These are war scythes (and some spears and pikes at the bottom). War scythes were derived from agricultural scythes and were known to be popular and effective weapons used by peasants in late Medieval Europe. They were known for being much cheaper to manufacture than swords, pikes, or guns, and they were considered easy to use because they were wielded in almost exactly the same way as agricultural scythes. This was a common, recurring theme: many polearms were descended from repurposed agricultural implements.
Adapted from scythe does not mean scythe. If you read the text of the Wikipedia article you got that image from, you will see that even those using them recognized this difference and renamed them later. 'Sudlice,' for example, translates to 'Voulge' rather than 'Scythe.'
Descended from, yes, and I said that myself. However every polearm in that image has a conventional blade on a stick. The blades may be concave rather than convex but they are no longer at 90 degrees to the pole but rather in line with it. Very different weapons than an actual scythe would be. There are some images of people fighting with actual scythes, but they are suspected to be depictions of show battles rather than any actual normal form of combat.
And before the war scythe was developed, there are records that agricultural scythes were turned into weapons by turning the blades in a similar way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yep, if (in a RW setting) you were going to sponsor farmworkers to develop a local militia, you might be more prone to buy the harvesters polearms instead of swords.
In AD&D clerics were not supposed to use blade weapons and Magic Users were limited to d4 weapons. Maybe it is a holdover from the early days. I don't find it to be a problem.
I was just about to say the same thing, well…the part about clerics. No pointy swords for old edition clerics just a good old mace (the cleric weapon of choice at our table back then)
Though somehow a morningstar was still considered a cleric weapon despite the business end being covered in stabby bits.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
In AD&D clerics were not supposed to use blade weapons and Magic Users were limited to d4 weapons. Maybe it is a holdover from the early days. I don't find it to be a problem.
I was just about to say the same thing, well…the part about clerics. No pointy swords for old edition clerics just a good old mace (the cleric weapon of choice at our table back then)
Though somehow a morningstar was still considered a cleric weapon despite the business end being covered in stabby bits.
The Cleric As has been stated previously in the section detailing CHARACTER ABILITIES, the principal attribute of a cleric is wisdom. A character must have a minimum wisdom ability score of 9 (13 if a multi-classed half-elven cleric but 9 if a multi-classed half-orc cleric). If wisdom ability is greater than 15, the character adds 10% to experience (9.v.) awarded to him or her by the referee. Example: A cleric character gains an award of 975 experience points from the DM after a successful adventure. Because the character has a wisdom ability score in excess of 15, he or she then adds 98 experience points (975 X .10 = 97.5, or 98 E.P.) to the 975, for a total of 1,073 E.P. Of course, a cleric will benefit in other ways by having a high wisdom score. He or she gains bonus spells from high wisdom, as well as a better chance to avoid the effects of certain magical attacks. High ability scores in strength and constitution are also desirable for a character of this class, and good dexterity is likewise of benefit. This class of character bears a certain resemblance to religious orders of knighthood of medieval times. The cleric has an eight-sided die (d8) per level to determine how many hit points (q.v.) he or she has. The cleric is dedicated to a deity, or deities, and at the same time a skilled combatant at arms. The cleric can be of any alignment (q.v.) save (true) neutral (see Druid hereafter) alignment, depending upon that of the deity the cleric serves. All clerics have certain holy symbols which aid them and give power to their spells. All are likewise forbidden to use edged and/or pointed weapons which shed blood. All clerics have their own spells, bestowed upon them by their deity for correct and diligent prayers and deeds. A study of the spells usable by clerics (see CHARACTER SPELLS) will convey the main purpose of the cleric. That is, the cleric serves to fortify, protect, and revitalize. The cleric also has a limited number of attack spells, some of which are simply the reverse form of curative incantations. Note that all spells must be spoken or read aloud. In addition, the cleric has the ability to wear armor, carry effective weaponry, and engage in hand-to-hand (melee) combat with a reasonable chance of success. Another important attribute of the cleric is the ability to turn away (or actually command into service) the undead and less powerful demons and construction will be only one-half the usual for such a place because of religious help. If the cleric then clears the surrounding territory and humans dwell in this area, there will be a monthly revenue of 9 silver pieces per inhabitant from trade, taxation, and tithes.
Weapons could have a strength requirement for use without penalty and then be based on dex to hit and str based for damage. Strength could also increase missile range for weaponry suited to stronger users.
Weapons could have a strength requirement for use without penalty and then be based on dex to hit and str based for damage. Strength could also increase missile range for weaponry suited to stronger users.
IRL, you need enough strength to properly wield any given weapon. More strength could let you wield a larger/greater pull missile weapon, but it is not a given it helps a lot for a weapon you are beyond the pull strength of, particularly a crossbow.
Perhaps a crossbow suited to a storm giant might have similarities to a ballista though I'm certainly not so sure how a halfling with a belt of storm giant strength would handle such a weapon. :D
Elves might have accuracy - but orcs might have range.
In real life, Dex means almost nothing for a long or short bow. Aiming occurs while your muscles are at full power, strength and training determines if you hit, unless you are using a bow designed for a child. Similar issues for any thrown weapon much heavier than a dagger.
Crossbows and compound bows could have a strength minimum with a dex based attack. Slings, blowguns, and thrown light weapons (daggers/shuriken) should be entirely dex based.
In real life, Dex means almost nothing for a long or short bow. Aiming occurs while your muscles are at full power, strength and training determines if you hit, unless you are using a bow designed for a child. Similar issues for any thrown weapon much heavier than a dagger.
Crossbows and compound bows could have a strength minimum with a dex based attack. Slings, blowguns, and thrown light weapons (daggers/shuriken) should be entirely dex based.
Yeah, I think this fits (though I'll probably be lazy and stick with RAW).
For me, I'd say that in RL strength would determine the range of weapons you could comfortably handle and the duration you could handle them before fatigue while training and coordination would determine your chances to hit.
Issues get complicated in 5e where strength is considered to measure both natural athleticism as well as bodily power. Dexterity however is all about physical control which I'd continue to rule as being fundamental to shooting.
In AD&D clerics were not supposed to use blade weapons and Magic Users were limited to d4 weapons. Maybe it is a holdover from the early days. I don't find it to be a problem.
