Creating a Spartan Soldier

[liquidformat]

I want to pick the brains of the community for cool ideas for a basic 3.5 spartan soldier build. I’m not quite sure what level they should start let’s say 3-6 and since it’s dnd spicing it up with magic seems reasonable for a spartan in a magic setting.
Some basics, they were forced to survive off the ‘lands’ alone as small children then rigorously trained to be elite military units i would expect most of the basic fighter skills plus survival, tumble, use rope, and possibly pick pocket and sense motive for bare minimum skills, and let’s be generous with a 32 point buy.
Weaponry would be short spear, javelin, and dagger or short sword with at least light armor and a heavy shield.

[Telok]

Bog standard fighter. Weapon specialization in spear. Toughness. Iron will. Phalanx fighting.

Warning: the following link is to the blog of an actual ancient Greece/Roman historian writing about Sparta as it compares to other ancient Greek city-states, and the Spartans do not come out smelling like roses.
https://acoup.blog/2019/08/16/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-i-spartan-school/

[RNightstalker]

It would have to be an extreme PrC. If you've ever read The Dark Elf Trilogy, the Spartans were in many ways and overall more extreme than the drow. And honestly a point-buy for them would be inconceivable. There would have to be some form of high-powered stat generation involved because if someone didn't measure up, that person faced death from a cliff or from training. One would almost have to go older-school back to 1st/2nd edition for ability score requirements as prerequisites to become a true Hoplite.

[El Dorado]

Might want to look at the Pathfinder 1e phalanx soldier archetype.

[liquidformat]

Bog standard fighter. Weapon specialization in spear. Toughness. Iron will. Phalanx fighting.

This seems pretty boring for a spartan and I don't think it quite works either. They were thrown out into the woods as children to survive on their own, so without some decent cross class skill point useage it isn't very viable and they still would have had some decent investment in other skills.


And honestly a point-buy for them would be inconceivable. There would have to be some form of high-powered stat generation involved because if someone didn't measure up, that person faced death from a cliff or from training. One would almost have to go older-school back to 1st/2nd edition for ability score requirements as prerequisites to become a true Hoplite.

I don't know its hard to really compare most game stats to real life, I think strength which is the easiest to compare they would probably be ok with 15+. The others get a little fuzzy as far as what you would actually need but I think 15,14,14,12,12 would be the absolute min for one but even that does seem a bit low maybe a 40 or 50 point buy. Then again they were pretty much doing crude eugenics so I could see an argument that a 'spartan' is some sort of starting racial template.

[Mechalich]

They were thrown out into the woods as children to survive on their own,

No, they were not. They were indoctrinated by their fellows in a communal process called the agoge. It was exceedingly brutal but did not involve prolonged wilderness exposure.

In any case, cultural traits aside, Spartiates (the citizen class of Sparta) were, as combatants, broadly identical to all other Greek Hoplites (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoplite) from the period. The differences in battle between Spartans, Athenians, Megarans, or any other city state are minimal. Spartan hoplites regularly fought together in battle with hoplites from other city states and integrated with their forces without any significant difficulty.

Overall, hoplite warfare is extremely focused on formation fighting and as such very poorly suited as the focus for any D&D character - since such characters will fight in large formations basically never. Also, the hoplite phalanx is a feature of the early period of classical antiquity - the hoplite was becoming extinct by the 3rd century BC - and most D&D worlds are set roughly 1500 years of technological evolution after that period.

[Anthrowhale]

The Allied Defense feat from Shining South gives an (Improved) Combat Expertise AC bonus to the whole party if they are adjacent. In a phalanx setting, that means every 3rd warrior can tank their attack to give a very substantial bonus to every warrior.

[wilphe]

There's a big difference between:

300 style Spartan

&

Historically Accurate Spartan (and that in turn varies by era)


With lot of in-between points

So where do you want to be?

[ShurikVch]

Which generation of Spartan program? :smallamused:

https://avatars.mds.yandex.net/i?id=b4f4fcd86524e029a525e051297b69e2d9ef8dad-10022398-images-thumbs&n=13

[awa]

https://acoup.blog/2019/08/16/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-i-spartan-school/

you beat me to it.

I was also going to mention that Spartans did not live of the land they had huge forces of noncombatants following their armies around and had shockingly poor logistics.
As they were utterly terrible at diplomacy I would be extremely hesitant to give them good sense motive.
Their fighting style relied on extremely cumbersome gear and tight formations so tumble seems wildly out of place.
Not certain why they would have use rope but at least they are not specifically know for being bad with ropes.

As others have mentioned the spartan fighting styles is not very effective for a pc its all about the whole group fighting together as one and spartan training would be fundamentally impractical for a lone warrior running around fighting in small group skirmishers.

