Why don't dwarves use pikes??

They can only get as tall as the cielings allow, meaning the dwarves could always have the longest possible pikes if planned properly

Possibly because dwarf-sized corridors are still goblin-sized corridors, and the dwarfs know they need big enough rooms for human adventurers to travel through later.

what if they are square rocks

I think spears and polearms should be the weapon of choice for monster-hunting adventurers especially when said monsters are big.

...

Yeah Puikes might work in their own fortress, but it won't be any used in newly heaved out tunnels, where the ceiling aren't perfect height constantly, or atleast making them perfectly would severly limit the rate of mining or expansion.
Fighting in a narrow corridor wouldn't be a problem but fuck moving
Would make sense in a perfectly disciplined force

what if they are square dwarves in a cubical tunnel with a tesseract shaped boulder

Collapsible pikes.

It would work, you just need to make sure your ceilings are the right size.

But I get your point, in the limited space present in underground settings, a stabbing weapon would be more useful.

Also turning around with spears, if they have multiple direction to defend from, is hard as dicks, and forming a square requires space

The dwarves turn sideways. Being squares they have infinitely small profile in one of the tunnel's. dimensions (two of the boulder's dimensions), therefore when boulder reaches them there will be no impact surface and it can pass through them unharmed.

touche dwarves, touche.

What about cubic dwarves

They still have one "safe" infinitely small collision facing to meet the boulder with without harm.

>inb4: tesseract dwarves
they step out of the tunnel in the dimension the tunnel doesn't occupy

What if humans just pour in cement. Dead dorfs for days

They do in my setting, sort of. They use halberds, which in my eyes is the perfect compromise between "muh axe wielding dwarves" and compensating for the dwarven lack of height/reach. Their culture in my setting is kind of a clusterfuck though. They live on a peninsula and are known as great sailors (stealing an idea from Veeky Forums, I made it so that dwarven sturdiness to being bull rushed etc. also translates to having good sea legs) so at first I wanted to make them Norse, but over time bits of England and even Switzerland slipped in. The standard dwarven infantryman is now basically a landsknecht, and often hired by foreign militaries.

The only real "plot hole" I see is that halberds make highly questionable weapons for naval warfare. Unless for some reason dwarven ships sail right next to their enemies and start poking until there's an opening to board.

Nah, it's from the game Battle for Middle-earth 2. Although I can't find a better picture either.

Because Tolkien did not do it, thus it is forbidden now and forever. Bucking this makes you a snowflake and shunned.

Have you considered them using a kind of boarding axe? I could see those being a great choice for Dwarves; short heavy strikes that have to be avoided unless you wanted to lose a limb, and what with naval warfare being what it is yiu wouldn't really be wearing the armor necessary to absorb a blow like that.

They do in my setting as well. The early dwarves developed pike and shot to combat the race of giants that enslaved them when they first migrated to the surface.

Dwarves don't like weapons taller than they are.

Because pikes are an awful weapon? They only function as a delaying method, if they are not backed by mass crossbows or mass gunfire capable of piercing the current armor they inevitably get slaughtered.

Look at the revolts in Ghent, Flanders, and the rest of France around the time of the 100 years war for examples. Heavy infantry do beat pikes head to head (he'll that is why Romans came to be), and heavy cavalry can be trained to break pike walls.

So try hitting anything with massed gunfire in a cave and then ask the question.

pikes are made of wood
wood comes from trees
trees are evil (as far as dwarves are concerned) therefore pikes are evil

Why does everyone always bring up tunnels like dwarves are fucking moles when in every single setting they build monolithic chasms?

>Year 535 of The Reign of Urist Longhands
>Making Pikes out of anything but Adamantium

Might as well cut your fuckin beard off now laddy

>they step out of the tunnel in the dimension the tunnel doesn't occupy
if the world is 4d then the fourth dimension is also filled with rock and they can't step into it without tunneling first.

What about a compromise?

