weapon lenght after bash

[svenlein]

A couple comments:
I don't think a dagger is superior to an 18' pike.
I too would like to concentrate on the 14' pike.
I do think a 9' spear is superior to a 14' pike.  The in the current tros rules this is not the case.
Here are some quotes from Silver:
http://www.aemma.org/onlineResources/silver/silver5_body.htm
Section 5.2.8
First he says:
"The short staff is most commonly the best weapon of all others, although other weapons may be more offensive, and especially against many weapons together, by reason of his nimbleness and swift motions"
Then a few sentence later says:
"Lastly note this, that long Staves, Morris pikes, and such like weapons of imperfect lengths, being to be used with both hands, notwithstanding their imperfect lengths, are perfect weapons to be used, the one against the other"
Also he says they are better weapons in the dark, but inferior to a short staff in the light

Looking at the pictures in DiGrassi's work
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~hudson/digrassi/pike.html
they are either not drawn to scale or he is probably refering to an 8-10' spear when he says pike.

Here are some other quotes of less reputable sorces:

http://www.lmj.i12.com/wallers/combat/
Very heavy and cumbersome, pikemen would often shorten their pike to make them easier to handle, unfortunately rendering them ineffective in battle at he same time.

http://www.apva.org/ngex/c9pike.html
The pike was not especially useful to the Jamestown colonists since mounted soldiers did not confront them and their principal engagements were skirmishes with the Indians.

http://members.austarmetro.com.au/~aergos/Armoury/polearms.html
Pike: The pike was used by infantry to fend off cavalry. It was very effective against mounted troops. Like the halberd, pikemen were vulnerable to infantry attacks, and so was deadly for the wielder if he fought alone.

[Thirsty Viking]

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.

I finally found DiGrassi talking about the Pike

You should read this section closer.  He clearly stated that this is not holding the pike in the middle,  and not holding it at the but,  because both positions are poor trade offs.   Rather this is a compromise position he maintains by Locking his elbow of the back hand.   since it is clearly not a balnced positon with the forward hand in the mid point of the pike,  you should reconsider youre lengths.   even without the diameter variations,  they are still too short.  Be carefull,   you might find your self at ~ 14'  IMO  :-)   the rear elbow is locked because the 5-6 feet of pike behind the front hand weighs less than the length in front of the hand.
Here is the Paragraph from the above length for those that would rather read it here..    there is a diagram at the link.  

THis renowmed weapon hath beene of divers diversly handled, in single combat: (for the manner of using it in the warres, maketh not at this present for my purpose.) Therefore it shall not be amisse, if (speaking of the manner of his use in these are daies) I declare also mine opinion concerning the same. There have beene some (who greatly regarding ease & little paine) would have the Pike to be borne in the middle. Other some, more strong of arme, but weaker of hart, (to the end they might be the farther off, from hurte) accustomed to beare it at the beginning neere the heele or blunt end thereof: which two waies in my judgement are to be refused, the one being too daungerous (I meane the bearing of it in the middle) the other too difficult (I mean, the bearing it at the blunt end,) because a man is not able to stande long at his ward, neither to defend himselfe strongly, nor offend safely, considering, much of his force is taken away, by ststeining and bearing it at the said end. So that, when a forcible blow commeth he hath not sufficient power to beat it off. And forasmuch as the Pike is a long straight lyne, which hath his motion in the head or beginning thereof, which motion be it never so finall, neere the hand, is yet verie great at the point, it is requisite, if he would strike just and straight, (when he so holdeth it at the end) that he be greatly practised, and have great strength whereby he may be both skilfull & able to beare it so just & even, that the point thereof strik or hit there where the hand & eie would have it. This is verie hardly accomplished, aswel beecause it is a thing impossible to strike by the straight lyne, as also for that the armes being weakened with the paize of the Pike, do shake and deliver unstedfastly. Therefore, for the avoyding of these two inconveniences, the Pike must be born within an armes length of the said heele or blunt end, in which place, it is sufficiently distant from hurt, & it is not borne with much difficultie if the hands be placed an armes length one from another of the which the hinder hand must be stedfast, I meane, holde the Pike harde, and the forehand somewhat lookse: So that the Pike may shift through it to and fro

Here is the image of  Man with Pike (hope this works)

[Bob McNamee]

I thought the point of this thread was to examine if there is an effective method for a dagger and shield user to combat a pike user who has range, one on one...no alley mentioned. It seemed that the Pikeman had great advantage.

