I broke my brain...Duel Weilding a Lances on a horse!?!? lol

Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon
Had a big discussion on RPG stack Exchange some years ago on this BS.

It is imho to ridicolous to be even discussed. Dual wielding in RL has only been widely done with rapier / dagger nothing else (Sabre / Pistol in later times sometimes also). Everything else was just showing of skills mostly. Several myths are still around:

Most RPGs allowing dual wield asume you are getting more attacks by dual wielding making you in fact faster, that is of course rubbish since you gotta Change stances (Forward leg) to bring the second weapon to the attacker which in fact is slower than fighting single weapon or weapon shield.

Why was it done then? Well, for parrying purposes in rapier fighting, though some prefered a buckler / cape / coat / hat / good glove for this.

Normally whe nfighting with two wepons RL you attack with one and defend with the other. Everything else is just making things complicated.

Yup. There were a few exception, but 90% of the time the "spare weapon" was a defensive tool/close work tool. On the latter: you could parry with your main weapon, step very close to the enemy and stab with the dagger.

With the beginning example of dual wield Lances: it will distribute the force of the Impact if both hit at the same time, so you should get half damage dice for that :p , nah it is obvious that you autofail to hit since you cannot control your horse anymore because you got no Hand free for the reigns.

It is so silly that is where the "ruling not rules" steps in and the DM simply says "nope". No rule set is perfect, GM intervention is a normal part of the game.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
Sure you can carry two lances simultaneously, but can you wield them? Clumsy is a modest word to start to describe the result.

Try giving the jouster Disadvantage and point out that aiming a 10-foot pole from horseback is HARD.
 

Zardnaar

Legend
Lance abuse has been around for as long since at least 2E where you could use one to inflict 260 damage with a hit (in an edition where Dragons had 90 hit points).

We figured this one out a while ago, never seen it in play because horses are a bit to situational.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Had a big discussion on RPG stack Exchange some years ago on this BS.

It is imho to ridicolous to be even discussed. Dual wielding in RL has only been widely done with rapier / dagger nothing else (Sabre / Pistol in later times sometimes also). Everything else was just showing of skills mostly. Several myths are still around:

Most RPGs allowing dual wield asume you are getting more attacks by dual wielding making you in fact faster, that is of course rubbish since you gotta Change stances (Forward leg) to bring the second weapon to the attacker which in fact is slower than fighting single weapon or weapon shield.

Why was it done then? Well, for parrying purposes in rapier fighting, though some prefered a buckler / cape / coat / hat / good glove for this.

Normally whe nfighting with two wepons RL you attack with one and defend with the other. Everything else is just making things complicated.

With the beginning example of dual wield Lances: it will distribute the force of the Impact if both hit at the same time, so you should get half damage dice for that :p , nah it is obvious that you autofail to hit since you cannot control your horse anymore because you got no Hand free for the reigns.

It's ridiculous for giants not to be crushed under their own body weight. It's ridiculous that rocs can fly. That a person can take a perfect blow (crit) from a great axe and stay standing, much less do it again and again. There's lots of "ridiculous" things compared to reality well before getting into magic at all. That's the nature of the game - 5e delivers heroic fantasy, not gritty realism by default. That's the default assumption.

We already accept that every single character with Extra Attack can get in multiple attacks with a lance while mounted. Rushing in with a lance braced under each arm and aiming them both at the same target is frankly easier to believe then a single lance hitting three times.

There's a level of abstraction to all of 5e already.
 

Oofta

Legend
I have a basic rule in my games. I don't allow "silly" options even if they are technically allowed.

It doesn't matter often, but it would in this case. I also apply it the other way, so if you want to hit with your off-hand weapon before your primary you can, regardless of JC's silly rule on timing.
 

cooperjer

Explorer
What would Mike Mearls do? Think of some literature or movie that has a dual lance wielding fighter present as a concept. Start making a sub-class that allows this concept to come true in the game. Give it feature names that are inspired by '80s metal bands. Put it in Unearthed Arcana.

I don't think my players would attempt this fighter build; mostly because they are in a dungeon. I don't assume the rules try to model reality so, if there was a field battle and a player had this idea, I would roll with it until it seemed to exhaust it's fun.
 

BookBarbarian

Expert Long Rester
The bonus action attack is just not that useful to a fighter since they have so many attacks already.

The real cheese comes in the form of a Halfling Beastmaster Ranger Dual Wielding laces on his Medium Sized Animal Companion. Panther for Climbing speed or Pterodactyl for flying.
 

Oofta

Legend
The bonus action attack is just not that useful to a fighter since they have so many attacks already.

The real cheese comes in the form of a Halfling Beastmaster Ranger Dual Wielding laces on his Medium Sized Animal Companion. Panther for Climbing speed or Pterodactyl for flying.

Make it a lightfoot halfling riding a pteranadon, and they can hide behind the creature to get a stealth check and attack with advantage as well.

If you're going silly, do it up right.
 


pming

Legend
Hiya!

Things like this lead me to ask one, simple question: "If I saw this in Peter Jacksons Lord of the Rings, would I be thinking...COOL!....or would I be thinking WFT?!?". If it's the later...then no, it won't work.

^_^

Paul L. Ming
 

Remove ads

Top