weapon lenght after bash

[Brian Leybourne]

Sounds like a fricking hassle to me. Lets say I have 12 dice in my CP (cut & thrust, say) and I attack on the first exchange, spending 7. I am parried and the other guy gets initiative.

Second exchange he attacks me. I want to evade please. Now you're in the situation where you're trying to recalculate my CP using your reflex + 1/2pugilism system (or whatever it was, I can't be bothered going and checking) for the second exchange, but I already spent some dice on the first...

It just doesn't work smoothly, and the whole point of the TROS combat is it's smoothness. It's exactly the same problem as changing weapons mid round for the second exchange, which is why I would always force a character who did so to spend the second exchange evading only (with whats left of his old CP) so we can recalculate the new CP at the start of the next round. It's just messy otherwise.

Same problem the other way around too, in fact. Lets say I start off a round under your system by evading, so you work out my CP with your system, and I spend some dice. I'm successful, and second exchange I want to attack. What happens then?

No sir, I don't like it at all.

[Thirsty Viking]

Jake are you having the idea that if the pike guy successfully dodges the dagger, future exchanges are at the dagger's lenght untill the pike can full evade, or successfully parry?

Scott

I didn't think that was an issue.  the answer on the pike guy si the same as the dagger guy.  he pays the CP penalty for range till he established his range.   I guess he can duck and weave away,  or full evade.   Like jake i'd consider range penalties on full evade  because the dagger guy isn't going to make it easy for him to get out to pike range.    To negate these penalties he can drop the pike.

[svenlein]

Jake are you having the idea that if the pike guy successfully dodges the dagger, future exchanges are at the dagger's lenght untill the pike can full evade, or successfully parry?

Scott

I didn't think that was an issue.  the answer on the pike guy si the same as the dagger guy.  he pays the CP penalty for range till he established his range.   I guess he can duck and weave away,  or full evade.   Like jake i'd consider range penalties on full evade  because the dagger guy isn't going to make it easy for him to get out to pike range.    To negate these penalties he can drop the pike.

The problem is the dagger guy will never get within range of the pike.
Example combat:

Dagger guy beats pike with shield, and succeeds since only has half the range penalty.
Then dagger guy trys to close with pike guy, if pike guy successfully dodges, dagger guy says at long range.
I would like there to be a way for the dagger guy to close the distance without having to actually hit the pike guy that exchange.
OR
another idea would be, since the pike is beaten, the dagger guy shouldn't have to have the length penalties imposed apon him since the pike is unavialable for defense.

Even with both these rules, the pike guy is likely to win, since he can still full evade to get the advantage again.

Scott

[Lyrax]

Uhm, Svenlein?  That's not a problem, at least not IMHO.  It's a feature.  The pike is, at pike range, infinitely superior to the dagger.

Also, the pike is a polearm, so those who say his back is completely exposed while in a narrow alleyway are simply not correct.  I'd rather have a thrusting weapon in an alleyway than a cutting weapon (all polearms are thrust-heavy), and, at proper range, would rather have a long thrusting weapon than a short one.

Also, not to be *TOO* picky, but you're assuming that the dagger guy has a shield.  That might be assuming too much.[/list]

[Valamir]

Svein...I repeat my earlier suggestion.  Make a terrain roll.  That roll can and should be used to cover every "jockeying for position" type stuff you can think of.  Terrain roll successfuly = you've closed.  Not successful = you haven't.  Is there some reason you don't like this solution?

Lyrax...if we were talking a spear or other polearm you'd be 100% correct.  But with a Pike...no...there are very few special situations (like being in a very narrow alley) where a 14-18' polearm isn't going to be a liability.

REACH IS NOT AN ASSET in this case.  Having that much leverage way out in front of you is not an easy thing to manage.  This is why Pikes are straight forward formation weapons.  NOT man on man weapons.

In any non manipulated situation with a dagger guy vs a pike guy, the dagger guy WILL WIN, unless the pike guy drops the pike and draws a different weapon.

The dagger guy IS NOT the one at a disadvantage here.  A Pike is NOT a spear...its NOT a staff...it is almost certainly of much greater diameter than you probably realize (it has to be to keep from breaking at that length).  It simply is not a wieldy weapon.

Pike loses every time unless the situation is manipulated or the dagger guy just careless.