More a problem of...
Is a Pikeman that effective against a short weapon user?
... and, is there a fast way to get inside the pike?
... and if so, how about a good set of defense for the pikeman to regain range (or is this a case of "drop it and pull out something short ")?

Bob McNamee

[Bob Richter]

A couple comments:
I don't think a dagger is superior to an 18' pike.

I do.

Let me clarify, because I know you just said:

"Psh! How can a *DAGGER* be superior to anything?"

I don't mean as a battlefield weapon. I mean in a duelling situation.

A Pike is nothing more than a knife on the end of an extremely long pole. So if I have a knife, I'm halfway to matching it.

I'll bet that I can go forward faster than you can go back.

The Pike can be easily and painlessly blocked and arrested by one's hand. Unless I am dumb enough to charge straight onto its tip, an 18' (or, hell, 14') Pike is easily circumvented.

Once I'm inside the reach of the blade and have the Pike gripped in my off-hand, the weapon is neutralized.

All that remains is for me to close the distance and finish the fight.

A *Spear* (which TROS defines as being 10' or under in length) is a different matter entirely than a *Pike* (which is 14' in this case.)

The Pike's length acts against it in any attempt to reposition it or strike an opponent with it.

I'd bet on a Spear against a dagger any day of the week, but never a Pike.

[Thirsty Viking]

I thought the point of this thread was to examine if there is an effective method for a dagger and shield user to combat a pike user who has range, one on one...no alley mentioned. It seemed that the Pikeman had great advantage.

but that is the answer.  the effective way to get close to a pike,  is to ambush him.  In an alley, in a forest, a flanking attack from a building.  Walking casually down the street past him before he knows your an enemy.  These are the methods to negate a pikes' advantage.  Think some english beefeater or whatever they are caled  standing a guard post with any polearm resting on the ground, standing up in the air.  or even at order arms on his shoulder.  If you can get within 5' of him before he knows your his enemy (or before he readies for combat more accurately),  he'll never ready the polearm in time.

More a problem of...
Is a Pikeman that effective against a short weapon user?
... and, is there a fast way to get inside the pike?
... and if so, how about a good set of defense for the pikeman to regain range (or is this a case of "drop it and pull out something short ")?

Bob McNamee

The question here is how short?  Dagger short?  Yes say I.  longsword and shield?  This might be almost even to a slight disadvantage depending on length of pike.

no, the fastest way is to charge and hope you don't get speared...  hard. Beat as written is a tough call.  A pike man should be attacking on the first exchange.  In this case neither player has defence.  The issue of beat in simulatneous attacks hasn't been ruled on to my knowledge.  typically a beat costs the pike 2 cp  per success margin and prevents a weapon defece like parry the next round.  But a pike can be brought back into line by a half step back, and retracting your arms.  this will quickly move the pike head some 2-4 feet or so.  also setting you up for a nice thrust. The pike has a really explosive 3'-4' Jab.  It's like a lunge with a sword, only it uses the oposite foot.  In order to beat it with a buckler or shield.  You are in range for a strike as (if not before) you beat. This is hard. It takes 11 CP minimum to pull of this manuver. 3 beat activation, 1 rolled a success, 6 CP to close and 1 rolled for a successful attack.   Duck and weave is an option, instead of 9 activation cost, roll those 9 dice for almost 2 more successes.  If this succeeds you close the distance.   Wear full platemail, simultaneous attack and pray.

These rules aren't an accident.  Played smartly a pike man will not be anywhere a teraign role can be logically made to close this distance.  The way for a dagger man to defeat this,  is to be greatly better (CP) than the pike.  Bring a friend,   or use his brain and fight the pike somewhere other than a dueling ground, or open battlefield.   Oh yeah.  missle attack.