When in tunnel formation, dwarves use halberds with pointed spikes and ornate axe blades along with shields to create a phalanx. For combat in more open spaces or chaotic melees when formations are broken, they unscrew and discard the longer shafts to use their weapons as a battle-axe.

I had an idea for some fluff that involved the shafts being universal but the axe/heads being family heirlooms or forged by each individual dwarf, I thought that would be cool.

waifu2x is your friend.

A short and stocky dwarf is playing a losing game if they invest in a weapon system that emphasizes reach. Sure, it might be an okay strategy against smaller opponents like goblins or kobolds, but most demihumans and menfolk are taller than your average dwarf and therefore have a natural edge in reach. It would be better for a dwarven warrior to close in and mitigate that advantage. Their compact stature means their going to hit like a truck without needing the same amount of room for their swings/jabs.

>not watching the Swiss take pikes and literally run people over because they were insane maniacs without a sense of self-preservation

because not everything can be a huge open space underground, because physics and cave collapses.
inevitably there will be small tunnels, connecting muh huge underground open spaces.
stop being a retard.

My autism can't allow that.

1. In the time it takes to fiddle around with your ax to make it smaller, you may as well just take out a second ax

2. Anything with removable/moving parts are going to be not as structurally sound as say, a hunk of sharp metal with a handle.

...

>motherfuckers think that the axes Tolkien described were anything OTHER then Dane Axe-style polearms, fitting the roughly 12th century warfare aesthetic most kingdoms had excepting Gondor

I mean I know you lazy fucks don't read and just watch movies but come on.

Pikes are too long.
Dwarves are too weak.

Plus, they get tangled in their beards.

>I mean I know you lazy fucks don't read and just watch movies but come on.
literally how could anyone possible know that by reading the books?
show me a source that describes the axes as long-handled axes, and I'll shut the fuck up.

>Heavy infantry do beat pikes head to head (he'll that is why Romans came to be)
What? What the fuck are you talking about? Do you think peltasts were chucking fucking pikes or something?

>Massive column of dwarf warriors with pikes
>One (1) fire wizard

Source on the minis?

actually if all of the force is impacting at an infinitely small collision point, they are receiving an infinitely large collision. That will hurt real good.

Have fun getting any furniture/mine carts/large alcohol barrels around your fortress, user.

>They only function as a delaying method
The Caroleans would say otherwise, user.

Reading comprehension, try it. Romans were heavy infantry and they came to power during a period where pike armies had been dominant, but stopped being due to being beaten by the Romans.

@Carloens yeah, like I said, when you can use guns to do the killing pikes are great. There is a reason it was pike and shit not pike and pike.

Carolean's used pikes to do the killing. Pretty much their entire line marched towards the enemy, fired 1-2 volleys from their muskets then charged with their pikes to punch through the enemy line. Guns were the back up to the pikes, not the other way around.

technically the books describe the dwarves using MATTOCKS. And these were, indeed, of a two handed variant similar to the dane axe

The funniest bit about the Book vs Movie LotR dwarves is the book ones are Hebrew inspired, while the Movie ones went full Scotsman.

because of the fucking dwarven scottish meme, i'm not sure where the fucking fuck that started but reeee

And their LANGUAGE is hebrew inspired, the dwarves themselves are pretty much just norse dwarves. Otherwise they sure as shit wouldn't be using heavy armor.

Roman heavy infantry got FUCKED by pikes whenever pikes weren't on bad terrain. When the Romans won, it was either because the elephants freaked out and ran into their own pikes, the pikemen were on shit terrain like one of two major battles Macedon fought, the Romans won because both armies stumbled into each other at the top of a hill with no warning, and even then one flank held marvelously.

They close the door and go out another exit for any liquid. A secret exit if need be. Dig a new exit if they have to.

Alternatively the dwarfs look on at annoyance as their enemies pour massive amounts of cement that only manages to fill a single tunnel and make a puddle in a hall because it was allowed to freely flow in till they ran out of cement. Now they'll have to clean up the mess later, which they can do faster than their enemies can make cement.

