Rule change for spears and halberds.

[Leth Shyish'phak]

Well, I was sitting playing a game of warhammer (as you do ), when my unit of Empire Halberdiers got charged (as they do ). Being a rather funny person, I declared that I would stand and shoot with my halberds.

And then, I thought, that doesn't actually sound so stupid. What if units armed with spears or halberds could declare a stand and shoot reaction? Using their weapon skill instead of their ballistic skill, and their own strength value (including any halberd bonus, obviously), while ignoring penalties for long range, cover and stand and shoot, and getting one "shot" each.

So, say a unit of Empire Spearmen in horde formation is being charged, they declare a stand and shoot reaction. The first two ranks get to "shoot", giving them 20 "shots" at S3, hitting on a 4+. Not a massive boost, but I think it makes sense and certainly gives large units an incentive to carry pointy sticks instead of just hand weapons. Perhaps grant these "shots" the armour piercing rule, to represent the impact of charging into lots of spears? That, combined with the -1 to hit from skirmishers would make it more effective against tightly packed units rather than units fighting in a loose formation, which also makes some sense.

It wouldn't be a completely unavoidable attack either. If the enemy gets within their movement distance, the stand and shoot can't happen so you have to decide whether to charge from a distance and get stabbed a lot, or move right up close and let the enemy charge you/keep shooting you. Could possibly add a nice little tactical element to deciding whether to charge or not. Also makes elf spearmen potentially useful!

So, any opinions on this idea? I quite like it, thought I'd throw it out there.

[Haravikk]

Isn't this already represented by the Fight in Extra Ranks rule for Spears and the Strength bonus for Halberds? Spears currently don't have much value, but they could be improved by enabling Spear & Shield to benefit from Parry except when charging.

Otherwise, what I'd love to see is some kind of strikes first mechanic for cavalry spears and lances, and for infantry spears. This way spears would be a counter to the cavalry bonus.

[Mchagen]

Isn't this already represented by the Fight in Extra Ranks rule for Spears and the Strength bonus for Halberds? Spears currently don't have much value, but they could be improved by enabling Spear & Shield to benefit from Parry except when charging.

Otherwise, what I'd love to see is some kind of strikes first mechanic for cavalry spears and lances, and for infantry spears. This way spears would be a counter to the cavalry bonus.

Or initiative bonuses for charging cavalry (spears/lances) that are negated by spears on foot. +2 or +3 Initiative would have been a great way to represent cavalry with those weapons on the charge. Great weapons could just strike at initiative.

Spears don't need much, but they probably need something to distinguish them from additional hand weapons. There are already thrown weapons which seems to encompass throwing spears and similar weaponry, so giving spears a stand and shoot option wouldn't be the best choice.

[Blast Hardcheese]

In an epic nerd moment I asked one of my history professors if spears were effective against cavalry, and if the lance was used against infantry. He said it is of debate actually, as no records really record how weapons are supposed to work, and the fact that infantry usually carried a menagerie of weapons makes it only capable to speculate. Quick disclaimer this guy was not a PHD, but did know way too much about medieval crossbows. In his opinion, the thrusting spear was not really the bane of cavalry. A lance was usually longer, and even a wall of spears would not deter a knight charge as they would bowl over the infantry. Pikes stopped knights flat. Unless your Gandalf, no one was that bold to charge home into pikes (maybe once or twice). Halberds in turn made a mockery of armor (wiki Goddendag) when having a blunt or spiked side. Basically, if I had the ability I would say spears are good as is, and Halberds should be armor piercing. Unfortunately that really unbalances the game. Personally I would compensate by either letting spears have an extra rank on top of what they got. Or something resembling the phalanx formation, which did deter cavalry. Sorry for the history lesson, I love talking about this stuff

[hazmiter]

Spears were primarily a stabbing weapon, and once in close combat, combatants generally used gladius, or knives.
Lances were better vs cavalry, but were usually one shot as the shaft would often break on contact.
The halbeard had a hook used to pull riders off the horse.

[HeOfTheRedPen]

Being a self-confessed nerd in terms of ancient/medieval weapons technology, I think that there should be a seperate 'pike' style spear that is differentiated from the stabbing spears used currently in the main rule book of the game. Short-shafted spears were actually rarely used by armies of the past in favour of swords or heavier, armour-wrecking armaments, as calvary were unfazed by charging towards them- indeed, calvary were the primary users of short spears, as the extra momentum would usually result in a skewered enemy before the hand-to-hand sword was drawn. Pikes, however, were a hideous prospect to ride towards, being capable of bogging down riders, knocking others from their steeds and piercing all those who escaped the earlier fates. In the English civil war, pikemen were the main deterrent for the devastating calvary charge that won most battles of the conflict- the only way to shift such hedgehog-like blocks would be to outflank them. However, records show that no spears were used at all- this conforms with the fact that even the greatest tacticians the world has known, i.e. the Romans and Greeks, preferred thrown pilums, in the case of the former, and defensive pike-armed phalanxes, in case of the latter. Spears were relegated to expendable auxilia or light calvary, used to thrust rather than unhorse.