If a man with a dagger gets up on you,  it's as hard for you to get away as it would be for him to close.  And he is so far inside your radius,  that alternate attack forms are pretty useless.  Drop and grapple him you don't have time to draw probably..

[Thirsty Viking]

I don't mean as a battlefield weapon. I mean in a duelling situation.

I'll bet that I can go forward faster than you can go back.

no doubt about that,  the problem is the first 6-8 feet.   First you have the 3-4 foot jab distance of the pike,  then you have the 3-4 foot draw distance.  in other words you don't have to advance faster than i withdraw.  you have to advance that 7' or so faster than I can spit you in the upper chest/neck/face.   Or were you planning on waiting till i stab at you to try and catch the spear when you are 10 feet away from me?

The Pike can be easily and painlessly blocked and arrested by one's hand. Unless I am dumb enough to charge straight onto its tip, an 18' (or, hell, 14') Pike is easily circumvented.

A nice theory anyway.  if you get past the 7 feet, and I leave it there, and you don't have a shield.   possibly,  awful lot of iffs though.

Once I'm inside the reach of the blade and have the Pike gripped in my off-hand, the weapon is neutralized.
All that remains is for me to close the distance and finish the fight.

not too much doubt about that,  I just don't think it's a very blody likely position to be achieved.  the same is true of any length spear.

A *Spear* (which TROS defines as being 10' or under in length) is a different matter entirely than a *Pike* (which is 14' in this case.)

The Pike's length acts against it in any attempt to reposition it or strike an opponent with it.

I'd bet on a Spear against a dagger any day of the week, but never a Pike.

Given that you think it is easy to grab a competantly wielded spear.  I can see how you make this mistake.   Thats all a pike is,  a longer spear.   At 14' versus a dager i'd stake my life on the pike without hesitation. Especially if you come without a shield thinking you can just grab my spear.   at 18' I would still take the pike,  though I'd not be enthusiastic about the confrontation.

[Thirsty Viking]

A couple comments:
I don't think a dagger is superior to an 18' pike.
I too would like to concentrate on the 14' pike.
I do think a 9' spear is superior to a 14' pike.  The in the current tros rules this is not the case.
Here are some quotes from Silver:
http://www.aemma.org/onlineResources/silver/silver5_body.htm
Section 5.2.8
First he says:
.....

Once again you stopped in a document skipping area that refute you.

(5.2.7) Again of the Vantages of Weapons *28*
...
And if two shall fight with staves or swords, or what weapons soever, the one of them having his weapon longer than the perfect length, and the other shorter than the perfect length, he that has the longer has the vantage, because the shorter can make no true cross in true time. The short staff or half pike, Forest bill, Partisan, or glaive, or such like weapons of perfect length, to be used with both hands, have the advantage against two swords and daggers, or two rapiers, poniards and gauntlets, and against all other weapons whatsoever, the Forest bill excepted.

Looking at the pictures in DiGrassi's work
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~hudson/digrassi/pike.html
they are either not drawn to scale or he is probably refering to an 8-10' spear when he says pike.

The first drawing he shows a short spear it is true. starting with the example that the basic theory is that you hit your opponent before he hits you.  He then exponds adding length to increas the buffer.  As has been noted later, the pike he develops furht he is holding with hands one arms lengeth from but, and one arms length from the other hand.   This places the forward hand clearly 5+ feet on the pike.   He futher says this isn't holding the pike in the middle, but a compromise for length and ability to use.   This pike seems to clearly be in excess of 10' to me.  Given that period pike formations of the swiss and english were 15' range (though some used longer,  this seems reasonable).

Here are some other quotes of less reputable sorces:

http://www.lmj.i12.com/wallers/combat/
Very heavy and cumbersome, pikemen would often shorten their pike to make them easier to handle, unfortunately rendering them ineffective in battle at he same time.

The would be ineffective because they were going against other pikeman.  Giving the other pikes the range advantage.

http://www.apva.org/ngex/c9pike.html
The pike was not especially useful to the Jamestown colonists since mounted soldiers did not confront them and their principal engagements were skirmishes with the Indians.