I was just about to say the same thing, well…the part about clerics. No pointy swords for old edition clerics just a good old mace (the cleric weapon of choice at our table back then)
Though somehow a morningstar was still considered a cleric weapon despite the business end being covered in stabby bits.
The interpretation being used was "mace and chain," i.e. a handle with a chain ending in a ball, without the spikey bits.
That's a flail, not a morningstar. Which was a different weapon from maces and morningstars, and one that clerics were also allowed to use.
In AD&D clerics were not supposed to use blade weapons and Magic Users were limited to d4 weapons. Maybe it is a holdover from the early days. I don't find it to be a problem.
I was just about to say the same thing, well…the part about clerics. No pointy swords for old edition clerics just a good old mace (the cleric weapon of choice at our table back then)
Though somehow a morningstar was still considered a cleric weapon despite the business end being covered in stabby bits.
The Cleric As has been stated previously in the section detailing CHARACTER ABILITIES, the principal attribute of a cleric is wisdom. A character must have a minimum wisdom ability score of 9 (13 if a multi-classed half-elven cleric but 9 if a multi-classed half-orc cleric). If wisdom ability is greater than 15, the character adds 10% to experience (9.v.) awarded to him or her by the referee. Example: A cleric character gains an award of 975 experience points from the DM after a successful adventure. Because the character has a wisdom ability score in excess of 15, he or she then adds 98 experience points (975 X .10 = 97.5, or 98 E.P.) to the 975, for a total of 1,073 E.P. Of course, a cleric will benefit in other ways by having a high wisdom score. He or she gains bonus spells from high wisdom, as well as a better chance to avoid the effects of certain magical attacks. High ability scores in strength and constitution are also desirable for a character of this class, and good dexterity is likewise of benefit. This class of character bears a certain resemblance to religious orders of knighthood of medieval times. The cleric has an eight-sided die (d8) per level to determine how many hit points (q.v.) he or she has. The cleric is dedicated to a deity, or deities, and at the same time a skilled combatant at arms. The cleric can be of any alignment (q.v.) save (true) neutral (see Druid hereafter) alignment, depending upon that of the deity the cleric serves. All clerics have certain holy symbols which aid them and give power to their spells. All are likewise forbidden to use edged and/or pointed weapons which shed blood. All clerics have their own spells, bestowed upon them by their deity for correct and diligent prayers and deeds. A study of the spells usable by clerics (see CHARACTER SPELLS) will convey the main purpose of the cleric. That is, the cleric serves to fortify, protect, and revitalize. The cleric also has a limited number of attack spells, some of which are simply the reverse form of curative incantations. Note that all spells must be spoken or read aloud. In addition, the cleric has the ability to wear armor, carry effective weaponry, and engage in hand-to-hand (melee) combat with a reasonable chance of success. Another important attribute of the cleric is the ability to turn away (or actually command into service) the undead and less powerful demons and construction will be only one-half the usual for such a place because of religious help. If the cleric then clears the surrounding territory and humans dwell in this area, there will be a monthly revenue of 9 silver pieces per inhabitant from trade, taxation, and tithes.
Clerics just wanted you to bleed internally.
I'm aware of what the book said, but in 2E, morningstars were weapons that clerics were allowed to use despite being covered in spikes. It was a blatant contradiction of the line you highlighted, but it was still how the rules for cleric weapon proficiencies worked.
In AD&D clerics were not supposed to use blade weapons and Magic Users were limited to d4 weapons. Maybe it is a holdover from the early days. I don't find it to be a problem.
I was just about to say the same thing, well…the part about clerics. No pointy swords for old edition clerics just a good old mace (the cleric weapon of choice at our table back then)
Though somehow a morningstar was still considered a cleric weapon despite the business end being covered in stabby bits.
The interpretation being used was "mace and chain," i.e. a handle with a chain ending in a ball, without the spikey bits.
That's a flail, not a morningstar. Which was a different weapon from maces and morningstars, and one that clerics were also allowed to use.
In AD&D clerics were not supposed to use blade weapons and Magic Users were limited to d4 weapons. Maybe it is a holdover from the early days. I don't find it to be a problem.
I was just about to say the same thing, well…the part about clerics. No pointy swords for old edition clerics just a good old mace (the cleric weapon of choice at our table back then)
Though somehow a morningstar was still considered a cleric weapon despite the business end being covered in stabby bits.
The Cleric As has been stated previously in the section detailing CHARACTER ABILITIES, the principal attribute of a cleric is wisdom. A character must have a minimum wisdom ability score of 9 (13 if a multi-classed half-elven cleric but 9 if a multi-classed half-orc cleric). If wisdom ability is greater than 15, the character adds 10% to experience (9.v.) awarded to him or her by the referee. Example: A cleric character gains an award of 975 experience points from the DM after a successful adventure. Because the character has a wisdom ability score in excess of 15, he or she then adds 98 experience points (975 X .10 = 97.5, or 98 E.P.) to the 975, for a total of 1,073 E.P. Of course, a cleric will benefit in other ways by having a high wisdom score. He or she gains bonus spells from high wisdom, as well as a better chance to avoid the effects of certain magical attacks. High ability scores in strength and constitution are also desirable for a character of this class, and good dexterity is likewise of benefit. This class of character bears a certain resemblance to religious orders of knighthood of medieval times. The cleric has an eight-sided die (d8) per level to determine how many hit points (q.v.) he or she has. The cleric is dedicated to a deity, or deities, and at the same time a skilled combatant at arms. The cleric can be of any alignment (q.v.) save (true) neutral (see Druid hereafter) alignment, depending upon that of the deity the cleric serves. All clerics have certain holy symbols which aid them and give power to their spells. All are likewise forbidden to use edged and/or pointed weapons which shed blood. All clerics have their own spells, bestowed upon them by their deity for correct and diligent prayers and deeds. A study of the spells usable by clerics (see CHARACTER SPELLS) will convey the main purpose of the cleric. That is, the cleric serves to fortify, protect, and revitalize. The cleric also has a limited number of attack spells, some of which are simply the reverse form of curative incantations. Note that all spells must be spoken or read aloud. In addition, the cleric has the ability to wear armor, carry effective weaponry, and engage in hand-to-hand (melee) combat with a reasonable chance of success. Another important attribute of the cleric is the ability to turn away (or actually command into service) the undead and less powerful demons and construction will be only one-half the usual for such a place because of religious help. If the cleric then clears the surrounding territory and humans dwell in this area, there will be a monthly revenue of 9 silver pieces per inhabitant from trade, taxation, and tithes.
