Polearm Master in hardcover adventures - should the DM add magical polearms?

[stoutstien]

Good answer. OP is asking the wrong people.

Aye. A more interesting question is how do you introduce gear that is based on the player's choices without it feeling forced or what is the value of a magical weapon that might not fit their primary style compared to a non magical weapon that does.

[MaxWilson]

Aye. A more interesting question is how do you introduce gear that is based on the player's choices without it feeling forced or what is the value of a magical weapon that might not fit their primary style compared to a non magical weapon that does.

I'm in favor of doing this at the rules level or sandbox level so that it's still based on player choices. You want a magical hand crossbow instead of a sword? Make one or go looking specifically for one. Talk to sages, make deals--or do something so legendary that your signature hand crossbow acquires an original magic of its own from your deeds and the stories told about them. BE the mighty hero of legend.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

This is a question that should be asked at session 0 and should considered if the player asks for it.

Adventures strongly favor longswords and to a lesser extent Versatile Str weapons. Experienced players should know this. It seems from the place one handed swords have in mythology and fantasy literature and has been baked deeply into the culture of D&D, there's a reason that the pulp genre is often called "Sword & Sorcery".

PAM is known to be an optimal style generally stronger than longsword and shield as is Dex melee. It can be fun to have an extra challenge and layer of thought in a game if they need to have a suboptimal backup weapon for opponents with resistances. Also if there are two front line warriors in your game there's a god chance the longsword wielder could use a little boost.

In a recent Sunless Citadel game I used the anti-plant axe Hew and a shield for the boss well foreshadowed boss battle despite being an Echo Knight with Great Weapon Fighting. In the same campaign I now have a magical two handed sword, but have a minor radiance weapon on my hip for utility. This has been fun character building for me.

On the other hand I've had characters where I asked before even session 0 in personal conversation with the DM if the character would be accommodated in the loot tables like a Gunslinger or in the case of one highly specialized warrior that pretty much became noodle arms if he wasn't welding Feycrafted Mithral Elven Court Blades if we would be able to get custom upgrades on enchantments every few levels.

[EggKookoo]

Aye. A more interesting question is how do you introduce gear that is based on the player's choices without it feeling forced or what is the value of a magical weapon that might not fit their primary style compared to a non magical weapon that does.

One thing I do with tailored items is put/equip them on the creatures the party is intended to fight, as opposed to having them sitting in a chest in the back of the chamber somewhere. Not any less forced, strictly speaking, but it creates a bit of excitement and makes the item feel more earned. Plus it lets me show off any signature features.

[MinotaurWarrior]

I always find it funny when people say that magic swords are more prominent in mythology or whatever. The Spear of Destiny was by far the most prominent magical weapon in the environment dnd loosely emulates (with several historical rulers "wielding" "it" to miraculous effect) and was prominent enough to feature as a central device in golden age comics not too long ago. And if you go further / wider / older, gungnir, the trident, Green Dragon Crescent Blade, etc. were all prominent legendary polearms. The real issue is that nobody in either LOTR or pulp fiction prominently used polearms.

Anyway, I actually think it's better to give PCs off-build magic items to create flexibility and play variance, so long as you don't end up giving martials too few core magic item upgrades. If by T3 you've got a martial PC in all mundane equipment, I'd drop them something relevant. But for example, I think a vorpal sword adds the most fun to a party where nobody is built to use swords.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I believe that this is a legacy both of popular culture (in an incestuous way both cause and effect) and of earlier editions. In western fantasy culture, swords are the good-guy weapon. Polearms are for chumps and mooks.

This isn't exclusive to the west, it's true of every culture that developed swords.

[PhoenixPhyre]

This isn't exclusive to the west, it's true of every culture that developed swords.

I thought so, but wasn't sure.

And the Spear of Destiny, iirc, was much more ambiguous as a heroic weapon than something like Excalibur. Less an active weapon than an Artifact of Power, something you own that grants power than something you wield directly in combat.