As for stats they might have been slightly above average but average is a bunch of 11s and 12.


Edit
Im less confident here but I think most of the theft being done is more along the lines of bigger kids stealing from smaller kids rather than picking pockets. Actually I'm basically certain they weren't picking pockets the main thing they would be stealing would be extra food people dont keep that in their pockets.

[Mechalich]

There's a big difference between:

300 style Spartan

&

Historically Accurate Spartan (and that in turn varies by era)

Even in the context of the movie 300, the Spartan still fall out as fairly standard Fighter Class. That film, and it's sequel 300: Rise of an Empire portrays hoplites from other Greek city states, notably Athens, in battle, and they are outfitted and fight more or less exactly the same (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1253863/mediaviewer/rm1384502528/) as the Spartans.

As such, a reasonable reading of the films mythology is that the Spartans are on average better than the Greeks due to variations in training and specialization. Justifiably the average Spartiate could be given the elite array as opposed to standard stats, and they ought to be single-class fighters rather than a mix of aristocrat/expert/warrior/fighter levels like many of the other members of Greek hoplite forces (which were quasi-militia in structure).

By contrast the Persians in the film are mostly conscripts, probably Commoner 1, or if lucky enough to have gained some experience, Commoner 1/Warrior 1, while the Spartans are specifically called out as being elite veterans, so probably Fighter 4-5. Considered this way, D&D rules actually represent the events of the film surprisingly well.

The 300 films, as a setting, are very dumb, but if you translate them in 3.5 D&D, it's also an E6 world with basically no members of any spellcasting classes at all. If you take something from that setting and plop them into a standard D&D world it's not going to be especially impressive.

[Maat Mons]

My major gripe with trying to represent classical warfare in D&D is that the stats for shortspear don’t seem to match up with actual one-handed spears. Google says 7-9 feet for the spears Greeks (and others) would have been using in one hand. Or 13-21 feet for the spears Macedonians used in two hands while still also using shields. Seems like you should be able to get reach with a one-handed spear, and extra-super-reach with a two-handed spear.

The closest I’ve been able to figure out mechanically to classical warfare in 3.5 is the Shield and Pike Style feat (Dragon 338, p92) to use a two-handed spear and a light shield at the same time. But as I said, it was only really the Macedonians using their spears in two hands. And they only really needed to because they were using something that probably should have had stats like an awl pike (Dragon 331, p23). The awl pike would get you three rows of spears usable at the same time. But the Macedonians had up to five rows of spears usable at the same time. Three rows usable at a time is what a more traditional phalanx, without the two-handed spears, would be getting.

[Zombulian]

Alright guys how about we answer OP’s - pretty specific- building question and ignore the obviously heinous and ahistorical representations of spartans in pop culture.

A canny warrior with a variety of weapon types and a little magic and living off the land sounds like a ranger to me.

[Maat Mons]

As far as using Ranger for a Spartan, while there were definitely lightly armored soldiers in classical armies, my understanding is that Spartans would all be wearing breastplates. Breastplates are medium armor, at least under D&D rules, whereas Rangers are blackmailed into wearing light armor by their Combat Style class feature. Mithral can turn a breastplate into light armor, but if a city-state is outfitting all of its citizen-soldiers with mithral armor, they’d either need to be situated on a mithral mine, or be prosperous enough to acquire all the mithral they need through trade.

Barbarian and Warblade are both classes which have a reasonable number of skill points, and for which wearing a non-mithral breastplate makes sense, at least at certain levels.

For mixing in some magic with the spear and shield style, it’s a bit annoying that you need a hand relatively free to provide somatic components. A light shield would leave your hand free enough for the purpose, but Spartans used heavy shields. The Somatic Weaponry Feat (Complete Mage, p47) is an option, alternately the Weaponmaster ACF for cleric (Dragon 353, p88) provides a more limited form of the same benefit, restricted to your deity’s favored weapon. Unsurprisingly, Athena’s favored weapon is the shortspear.

[wilphe]

Alright guys how about we answer OP’s - pretty specific- building question and ignore the obviously heinous and ahistorical representations of spartans in pop culture.

A canny warrior with a variety of weapon types and a little magic and living off the land sounds like a ranger to me.

I would disagree with the first proposition (we need to know what we are emulating)

And agree mostly with the second, at least for the first part of their training


But here's a go at one, who can be scaled up or down depending your preferences.


Stats:

Con is key, because Spartan training and Hoplite warfare are all about enduring, not feats of Strength or Dexterity

Str because you are a warrior, Dex depending on armour and role.

Historical Spartans would wear the best they could afford, if you are going be doing cinematic leaps and fighting in just a cloak you can pump this further

Wis, ok

Int and Cha should be dumped, because Sparta is not a culture that valued book learning or being good at talking, Spartans gave the world the word "laconic". Don't confuse this with them being stupid or slow witted.