[Thirsty Viking]

The problem is the dagger guy will never get within range of the pike.
Example combat:

Dagger guy beats pike with shield, and succeeds since only has half the range penalty.

ok a starting point.   Dagger dude gets initiative, and beats the weapon out of line  spoiling the attack of the pike.  I'd be attacking with the pike.   or do you allow this attack to take place normally because beat is a move that sets up the next exchange.    Are you arguing that a beat should provide two exchanges worth of defence?

Then dagger guy trys to close with pike guy, if pike guy successfully dodges, dagger guy says at long range.

If i was armed with a pike,  my defence would be to maintain the distance so i could counter attack...  are saying you would just sidestep?

I would like there to be a way for the dagger guy to close the distance without having to actually hit the pike guy that exchange.
OR
another idea would be, since the pike is beaten, the dagger guy shouldn't have to have the length penalties imposed apon him since the pike is unavialable for defense.

but the dagger guy is Still 6+ feet out of dagger range....  that is the penalty, the largest part of it.   The defender loses 2CP! for each success margin of the Beat as well as the use of his weapon for an exchange.
The rules are quite clear...   if you want to negate the range penalties...  be a man and duck and weave the pike thrust if you can.  That requires a TN of 9! ...  not 6, 7 or whatever the shield beat is.  Beats shouldn't be as easy against two handed weapons as one handed anyway IMO  As for the succsessful patial evasion with a pike when the dagger guy tries to close distance,  that means he managed to get it back inline with you,  and you decided not to spit yourself upon it.  Possibly he fell back a couple feet to do so.  Thats why you didn't close range.  1 success margin  means you did..  even if you do no damage because of armor and whatnot.

You want to beat a pike?  Toss red on your first rd.  If you win the reflex vs ATN contest  Attack him with all you have.  If he throws red he has no defence.  If you tie it'll look like King Arthur impaling himself on mordreds spear and gutting him.    I really don't get it.   why in the world would anyone think that charging a pike man with dagger and buckler was a good idea anyway?

Even with both these rules, the pike guy is likely to win, since he can still full evade to get the advantage again.

Scott

This has already been disputed by Jake and I.  while not in the rules  it makes sence that disengaging all the way to pole arm length should have an activation cost (to attack resestablishing the range this cost is paid).  The only option to this is the high TN Duck and Weave.  When disengaging is one step  and your short sword is now at optimal range...  is much easier that putting 3 yards between yourself and the maniac trying to spit you on his dagger at close range.

Also, the pike is a polearm, so those who say his back is completely exposed while in a narrow alleyway are simply not correct

Let me clarify this...  the front of a polearm user is where he is facing.   by back i meant 180 degrees from that.  If he is positioned in a narrow alley he can not simply spin in place to fight a guy attacking his rear. he has to lift the head of the pole arm spin and lower.  Odds are anyone jumping out and  charging his REAR  will get inside his range before he can ready his weapon,  if his weapon was lowered in the other direction.    Polearms aren't invincible.   Even in Formation.

Lets face it... if you have a pole arm and a dagger guy is tickling your ribs...  you probably need to drop the polearm and FLEE.   If you have a dagger,  even with a shield...   and find yourself 2 feet outside of polearm distance  from a guy in an agressive stance preparing to stab...   you need to flee.   If this isn't an option you pray for assistance.  

IT ISN'T A FAIR FIGHT!  IT NEVER WAS!  IT NEVER WILL BE!

Anyone who fights fair duels to the death...  ends up dead at least half the time.

[Thirsty Viking]

Svein...I repeat my earlier suggestion.  Make a terrain roll.  That roll can and should be used to cover every "jockeying for position" type stuff you can think of.  Terrain roll successfuly = you've closed.  Not successful = you haven't.  Is there some reason you don't like this solution?

Lyrax...if we were talking a spear or other polearm you'd be 100% correct.  But with a Pike...no...there are very few special situations (like being in a very narrow alley) where a 14-18' polearm isn't going to be a liability.

REACH IS NOT AN ASSET in this case.  Having that much leverage way out in front of you is not an easy thing to manage.  This is why Pikes are straight forward formation weapons.  NOT man on man weapons.