Clerics just wanted you to bleed internally.
I'm aware of what the book said, but in 2E,morningstars were weapons that clerics were allowed to use despite being covered in spikes. It was a blatant contradiction of the line you highlighted, but it was still how the rules for cleric weapon proficiencies worked.
Yeah, they were allowed, but within specific contexts and that definitely gives valued food for thought.
I think that ad&d books (possibly deities and demigods) may have similarly allowed exceptions.
Here's a big block of unbroken (sorry) 2e PHb text:
Cleric Ability Requirement: Wisdom 9 Prime Requisite: Wisdom Races Allowed: All The most common type of priest is the cleric. The cleric may be an adherent of any religion (though if the DM designs a specific mythos, the cleric's abilities and spells may be changed--see following). Clerics are generally good, but are not restricted to good; they can have any alignment acceptable to their order. A cleric must have a Wisdom score of 9 or more. High constitution and Charisma are also particularly useful. A cleric who has a Wisdom of 16 or more gains a 10% bonus to the experience points he earns. The cleric class is similar to certain religious orders of knighthood of the Middle Ages: the Teutonic Knights, the Knights Templars, and Hospitalers. These orders combined military and religious training with a code of protection and service. Memberswere trained as knights and devoted themselves to the service of the church. These orders were frequently found on the outer edges of the Christian world, either on the fringe of the wilderness or in war-torn lands. Archbishop Turpin (of The Song of Roland) is an example of such a cleric. Similar orders can also be found in other lands, such as the sohei of Japan. Clerics are sturdy soldiers, although their selection of weapons is limited. They can wear any type of armor and use any shield. Standard clerics, being reluctant to shed blood or spread violence, are allowed to use only blunt, bludgeoning weapons. They can use a fair number of magical items including priest scrolls, most potions and rings, some wands and rods, staves, armor, shields, and magical versions of any weapons allowed by their order. Spells are the main tools of the cleric, however, helping him to serve, fortify, protect, and revitalize those under his care. He has a wide variety of spells to choose from, suitable to many different purposes and needs. (A priest of a specific mythos probably has a more restricted range of spells.) A cleric has major access to every sphere of influence except the plant, animal, weather, and elemental spheres (he has minor access to the elemental sphere and cannot cast spells of the other three spheres). The cleric receives his spells as insight directly from his deity (the deity does not need to make a personal appearance to grant the spells the cleric prays for), as a sign of and reward for his faith, so he must take care not to abuse his power lest it be taken away as punishment. The cleric is also granted power over undead -- evil creatures that exist in a form of non-life, neither dead nor alive. The cleric is charged with defeating these mockeries of life. His ability to turn undead (see "Turning Undead" in Chapter 9: Combat) enables him to drive away these creatures or destroy them utterly (though a cleric of evil alignment can bind the creatures to his will). Some of the more common undead creatures are ghosts, zombies, skeletons, ghouls, and mummies. Vampires and liches (undead sorcerers) are two of the most powerful undead. As a cleric advances in level, he gains additional spells, better combat skills, and a stronger turning ability. Upon reaching 8th level, the cleric automatically attracts a fanatically loyal group of believers, provided the character has established a place of worship of significant size. The cleric can build this place of worship at any time during his career, but he does not attract believers until he reaches 8th level. These followers are normal warriors, 0-level soldiers, ready to fight for the cleric's cause. The cleric attracts 20 to 200 of these followers; they arrive over a period of several weeks. After the initial followers assemble, no new followers trickle in to fill the ranks of those who have fallen in service. The DM decides the exact number and types of followers attracted by the cleric. The character can hire other troops as needed, but these are not as loyal as his followers. At 9th level, the cleric may receive official approval to establish a religious stronghold, be it a fortified abbey or a secluded convent. Obviously, the stronghold must contain all the trappings of a place of worship and must be dedicated to the service of the cleric's cause. However, the construction cost of the stronghold is half the normal price, since the work has official sanction and much of the labor is donated. The cleric can hold property and build a stronghold any time before reaching 9th level, but this is done without church sanction and does not receive the benefits described above. Priests of Specific Mythoi In the simplest version of the AD&D game, clerics serve religions that can be generally described as "good" or "evil." Nothing more needs to be said about it; the game will play perfectly well at this level. However, a DM who has taken the time to create a detailed campaign world has often spent some of that time devising elaborate pantheons, either unique creations or adaptations from history or literature. If the option is open (and only your DM can decide), you may want your character to adhere to a particular mythos, taking advantage of the detail and color your DM has provided. If your character follows a particular mythos, expect him to have abilities, spells, and restrictions different from the generic cleric. Priesthood in any mythos must be defined in five categories: requirements, weapons allowed, spells allowed, granted powers, and ethos. Requirements Before a character can become a priest of a particular mythos, certain requirements must be met. These usually involve minimum ability scores and mandatory alignments. All priests, regardless of mythos, must have Wisdom scores of at least 9. Beyond this, your DM can set other requirements as needed. A god of battle, for example, should require strong, healthy priests (13 Str, 12 Con). One whose sphere is art and beauty should demand high Wisdom and Charisma (16 or better). Most deities demand a specific type of behavior from their followers, and this will dictate alignment choices. Weapons AllowedNot all mythoi are opposed to the shedding of blood. Indeed, some require their priests to use swords, spears, or other specific weapons. A war deity might allow his priests to fight with spears or swords. An agricultural deity might emphasize weapons derived from farm implements -- sickles and bills, for example. A deity of peace and harmony might grant only the simplest and least harmful weapons -- perhaps only lassoes and nets. Given below are some suggested weapons, but many more are possible (the DM always has the final word in this matter). Deity Weapon Agriculture Bill, flail, sickle Blacksmith War hammer Death Sickle Disease Scourge, whip Earth Pick Healing Man-catcher, quarterstaff Hunt Bow and arrows, javelin, light lance, sling, spear Lightning Dart, javelin, spear Love Bow and arrows, man-catcher Nature Club, scimitar, sickle Oceans Harpoon, spear, trident Peace Quarterstaff Strength Hammer Thunder Club, mace, war hammer War Battle axe, mace, morning star, spear, sword Wind Blowgun, dart Of course there are many other reasons a deity might be associated with a particular weapon or group of weapons. These are often cultural, reflecting the weapons used by the people of the area. There may be a particular legend associated with the deity, tying it to some powerful artifact weapon (Thor's hammer, for example). The DM has the final choice in all situations. Spells Allowed A priest of a particular