In answer to the Athenian who called the Spartans unlearned, Antalcidas said, "At any rate we are the only people who have learned no evil from you

They are however a warrior elite used to being obeyed and regard just about everyone else as inferior, asking nicely is not a concept they are really used to.

25 pt buy:

CON 16
STR and DEX 14
WIS 11
INT and CHA 8


Class:

Passing through the agoge needs stealth, adaptability and self-reliance.

You can reskin Ranger as follows:

Class features:

Remove:

Spellcasting
Track
Wild Empathy
Animal Companion
Other "druidy" stuff; you are not a wilderness guy, you sneak around farmland stealing food and killing Helots

Add:
Hit die to d12
1st Favoured Enemy must be human
Combat Style is Spear + Shield; cannot take any other, works in all armour

Maybe play with the OA Samurai rules for your panoply, but remember the Shield is the most important


Skills:

Remove Concentration
Add Intimidate, Knowledge (Nobility and Royalty), Perform (Sing)

Stealth and Perception skills are a must, as is at least one rank in Perform (Sing)

Avoid craft skills unless you are involved in siege work or the navy and you certainly should not be doing so for a living.
Slightly softer ban on Profession.

Survival, well you are supposed to steal from others not fend for yourself, but this isn't so bad


Progression:

Picking up Endurance at Rgr3 makes that a good break point.

Further progression might be Fighter or Aristocrat or [Insert Homebrew Noble Class here]

[pabelfly]

First, Spartans have the following gear - an Xiphos (short sword), possibly a Kopsis (a longsword), javelins to soften enemies from range, and an Apsis (circular shield). The Apsis probably deserves its own stats, since it's made of both wood and bronze, unlike other shields in DnD, so here's some rough stats:

Apsis Shield (Exotic Shield)
15gp
+2 Armor Bonus
-1 AC Penalty
10% Arcane Spell Failure
15lb

As for Spartans as a class, I'd come up with a variant Fighter: Spartan.

Base Will Save is equal to Fort Save for the Spartan. Spartans spend years training as soldiers and have honed their mental fortitude.
Proficiency: Light and Medium armor, Shields and Exotic Shield Proficiency: Apsis Shield. While Spartans would wear breastplate, their arms and legs were free of armor. They also wielded the exotic shield, the Apsis Shield.
Bonus Feats: The Spartan does not gain a bonus feat at 1st level like the normal fighter class does. Instead, the Spartan gains a +1 bonus to all attack and damage rolls with Short Swords, Long Swords, and Javelins. They must be wielding the Apsis shield in their off-hand to gain this bonus. This bonus increases by +1 at 5th level of Spartan and increases by +1 again every five levels thereafter.


I personally wouldn't bother with spellcasting for Spartans. Yes, that would make them more powerful, but spellcasting isn't part of the Spartan mythology.

[awa]

[QUOTE=Maat Mons;25938798] but if a city-state is outfitting all of its citizen-soldiers

/QUOTE]

Spartans aren't citizen soldiers and were not supplied arms and armor by the state they are closer to a warrior aristocracy each member supported by a large number of slaves and other less free peoples. Relative poverty was even more likely to cost you your chance as a spartan than physical disability.

[Telok]

No craft skills. They considered anyone who did any form of "work" to be unworthy scum. There's a record of one of them being aghast (and then likely insulting) that another city's king was gardening as a hobby. Spartans didn't forge weapons, plant anything, write poetry, make armor, tame animals, row boats, mend sails, or cook food. That was slaves' work.

There was apparently a fair bit of "sport" hunting to keep meat on the table and maintain status though. Stealth is fine, though they're probably a bit whacko honor hypocrites about it. They graduated their agog training and did their annual 'war' against the helots (their slave class) with night raids and ambush murder. But don't expect them to do any 'stealth' stuff in battle, or in armor, or plan & execute ambushes, or hide their camp, or generally try to scout at all (slaves' work again). Cross class stealth is probably enough.

Also, 3.5 could use a "hand and a half" spear with similar rules to the bastard sword. As a martial weapon its either a no-throw no-reach 1d6+1 short spear or a 2-handed reach 1d6+1 long spear. With exotic prof you can go 1-handed reach 1d6+1. Then you just use the squeezing rules and some group fighting feats to "phalanx up" and get more spears on the frontage. Use noble 3/fighter 3 with breastplate and large shield for standard hopilites and fighter 5 with the same gear for Spartans.

[Metastachydium]

No craft skills. They considered anyone who did any form of "work" to be unworthy scum. There's a record of one of them being aghast (and then likely insulting) that another city's king was gardening as a hobby. Spartans didn't forge weapons, plant anything, write poetry, make armor, tame animals, row boats, mend sails, or cook food. That was slaves' work.