No disputing this...  the indians weren't silly enough to fight the pikes in massed formation.  They also were the ones who taught the americans guerilla warfare.  Snipe from cover.  fight where you have the advantage. Ambush your enemy.   I've been saying this all along.

http://members.austarmetro.com.au/~aergos/Armoury/polearms.html
Pike: The pike was used by infantry to fend off cavalry. It was very effective against mounted troops. Like the halberd, pikemen were vulnerable to infantry attacks, and so was deadly for the wielder if he fought alone.

This last entry is the most suspect of the lot.  Fought alone?  against who?  another infantry unit?  2 men?  or a duel against a Dagger?  It seems obviously he isn't addressing a dagger.   The majority of the polearm page if not all of it seems devoted to military use, hence the battlefield environemnt seems the right interpretation,  not having anything to do with a one on one against a dagger.   Pikes are perhaps the worst weapon choice for facing multiple opponents..

[Bob Richter]

Thats all a pike is,  a longer spear.  

Thus the basis of this entire misunderstanding.

No, that is decidedly NOT what a pike is.

Despite similarities in construction, a pike is a totally different weapon from a spear. It is longer. It is thicker. And Moment of Inertia (Physics, that is,) dictates that it CAN NOT be used in the same manner.

Your jabs will not be as strong or as quick. Your draws will be similarly plagued. And you will find (if you ever try) that you CAN NOT reposition quickly enough to catch a flank action by a lone man.

[svenlein]

Here is a summary of some of what people thought about fighting in open field starting from far away where no one throws their weapons.  I'm not very interested in alleyways, but I don't wish to stifle your conversation if you wish to continue it.  Please tell me if I have misrepresented your opinion.

Valamir - make a Terrain roll to make 14' pike ineffective, 1 14' Pike vs Dagger is "insanely easy" for dagger guy to make pike ineffective
Thirsty Viking - 14' pike crushes dagger into dirt and spits on his grave, 18' pike slightly worse but still kills the dagger guy, 10' spear kills him even better
Jake - 14' pike superior to dagger
Lyrax - "The pike is, at pike range, infinitely superior to the dagger."
Bob Richter - dagger is superior to 14' pike, 10' spear is superior to dagger.

I believe (in single combat fighting against someone with a dagger) 10' spear is superior to 14' pike which is superior to 18' pike. (note I didn't mention who will win between the two fighters I'm just saying 10 is better than 14, maybe they both beat the dagger guy, but the 10' guy will have an easier time beating him, but right now I'm not discussing that, so that we can focus on what we agree on first, then talk about disagreements)

Does everyone agree?
Is this reflected in the rules?  

I also believe this relationship is true (in single combat) against each other.  Since according to Silver the 10' is closest to the "perfect length" compared to the 14' and the 18'.

Does everyone agree?
Is this reflected in the rules?

Jake what did you mean when you said "I'd say that you're welcome to dodge, but you forfeit any advantage you would have had due to range. Hmm... "?

When is there a situation when a 14' pike man would want to drop his pike and pull out a sword?

I'll ask in a later post about whether the rules accurately show the pikes advantage over the dagger, or if they are over blowing the pikes advantage, of if the dagger is actually superior to a 14' pike.

Also I'd like to add a line to say how much I enjoy this thread, this is why I picked up tros, because of the interesting discussion on the RPGnet thread and this forum. : )

[Jake Norwood]

Jake what did you mean when you said "I'd say that you're welcome to dodge, but you forfeit any advantage you would have had due to range. Hmm... "?

When is there a situation when a 14' pike man would want to drop his pike and pull out a sword?

People were suggesting to avoid the pike's high DTN by dodging at a DTN of 7 instead. This is fine, but I would not penalize the attacker with the range difference between his dagger (or whatever) and the defending pikeman. Thus a pikeman can dodge, but he loses the bonus for having a longer weapon in the process, because he's not trying to keep his weapon between himself and his opponent--which is what "parrying" sort-of represents in TROS.

Therefore if the dagger guy got close in it would make more sense for the pikeman to pull a sword and have a more reasonable range advantage over the dagger guy. This is doubly true if the dagger guy has wisely grasped his opponent's pike. Then, instead of trying to recover the lost pike, the pikeman would just pull his sword and go at it.