After that brief history lesson (sorry), I believe the distinction between pikes and spears should be drawn in a rules sense. Mounted use of spears should remain the same- perhaps gaining armour piercing on the charge as well as +1 strength- whilst units of footsoldiers should be armed with pikes that grant a bonus against charging calvary to the front facing ONLY (the pike was very ponderous and difficult to adjust in facing, and so almost useless as a repellent for flank attacks). Perhaps inflicting something like impact hits would be appropriate? 2D6 hits at the unit's base strength could be an option, representing the calvary skewering themselves on the forest of blades as they run recklessly into their tips? Tell me what you think of those options.

In terms of halberds, historically they were used to hack brutally through enemy armour at close range. They would have offered little support against calvary, being designed as cut-and-thrust aggressive weapons rather than piercing ones. In battle, regiments equipped with halberds would have acted as the second strike after the pike defense was charged- flank attacks, bogging the knights down and cutting them savagely from their steeds when they were crippled in terms of mobility would likely have been the order of the day. If the halberdiers had been charged alone, however, they would have been bowled over and crushed underfoot (or under-hoof). Therefore, although armour piercing would unbalance the game irrevocably in conjunction with the current strength boost, it would be most historically appropriate to the weapon's characteristics.
Yours,
HeOfTheRedPen

[lanrak]

It might just be me, but when WHFB lost the weapon initiative modifiers, then all the problems started with weapon competativness levels.

All weapons used to have a usefullness , and ballance between strenght and intitiative modifiers..
Eg
Great weapons -2 init +2 str

Lances +2 str(On the charge.)

Mounted spears +1 str(On the charge.)

Spears +1 init

Halberds +1 str.

[Blast Hardcheese]

I like the idea of weapons effecting initiative more. I cannot believe they got rid of that. The only thing is, most armies that use spears are elves who are already faster than everybody anyway. As for the topic of Pikes, I am actually in the middle of creating a custom Dogs of War list with my gamin group. Are rules for pikes are, fights in 3 ranks, always goes first in the initial round of combat (even before ASF and impact hits), receives +1 strength first turn when charged by anything that is not infantry or swarms. Requires 2 hands. We are also playtesting a rule where pike units charge 2d6 take the highest, but do no lose any ranks on the charge. Off topic, but as it has been stated, pikes should stop Brettonians better than anything else in the game. Oh, same list, we have Pole-Axe's which are armor piercing halberds. They fit fluff wise, and only 1 unit has them.

[lanrak]

Well back when weapons modified initiative, Elves were expencive because of thier high initiative, and the +2 initiative for charging helped too!

The house rules we use for pikes are.

Fights in 3 ranks.
When charging pikes from the front.
Oponent looses all charge bonuses.(Strike in inititative order at normal strenght.)
Opponent losses armour bonus from mount.

We used these ones, as the more historicaly informed gamers in our group said pikes are praticaly impossible to charge in formation.
So most units loose formation when contacting pikes, and lose the impetus (bonuses) of the charge.

Its slightly different , to your house rules.But I thought you may like to see an alternative ...

[Blast Hardcheese]

@Ianrak

Always appreciate an alternative to rules. I thought of a similar idea based on the 5th edition DoW book, but with combat no longer favoring the charger so heavily we opted to go with the +1 strength. Also, thanks for mentioning that weapons used to affect initiatives. Was working on a Elf Character for a DoW list, and it sparked a good idea.

[Lord Dan]

Has anyone ever tried to throw a halberd? Not pretty.

[Haravikk]

I would like to see a return to Initiative modifiers for weapons, as more differentiation is better.