Or something one delegates to the perioikoi, who weren't slaves, just second-class not-really-citizens, but yeah.


Also, 3.5 could use a "hand and a half" spear with similar rules to the bastard sword. As a martial weapon its either a no-throw no-reach 1d6+1 short spear or a 2-handed reach 1d6+1 long spear. With exotic prof you can go 1-handed reach 1d6+1

OR one can trade accuracy for more damage in a basically RAW way. GreatspearsCW have reach, which they retain even if sized down to Small; at which point someone who took EWP for them can wield 'em one-handed at a -2 to hit, dealing 1d10+STR (still better than a longspear, mind) per hit, effectively trading -2 to attacks for (at average, compared to a shortspear) +2 to damage and +2 to AC and reach.

[Maat Mons]

Rules Compendium has this tucked away on page 151:


A wielder gains no reach from a reach weapon that is too small. No additional reach is granted by a reach weapon that is too big.

I feel like it was written somewhere else too, but I can't find where.

[Metastachydium]

I don't know that this applies here. Small is a little anomaly to itself in this regard, as Small and Medium have the same reach by default, and reach weapons double that to the same distance as well. And that's only the rules side of things. Logically, a weapon that can give a, say, 2'8" tall thing 10' reach shouldn't be able to only grant 5' for something 7' tall.

EDIT: Okay, went straight to the source. Since it is specified on p. 150 of RComp that
Tiny or smaller creatures gain no advantage from reach weapons, it seems fairly obvious to me that what you quoted simply means that weapons too small to grant reach (i.e. weapons sized for Tiny or smaller) continue not to grant reach for creatures of of size Small and above.

[Maat Mons]

So, you're reading that passage like this?


A wielder gains no reach from a reach weapon that is too small [to grant reach]. No additional reach is granted by a reach weapon that is too big [to grant reach].

What's "a reach weapon too big to grant reach?"

[Morphic tide]

First, Spartans have the following gear - an Xiphos (short sword), possibly a Kopsis (a longsword), javelins to soften enemies from range, and an Apsis (circular shield). The Apsis probably deserves its own stats, since it's made of both wood and bronze, unlike other shields in DnD, so here's some rough stats:

Apsis Shield (Exotic Shield)
15gp
+2 Armor Bonus
-1 AC Penalty
10% Arcane Spell Failure
15lb
The Apsis could probably just be an Extreme Shield (+3 AC, -4 AC penalty, 10% ASF, 25 lbs) that happens to be bronze-faced, being much larger than any medieval period shield to get some leg coverage by sheer size of the circle and basically nobody making all-steel shields larger than a buckler (not that D&D weights care). More important, I think, would be implementing the Dory as a distinct weapon with Reach on Readied attacks, or a feat for spears to allow added reach on Readied attacks or Attacks of Opportunity. Conditional Reach means normally attacking adjacently, so the first rank doesn't have to get out their swords to attack the enemy front rank.


As for Spartans as a class, I'd come up with a variant Fighter: Spartan.

Base Will Save is equal to Fort Save for the Spartan. Spartans spend years training as soldiers and have honed their mental fortitude.
Proficiency: Light and Medium armor, Shields and Exotic Shield Proficiency: Apsis Shield. While Spartans would wear breastplate, their arms and legs were free of armor. They also wielded the exotic shield, the Apsis Shield.
Bonus Feats: The Spartan does not gain a bonus feat at 1st level like the normal fighter class does. Instead, the Spartan gains a +1 bonus to all attack and damage rolls with Short Swords, Long Swords, and Javelins. They must be wielding the Apsis shield in their off-hand to gain this bonus. This bonus increases by +1 at 5th level of Spartan and increases by +1 again every five levels thereafter.

This doesn't really answer any of the problems 3.5 poses for phalanx combat, it just gives efficient numbers for rigid adherence to the set of equipment that's missing a spear. You don't need Attack and Damage bonuses, you need to be able to have three ranks attacking reliably and something to keep this from evaporating the moment Area effects show up. This could be done in either Zhentarim or Targeteer fashion, with the former being a handful of substitution levels very bluntly making something work (Swift Action Demoralize at 9th) and the latter reducing the Proficiencies and Bonus Feat list in exchange for unique Bonus Feat alternatives (yet more attacks than Rapid Shot and compressing a Full Round Attack).

[JNAProductions]

This doesn't really answer any of the problems 3.5 poses for phalanx combat, it just gives efficient numbers for rigid adherence to the set of equipment that's missing a spear. You don't need Attack and Damage bonuses, you need to be able to have three ranks attacking reliably and something to keep this from evaporating the moment Area effects show up. This could be done in either Zhentarim or Targeteer fashion, with the former being a handful of substitution levels very bluntly making something work (Swift Action Demoralize at 9th) and the latter reducing the Proficiencies and Bonus Feat list in exchange for unique Bonus Feat alternatives (yet more attacks than Rapid Shot and compressing a Full Round Attack).