I mean there are certainly non sword famous weapons of power. The Celtic Gae Bolg, for one. But they're all old and not as much part of popular culture as the swords. For whatever reason.

[MinotaurWarrior]

I thought so, but wasn't sure.

And the Spear of Destiny, iirc, was much more ambiguous as a heroic weapon than something like Excalibur. Less an active weapon than an Artifact of Power, something you own that grants power than something you wield directly in combat.

I mean there are certainly non sword famous weapons of power. The Celtic Gae Bolg, for one. But they're all old and not as much part of popular culture as the swords. For whatever reason.

Excalibur wasn't that big of a deal. Arthur also had Ron, his magic Spear, and Carnwennan, his dagger, was the most DnD magical item, cloaking him in shadow. But Arthur was an overall minor character from a remote backwater island. It's in retrospect, after Britain rose to world dominance, that he looks more prominent.

The most important magical sword in Europe was Joyeuse, Charlemagne's sword, which got its power from the Spear of Destiny, and could basically be used to cast color / prismatic spray.

Also, while on the topic, I wish someone would make some form of fantasy content based on the full array of crazy stories about Karl and his enemies. Modules, video game, TV show, etc. Over the centuries so many people made up new stories about him, if you put them all together it'd be fantastically loaded.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Excalibur wasn't that big of a deal. Arthur also had Ron, his magic Spear, and Carnwennan, his dagger, was the most DnD magical item, cloaking him in shadow. But Arthur was an overall minor character from a remote backwater island. It's in retrospect, after Britain rose to world dominance, that he looks more prominent.

The most important magical sword in Europe was Joyeuse, Charlemagne's sword, which got its power from the Spear of Destiny, and could basically be used to cast color / prismatic spray.

Also, while on the topic, I wish someone would make some form of fantasy content based on the full array of crazy stories about Karl and his enemies. Modules, video game, TV show, etc. Over the centuries so many people made up new stories about him, if you put them all together it'd be fantastically loaded.

I'm talking mostly in popular culture, not in the actual myths at this point. Sure, different depictions had different weapons, but the ones that survived in the popular mind until now have been dominantly swords. And you can almost always identify the protagonist of a fantasy work by their weapon of choice--it's almost always a sword.

And there are other cultural markers--I remember reading about cultures where being beheaded by a sword was higher status than by an axe or by hanging. But can't remember them right now.

[MinotaurWarrior]

I'm talking mostly in popular culture, not in the actual myths at this point. Sure, different depictions had different weapons, but the ones that survived in the popular mind until now have been dominantly swords. And you can almost always identify the protagonist of a fantasy work by their weapon of choice--it's almost always a sword.

And there are other cultural markers--I remember reading about cultures where being beheaded by a sword was higher status than by an axe or by hanging. But can't remember them right now.

Yeah, I agree. I just think it's specifically a 1960s on thing. Nobody in LotR or the big pulp stories that influenced Gygax and his players used polearms.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Yeah, I agree. I just think it's specifically a 1960s on thing. Nobody in LotR or the big pulp stories that influenced Gygax and his players used polearms.

It's still present today. As I said, it's kind of incestuous--early D&D didn't have polearms, which influenced later depictions, which then kept D&D out of the polearm business. Look at a lot of anime today--polearms are there, they're just not protagonist weapons. Except staffs.

Another thing I was thinking of is that most "modern" polearms (halberd, glaive, pike) really got their western[1] start much later than things like spears and swords. When I think "Halberd", I think Renaissance/late medieval, not myth and magic. By that time, the whole "magic weapons" thing had gone away, so we didn't really get legends or cultural habits of magical polearms.

[1] Yes, I know that china and the east had lots of polearms of various types way earlier. But that hasn't percolated into western culture nearly as much, except as "exotic" weapons despite being pretty normal.

[MaxWilson]

Yeah, I agree. I just think it's specifically a 1960s on thing. Nobody in LotR or the big pulp stories that influenced Gygax and his players used polearms.