mythos is allowed to cast the spells from only a few, related spheres. The priest's deity will have major and minor accesses to certain spheres, and this determines the spells available to the priest. (Each deity's access to spheres is determined by the DM as he creates the pantheon of his world.) The 16 spheres of influence are defined in the following paragraphs. A priest whose deity grants major access to a sphere can choose from any spell within that sphere (provided he is high enough in level to cast it), while one allowed only minor access to the sphere is limited to spells of 3rd level or below in that sphere. The combination of major and minor accesses to spheres results in a wide variation in the spells available to priests who worship different deities. All refers to spells usable by any priest, regardless of mythos. There are no Powers (deities) of the Sphere of All. This group includes spells the priest needs to perform basic functions. Animal spells are those that affect or alter creatures. It does not include spells that affect people. Deities of nature and husbandry typically operate in this sphere. Astral is a small sphere of spells that enable movement or communication between the different planes of existence. The masters of a plane or particularly meddlesome powers often grant spells from this sphere. Charm spells are those that affect the attitudes and actions of people. Deities of love, beauty, trickery, and art often allow access to this sphere. Combat spells are those that can be used to directly attack or harm the enemies of the priest or his mythos. These are often granted by deities of war or death. Creation spells enable the priest to produce something from nothing, often to benefit his followers. This sphere can fill many different roles, from a provider to a trickster. Divination enables the priest to learn the safest course of action in a particular situation, find a hidden item, or recover long-forgotten information. Deities of wisdom and knowledge typically have access to this sphere. Elemental spells are all those that affect the four basic elements of creation--earth, air, fire, and water. Nature deities, elemental deities, those representing or protecting various crafts, and the deities of sailors would all draw spells from this sphere. Guardian spells place magical sentries over an item or person. These spells are more active than protection spells because they create an actual guardian creature of some type. Protective, healing, and trickster deities may all grant spells of this sphere. Healing spells are those that cure diseases, remove afflictions, or heal wounds. These spells cannot restore life or regrow lost limbs. Healing spells can be reversed to cause injury, but such use is restricted to evil priests. Protective and merciful deities are most likely to grant these spells, while nature deities may have lesser access to them. Necromantic spells restore to a creature some element of its life-force that has been totally destroyed. It might be life, a limb, or an experience level. These spells in reverse are powerfully destructive, and are used only by extremely evil priests. Deities of life or death are most likely to act in this sphere. Plant spells affect plants, ranging from simple agriculture (improving crops and the like) to communicating with plant-like creatures. Agricultural and nature Powers grant spells in this sphere. Protection spells create mystical shields to defend the priest or his charges from evil attacks. War and protective deities are most likely to use these, although one devoted to mercy and kindness might also bestow these spells. Summoning spells serve to call creatures from other places, or even other dimensions, to the service of the priest. Such service is often against the will of the creature, so casting these spells often involves great risk. Since creatures summoned often cause great harm and destruction, these spells are sometimes bestowed by war or death powers. Sun spells are those dealing in the basic powers of the solar universe--the purity of light and its counterpart darkness. Sun spells are very common with nature, agricultural, or life-giving powers. Weather spells enable the priest to manipulate the forces of weather. Such manipulation can be as simple as providing rain to parched fields, or as complex as unbridling the power of a raging tempest. Not surprisingly, these tend to be the province of nature and agricultural powers and appear in the repertoire of sea and ocean powers. Additional spheres can be created by your DM. The listed spheres are typical of the areas in which deities concentrate their interest and power. Spells outside the deity's major and minor spheres of influence are not available to its priests. Furthermore, the priest can obtain his spells at a faster or slower pace than the normal cleric. Should the character's ethos place emphasis on self-reliance, the spell progression is slower. Those deities associated with many amazing and wondrous events might grant more spells per level. Of course, your DM has final say on this, and he must balance the gain or loss of spells against the other powers, abilities, and restrictions of the character. Granted Powers Another aspect of a specific mythos is the special powers available to its priests. The cleric's granted power is the ability to turn undead. This ability, however, is not common to all priests. Other deities grant powers in accordance with their spheres. If your DM is using a specific mythos, he must decide what power is granted to your priest. Some possible suggestions are given below. *Incite Berserker Rage, adding a +2 bonus to attack and damage rolls (War). *Soothing Word, able to remove fear and influence hostile reactions (Peace, Mercy, Healing). *Charm or Fascination, which could act as a suggestion spell (Love, Beauty, Art). *Inspire Fear, radiating an aura of fear similar to the fear spell (Death). These are only a few of the granted powers that might be available to a character. As with allowed weapons, much depends on the culture of the region and the tales and legends surrounding the Power and its priests. Ethos All priests must live by certain tenets and beliefs. These guide the priests' behavior. Clerics generally try to avoid shedding blood and try to aid their community. A war deity may order its priests to be at the forefront of battles and to actively crusade against all enemies. A harvest deity may want its priests to be active in the fields. The ethos may also dictate what alignment the priest must be. The nature of the mythos helps define the strictures the priest must follow. Priest Titles Priests of differing mythoi often go by titles and names other than priest. A priest of nature, for example (especially one based on Western European tradition) could be called a druid (see below). Shamans and witch doctors are also possibilities. A little library research will turn up many more unique and colorful titles, a few of which are listed here: Abbess, Abbot, Ayatollah, Bonze, Brother, Dom, Eye of the Law, Friar, Guru, Hajji, Imam, Mendicant, Metropolitan, Mullah, Pardoner, Patriarch, Prelate, Prior, Qadi, Rector, Vicar, and Yogi Balancing It All When creating a priest of a specific mythos, careful attention must be given to the balance of the character's different abilities. A priest strong in one area or having a wide range of choice must be appropriately weakened in another area so that he does not become too powerful compared to the other priests in the game. If a war deity allows a priest the use of all weapons and armor, the character should be limited in the spells allowed or powers granted. At the other extreme, a character who follows a deity of peace should have significant spells and granted powers to make up for his extremely limited or non-existent choice of weapons. A druid, for example, has more granted powers than a normal cleric to compensate for his limited armor and spell selection.