Because Scottish stereotypes are more marketable than Hebrew ones.

Yeah, their culture is definitely Norse, the main Hebrew inspiration is the hole "not having a homeland, hoarding gold and having big noses".

>fire wizard
>One (1) crossbowman
alternatively a pack cats can kill a wizard, which are basically a free and infinite resource.

"Not having a homeland" was specific to ONE group of Dwarves, not all of them. I don't know where this meme came fromJACKSON, but it's fucking stupid.

Said group was the main characters, though.

Yeah, that and the romans had a shit ton of reinforcement to offset their massive losses. The Macedonians were winning most of the battles until that major loss turned the tide of the war in favor of romans.

came from Veeky Forums IIRC actually, when we realized Thorins dwarves were kind of jews

>pikes
>working against rockworms

thats why they got hooks or crowbills as sidearms

The romans generally played to the weaknesses of pikes, ie. avoiding direct confrontation and forcing phalanxes to maneuver, or just pelting the fuck out of them from range.

Very true. Macedon only had the manpower of Macedon to use. They had about maybe 50,000 men at the start of the conflict to use. They couldn't stand losses. Not to mention that the conquests of Alexander had all sorts of "auxiliaries" to use. Tens of thousands of skirmishers, additional cavalry, and hoplites to cover the weaknesses of the pikes, now horribly lacking in the armies of the diadochi.

Not true. They tried to fight them head on again and again and again. They failed.

Nah, axes are meant to replace the picks they use to make their tunnels. Why not both? halberds to be used in traditional warfare formation and light axes to be carried as a general tool/status symbol. Could even be seen as heirlooms from the fatherland.

>axes are meant to replace the picks they use to make their tunnels
IIRC, the whole dwarven axe/pick/hammer thing is BECAUSE they're tools of industry, ie Dwarves make no distinction between war and industry, or industry and war. Axes can also be used for chopping stone as well as wood.

Spears on the other hand strike me as more of a professional soldiers weapon, given Dwarves have no use for them since they don't do a lot of overland hunting

>ie Dwarves make no distinction between war and industry, or industry and war.
I like that concept, and I will remember it going into the future.

If you need a Pike/Halberd/Polearm equivalent that also works as a tool, just use a give them Bardiches, that's what they use in my setting.

I actually like the idea that the professional soldier class is an emerging thing in Dwarven Society in order to meet the needs of a civilization that is growing due to advancements in agriculture - going back to my dwarves not doing much overland hunting thing, this would be one of the reasons their population was always so limited. Elves would have the OPPOSITE problem, lots of hunting but little agriculture. Humans are fucking everywhere like rats because they have BOTH, and now they're trading resources with the other races which is leading to a population boom which is leading to national growth

because of this national growth, the time honored traditions of a militia society - which both elves and dwarves traditionally display in D&D as well as other settings - where everyone is a soldier part time isn't holding up to the needs of the state. Keep in mind that the idea of a professional standing military force was a game changing idea back in the Classical Era.

So, digressions aside, the SOLDIER class is emerging in Dwarven and Elven societies, which is to say, individuals for whom war is a profession, not a secondary obligation to the community.

So you would have situations where traditional dwarven weapons like axes, picks, and javelins are being superceded by weapons designed solely for war, like long spears and swords. The same for the elves, with their spears and bows being replaced with swords and crossbows

Interesting. This would make the sword a fascinating symbol in dwarven culture. I'm not even sure how it would be viewed. Young dwarves who want to appear cool and cutting edge (which would be an interesting turn of phrase for dwarves) might wear swords as a fashion statement, while the elders look at them in disdain. Or maybe only the extremely wealthy owned swords previously, and are having their symbol taken from them. Or maybe dwarves see it as a sign of changing tides, with their personal opinions on the matter depending on how conservative they are, in the actual sense of the word.