Jake

[Mokkurkalfe]

Would this be the case with other, shorter weapons as well?

[Lyrax]

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.  

It's not that clumsy, can still go several inches through a skull, and he can always choke up.  Any polearm user whose hands are firmly in one place throughout the fight is a dead man.

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.

It would only need to be about five or six feet wide.  That doesn't seem unreasonable to me.  Maybe even four feet.  As long as the man isn't touching both sides of the alleyway just by standing there, he can turn around.  The TN wouldn't be much, if any higher, and the damage would be the same as a short staff, roughly.  That's more than enough to kill somebody.  In short, I think it would be worse for the dagger user.  If a man with a "short" staff can kill two men with swords, then a man with a long staff should have no trouble with two men with daggers.

[svenlein]

People were suggesting to avoid the pike's high DTN by dodging at a DTN of 7 instead. This is fine, but I would not penalize the attacker with the range difference between his dagger (or whatever) and the defending pikeman. Thus a pikeman can dodge, but he loses the bonus for having a longer weapon in the process, because he's not trying to keep his weapon between himself and his opponent--which is what "parrying" sort-of represents in TROS.

Presumably the 14' pikeman would be dodgeing backwards mostly.  Would you still suggest this "no range penalty" idea?  Posibly the dodge backwards alows you to keep your range benifit, but you need to make a terrain roll since your running backwards while concentrating on keeping your spear between you and the dagger guy.

Therefore if the dagger guy got close in it would make more sense for the pikeman to pull a sword and have a more reasonable range advantage over the dagger guy.

Wouldn't it be more effective for the pike man to full evade?  It seems like only if full evade is not possible would pulling out a sword be better.  Is this true in real life?  I this true in the rules?

This is doubly true if the dagger guy has wisely grasped his opponent's pike. Then, instead of trying to recover the lost pike, the pikeman would just pull his sword and go at it.

How would someone try to grasp an opponent's pike in TROS?

Scott

[Thirsty Viking]

Would this be the case with other, shorter weapons as well?

IMO weapons longer than a dagger would be at less of a disadvantage,  possibly even at an advantage.  They close range quicker.  (have less far to go.   They beat a pike better because of thier length.  Even a shield beat is executed at essentially dagger range. and thier momentum on a swing.  

Dagger is at the extremely short range with unarmed.

People say a pike is heavier than a spear,  of course it is.   the speed of the attack will be marginally slower,  Though some think the answer here is GREATLY SLOWER  I disagree with them.  These things of course are all modified by weapon balance and how it is held and employed.  I'm a strong guy,  a pike in my hands is faster than in the hands of someone of less upper body str.  If you give a weapon to someone who can hardly hold it, then I'm sure much of what they say becomes true.  I'm not the worlds best climber,  but my arms still heft my girth...   though i'd be sore the next day, i'm sure i can put decent accurate velocity on a pike thrust.  Legs that haul my 300 pound carcass up mountains with a 60# backpack are not going to care that the 60# is a pike instead (i think that is too heavy but I didn't find stats on pike weight.  Facing a dagger,  I can take a middle hold on the pike balancing the weapon, and opening up the variety of atacks.  and still stab the dagger guy when he is ~ 10' away.  If i smash him with the but end when he is 5' away ...  I still haven't been stabbed.   Any dagger guy gets to me  without taking a good hit,  was agile enough and quick enough,  that it probably wouldn't have mattered what weapon i'd been holding except mabye my walking staff.  I've carried it for 100's of trail miles over the last couple years, even done kata's at dawn on mountain tops with it...   well  not a real kata i guess...  just what I make up.

[Bob Richter]

Though some think the answer here is GREATLY SLOWER  I disagree with them.  

And you're wrong. No bones about it. You're simply wrong. It's physics. You can't beat physics. Don't even try.

And if you really want a demonstration, come up to Richland, WA and I'll try to show you what I mean.

Don't even bother to respond to this post until you've actually gone out and swung around poles of varying length and therefore have SOME idea what you're talking about.