The phalanx came to be in a world where AoEs didn't exist very much.
In a world where people can wave their hands and summon big bursts of fire, you'd see different tactics and strategies develop.

Now, you certainly can make a set of feats, classes, etc. for a phalanx fighter. But there's less reason for it to exist in a higher and wider magic D&D world.

[Pugwampy]

Take a barbarian class , add 1 level of fighter . Play with spear , tower shield and sword .

Skip on armour and range weapon if you wanna roleplay .

[Metastachydium]

So, you're reading that passage like this?



What's "a reach weapon too big to grant reach?"

I see the point you're trying to make it and it is a fair contention, but the rule clarification will yield asymmetrical results no matter what. If we take it to mean what you think it means, it gives us "Large or larger grants reach based on the wielder's natural reach; Small simply loses its reach because whatever".

[Maat Mons]

Ah, sorry, I should have clarified. I'm reading it like this:


A wielder gains no reach from a reach weapon that is too small [for that wielder]. No additional reach is granted by a reach weapon that is too big [for that wielder].

So anyone, regardless of size, loses any reach benefits when wielding a weapon designed for someone smaller than themselves. A large creature gains no reach from a weapon designed for a medium or smaller creature. A medium creature gains no reach from a weapon designed for a small or smaller creature. A small creature gains no reach from a weapon designed for a tiny or smaller character. A tiny character has reach 0, so doubling it still leaves them at reach 0. Et cetera.

I suppose that can still produce some oddities, like a centaur needing a much bigger spear than a human only to wind up with the same reach as the human got from the shorter spear. But in its way, it also makes sense. If a human uses a longspear built for a halfling, it's about as big as a shortspear designed for a human would be, so it would be weird if it granted reach when the shortspear doesn't. By that same logic, a halfling wielding a shortspear designed for a human should gain reach as if wielding a longspear, but 3.5 decided to ditch those rules form 3.0.

[lesser_minion]

Rogue with points in Profession (Hoplite), Bluff, and Intimidate, and avoiding Craft, Diplomacy, Knowledge, and other Profession skills.

You don't need proficiency with hoplite weapons and armour -- the Spartans trained for hoplite warfare, which D&D combat isn't.

[ShurikVch]

A tiny character has reach 0, so doubling it still leaves them at reach 0.
IIRR, on the WotC site they suggested the variant rule: creature with natural reach 0' got 5' reach when wielding reach weapon

Some of reach weapon, rather than simply double the wielder's reach, give specific reach values - like Whip and Awl Pike are always 15' reach

Also, Long Arm graft gives +5' reach

[Metastachydium]

Ah, sorry, I should have clarified. I'm reading it like this:



So anyone, regardless of size, loses any reach benefits when wielding a weapon designed for someone smaller than themselves. A large creature gains no reach from a weapon designed for a medium or smaller creature. A medium creature gains no reach from a weapon designed for a small or smaller creature. A small creature gains no reach from a weapon designed for a tiny or smaller character. A tiny character has reach 0, so doubling it still leaves them at reach 0. Et cetera.

I suppose that can still produce some oddities, like a centaur needing a much bigger spear than a human only to wind up with the same reach as the human got from the shorter spear. But in its way, it also makes sense.


The issue is, the asymmetry I've been talking about persists, insofar as this would give us larger weapons granting reach based on the wielder's size and smaller weapons except Small weapons, for whatever reason, based on the weapon's size. (Or, if we go very obtusely literal on reading it, "too small" weapons would remove the natural reach of creatures, while "too big" weapons would leave that in place, but wouldn't grant any additional reach.)


If a human uses a longspear built for a halfling, it's about as big as a shortspear designed for a human would be, so it would be weird if it granted reach when the shortspear doesn't. By that same logic, a halfling wielding a shortspear designed for a human should gain reach as if wielding a longspear, but 3.5 decided to ditch those rules form 3.0.

I think that ship sailed when the developers decided they'll make Small creatures more playable by giving them the same reach as Medium creatures enjoy. I mean, if a 2'10" tall creature with something the size of a shortspear can have 10' reach, how could that reach diminish if you leave the weapon's size unchanged but increase the wielder? Due to the peculiarities of how Small size works in combat, that logic is not even remotely applicable.

[Maat Mons]

… smaller weapons except Small weapons, for whatever reason, based on the weapon's size.