And yet somehow Gygax seems to have been obsessed with them anyway. Spetums, ranseurs, glaive-guisarmes, voulges, etc. I don't even know what most of those really are, I just know their AD&D stats. :)

[MoiMagnus]

As a DM, is it preferable to stick to the books, or should magical loot (such as a +1 halberd) be provided to players when not available in the adventure?

"Generic +1 weapon that is only in the module because the fighter need some loot otherwise will be rendered irrelevant by magic-resistant enemies" should be replaced by the appropriate type of weapon, or rolled through a random table. If the weapon has a particular reason to be the kind of weapon it is, then leave it as such.

How to determine it. Assume the player is unhappy, and ask "Why is this weapon a stupid sword and not something I can use?".
Do you have an answer other than "That's how it is." or "That's what is written in the book."? The answer can be as simple as "it is the weapon of the big bad guy, and as you saw, he uses swords".

If you don't have any reason, then the weapon is just a generic loot, and should be treated as such.
In this case, you should talk with your table to know if they prefer random weapons or tailored weapons.

[Unoriginal]

But Arthur was an overall minor character from a remote backwater island. It's in retrospect, after Britain rose to world dominance, that he looks more prominent.

That's quite untrue, historically speaking. Medieval France loved King Arthur hard.

[Pex]

Of course! The DM runs the game, not the published book. Give the players what they want for the fun of the game. Not any particular magic weapon. Not any particular must get by level, but they get one. You don't punish the player for the audacity of taking Pole Arm Master by denying him a magical glaive forever.

[Tanarii]

And yet somehow Gygax seems to have been obsessed with them anyway. Spetums, ranseurs, glaive-guisarmes, voulges, etc. I don't even know what most of those really are, I just know their AD&D stats. :)

He was a wargamer.

Besides, D&D assumed you'd have armies in the late game, so lots of mundane polearms floating around. OTOH I have no idea if battlesystem used that table. I don't recall the 2e Battlesystem version using anything like it.

Magic swords play a huge part in the older D&D rules for the heroes. Being able to use them was considered a major class feature by the time of BECMI/AD&D. oD&D I gather they all came with ego, so a mixed blessing. But they were still the only special magic weapons.

[KorvinStarmast]

Why can’t a spear be a flame tongue or frost brand?

Because the genre is swords and sorcery. That's why.

That said, I side with Willie the Duck on this matter.

[Sigreid]

If I'm running a module, I'm probably just going to use what's in the module. There's nothing wrong with swapping stuff out, it's just not what I'm going to do because if I'm running a module it's because I've not got the time or inclination to put something together myself.

When I'm running an adventure I create, I'm going to go with random treasure tables.

If a player wants a particular type of magic item they can research how to make it (I'll let non-casters make magic items because why not), or research existing items and I'll build an adventure around that.

[Tanarii]

(I'll let non-casters make magic items because why not)

Using the Xanathars rules, they already can as long as they've got the formula, the exotic and mundane ingredients, and the right tool proficiency (or Arcana proficiency).

[Sigreid]

Using the Xanathars rules, they already can as long as they've got the formula, the exotic and mundane ingredients, and the right tool proficiency (or Arcana proficiency).

I'm aware, but I have this feeling that a lot of people have been conditioned for decades that that's a spellcaster thing.

[Mellack]

Some earlier editions of D&D bypassed this debate by making a rather inexpensive spell called Transfer Enchantment. Found a vorpal sword but you prefer to use an axe? Just transfer the power over. I believe it cost just 25gp in components.

[Pex]

If I'm running a module, I'm probably just going to use what's in the module. There's nothing wrong with swapping stuff out, it's just not what I'm going to do because if I'm running a module it's because I've not got the time or inclination to put something together myself.

When I'm running an adventure I create, I'm going to go with random treasure tables.

If a player wants a particular type of magic item they can research how to make it (I'll let non-casters make magic items because why not), or research existing items and I'll build an adventure around that.