In any non manipulated situation with a dagger guy vs a pike guy, the dagger guy WILL WIN, unless the pike guy drops the pike and draws a different weapon.

The dagger guy IS NOT the one at a disadvantage here.  A Pike is NOT a spear...its NOT a staff...it is almost certainly of much greater diameter than you probably realize (it has to be to keep from breaking at that length).  It simply is not a wieldy weapon.

Pike loses every time unless the situation is manipulated or the dagger guy just careless.

Obviously  we disagree so much that i'm not going to bother disputing all the points raised.   My example was a situation where  pikes were a bad choice...   going down alleys.   Unless you are attacking everyone you see,  and driving the people in front of you, carrying pikes on any street are a bad idea..  even then being attacked from the side out of buildings will be devastating.  THESE WERE REASONS NOT TO HAVE PIKE AS A WEAPON.   reread my thread.  

When you want to kill me let me know,  I'll drag my old over weight carcass out with a 14 foot pole with a spike on the end.  You bring a dagger.  is open field too manipulated a situation for you?  Odds are you have more CP than I do.     How long a spike do you want me stabbing you with?   I should be able to weld some sort of head together (Perhaps a survival knife would do).   I don't claim my style will be pike formation fighting  (obviously no formation).  I'd just be some poor untrained peasant caught alone trying to survive,  anything I can think of doing with it now, a peasant would have been able to then.  worse than that for me...  they tended to be in shape from doing manual labor.   I will need a clear waiver from you stipulating that you are trying to kill me in the middle of that field.  It will probably not be enough to keep me out of jail, but it should minimize my time there.

[Valamir]

Given:  a 14' pole (although the initial poster said 18') made with period techniques strong enough to withstand being employed as a weapon against armored mounted targets...against someone with a modicum of skill as a knife fighter...you'd be dead.

Or you'd wisely realize the smart thing to do is drop the pike and draw a knife of your own.

Remember...its not enough to simply contact the other guy with the tip.  You actually have to thrust with enough force to drive it home...especially against armor.  In battle this is accomplished firstly by the initial rush.

I'm not sure what the difficulty is in understanding this.  The pike is a formation weapon.  It is a VERY VERY VERY specialized (for all its simplicity) formation weapon.  It is not a man to man weapon.  In a man to man situation, its length is a liability.  If you've never held one of these things you may not realize just how awkward they are to do anything other than what they're designed to do.

[Jake Norwood]

While I agree with all that you've said, John, I have *heard* (I haven't confirmed it) of duels at the pike. Scary stuff indeed.

Jake

[Valamir]

One point that has not been raised here that should be is the vaguaries of terms.

On about the 19th century when archeaology and museums became popular pastimes for gentlemen, there was spawned a huge effort in categorization and clasification.  Most of the standard terms we now refer to weapons with, date from that time.  Prior to that time naming conventions were sloppy and unenforced at best.  Today "Claymore" has a specific meaning and "Basket Hilt Claymore" has a specific meaning.  At the time "Claymore" simply meant big sword and would be applied with equal aplomb to any sword that was noticeably bigger than the other swords around it that it was being compared to...as in "Which sword do you want?"  "The big one".

This is also true of the term Pike.  There are many many different weapons (and spellings for that matter) that have been referred to as a pike throughout history.  The Pike of the British Navy for instance is a far cry from the pike we normally think of for the term.  I'm still trying to figure out what a Morris Pike is that Silver refers to.

It is important to note further that while we category happy types make a clear distinction between a "spear" and a "Pike" that in reality, this distinction is pretty arbitrary.  I am unaware of any time in history where spears and pikes were used side by side on the same battle field.  They are essentially different terms applied to the same weapon that we have ourselves assigned distinctive meaning to.

In the period we are discussing there are numerous pole arms.  A bill being a machete on the end of a pole.  A Halbard being a bill with a spike on it, and a partisan being a halberd with hooks...along with all manner of regional and national variations.

Period weapons masters such as Silver and DiGrassi talk of fighting with a Pike in man to man combat.  But what becomes clear upon reading their text in context is that the weapon they refer to as a pike is not the weapon WE think of as a pike.  