I really have no idea where you're getting the idea of any weapons granting reach based on the size of the weapon or weapons sized for Small creatures being any sort of special exception. You double your natural reach or you don't, with one of the requirements for doubling your reach being that the weapon was built for a creature of at least your size.

[Metastachydium]

I really have no idea where you're getting the idea of any weapons granting reach based on the size of the weapon or weapons sized for Small creatures being any sort of special exception. You double your natural reach or you don't, with one of the requirements for doubling your reach being that the weapon was built for a creature of at least your size.

You misunderstand. Small is an exception by default, inasmuch as it's the one size that grants the same reach as Medium (the only such overlap between the sizes). Your reading of the rule removes its exceptional status in a way I find counterintuitive and defying the logic in place. To put it more simply, if RAW is "a shorter person with a short weapon has bigger reach than a taller person with the same weapon", that's pretty good content for one of those Hilariosuly Nonsensical RAW threads.

[RNightstalker]

In any case, cultural traits aside, Spartiates (the citizen class of Sparta) were, as combatants, broadly identical to all other Greek Hoplites (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoplite) from the period. The differences in battle between Spartans, Athenians, Megarans, or any other city state are minimal. Spartan hoplites regularly fought together in battle with hoplites from other city states and integrated with their forces without any significant difficulty.

Overall, hoplite warfare is extremely focused on formation fighting and as such very poorly suited as the focus for any D&D character - since such characters will fight in large formations basically never. Also, the hoplite phalanx is a feature of the early period of classical antiquity - the hoplite was becoming extinct by the 3rd century BC - and most D&D worlds are set roughly 1500 years of technological evolution after that period.

I would disagree about Spartans being like other Greeks. I would also be wary of quoting a source that any anonymous joe can edit...the Tim Howard as Secretary of Defense edit comes to mind.


The Allied Defense feat from Shining South gives an (Improved) Combat Expertise AC bonus to the whole party if they are adjacent. In a phalanx setting, that means every 3rd warrior can tank their attack to give a very substantial bonus to every warrior.

If we were going to build a Spartan, that (or something like it) would be a start.


There's a big difference between:

300 style Spartan

&

Historically Accurate Spartan (and that in turn varies by era)


You mean guys breaking formation to showoff isn't historically accurate?!?


Which generation of Spartan program? :smallamused:

https://avatars.mds.yandex.net/i?id=b4f4fcd86524e029a525e051297b69e2d9ef8dad-10022398-images-thumbs&n=13

I almost included a reference to that as part of my first response.



The 300 films, as a setting, are very dumb, but if you translate them in 3.5 D&D, it's also an E6 world with basically no members of any spellcasting classes at all. If you take something from that setting and plop them into a standard D&D world it's not going to be especially impressive.

That's what happens when we base "historical" movies off of graphic novels.



Barbarian and Warblade are both classes which have a reasonable number of skill points, and for which wearing a non-mithral breastplate makes sense, at least at certain levels.


Barbarians flying into a rage...not exactly what comes to mind when thinking highly trained and disciplined solder.


The phalanx came to be in a world where AoEs didn't exist very much.
In a world where people can wave their hands and summon big bursts of fire, you'd see different tactics and strategies develop.

Now, you certainly can make a set of feats, classes, etc. for a phalanx fighter. But there's less reason for it to exist in a higher and wider magic D&D world.

Probably the best response of the thread.


Take a barbarian class , add 1 level of fighter . Play with spear , tower shield and sword .


Once again barbarian doesn't fit, nor does the tower shield. It has some thematic fit, but IRL or 3.5 it would seriously hamper combat.


Rogue with points in Profession (Hoplite), Bluff, and Intimidate, and avoiding Craft, Diplomacy, Knowledge, and other Profession skills.

You don't need proficiency with hoplite weapons and armour -- the Spartans trained for hoplite warfare, which D&D combat isn't.

Rogue? While I agree that D&D combat isn't ancient shield-wall combat, if we're going to try to make a Spartan/Hoplite, weapon and armor proficiencies are quite necessary and essential.

[Maat Mons]

A Rogue could use a mithral breastplate and a darkwood heavy shield without penalty. I’ve already said I don’t like relying on special materials for unnamed NPCs, but it’s not otherwise an off-base suggestion. If we’re doing multiclassing, you could get whichever proficiencies you like from the other class, and Feat Rogue wouldn’t be a terrible way to pick up some extra feats. You’d lose a point of base attack bonus, but you’d gain skill points and Evasion. People have been talking about how tempting a target a formation would make for area of effect spells. Evasion could help a little. Unfortunately, Evasion only works in light armor, which brings us back to the mithral issue if we stick to the iconic breastplate.