The general baseline was still of the clerics that avoided shedding blood but, if this restriction was lifted, the recommendation was that another limit was added to balance.
This is one aspect of 2e which I think would work well in 5e.
In AD&D clerics were not supposed to use blade weapons and Magic Users were limited to d4 weapons. Maybe it is a holdover from the early days. I don't find it to be a problem.
I was just about to say the same thing, well…the part about clerics. No pointy swords for old edition clerics just a good old mace (the cleric weapon of choice at our table back then)
Though somehow a morningstar was still considered a cleric weapon despite the business end being covered in stabby bits.
The interpretation being used was "mace and chain," i.e. a handle with a chain ending in a ball, without the spikey bits.
That's a flail, not a morningstar. Which was a different weapon from maces and morningstars, and one that clerics were also allowed to use.
And a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. It is tough to find evidence after all this time, but maybe this works? These are the icons for morning star wielders from the original Pool of Radiance game, which came out just before the release of 2e, so was still 1e.
That's a sprite from a computer game with very limited graphics. Not really a great indication of what a weapon was supposed to look like in the tabletop game. Now, 1E is before my time as a player but by 2E I know that the mace, morningstar, and flail were all distinctly different weapons with their own stats and proficiencies. The morningstar and the flail were definitely not being confused with each other.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Just saying that pixelvision illustration looks like someone using a pufferfish as bait on a rod and line ... pretty sure swordfish weren't beaked to arm short swordsmen....
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
It may take proficiency to wield a short sword as a d6 weapon. Otherwise you just have a longer dagger.
But in mechanics, proficiency only helps "to hit" rolls so that wouldn't explain it.
My feeling is it takes proficiency to wield it in combat enough to keep up with the tempo of the fight. There is a lot to learn about controlling the momentum of your weapon. It is because of momentum that fighting with a flail is very very difficult.
It may take proficiency to wield a short sword as a d6 weapon. Otherwise you just have a longer dagger.
But in mechanics, proficiency only helps "to hit" rolls so that wouldn't explain it.
My feeling is it takes proficiency to wield it in combat enough to keep up with the tempo of the fight. There is a lot to learn about controlling the momentum of your weapon. It is because of momentum that fighting with a flail is very very difficult.
Yes, but one person's longer dagger might be another person's shorter spear - only that you've got a handguard so you don't have so much concern about getting your hand hurt, it's light but (as its weight is more balanced than the weight of a hammer or hand axe) you can use it with finesse. Personally, I'd also think that spears could be handled with finesse though using a shortsword would be more like holding a club than a lightish quarterstaff. Personally I also also think that spears could be used as reach weapons by holding them toward their base ends but, even if you hold a spear more toward the middle, a short sword has less inertia for changing direction.
The big question here is whether people could have had the opportunity to become proficient.
Just saying that pixelvision illustration looks like someone using a pufferfish as bait on a rod and line ... pretty sure swordfish weren't beaked to arm short swordsmen....
Hey, low res graphics were all we had and we liked it!
There is the shortsword graphic:
In the 80s I also had great books on Roman and medieval life which had great, to scale pictures including weapons. I liked them.
It may take proficiency to wield a short sword as a d6 weapon. Otherwise you just have a longer dagger.
But in mechanics, proficiency only helps "to hit" rolls so that wouldn't explain it.
My feeling is it takes proficiency to wield it in combat enough to keep up with the tempo of the fight. There is a lot to learn about controlling the momentum of your weapon. It is because of momentum that fighting with a flail is very very difficult.
Yes, but one person's longer dagger might be another person's shorter spear - only that you've got a handguard so you don't have so much concern about getting your hand hurt, it's light but (as its weight is more balanced than the weight of a hammer or hand axe) you can use it with finesse. Personally, I'd also think that spears could be handled with finesse though using a shortsword would be more like holding a club than a lightish quarterstaff. Personally I also also think that spears could be used as reach weapons by holding them toward their base ends but, even if you hold a spear more toward the middle, a short sword has less inertia for changing direction.
The big question here is whether people could have had the opportunity to become proficient.
Getting into spear technique in combat is well off topic.
While in theory, peasants could indeed make wooden swords to practice with, why would they worry so much about balancing them? Where would they learn about properly balancing wooden swords? ...
And when they become warlocks or clerics I'd consider that they may have some background to use them. If you have a different view, you do you.
... And when a peasant uprising happened, where would they suddenly magically acquire thousands of short swords to suddenly arm themselves en masse? They already have the pointy sticks. They already have the axe heads and farm implements and those are much easier to adapt into pole arms than into swords, particularly with no practice in sword making. ...
At anytime prior to becoming a warlock or cleric they could spend their money to buy what they want.
... There were and still are literal schools of sword technique. There are no such schools of spear technique, at least outside of the military. Doesn't that in and of itself indicate a difference in learning difficulty?
"Spears are a bizarrely neglected weapon in the world of Historical European Martial Arts or HEMA". My perception on this is that people think they're boring.
It may take proficiency to wield a short sword as a d6 weapon. Otherwise you just have a longer dagger.
But in mechanics, proficiency only helps "to hit" rolls so that wouldn't explain it.
My feeling is it takes proficiency to wield it in combat enough to keep up with the tempo of the fight. There is a lot to learn about controlling the momentum of your weapon. It is because of momentum that fighting with a flail is very very difficult.
Yes, but one person's longer dagger might be another person's shorter spear - only that you've got a handguard so you don't have so much concern about getting your hand hurt, it's light but (as its weight is more balanced than the weight of a hammer or hand axe) you can use it with finesse. Personally, I'd also think that spears could be handled with finesse though using a shortsword would be more like holding a club than a lightish quarterstaff. Personally I also also think that spears could be used as reach weapons by holding them toward their base ends but, even if you hold a spear more toward the middle, a short sword has less inertia for changing direction.
The big question here is whether people could have had the opportunity to become proficient.
Getting into spear technique in combat is well off topic.