And that's just scratching the surface.

In my setting the "main character" civilisation of Dwarves is sort of in a symbiotic relationship with a minor Human Kingdom. So the Dwarves mine and refine the metals which the humans then trade to everyone else for gold or use it as a equipment.
Meanwhile the Humans provide most of the food and military manpower for the Dwarves and are able to hide in the Dwarven Fortresses if they are attacked.

All of these things, yes

I admittedly gleaned the idea from Warhammer, where that's actually the dwarves primary trade with humanity

Because dwarf on dwarf warfare is going to be about tunneling and counter tunneling and nobody else is going to invade the dwarves

>tunneling and counter tunneling

Picks for piercing heavy dwarf armor

Axe shovels for shovelin and cleavin

I know that Warhammer Dwarves swore off of using polearms and swords because that's what the Elves use

Anyone ever made a Dwarf explorer character who carries a shitton of tools which can double as a weapon as they're durable because muh dwarf craft? His hammer be used for forging & hitting. His axe is a tomahawk-style one & tomahawks do have some uses. His shovel can be used to attack like it's WWI trenches or TF2 Soldier. His mattock has many uses too. His knife has all sorts of survival benefits. Etc.

Phalanxes have plenty of weaknesses. A classical one is that they're not actually that good at defeating enemy infantry formations. At Heraclea the Epirotes literally spent five hours fighting the Romans frontally, with no maneuvering, and a numerically superior force and failed to rout them until Phyrrus finally send some elephants around the flanks.

The point of phalanxes is to fix the opponent in place while your cavalry outmaneuvers them and hits them from the sides, or while skirmishers pepper them from afar. A phalanx by its own is relatively harmless unless it has a very good position and/or is fighting a wildly inferior enemy, as was the case at Thermopolae.

Additionally, and this is key, sieges that actually result in people storming the walls are almost absurdly rare, there's no reason to do it unless you've got a press for time or an overwhelming advantage in fire/manpower. Why would you build a fortress around, and train hundreds of dwarves for, a style of warfare which really only advantages you in situations in which you've already lost?

It really makes more sense for dwarves to engage in a sort of defense-in-depth using subterranean routes, so that not only the siege itself, but even the march to the siege, is fraught with ambush, danger, and hazard. For that kind of warfare, a knife and a shovel are more deadly than a pike.

Had a Ranger who did this. Dwarven Rangers are the best.

I like my dwarves to have two or three real varieties of soldiers. First is the pike phalanx, who are the "normal" dwarven soldiers. They're obviously equipped with pikes. Usually, the outer rank will have shorter spears and shields, so that they can protect against missile fire and deal with going around corners or other unexpected threats. Then you've got some sort of caver-type guys, who wear lighter armor and are semi-skirmishers and deal with caving. Small, tight tunnels and uneven natural caves are where they are expected to fight. They carry things like trench knives, small maces, and maybe shields, maybe small throwing weapons. Then you get weirdo surface dwarfs. They're fucking strange ones. There's a good number of forresters and hunters who skirmish using bows or crossbows.

I'm also partial to mountain goat riders from the surface of mountains.

>At Heraclea the Epirotes literally spent five hours fighting the Romans frontally
Dwarves are stubborn, they don't care how long defeating their foe takes.

>The point of phalanxes is to fix the opponent in place while your cavalry outmaneuvers them and hits them from the sides, or while skirmishers pepper them from afar. A phalanx by its own is relatively harmless unless it has a very good position and/or is fighting a wildly inferior enemy, as was the case at Thermopolae.
Cavalry can be replaced by tunnellers sneaking behind the enemy via secret routes. Dwarves have ranged fire with Crossbows and Firearms, should they be advanced enough
>Additionally, and this is key, sieges that actually result in people storming the walls are almost absurdly rare, there's no reason to do it unless you've got a press for time or an overwhelming advantage in fire/manpower. Why would you build a fortress around, and train hundreds of dwarves for, a style of warfare which really only advantages you in situations in which you've already lost?
This isn't so much sieges as pitched battles being fought underground.