What is so fundamentally difficult to change where it says +1 longsword that deals +1d6 cold damage to +1 glaive that deals +1d6 cold damage? Why should Glaive Pole Arm Master guy have to spend game world time, money, and effort to research but Greatsword Great Weapon Master guy can have his magic weapon because it's Tuesday?

[Sigreid]

What is so fundamentally difficult to change where it says +1 longsword that deals +1d6 cold damage to +1 glaive that deals +1d6 cold damage? Why should Glaive Pole Arm Master guy have to spend game world time, money, and effort to research but Greatsword Great Weapon Master guy can have his magic weapon because it's Tuesday?

Never said it was hard. Said I wasn't going to do it.

[Tanarii]

What is so fundamentally difficult to change where it says +1 longsword that deals +1d6 cold damage to +1 glaive that deals +1d6 cold damage? Why should Glaive Pole Arm Master guy have to spend game world time, money, and effort to research but Greatsword Great Weapon Master guy can have his magic weapon because it's Tuesday?

I mean, you just need to change what it made sense for ancient Wizard magical blacksmiths to spend their time creating.

And of course, in a world where the underlying rules of the multiverse make it common for heroes to specialize in polearms because it's mechanically superior, it does make perfect sense.

[MinotaurWarrior]

It's still present today. As I said, it's kind of incestuous--early D&D didn't have polearms, which influenced later depictions, which then kept D&D out of the polearm business. Look at a lot of anime today--polearms are there, they're just not protagonist weapons. Except staffs.

Another thing I was thinking of is that most "modern" polearms (halberd, glaive, pike) really got their western[1] start much later than things like spears and swords. When I think "Halberd", I think Renaissance/late medieval, not myth and magic. By that time, the whole "magic weapons" thing had gone away, so we didn't really get legends or cultural habits of magical polearms.

[1] Yes, I know that china and the east had lots of polearms of various types way earlier. But that hasn't percolated into western culture nearly as much, except as "exotic" weapons despite being pretty normal.

Right, 1960s on.

Though I'd note that pikes are much older than you give them credit for (Alexander the great had pikes) and complex polearms are precisely as anachronistic as full plate / breastplate (taking breastplate to be the sort of Conquistador style heavy breastplate alone armor)

That's quite untrue, historically speaking. Medieval France loved King Arthur hard.

England and Wales being confusingly overlapping with France, yes, it was a part of (high medieval) French Literature. However, the "Matter of France" was more prominent - think, even, of the Paladin class, named for Charlemagne's companions.


But Charlemagne was also a major figure in the rest of Christendom, especially the Holy Roman Empire. And other Kingdoms had their own national heroes, eg El Cid in the Iberian Peninsula.

It may be an exaggeration to call Arthur minor, but it's also an exaggeration to project his current prominence back into medieval Europe.

[Sigreid]

It's still present today. As I said, it's kind of incestuous--early D&D didn't have polearms, which influenced later depictions, which then kept D&D out of the polearm business. Look at a lot of anime today--polearms are there, they're just not protagonist weapons. Except staffs.

Another thing I was thinking of is that most "modern" polearms (halberd, glaive, pike) really got their western[1] start much later than things like spears and swords. When I think "Halberd", I think Renaissance/late medieval, not myth and magic. By that time, the whole "magic weapons" thing had gone away, so we didn't really get legends or cultural habits of magical polearms.

[1] Yes, I know that china and the east had lots of polearms of various types way earlier. But that hasn't percolated into western culture nearly as much, except as "exotic" weapons despite being pretty normal.

Well, I can see enchanting something you can keep with you more or less at all times. When it comes to walking through town or going to an event, sword to pole arm is a lot like holstered pistol to semi-automatic rifle.

[patchyman]

I think it isn’t either/or. I never have a problem changing around the magical gear in an adventure, but I always do so with an eye to the flavour of the adventure.

If the adventure has a lot of flavour (say SKT), I will probably include a lot of axes and mauls (and you might find fewer swords than in the adventure). In Dragon Heist, where the flavour is different, I have no problem changing magical weapons to whatever the player is likely to use.