While in theory, peasants could indeed make wooden swords to practice with, why would they worry so much about balancing them? Where would they learn about properly balancing wooden swords? ...
And when they become warlocks or clerics I'd consider that they may have some background to use them. If you have a different view, you do you.
... And when a peasant uprising happened, where would they suddenly magically acquire thousands of short swords to suddenly arm themselves en masse? They already have the pointy sticks. They already have the axe heads and farm implements and those are much easier to adapt into pole arms than into swords, particularly with no practice in sword making. ...
At anytime prior to becoming a warlock or cleric they could spend their money to buy what they want.
... There were and still are literal schools of sword technique. There are no such schools of spear technique, at least outside of the military. Doesn't that in and of itself indicate a difference in learning difficulty?
"Spears are a bizarrely neglected weapon in the world of Historical European Martial Arts or HEMA". My perception on this is that people think they're boring.
Becoming a warlock, their patron teaches them. The patron presumably sees fit to teach them other things.
Becoming a cleric, they are taught what their faith teaches them. Again, they have more important things to spend their time on. ...
I'm not convinced that a warlock patron would get involved in any weapon training or that clerical training would necessarily see an importance in various of the proficiencies in this list.
... As for modern competitions using medieval weapons, swords are associated with heroes, who tended to be nobility of some level or other and a lot 'cooler' than any peasant with a pointy stick. However if you go to any such event, you will quickly realize that swords are not so simple as weapons. A spear or quarterstaff (and quarterstaffs are still cool enough that people fight using them) is a lot easier to learn to use decently. ....
Yeah, spears are awesome weapons. But I'm not sure how hard it would be to learn to use a shortsword with a comparable level of proficiency. Maybe it's just a different point of view. I certainly think that it could be a lot easier and more natural to gain combat proficiency with a sword than with a hammer.
... You were arguing that they could have practiced with wooden swords. My counter was to ask where they would have learned to balance wooden swords and why. ...
Swords have differences. Practice weapons such as the waster are approximations of weapons that have differences. Practice weapons are still commonly used for practice. In our time people commonly practice combat with swords. They more rarely practice combat with spears. They seldom ever practice combat with tools like hammers.
... Your new argument seems to be that they could simply have bought shortswords themselves and trained themselves. Again, in their former lives, when would they have taken the time to do so? They were busy with their former lives. Now fair game to ask why even the Soldier background does not include such training, but again, spear was a very common weapon for peasant armies.
and yet they still managed to gain proficiency with clubs, daggers greatclubs, handaxes, javalins, light hammers, maces, quarterstaffs, sickles, spears, light crossbows, darts, shortbows and slings despite having a background as as acolyte, anthropologist, athlete, charlatan, clan crafter, cloistered scholar, courtier, criminal or entertainer etc.
Swords have differences. Practice weapons such as the waster are approximations of weapons that have differences. Practice weapons are still commonly used for practice. In our time people commonly practice combat with swords. They more rarely practice combat with spears. They seldom ever practice combat with tools like hammers.
and yet they still managed to gain proficiency with clubs, daggers greatclubs, handaxes, javalins, light hammers, maces, quarterstaffs, sickles, spears, light crossbows, darts, shortbows and slings despite having a background as as acolyte, anthropologist, athlete, charlatan, clan crafter, cloistered scholar, courtier, criminal or entertainer etc.
Modern urban middle class practice with swords today and as a hobby. And they need to actually put in significant learning time to be any good with them.
Shortbows and slings are used for hunting, but frankly it is likely easier to make an argument that they should be martial rather than simple, i.e. arguments involving them actually go the other direction. Nevertheless, every profession needs to eat as they travel and rations cut into budgets quick, especially if you are not around anywhere convenient to buy them.
Daggers are similarly convenient for travel without seeming too threatening to any local constabulary.
Handaxes are pure utility. Hammers are also utility, doubling as tools.
Clubs, spears and javelins are among the earliest, most primitive weapons. That alone should be argument in favour of their simplicity.
And crossbows..... easier than rifles and can even be fitted with sights, even if just a groove.
Really not sure why darts are still on the weapons list at all. Who actually uses them using their proper sizes?
Our issue here may be that you may be applying a higher standard than me. The way I'd put it would be that hobbyists with swords need to actually put in significant learning time to be able to compete with those who are good with them. I'd still speculate that swords immediately present as a readily wieldable weapon but that there can be great extents to which you can go with mastery. I think that a lot of this may be down to versatility as for starters, and at least out of 5e, you can use swords for bith piercing or slashing.
I used to work with construction but, if an unarmoured opponent was coming to attack me and I had an option to pick up a (not so) light 2 lb hammer of a 2 or 3 lb sword, I'd choose the sword every time. On the topic of clerics, even Jesus (who was presented as a carpenter) agrees as, at the Last Supper, he went as far as to say "if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one".
If the opponent was wearing chain or plate armour maybe I'd choose the hammer especially if it was a 2 lb war hammer (which, in the real world, would typically have a can opening war pick point on it's reverse side). I'm sure Jesus would be proud of me. Hammers could make good can denters and, if anything, would be martially relevant as weapons.
In the real world where people did not live and travel while permanently wearing the heaviest armour they could find, there could be a great value in having the best possible option for a "that's not a knife" moment that could be managed. Clubs could also be transported and staves and spears could also be used to aid walking while occupying a hand but an ideal could be to have a sword by your side.
In regard to less versatile, less finesse ready weapons, police forces can take batton training very seriously though, for sport, a longer Kendo (sword like) stick might be desired. The Romans used heavy, leadened, 1/4 pound plumbata darts militarily. Some tactics were very basic, just to hoist them high and try to get the dart to fall on enemy troops rather than your own. Other times darts were placed on the inside of shields to be thrown at specific oncoming troops. Just to confuse things, dart-throwing might fit a definition as a simple, martial skill and, to me, the 5e categorisations are just a convenient contrivance.
For individuals with shields, sword and shield seem to work better than spear and shield with spears seeming to be better suited two-handed use. Spear and shield seem to work best in martial contexts when fighting as a member of a group.
I think that, given the choice, there were a lot of reasons why swords may have generally been go-to weapons.