The idea of using the extreme shield from Races of Stone has already been mentioned. Now that I look into it, ancient Greek shields were apparently around 16 pounds, and an extreme wooden shield is statted as 15 pounds, so that tracks. Fighters can get the Exotic Shield Proficiency feat for free by giving up proficiency with tower shields, so there’s not necessarily a big cost to using an extreme shield.

[GloatingSwine]

Justifiably the average Spartiate could be given the elite array as opposed to standard stats, and they ought to be single-class fighters rather than a mix of aristocrat/expert/warrior/fighter levels like many of the other members of Greek hoplite forces (which were quasi-militia in structure).

No, the Spartiates were exactly the same citizen militia as any other Greek of their day. They didn't spend any time at all training for battle, the only thing they trained was formation marching and they only did that when they were called up.

The difference between a Spartiate and his contemporaries is that he's much much richer and doesn't have a job.

At most they're a tiny bit bigger, stronger, and tougher because they eat more meat than average (but not as much as athletes of their day).

[Mechalich]

No, the Spartiates were exactly the same citizen militia as any other Greek of their day. They didn't spend any time at all training for battle, the only thing they trained was formation marching and they only did that when they were called up.

The difference between a Spartiate and his contemporaries is that he's much much richer and doesn't have a job.

At most they're a tiny bit bigger, stronger, and tougher because they eat more meat than average (but not as much as athletes of their day).

The sentence in front of the piece you quoted reads: 'As such, a reasonable reading of the films mythology is that the Spartans are on average better than the Greeks due to variations in training and specialization.' I was very clearly speaking with regard to the 300 films in that post, not the historical case.

[YellowJohn]

When I ran RHOD, I statted up the Shining Axes as Fighter 6's with a very Phalanx Combat flavour. Their equipment doesn't match the historical spartan, but it gives me something to riff off, plus some other ideas in the thread. Let’s see where I end up…
DM Fiat: You will need a custom teamwork benefit so that members of your 'team' don't grant your opponents cover. That's important; you can't make attacks of opportunity against opponents in cover and this build is all over the AOO’s.

Elite Array: Str 14, Dex 13, Con 16 (15 + 1 L4), Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 8
Equipment: Armour of choice (Full Plate for numbers, Breastplate for Flavour), Exotic Shield of choice (Tower or Extreme), Awl Pike (DrM331 p.24), non-reach melee weapon of choice. Fighters who step into the front rank should come from ranks 4+ and have shield & melee ready.

Stub:
1: Warblade 1 (IL 1)
1st Level Feat: Awl Pike Proficiency
Human Bonus: Combat Reflexes
Maneuver 1: Leading the Attack (WR)
Maneuver 2: Steel Wind (IH)
Maneuver 3: Stone Bones (SD)
Stance: Leading the Charge (WR) OR Bolstering Voice
2: Warblade 2 (IL 2)
Maneuver 4: Whatever.
3: Fighter 1 (IL 2)
3rd Level Feat: Expert Tactician (CAd p.109)
Fighter Bonus: Hold the Line (CW p.100)
4: Fighter 2 (IL 3)
Fighter Bonus: Backstab (DrM340 p.86)
5: Warblade 3 (IL 4)
Maneuver 5: Mountain Hammer
6: Warblade 4 (IL 5)
6th Level Feat: Double Team (DC p.95)
Maneuver: Swap L2 maneuver for Lion’s Roar or Iron Heart Surge
Stance: Tactics of the Wolf (WR)

One in nine should be a ‘leader’, swapping their Dex and Int stats, exchanging Expert Tactician and Hold the Line for Combat Expertise and Allied Defence (ShS p.19). Some should also exchange Leading the Charge for Bolstering Voice. These individuals go in the second rank.
As has been noted, formations are weak to AOE attacks, so keep some clerics further back with Countermagic handy.

When two people with the Double Team feat threaten an opponent, they flank that opponent.
The Backstab feat allows (1/turn) an AOO against an opponent you flank who attacks someone else. Hold the Line also allows an AOO against any charging opponent who moves into your threatened space.
Expert Tactician means all your friends get +2 to hit & damage against any opponent you hit with an AOO.
Tactics of the Wolf stance only gives a +2 bonus to damage - but it's untyped, and there are eight people in this flank so it's really +16.
If the formation is ready to charge, swap to the 'Leading the Charge' stance (which also gives an untyped bonus - this time +5 damage to everyone in 60' if you charged this turn), and things get silly pretty quickly - especially if you let the whole formation move at once. Don't forget the Leading the Attack Strike for another +10. The Lions Roar boost can give the formation more bonuses as enemies start dropping although Iron Heart Surge may be a better pick for defensive reasons.
Meanwhile the leaders in the second rank use their Allied Defense to give everyone a big bag of AC.

Should be an absolute meat grinder for other infantry formations.

