggest disadvantages, but not the only one. Its vulnerability to missile attacks and its vulnerability to flanking by more maneuverable units were just as important.


Well, D&D doesn't let shields offer much extra effectiveness against ranged attacks short of the tower shield(which was rejected earlier, and messes with the whole use of reach weapons anyway).I can houserule that in; that was actually a big part of what I was looking for in the way of advice on this thread.

The problem is that for low-level characters who don't have heavy armor, taking a two handed weapon means sacrificing a point of AC, which is not a trivial consideration. If you include some kind of formation fighting feat to allow them to cover each other, the sacrifice becomes even bigger. Relying entirely on the ability to deliver AoOs with 15' awl pikes makes my army a bunch of eggshells armed with sledgehammers. They can kill anything that approaches them, but they are extremly vulnerable to being killed in return. So I need a decent AC to keep them alive in a battle, which means shields and formation fighting tactics.


Just remember that in medieval times peasant levies were gathered from the fields, with maybe quilted armor from their families and given spears or other simple weapons that were around. Anyone who is not normally a warrior will most likely be poorly armed. And most of them are going to get killed out there no matter what.I know that very well, but I don't think you understand where this militia is coming from. The militia exists because the previous count, at great expense, paid enough money to equip a regiment-sized force with shields, spears, light armor, and (most expensive of all) crossbows. The weapons are already there for these guys to use; they don't have to buy their own weapons as most historical medieval warriors did.


At the least I hope this would make them effective against low HD enemies, cheap and quick to make, and not overshadow the other units/heroes.They're not supposed to overshadow the heroes; they are a backdrop for the heroes to fight alongside.


Blanket statements about the role of Medieval peasants in warfare are unwise. It varied with regards to period, individual and locale. The Anglo Saxon Fyrd, for instance, constituted a semi professional body of Soldiers very similar to what might have been raised in Ancient Greece (not every Hoplite wore Body Armour!).These guys do have a nontrivial resemblance to the Fyrd. The concept is similar.

As for their armament scheme, the guy who created them was modeling their armament after the Royal Life Guards. This may have been a mistake in hindsight, because the Royal Life Guards have more time to train than the county militia's "weekend warriors" do. But history includes people making mistakes.