To them a pike is the simplest pole arm of all, a straight shaft with a long point...no axe head...no hook...just a clean simple weapon.  In other words, a spear.  Meaning that during this period the term pike was applied with equal meaning to 8-12 foot weapons (what we would call a spear) and 14-18 foot weapons (what we would call a pike).  The period masters did not make this distinction.  To them they were all pikes.

Therefor when we see Silver and DiGrassi writing of training with a Pike we don't immediately know what weapon (by our standards of classification) they are referring to.  Although Silver makes it plain he is not talking about military uses for the weapon.

But upon reading the text one gets a clear sense that the weapon in question is more spear than pike.  Silver speaks of a position where the butt of the weapon is held in front of the face.  It is hard to imagine being able to hold a 15 foot pike like this at all, let alone it being an effective stance.

The diagrams found in DiGrassi's texts comparing the effect of weapon length on impact (what we would call momentum) could just be out scale, but plainly do not show a weapon of montrous length.  Further DiGrassi speaks of the best balanced position for the pike being held the rear hand an arms length from the butt and the forward hand an arms length from that.  No clear diagram is provided of this in the version I have access to, but a quick sketch would indicate to me that such a hold would be balanced for a 10-12 foot weapon...not a 14-18 foot one.  

Further there is a web site with a video (tiny and hard to see) of people pike fighting in the DiGrassi style.  Its choppy and unclear, but what is clear is that the weapons are only about twice their height...again 10-12 feet (one must assume here for the video to have value, that these unidentified practitioners are using a weapon DiGrassi would recognize)

So to conclude.  It is certain that the "Pike" was used as a man on man weapon.  It is certain that it was an extremely effective man on man weapon.  

However, what seems equally certain to me is that the "Pike" being referred to is NOT the 18' formation weapon that was asked about early in this thread.

So I reiterate my opinion that a 14-18' pike is not an effective weapon 1 on 1.  It is a liability outside of its intended battle field use.  10-12 foot pikes are a different matter altogether, and not what was being asked about in the thread.

[Thirsty Viking]

Given:  a 14' pole (although the initial poster said 18') made with period techniques strong enough to withstand being employed as a weapon against armored mounted targets...against someone with a modicum of skill as a knife fighter...you'd be dead.

Yes, yes, yes... Tros Standard for a pike carried by an individual as opposed to a formation is 14'    Lengths varied always.   I'm sure jake had reason for giving the stats of a 14' pike....   since we were dealing with 1 on 1 combat in TROS  it made sence to clarify this....  I don't know why you are insisting on re-agruing this point...   except that you know a 14' would be even tougher than an 18' pike for the knifeman.   I found a site dealing with pikes.  I suspect they are smaller than you seem to think.  The goal of a pike is not to stop an armored calvary charge without breaking..   it is to KILL the enemy that charges.   Whether or not the pike then breaks is of little consequence (in terms of the generals viewpoint, though the private having the dead horse fall upon him is a little put out).

As for a periode example,  this is a description from a website about Swiss Pikes perhaps not the exact pike you are envisioning but one i could find describing the pole.

The Swiss first brought the pike to prominence in the late C15th and early C16th, destroying feudal armies of mounted knights, and tactics were based upon the ancient Greek use of the spear-armed 'phalanx'. Because of it's association with antiquity, the pike was regarded as the more noble weapon, and senior officers would often fight in the front rank, as would any spare or 'reformado' officers. The pike was also the cheapest weapon, costing about 3s 10d - 4s 2d, and was between 15ft ('Spanish' in New Model  contracts) and 16ft ('Inglish' in New Model contracts) long, made of  tapered ash. Sir James Turner says few actually exceeded 15ft. At Benburb in 1646, the Irish beat the Scots, partly because their pikes were longer 'by a foot or two'. The pike was about 1" in diameter at the butt, 1½" at the middle and ½" at the end, with a steel head, which was either dagger-shaped ('English pikes with square heads') or lozenge-shaped ('Dutch' or 'broadheaded'). Orrery and others couldn't agree which was best. Two metal cheeks, ('bars to be strong and serviceable' - 1654) between two to  four feet long, ran down from the head to hold it on and stop it being chopped off.

I'm not sure what the difficulty is in understanding this.  The pike is a formation weapon.  It is a VERY VERY VERY specialized (for all its simplicity) formation weapon.  It is not a man to man weapon.  In a man to man situation, its length is a liability.  

