LOL most people have stated they wanted spears back because it was the most commonly used weapon in history, and since skyim is in a viking-type setting, it seems silly to not have them.

But then again, Vikings had throwing axes, where are they? lol

I find it funny that they put a Spear in a Frozen mammoth in game tho, that was good for a chuckle.

Agreed. I'm all for spears if they're an entirely separate class of weapon, with their own skill and perk tree. Otherwise they're likely to be swords with a different model and a different animation.

Difficult? How could that possibly be? Its a spear, you stab things with it. At 'point blank range' your spear tip should already be bloody and sticking out the BACK of whats infront of you.

And by adding a spear weapon tree perk, they would have to add another perk tree for both mages and thieves. Again, this adds to the difficulty of just adding in a weapon.

That's a little simplistic. Every weapon has an associated tactic, and every weapon has advantages and disadvantages.

I like variety. Just because I don't use a feature doesn't mean I want it removed to spite others.

GAH. I didn't even think about that. Crap. I'd be perfectly happy if they just said "Oh well, there's one more skill tree for warrior skills than thief or mage skills. OH WELL." But you know full well that instantly after such a thing was added, there would be players demanding that Bethesda OWED them the return of Mysticism, and players demanding that they were OWED the addition of acrobatics or something...

Who's spiting anybody?

You're kidding right? Check any previous spear thread and you'll fine "Quit whining, Morrowhiner. I'm glad they are gone. I never used them." most of the time.

Damn, people are still on about spears? I haven't visited this section of the forums since the summer and there was arguments over spears back then to.

Yes, and while extreme, they're obviously responding to the people saying OMG HOW CAN YOU NOT HAVE SOMETHING WHEN IT WAS IN MORROWIND? IF IT WAS IN MORROWIND THEN IT'S SACRED STUFF MAY THE TRIBUNAL GODS SEND YOUR SOUL TO HELL YOU HERETIC.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Yup. About 50% of it is discussion between sane people giving rational arguments for and against spears, and the other 50% is having to defend against the nerd-rage of The Most Pious Acolytes of Morrowind demanding that they be added because they were in Morrowind.

That may well be, but people should expect harsh answers to statements that are both absurd and angry. I get that people in general need to cool off sometimes, but it's a bit silly for people to get so angry about things being different than Morrowind and then turn around and act surprised when they get angry answers.

For myself, I don't bother getting angry. I just let people know they've drunk too much Kool-Aid.

and on top that the main reason why people are kicking up a stink about it now is because bethesda made spears for that game jam.


Personally, I'd rather have throwing axe's lol

Sure, although they'd be pretty much a one-shot weapon like throwing spears. Throw the things, grab another weapon and get to fighting.

I'm not sure It really ever stopped.

It didn't. I've been hearing the same wailing about spears, attributes and classes since I first posted here.

Uh...people really don't seem that upset about spears being out of the game. That [censored]storm settled after Oblivion for the most part iirc. Some people are irritated though. I mean if you used swords for your character and then they were suddenly removed wouldn't you be kind of irritated? Not everyone only loves swords.

As for reasons? Well Spears just make sense for the worldspace.

Spears were one of the MOST important tools of combat throughout history. They were the most widely used and were used the earliest. The Elder Scrolls series has multiple references to Spears in their books as well. Yet the spears are missing. Most guardsmen would use spears not swords because it had 3 purposes that it served very well for their profession. It could be non-lethal(non-pointy end). It had great reach. It could be lethal. That makes it a very useful tool for a typical guard. The same applies in war though. In ranks spears would prove much more effective in use against a charging enemy. Especially cavalry. Which apparently do not exist yet as far as being used in combat.

Really while Skyrim has a believable world in many respects it completely makes no sense in many others due to game-play restrictions. Spears and cavalry were an essential part of most battlefields. Throwing weapons for that matter were very useful as well. Flaming pots of oil. Pilum. Javelins. Throwing spears. Throwing axes. Throwing knives. etc etc. While they were not as big a part of battles they would have their uses. Their absence from Skyrim's repertoire just does not make sense given the fact that a Civil War is going on in Skyrim. It would be much cheaper and more efficient to outfit your armies with Spears instead of swords. Spears are easier to use with no experience and are much cheaper to make. Pretty much essential for war.

So while it is not that big of deal to me. I can see why it would bother some people. Especially since this series is losing diversity so fast it is astonishing. Skyrim is a great place to play around in but in terms of choices and impact or even people and factions behaving realistically it is a joke. Even in comparison to its past games.

And yet your signature says that you'll get an aneurysm over people wanting more options.

I think marriage is a stupid feature and would have preferred a dozen other things over it, but I realize it's their choice to use an optional feature in the end.

You aren't bothering to read my signature completely then. I have no problem with more options. The point of the signature is that some people think that saying "IT WOULD BE AN OPTION" means that they win their argument, end of story. A dumb idea is a dumb idea whether it's optional or not. And even options affect the game. As I've said, maybe I think I shouldn't have to do some quest to get some item. Maybe I should argue "Why should I have to do this? I want the item, and I shouldn't have to do a quest to get it. Let people get the item without the quest if they want, and IT WOULD BE AN OPTION so nobody can logically argue with me."

That would be a dumb idea, wouldn't it? Even though I said the magic incantation, IT WOULD BE AN OPTION.


Sure, but that poor marriage system represents time wasted on a poor game mechanic. Nothing is free in that respect. It isn't that a bad marriage system hurts my game. It doesn't, because I didn't marry off my character. But given that everything has costs, every feature costs development time and effort, then therefore every crappy game mechanic you get and don't use because it stinks represents the loss of some other, cooler potential feature that you didn't get because the developers spent their time elsewhere working on something that turned out badly.

None of which is to crap on Bethesda's work; I'm a fairly adamant booster of Skyrim. Neither am I trying to dictate what the developers concentrate on or what features they choose to develop. But since I recognize that everything has a cost, I argue against features I think will be dumb simply because, as the man says, in a game you can do anything, but you can't do everything. Time spent on marriage (crappy or not) is time not spent on...whatever. Houses in the countryside for players to buy. Time spent on a poorly-planned, cosmetic addition of spears is time not spent on mounted combat. And, after all, time spent on adding adoption to the game is time not spent on developing a good and well-thought-out system that adds spears in with unique features.

So everything has tradeoffs. Adding things I dislike into the game does affect me, because of that expenditure of finite and precious development time and effort, meaning one less thing I might like makes it into the game. Argue for what you like all you want, and I'll argue for what I like, but I'll argue against the things I don't like, because of that cost.

Not really, they just have to add a few perks to the Two-Handed tree.

Why two-handed?

How is it people have the single notion that spears are a disadvatnage in close quarters melee? Last time I checked they didn't have a cross guard to stop you from sliding your hand up to make them just as useful in close combat. Not to mention swinging it wide would by most counts have more power behind it then the warhammer, whether it hits with the blade or the pole it would still be devastating to whoever was in range.