Double-ended Spears and Javies.......

[Digoza]

This is the same post I made in the Foam Smithing topic.

Why aren't double ended spears and javelins allowed? I can kind of understand why spears are, seeing how they were 99% of the time single ended, but, to my knowledge, javelins were commonly double-ended, plus, if we were to double end a javelin, then there would be no risk at all of getting a pommel to the face.

Just my two cents on the matter.

[Freyson]

The easiest answer would be because the rules don't allow double ended weapons other than staffs. But that doesn't explain the WHY of the rules. The reason the rule is that way is becasue of pommel spikes of all types. A pommel spike on a spear or javvy may not be too bad of a thing, but on a sword it is begging for an injury. A pommel stab downwards to an opponent's chest puts the blade, and more importantly sometimes the hand/fist, right in that opponent's face. The rule was made across the board to prevent this from happening, to simplify the rules, and to help out the weapon checkers. This way there is no problem with adding many, many rules about what can or cannot have a pommel spike and how those weapons can be used.

Javelins rarely hit people pommel first unless thrown backwards. That is not a weapon construstion problem, it is a fighter use problem. On those VERY rare occasions where a javvy may turn around, there is little chance of injury due to padding requirements and weight requirements.

[Kyrax]

Since you say you "kind of" understand why double-ended spears aren't allowed, then why ask the question? Or at least, why not toss out those thoughts to see if you're on the right track?

But to prevent you from actually having to use the search function, the answer is the one you probably figured out alread: safety. Double-ended spears or polearms are just accidents waiting to happen. As an experienced spear and polearm user, I know that in a melee if I was able to pommel-strike people that when I did there would be many feet of polearm swinging around so that I could bring that end to bear.

In fairness, pommel-spikes were historically built on some polearms. So I can understand about wanting one - heck, there've been times that I could have used one. But I recognize the safety issue that swinging around an 8-10 foot long weapon would cause. I also would point out that pommel spikes aren't actually that common historically. While they did occur, I wonder how practical they'd be in closely packed spear units like a phalanx? In a phalanx or square formation, the spearmen are not swinging their poles about, they're pointing the business end (spearhead) outwards toward the enemy. If they move the spear to point at another axis, it is still just the spearhead.

Javelin pommel ends need to be tested to nearly the same standard as the actual striking surface, so safety isn't really a plus here. As to the argument that they're historical, sure they are. But they're nowhere near as widespread as the rules of this game have made them. Outside of the Roman Pilum, which was ONLY a one-ended weapon, the actual usage of javelin type weapons was fairly limited as a weapon of war. Throwing spears were more of a hunting weapon in some cultures, and where they were used in warfare it was by mostly primitive cultures that adapted the throwing spears from their use in hunting. The Zulu warriors are a good example of the latter, and I'm sure one can come up with others. In those cultures, where the throwing spear was mostly a carved stick with one end fire-hardened, sure it could have been double-ended. But that same double-ended stick would be mostly useless against armor.

Sorry if that segued into a rant, but I feel that how we use javelins is one of the more ahistorical ways that this game distorts historical usage. Flails being the more talked about example of that.