Anyway, I just wanted to note that my rationale for cavalry spears and lances giving an Initiative bonus or striking first is to represent the cavalry charge more than anything, as we've essentially lost that in 8th. I know it's not truly representative of what the particular weapons were like, but rather that other weapons such as great weapons and such aren't as easy to use at speed, so wouldn't see the bonus. So it's worth considering it as a cavalry bonus that other weapons don't have, rather than a bonus that lances and spears are giving because of some innate property of those weapons. I mean, it just doesn't really make sense that cavalry don't get a bonus to when they strike, as the whole point really is to strike before the enemy can organise a proper defence. Besides, an Initiative bonus or striking first isn't such a big deal with Step Up! The result is that with current cavalry taking Great Weapons doesn't seem such a disadvantage anymore as you can gain +2 Strength all the time, rather than on the charge which, if you're me, is when all your attacks miss anyway


While I can understand that infantry spears aren't the same as pikes, I think it's fair to essentially have the two rolled together, as introducing a new weapon type doesn't seem that beneficial. Part of the point of giving spears an extra advantage or making them useful as a counter to cavalry is to give them added value over other weapons as currently spears aren't really worth taking. I don't know about others, but I'd still better fancy my chances with a spear against cavalry than I would with a short-sword. It's also worth noting that the rules for a weapon needn't necessarily be to represent just what the weapon itself can do, but rather what a unit armed with that weapon type can do; and I think the point of units with spears is to have a defensive focus, which resistance to any new cavalry advantages would help to represent.

[lanrak]

Hi Haravikk.
(Going from memory the original intent was something like this...)
The infantry spears basicaly gave the defenders an extra rank of attacks.(Fights in 2 ranks.)
And allowed a shield to be used ,(+1 AS.)

Halberds gave the defenders fight in an extra rank of attacks .(Fights in 2 ranks.)
And gave them +1 strenght.BUT they couldnt use a shield .

These fit well with the basic HWP And Shield, +1 AS,and 2 hwps +1 attack, no shield option.

To give the following options.
+1 AS.
+1 Str
+1 Attack.
+1 AS AND extra rank.
OR
+2 ranks .

Pikes are similar to spears, increased the fight in ranks to 3, but preventes the use of shields.(Pikes and Halberds being Two handed weapons.)

Cavalry charges have always been stronger in WHFB than historicaly.(But heroic cavalry charges are inspiring!)

So I dont think the devlopers wanted a strong 'anti cavalry infantry weapon' ,but wanted the players to develop alternative ways of dealing with cavalry.

But I think the option to take specialist anti cavalry weapons,(EG pikes as above.)Would be a nice option to have....

[monkey10120]

I actually like the idea of stand and shoot with spears. Its not actually throwing the spear but its good at representing running into a wall of razors. Also would force more flanks. That would really make a better defense.
However the sas should only happen on successful charge or it would not make sense.

[yabbadabba]

WAB differentiates between two types of spears; Throwing spears allow the bearer to reroll an attack dice in the first turn, thrusting spears allow the unit to fight in two ranks.

This debate does not fit into GW current design philosophy, but it is certainly a great opportunity for a totally useable set of house rules, generated by us. The two systems I have seen are modifiers and rankings (for WFB we would need rankings decided by Initiative). Both ahve their benefits and set backs.

[Col. Tartleton]

Spears are basically hand weapons with a bit of reach (maybe +1 to I, if not negligible) for people who can't afford swords. With a shield you can get work done certainly. The real advantage is with a pike although the half pike survived longer as a weapon, well into the 19th century. Well drilled pikes pretty much defeat any other weapon in combat as a formation. Pike vs Pike is either stand offish or incredibly bloody. You're absolutely screwed against Swiss Pikemen since the loonies charged full tilt in formation...

Most of the melee counter pike strategies like dopplesoldners with zweihanders or halberds and rodeleros with sword and buckler were dubious at best. They could only really succeed if the formation was already in disarray. Realistically the only thing you can do to a pike hedge is shoot them, which luckily is pretty easy. Of course mixed pike and shot formations make that less effective since they can shoot back.

Spears should maybe get +1 to initiative. Halberds with +1 strength is reasonable. Pikes should get +2 initiative and fight in extra ranks (up to 5 if we want to be realistic.)

Initiative is a good equivalent of reach rather than attack speed which I think should be rolled into weapon skill theoretically.

[lanrak]

Hi again.
As it has been mentioned.
The other thing they changed was the to WS vs WS to hit chart.
It used to cover all results , 2+,3+,4+,5+6+and N/A.

So higher weapon skill made a lot of diference to a units performance.(And there was more diversity too!)

I agree than Weapon Initiative Modifiers should reflect weapon reach.
And the speed of the attack could be included in the weapon skill.(If the old to hit type chart was re-instated to improve diversity.)

Isnt it odd every attempt to make the game simpler, has removed a simple mechanic /resolution.That has needed loads more pages of extra special rules to replace them!

Fixing weapon bonuses is overly restrictive IMO.
I think it would be nice to be able to modify them to suit different races.(Racial Weapon Specialisation perhaps?)