Of course it is,  but the lack of the length of the dagger is a GREATOR liability.   a 14' pole or 15' or 16' or 18'  will be used against the knife wielder well outside of the knifemans range.

If you've never held one of these things you may not realize just how awkward they are to do anything other than what they're designed to do.

I believe you are misstating things quite badly here.  Certainly any formation weapon is limited in it's usage inside a formation.   While in close order  formation doing anything else is potentially disasterous even if possible.
Outside of a formation  things  change as they always do.  If I insisted on using it the same way I would when surrounded by 200 mates also with pikes...  I'd probably die.   If your fool enough to come at me with a dagger assuming I will,   I have relatively little to worry about.

I have handled Long poles before, though not for an extended time,  or in formal combat training.  I'm 300 lbs and out of shape.   possibly you can wear me down over an extended periode of time...   that would be your best bet  short of giving up and throwing the dagger at me IMO.  My only formal military hand to hand training was with bayonet...  that was brief though since I wasn't an enlisted man.  Well wrestling and boxing might also count i guess.

The fact remains that to kill the man with a PIKE or other long weapon,  the guy with a DAGGER has to close the range if he isn't going to throw it.  Your problem is when you get within the operating range of my weapon, and yet are unable to strike.   You are right,  it isn't a spear, and it isn't a 8' staff...   Don't expect it to be used like it is.  I think you'd find being 8-10 feet from the pikeman fairly painful.  Just because a pike is easier for a daggerman to overcome, than a short staff... doesn't mean the odds are in his favor.

While it is true you will find many refrences to the great numbers of pikes needed for effective use...   this is beacuase these are military analysis of effective battlefield use.   I'd not try to fight two men with a pike by myself if I had any choice.  Not even if they only had daggers.

[Lyrax]

Let me clarify this... the front of a polearm user is where he is facing. by back i meant 180 degrees from that. If he is positioned in a narrow alley he can not simply spin in place to fight a guy attacking his rear. he has to lift the head of the pole arm spin and lower. Odds are anyone jumping out and charging his REAR will get inside his range before he can ready his weapon, if his weapon was lowered in the other direction. Polearms aren't invincible. Even in Formation.

Okay, here is where you are wrong, IMHO.  A pikeman can spin in place in a narrow alleyway (unless it's REALLY narrow!).  I didn't say that the pike spins, because that would be really inefficient.  All the pikeman would do is smack the guy with the butt end of his pike.  No, really, it's a pretty deadly maneuver, very simple, hard to dodge in a narrow alleyway, and I could pull it off with an 8'-10' or slightly longer pole, so I'm certain it would be a piece of cake for a guy who's trained with a 14-footer.  If he's surprised, then that's a different story, but then it wouldn't matter what weapon he's got so much as what armor he's got.  See what I was getting at?

Of course, all this arguing is useless and unprovable (at least by me) because I don't have a pike, and have fought in few alleyways.  Daggers, I have access to, and I can tell you that they are useless at any range other than very, very close.  Thus, it seems to me that it doesn't matter how long it takes to hit with a pike, because the pikeman has about twelve feet in which to do it.

[Thirsty Viking]

In the period we are discussing there are numerous pole arms.  A bill being a machete on the end of a pole.  A Halbard being a bill with a spike on it, and a partisan being a halberd with hooks...along with all manner of regional and national variations.

To them a pike is the simplest pole arm of all, a straight shaft with a long point...no axe head...no hook...just a clean simple weapon.  In other words, a spear.

Thats what I think of as a pike,   little more than a longer version of a spear.  often times with more than a sharp metal point.  What were you assuming?

The diagrams found in DiGrassi's texts comparing the effect of weapon length on impact (what we would call momentum) could just be out scale, but plainly do not show a weapon of montrous length.  Further DiGrassi speaks of the best balanced position for the pike being held the rear hand an arms length from the butt and the forward hand an arms length from that.  No clear diagram is provided of this in the version I have access to, but a quick sketch would indicate to me that such a hold would be balanced for a 10-12 foot weapon...not a 14-18 foot one.  

So to conclude.  It is certain that the "Pike" was used as a man on man weapon.  It is certain that it was an extremely effective man on man weapon.  

However, what seems equally certain to me is that the "Pike" being referred to is NOT the 18' formation weapon that was asked about early in this thread.