Swords have differences. Practice weapons such as the waster are approximations of weapons that have differences. Practice weapons are still commonly used for practice. In our time people commonly practice combat with swords. They more rarely practice combat with spears. They seldom ever practice combat with tools like hammers.
and yet they still managed to gain proficiency with clubs, daggers greatclubs, handaxes, javalins, light hammers, maces, quarterstaffs, sickles, spears, light crossbows, darts, shortbows and slings despite having a background as as acolyte, anthropologist, athlete, charlatan, clan crafter, cloistered scholar, courtier, criminal or entertainer etc.
Modern urban middle class practice with swords today and as a hobby. And they need to actually put in significant learning time to be any good with them.
Shortbows and slings are used for hunting, but frankly it is likely easier to make an argument that they should be martial rather than simple, i.e. arguments involving them actually go the other direction. Nevertheless, every profession needs to eat as they travel and rations cut into budgets quick, especially if you are not around anywhere convenient to buy them.
Daggers are similarly convenient for travel without seeming too threatening to any local constabulary.
Handaxes are pure utility. Hammers are also utility, doubling as tools.
Clubs, spears and javelins are among the earliest, most primitive weapons. That alone should be argument in favour of their simplicity.
And crossbows..... easier than rifles and can even be fitted with sights, even if just a groove.
Really not sure why darts are still on the weapons list at all. Who actually uses them using their proper sizes?
Our issue here may be that you may be applying a higher standard than me. The way I'd put it would be that hobbyists with swords need to actually put in significant learning time to be able to compete with those who are good with them. I'd still speculate that swords immediately present as a readily wieldable weapon but that there can be great extents to which you can go with mastery. I think that a lot of this may be down to versatility as for starters, and at least out of 5e, you can use swords for bith piercing or slashing.
I used to work with construction but, if an unarmoured opponent was coming to attack me and I had an option to pick up a (not so) light 2 lb hammer of a 2 or 3 lb sword, I'd choose the sword every time. On the topic of clerics, even Jesus (who was presented as a carpenter) agrees as, at the Last Supper, he went as far as to say "if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one".
If the opponent was wearing chain or plate armour maybe I'd choose the hammer especially if it was a 2 lb war hammer (which, in the real world, would typically have a can opening war pick point on it's reverse side). I'm sure Jesus would be proud of me. Hammers could make good can denters and, if anything, would be martially relevant as weapons.
In the real world where people did not live and travel while permanently wearing the heaviest armour they could find, there could be a great value in having the best possible option for a "that's not a knife" moment that could be managed. Clubs could also be transported and staves and spears could also be used to aid walking while occupying a hand but an ideal could be to have a sword by your side.
In regard to less versatile, less finesse ready weapons, police forces can take batton training very seriously though, for sport, a longer Kendo (sword like) stick might be desired. The Romans used heavy, leadened, 1/4 pound plumbata darts militarily. Some tactics were very basic, just to hoist them high and try to get the dart to fall on enemy troops rather than your own. Other times darts were placed on the inside of shields to be thrown at specific oncoming troops. Just to confuse things, dart-throwing might fit a definition as a simple, martial skill and, to me, the 5e categorisations are just a convenient contrivance.
For individuals with shields, sword and shield seem to work better than spear and shield with spears seeming to be better suited two-handed use. Spear and shield seem to work best in martial contexts when fighting as a member of a group.
I think that, given the choice, there were a lot of reasons why swords may have generally been go-to weapons.
In the middle to upper classes, swords were the go to because they are relatively light and can be scabbarded easily. Shields were pretty much entirely military use, as was 'the heaviest armor.' Note that both actually do have associated proficiencies in D&D.
If you want to discuss biblical references, PM me, though. This is not the place for such discussions.
That difference in standards, is the difference between being able to simply pick weapon up and use it (non-proficient) vs actually understand how to properly use it (proficient).
Whether middle class or not, people in 5e may have had better access to practice and real swords than to bows as per phb/equipment#Weapons.
Shortsword 10 gp Longsword 15 gp Crossbow, light 25 gp Shortbow 25 gp
Shield 10 gp
The difference in standards is between a character with a background such as acolyte, anthropologist, athlete, charlatan, clan crafter, cloistered scholar, courtier, criminal or entertainer being proficient with clubs, daggers greatclubs, handaxes, javalins, light hammers, maces, quarterstaffs, sickles, spears, light crossbows, darts, shortbows and slings but not with the swords which are just as associated with these games as the sorcery.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
And before the war scythe was developed, there are records that agricultural scythes were turned into weapons by turning the blades in a similar way.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yep, if (in a RW setting) you were going to sponsor farmworkers to develop a local militia, you might be more prone to buy the harvesters polearms instead of swords.
Though somehow a morningstar was still considered a cleric weapon despite the business end being covered in stabby bits.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I don't think so.
The AD&D PHb states (but with paragraph breaks):
Clerics just wanted you to bleed internally.
The weapons in D&D and not very realistic in many ways. Do not get me started on ranged weapons being dex when they should be strength.
Weapons could have a strength requirement for use without penalty and then be based on dex to hit and str based for damage. Strength could also increase missile range for weaponry suited to stronger users.
Perhaps a crossbow suited to a storm giant might have similarities to a ballista though I'm certainly not so sure how a halfling with a belt of storm giant strength would handle such a weapon. :D
Elves might have accuracy - but orcs might have range.
In real life, Dex means almost nothing for a long or short bow. Aiming occurs while your muscles are at full power, strength and training determines if you hit, unless you are using a bow designed for a child. Similar issues for any thrown weapon much heavier than a dagger.
Crossbows and compound bows could have a strength minimum with a dex based attack. Slings, blowguns, and thrown light weapons (daggers/shuriken) should be entirely dex based.
Yeah, I think this fits (though I'll probably be lazy and stick with RAW).
For me, I'd say that in RL strength would determine the range of weapons you could comfortably handle and the duration you could handle them before fatigue while training and coordination would determine your chances to hit.
Issues get complicated in 5e where strength is considered to measure both natural athleticism as well as bodily power. Dexterity however is all about physical control which I'd continue to rule as being fundamental to shooting.
That's a flail, not a morningstar. Which was a different weapon from maces and morningstars, and one that clerics were also allowed to use.