Finally, pikes aren't always for defense. See and

Look at the Swiss. The fuckers would keep pushing forwards with their pikes because they're suicidal maniacs. All you need is the will to keep pushing and you can do a LOT of damage.

Because at this point, as far as the instinctive, emotional part of my brain is concerned, dwarves using pikes has almost become a meme in how often it has been brought up here on Veeky Forums. This means I must loathe and disregard the whole idea, otherwise people will think that I am a brainless sheep who parrots everything I read off of the internet without any sort of consideration.

But seriously, pikes are not the be-all end-all of weapons. And why are you even trying to decide what weapons an entire race uses? Dwarves are the only race that ever gets associated with just one weapon. Even elves get a fair mix of bows and swords, and humans can use whatever the fuck they want. Why are you arguing about what one weapon dwarves would use, when logically they would use a variety of different weapons, with some particular preferences based on overall tactics, cultural biases, and technological advancements?

>Usually, the outer rank will have shorter spears and shields, so that they can protect against missile fire and deal with going around corners or other unexpected threats.
It would be better to just give everyone a shield and axe/pick/whatever as a sidearm instead of arming the front rank differently. Otherwise you'll just lose the anti-missile advantage as soon as the front rank goes down.

If everyone has a Shield and Sidearm in addition to the pike, then they can all use their shields for defence and, if they end up in the front rank then drop their pike and draw their sidearm.

And it was one of the few redeemable qualities of that shitheap trilogy.

That and the fact that Billy Connoly can do no wrong.

Exactly, you need combined arms warfare. Pike armed Dwarves hold the enemy in place to be shot up by Musket/Crossbow armed Dwarves and attacked by Axe armed Dwarves where their line is weakest.

Can't carry a shield of any size with a pike and expect to be doing tight maneuvers with it. Besides, the shields will prevent most missiles from hitting their owners, so the only time they're going down in any significant numbers is if they get in melee and somebody gets in close, under the pikes of everyone else. If not, the guy could drop his pike and pick up the guy in front's shield, although I find it unlikely that they'd ever really be incapacitated by missile fire. If they were mererly wounded, either they stay in place because stubborn dwarves or it's a tiny wound, or they could pass it to the guy behind them. They'd be sizable shields.

And yes, of course everyone is carrying sidearms of sort. That didn't need to be stated.

You can actually use a Pike and Shield quite easily, that's what the Macedonians did, longer pikes can also be managed by using a counterweight.

The Macedonian Pike could also be shortened into a Spear, so carrying multiple polearms wasn't necessary.

> Year 536
> Accidentally released the clowns

I miss dorfs.

in my setting whey are famous for regularly fighting in full surrounding with battalions forming a circle and usually they have very few to none losses, they are incredebly sturdy and bulky and as they have center of mass lower than rest of races its almost impossible to move them or trip them and brake the circle

agreed, in warfare i usually have first line use shields and horseman pick (the name is shit in english, had to google that ;D) and second line use pikes, thrid line is command giving orders and using usually axes (cultural thing). Due to dwarvse being sturdy, first line can open and close really quickly and easily so they sometimes use picks to pull some soldiers inside and close to line back again, soldiers pulled inside are easily killed on the ground by command

pikes were more than 3 meters long so you cant use it effectively with shield in single combat, Macedonians had shield to use when enemy gets close, they didnt use pikes and shield simultainously. also if you fight in lined formation and use a pike if enemy gets past your point you cant move your point back quickly enough. What they usually done in middle ages is first line carrying the shields and second/third lines using pikes. It's explained well in Matt Eastons video review of batlle of bastards in game of thrones

Guess the OP never saw the Hobbit movies.

not op, good for you but i guess you haven't seen EVERY OTHER FANTASY MOVIE EVER

>batlle of bastards
Please do not mention that pile of steaming horseshit