[Unoriginal]

England and Wales being confusingly overlapping with France, yes, it was a part of (high medieval) French Literature. However, the "Matter of France" was more prominent - think, even, of the Paladin class, named for Charlemagne's companions.


But Charlemagne was also a major figure in the rest of Christendom, especially the Holy Roman Empire. And other Kingdoms had their own national heroes, eg El Cid in the Iberian Peninsula.

It may be an exaggeration to call Arthur minor, but it's also an exaggeration to project his current prominence back into medieval Europe.

There is a reason why the first novel written in French (the "roman", which to this day is the French word for novel) was one of the Arthurian legend, though. King Arthur was maybe less universally known than now, but in England and France he was EXTREMELY popular. The Matter of Britain was certainly not less popular than the Matter of France.


That being said, and more to the point for this thread, the fact is that Charlemagne, El Cid and most of the heroes popular in the medieval times had legendary swords, or had their other weapons mostly forgotten as time went on.

Wondrous spears and legendary spear users were very present either in earlier times or in cultures where spear use remained something of the high casts. But in the middle of the European Middle Age, being rich enough to have several feet of worked steel as a sidearm was what was glorified, and it in turn influenced all the literature of the era (since it was the rich who paid for it to be written).

[KorvinStarmast]

And of course, in a world where the underlying rules of the multiverse make it common for heroes to specialize in polearms because it's mechanically superior, it does make perfect sense.

I sniggered at this, but here's a thought.

For many years and in many troop formations, the spear (and pole arms, which are a variation on the spear - something sharp and pointy at the end of a stick) was the primary weapon and a sword/blade was a secondary weapon (gladius, saeax, arming sword) for the shield and spear wielding infantry. Spears and pikes are also better horseback weapons in a lot of cases.

Swords, particularly the good ones, were more expensive and thus of limited distribution. They were more frequently found among the wealthy. An ax was also more common than a sword if we head up to the vikings and such.

Who will be able to afford the services of a wizard/sorcerer who can enchant a weapon? The wealthy. Magic swords make sense. The dwarves with their axes and hammers we'll leave alone for the moment.

I am not saying that magic spears don't make sense: they do. Gil Gilad's spear is mentioned in Tolkien's passages regarding the defeat of Sauron at the end of the Second Age, alongside Elendil's Narsil - and I think there's a magical spear in some of the older Celtic legends from Ireland (not braining very well at the moment) but the sword holds a unique place in the swords and sorcery fictional traditions (see also Durandal and Excalibur) that D&D grew from. Lest any doubt me, read the Monsters and Treasures book from original D&D.

[Sigreid]

I sniggered at this, but here's a thought.

For many years and in many troop formations, the spear (and pole arms, which are a variation on the spear - something sharp and pointy at the end of a stick) was the primary weapon and a sword/blade was a secondary weapon (gladius, saeax, arming sword) for the shield and spear wielding infantry. Spears and pikes are also better horseback weapons in a lot of cases.

Swords, particularly the good ones, were more expensive and thus of limited distribution. They were more frequently found among the wealthy. An ax was also more common than a sword if we head up to the vikings and such.

Who will be able to afford the services of a wizard/sorcerer who can enchant a weapon? The wealthy. Magic swords make sense. The dwarves with their axes and hammers we'll leave alone for the moment.

I am not saying that magic spears don't make sense: they do. Gil Gilad's spear is mentioned in Tolkien's passages regarding the defeat of Sauron at the end of the Second Age, alongside Elendil's Narsil - and I think there's a magical spear in some of the older Celtic legends from Ireland (not braining very well at the moment) but the sword holds a unique place in the swords and sorcery fictional traditions (see also Durandal and Excalibur) that D&D grew from. Lest any doubt me, read the Monsters and Treasures book from original D&D.

Cu Chulain (me spell bad) had a particularly brutal magic spear, Gale Bulg, made from the bones of a sea monster. One of the deities had a fiery spear that would fight on it's own.