I'm aware of what the book said, but in 2E, morningstars were weapons that clerics were allowed to use despite being covered in spikes. It was a blatant contradiction of the line you highlighted, but it was still how the rules for cleric weapon proficiencies worked.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yeah, they were allowed, but within specific contexts and that definitely gives valued food for thought.
I think that ad&d books (possibly deities and demigods) may have similarly allowed exceptions.
Here's a big block of unbroken (sorry) 2e PHb text:
The general baseline was still of the clerics that avoided shedding blood but, if this restriction was lifted, the recommendation was that another limit was added to balance.
This is one aspect of 2e which I think would work well in 5e.
That's a sprite from a computer game with very limited graphics. Not really a great indication of what a weapon was supposed to look like in the tabletop game. Now, 1E is before my time as a player but by 2E I know that the mace, morningstar, and flail were all distinctly different weapons with their own stats and proficiencies. The morningstar and the flail were definitely not being confused with each other.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Just saying that pixelvision illustration looks like someone using a pufferfish as bait on a rod and line ... pretty sure swordfish weren't beaked to arm short swordsmen....
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Getting back to the OP...
It may take proficiency to wield a short sword as a d6 weapon. Otherwise you just have a longer dagger.
But in mechanics, proficiency only helps "to hit" rolls so that wouldn't explain it.
My feeling is it takes proficiency to wield it in combat enough to keep up with the tempo of the fight. There is a lot to learn about controlling the momentum of your weapon. It is because of momentum that fighting with a flail is very very difficult.
Yes, but one person's longer dagger might be another person's shorter spear - only that you've got a handguard so you don't have so much concern about getting your hand hurt, it's light but (as its weight is more balanced than the weight of a hammer or hand axe) you can use it with finesse. Personally, I'd also think that spears could be handled with finesse though using a shortsword would be more like holding a club than a lightish quarterstaff. Personally I also also think that spears could be used as reach weapons by holding them toward their base ends but, even if you hold a spear more toward the middle, a short sword has less inertia for changing direction.
The big question here is whether people could have had the opportunity to become proficient.
In the 80s I also had great books on Roman and medieval life which had great, to scale pictures including weapons. I liked them.
And when they become warlocks or clerics I'd consider that they may have some background to use them. If you have a different view, you do you.
At anytime prior to becoming a warlock or cleric they could spend their money to buy what they want.
"Spears are a bizarrely neglected weapon in the world of Historical European Martial Arts or HEMA". My perception on this is that people think they're boring.
Simple weapons are listed as: club, dagger greatclub, handaxe, javalin, light hammer, mace, quarterstaff, sickle, spear, light crossbow, dart, shortbow and sling.
I'm not convinced that a warlock patron would get involved in any weapon training or that clerical training would necessarily see an importance in various of the proficiencies in this list.
Yeah, spears are awesome weapons. But I'm not sure how hard it would be to learn to use a shortsword with a comparable level of proficiency. Maybe it's just a different point of view. I certainly think that it could be a lot easier and more natural to gain combat proficiency with a sword than with a hammer.
Agreed. As I keep saying I'm happy to stick with the current prescription of RAW for mechanical ease despite thinking it to logically be BS.
Swords have differences. Practice weapons such as the waster are approximations of weapons that have differences. Practice weapons are still commonly used for practice. In our time people commonly practice combat with swords. They more rarely practice combat with spears. They seldom ever practice combat with tools like hammers.
and yet they still managed to gain proficiency with clubs, daggers greatclubs, handaxes, javalins, light hammers, maces, quarterstaffs, sickles, spears, light crossbows, darts, shortbows and slings despite having a background as as acolyte, anthropologist, athlete, charlatan, clan crafter, cloistered scholar, courtier, criminal or entertainer etc.
Our issue here may be that you may be applying a higher standard than me. The way I'd put it would be that hobbyists with swords need to actually put in significant learning time to be able to compete with those who are good with them. I'd still speculate that swords immediately present as a readily wieldable weapon but that there can be great extents to which you can go with mastery. I think that a lot of this may be down to versatility as for starters, and at least out of 5e, you can use swords for bith piercing or slashing.
I used to work with construction but, if an unarmoured opponent was coming to attack me and I had an option to pick up a (not so) light 2 lb hammer of a 2 or 3 lb sword, I'd choose the sword every time. On the topic of clerics, even Jesus (who was presented as a carpenter) agrees as, at the Last Supper, he went as far as to say "if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one".
If the opponent was wearing chain or plate armour maybe I'd choose the hammer especially if it was a 2 lb war hammer (which, in the real world, would typically have a can opening war pick point on it's reverse side). I'm sure Jesus would be proud of me. Hammers could make good can denters and, if anything, would be martially relevant as weapons.
In the real world where people did not live and travel while permanently wearing the heaviest armour they could find, there could be a great value in having the best possible option for a "that's not a knife" moment that could be managed. Clubs could also be transported and staves and spears could also be used to aid walking while occupying a hand but an ideal could be to have a sword by your side.
In regard to less versatile, less finesse ready weapons, police forces can take batton training very seriously though, for sport, a longer Kendo (sword like) stick might be desired. The Romans used heavy, leadened, 1/4 pound plumbata darts militarily. Some tactics were very basic, just to hoist them high and try to get the dart to fall on enemy troops rather than your own. Other times darts were placed on the inside of shields to be thrown at specific oncoming troops. Just to confuse things, dart-throwing might fit a definition as a simple, martial skill and, to me, the 5e categorisations are just a convenient contrivance.
For individuals with shields, sword and shield seem to work better than spear and shield with spears seeming to be better suited two-handed use. Spear and shield seem to work best in martial contexts when fighting as a member of a group.
I think that, given the choice, there were a lot of reasons why swords may have generally been go-to weapons.
Whether middle class or not, people in 5e may have had better access to practice and real swords than to bows as per phb/equipment#Weapons.
Shortsword 10 gp
Longsword 15 gp
Crossbow, light 25 gp
Shortbow 25 gp
Shield 10 gp
The difference in standards is between a character with a background such as acolyte, anthropologist, athlete, charlatan, clan crafter, cloistered scholar, courtier, criminal or entertainer being proficient with clubs, daggers greatclubs, handaxes, javalins, light hammers, maces, quarterstaffs, sickles, spears, light crossbows, darts, shortbows and slings but not with the swords which are just as associated with these games as the sorcery.