[ShurikVch]

There's a big difference between:

300 style Spartan

&

Historically Accurate Spartan (and that in turn varies by era)
How about the God of War spartans (https://godofwar.fandom.com/wiki/Spartan)?

[lesser_minion]

Rogue? While I agree that D&D combat isn't ancient shield-wall combat, if we're going to try to make a Spartan/Hoplite, weapon and armor proficiencies are quite necessary and essential.

The reason I suggested rogue is that it gives you a fairly reasonable starting point for a D&D character while still remaining somewhat respectful of the actual history (i.e., that the Spartans' only actual experience with the sort of competent, effective soldiers that they pretended to be was those soldiers eating them for breakfast). These people were taught to lie, cheat, bully, intimidate, and steal from a young age, in service to a system that was itself essentially a con designed to spare a handful of people and their families from having to work for a living.

For combat on a D&D scale, rogues can use hunting bows and short swords, which also fits what we know about Spartans' activities off the battlefield.


A Rogue could use a mithral breastplate and a darkwood heavy shield without penalty. I’ve already said I don’t like relying on special materials for unnamed NPCs, but it’s not otherwise an off-base suggestion. If we’re doing multiclassing, you could get whichever proficiencies you like from the other class, and Feat Rogue wouldn’t be a terrible way to pick up some extra feats. You’d lose a point of base attack bonus, but you’d gain skill points and Evasion. People have been talking about how tempting a target a formation would make for area of effect spells. Evasion could help a little. Unfortunately, Evasion only works in light armor, which brings us back to the mithral issue if we stick to the iconic breastplate.

The signature armour of hoplites was textile-based, i.e., padded, which is already light armour with no ACP. There's an argument that D&D's stats for it are wrong, but a decent chunk of the better armours being better is probably defensible, and the game's design limits how good the best armour can actually be.

[Elkad]

IIRR, on the WotC site they suggested the variant rule: creature with natural reach 0' got 5' reach when wielding reach weapon

DMG p29 agrees with that. We just have RC in the middle contradicting it.

My houserules document clarifies (allows) it. 10' reach for medium is 5' for Tiny. 15' for medium is 5' for Diminutive.

[Clause]

Im going in figther 7.
Weapon focus(short seord) and (lance)
Shield expert( HoB)
Formation expert(CW)
And another tactical feat i dont remmember the name now, but is formation focused.

If you have more levels take devoted protector levels and trick devotion to make a copy of yourself and lock shields with yous copy, and booth take te other as yous charge os protection. This will be great to see

[paladinn]

Sorry to come in late..

This is a variant fighter class that might be a better starting point for the spartan. It's not all feats and has some features that could makes for a bad-arse spartan.

https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Soldier_(3.5e_Class)

[RNightstalker]

For combat on a D&D scale, rogues can use hunting bows and short swords, which also fits what we know about Spartans' activities off the battlefield.


Fair enough. Starting with Rogue at first level especially would be a boon for skill points which would be in short supply afterwards in the progression.

[awa]

use one of the variant rogues to trade sneak attack for a feat

[ShurikVch]

FWIW, Dragon has "Giants In the Earth: Heroes of the Persian War" article

Leonidas there was Fighter 7, Megistias - Diviner 5/Warrior 2, and treacherous Epialtes - Rogue 2

[RNightstalker]

FWIW, Dragon has "Giants In the Earth: Heroes of the Persian War" article

Leonidas there was Fighter 7, Megistias - Diviner 5/Warrior 2, and treacherous Epialtes - Rogue 2

Opinions will vary. They've been trying to do this for ages. I remember them trying to stat out Robin Hood in an older edition of D&D.

[ShurikVch]

Opinions will vary. They've been trying to do this for ages. I remember them trying to stat out Robin Hood in an older edition of D&D.
Dragon #55: Robin there was 12th-level Fighter with special to-hit bonus with his longbow (on top of his level and Dex bonus), and the only stat below 16 was his Wis (14)
What's wrong about it?

[Pugwampy]

Once again barbarian doesn't fit, nor does the tower shield. It has some thematic fit, but IRL or 3.5 it would seriously hamper combat.



Kay , fighter and heavy shield ?

[RNightstalker]

Dragon #55: Robin there was 12th-level Fighter with special to-hit bonus with his longbow (on top of his level and Dex bonus), and the only stat below 16 was his Wis (14)
What's wrong about it?

Nothing is "wrong" about it. That only proves my point that opinions will vary because another source put him as a 13th level archer.

[ShurikVch]

Nothing is "wrong" about it. That only proves my point that opinions will vary because another source put him as a 13th level archer.
Which edition it was?
(I'm unable to find the "Archer" class)

[RNightstalker]

Which edition it was?
(I'm unable to find the "Archer" class)

1st or 2nd...I don't have the article anymore.