So I reiterate my opinion that a 14-18' pike is not an effective weapon 1 on 1.  It is a liability outside of its intended battle field use.  10-12 foot pikes are a different matter altogether, and not what was being asked about in the thread.

You dance quite nicely,  but this thread started with dagger vs pike in TROS.    The poster assumed an 18'  pike  and that was set straight.   I just posted to the effect that most pikes,  used as pikes,  by the SWISS who made pikes famous as anti-calvary weapons  were seldome over 15'.

Why YOU continue to RANT about 18' weapons  is beyond me.    just as things change going from 12 to 14 feet,  they change that much more from 14 to 16  and again from 16 to 18.    TROS uses a 14' pike for individual purposes and differentiates it from a Long spear of 10' length.  TROS doesn't cover FORMATION combat...  that might be in the OBAM  but was never in TROS (main Book).    Further more as is clear from my post,  Pikes were NOT made of uniform diameter by periode techniques.  Did your sketch include the varrying diameters for balancing point?

Finally why on earth would you think a 14' spear would have more in common with an 18' spear than a 12' spear?  that the 12' is more effective in personal combat than the 14'  I've never disputed.   This doesn't by anymeans make the 14' unusable or less effective than a dagger.   I don't think the 18' would be either,  but it would be a closer match.    NEVER did anyone suggest  making a NEW weapon for the 18' version.   They tried to agrue rule change for the  PIKE  wich is DEFINED as 14'  for the version in use.  Even described as "An extremely long spear".   So the need for all the smoke trying to distinguish bills, and other pole arms is beyond me.    The Text of Siver  clearly addresse the issues of extending length.   As for the morris pike,   this was clearly a pike that was longer than optimal.  It is used in his examples with the LONG Staff.  In short, what silver calls a Morris pike includes the 14' TROS pike  IMO

In general,  I'd say that it seems that any spear long enough to need two hands seems to be considered a pike by SILVER.  

As for your position he describes,   I didn't find it in searches of what seemed relative areas of "Paradoxes of Defense"  and you didn't give a good link for it (or any of your refrences for that matter).   In general I'd say the non morris pike Silver refers to is in the 8-12 range,  with the Short Staff.   But I don't know where silver would break the Long from the Short.

[Thirsty Viking]

Okay, here is where you are wrong, IMHO.  A pikeman can spin in place in a narrow alleyway (unless it's REALLY narrow!).  I didn't say that the pike spins, because that would be really inefficient.  All the pikeman would do is smack the guy with the butt end of his pike.  

Ok,  the pike man doe crushing instead of piercing damage.   Having 8+ feet of pole behind him hampers the range of engagement,  and he loses his length advantage of his weapon(at least most of it).  Assuming hands are 2-3 feet apart,  and rear hand is about 2-3 feet from but he now has a clumsy thrusting blunt shortsword.   He is at serious disadvantage as opposed to engaging with other end.    Higher target numbers, less range, less damage.  Periode alleyways  were in general narrow, they were footpaths that rarely saw a pack animal, let alone a wagon.  Ok maybe chinese alleyways  were major thouroughfares... I've seen the european and middle eastern cities though,   10' wide would be a BIG alley in these areas.

[Valamir]

John, what's with all of this hostility?  Have I offended you somehow?  I thought we were having a discussion.

Svein's initial post was about a pike.  He later clarified that to mean an 18' pike.  He later clearly said that he understood a shorter weapon would be more effective, but that he wasn't talking about a shorter weapon he was talking about a very long pike.

You have been argueing all along about the merits of a shorter pike as a superior weapon.  An arguement that I 100% agree with...but which was not what Svein was inquiring about.

I went so far as to illustrate how we were likely talking about 2 seperate things that were both labeled pikes but in reality are completely different in an effort to be more specific about what was being spoken about and you label it a smoke screen.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what has you all riled up about this.

If we're talking about a short pike (as silver and degrassi were likely doing) you are right.  If we're talking about a very long pike, IMO you are wrong.  

Svein was talking about a very long pike, I was answering Svein with an answer I think he'd find to be an easy, accurate solution, without the need for special rolls.  Treat, getting inside a very long pike as a terrain roll.

Is there any reason for you to be angry at this?