See already just seeing that Tief makes me wish they'd lean into it a bit more haha. Such a classic look!
Though even with the foreshortening, you can see from that one how it'd be even stronger using like an 8' spear over a 5-6 foot javelin. The way spears are weighted you can hold and control it pretty effectively and threaten over a wide area holding at the back quarter of the shaft. So at least he's going underhanded which is much stronger. Overhand is more like for throwing and held closer to the middle of the shaft. But a Javelin and shield isn't much better than a sword and shield for the reach. That's why the classic combo has pretty much always been Spear and Shield, And Sword hehe.
Or if not a sword, then at least something to hook round the shield or break through it, or drag it down and make it awkward to hold (which is what the Javelin was supposed to do), or like an axe, or even flail or curved bladed weapon to reach around. D&D also kind plays fast and loose with other weapon types that might make more sense for mounts, or things like sabres and other slashing weapons with the long archs for example, or spears again lol. But yeah I'd love to see a proper 1 handed spear. I'd also be cool if they went really deep dive on the various polearms types, since those are always cool, but at least for the Spear.
I think one of the kinks with D&D that shows up a lot for melee types is that the shield is conceived of more like just armor with the defense bonus, only for receiving or trying to parry, but not really so much a weapon in its own right, which it can also be. More shield type feats or proficiencies I guess would be one approach. In BG the shield was always just kinda AC boost plus missile defense, but not as much involved in the melee interplay. It's be rad if warriors could bounce around weapons combos more freely to try and counter enemy advantages based on what the enemy is using at the moment. But in BG it was always just kind of, use whatever is +3 enchanted, and not as much switching about for damage type, except for magical stuff like acid/fire for trolls or a passive ability or charged ability attached to the weapon.
Another thing that the weapons specialization system did in BG2 off 2nd Ed into 3rd edition, which was rather counterintuitive, is that it made Melee type PCs who could only specialize (like Paladins, Rangers, Barbarians, Mulit-Class fighters etc) more versatile for switching weapons types around on the fly. Whereas with pure fighters you had an overriding incentive for Grand Mastery or bust, in just a single weapon type.
I always tended to think of a fighter as someone who's arms training was more all-encompassing, using different weapons or countering combo types with different arms on the fly. Or like somebody who could pick up just about anything and kick ass with it. But in BG you had no real incentive to spread the weapons proficiencies around, and every reason to pick 1 weapon type and focus on it exclusively. Which was obviously kinda sad for Spears.
BG2 actually made the issue somewhat more pronounced, since in BG1 and IWD1 originally the weapons were all grouped together into larger categories of proficiency. So for example you didn't specialize in bastard swords, or longswords or scimitars. Instead they were all grouped together as "Large Swords" for the purposes of specialization. Which I think was more versatile than the BG2 system. BG2 introduced "fighting styles" as a thing (including dual-wielding), and specific weapons proficiencies, basically one for every specific type of weapon. They added two extra proficiency points to spend at Char creation to make up for adding all the extra stuff onto the same scheme, but it wasn't quite as flexible for weapons switching as BG1s more generalized types. In BG2 you might agonize over whether to be a Two-Handed Great Sword type fighter, or a Longsword and Board type fighter, but in BG1 both of them would have been covered under the same specialization in "Large Swords." The Enhanced Editions all use the BG2 weapons scheme, that's one of the big retcons in BG1EE.
Unless you were trying to make a wonky "spears only" sort of warrior from the getgo in BG2, it didn't make much sense to even bother being proficient in them, despite the fact that it's like the most iconic weapon of all lol. Maybe for a Human Zerker/Druid with a +5 in scimitar already from their fighter class, and some scattered proficiencies let over from the Dual-Classing process. But otherwise almost never. I guess in BG2 if you were one of those "can only specialize anyway" Alt Warrior types, and you were already trying to focus on 2 hander weapon styles, after already maxing in Two-Handed Swords and Halberds, maybe then Spears just for flare. But otherwise Spears kinda blew for a warrior. Which is too bad, cause spears are a mainstay
Last edited by Black_Elk; 25/02/21 01:58 AM.
