Power Attack, Weapon Finesse, and Lances

[Hypersmurf]

But yet (as mentioned) the majority of the players that I have encountered (including the Sage) came to this conclusion.

In the case of the Sage, he did us the favour of 'showing his working'... which means it's easier to track down his error.

By providing the longsword example as a part of his answer, he has demonstrated that he has invented a rule that how you are holding a weapon can alter its light/one-handed/two-handed designation. He then applies this non-existent rule in order to reach his conclusion.

By changing size category, you can alter a weapon's designation. By taking a feat like Monkey Grip, you might alter a weapon's designation. But not by adding or removing a hand.

The answer is based on a flawed premise - and because the answer is detailed enough to contain that premise, we can see the flaw.

-Hyp.

 

[mvincent]

I don't see how doing so "limits my views on the subject", whatever that means. What does it mean, exactly?

It means that you are possibly not looking at something objectively (i.e. that you are biased by your own viewpoint).

 

[Felix]

It means that you are possibly not looking at something objectively (i.e. that you are biased by your own viewpoint).

Power Attack gives 2-for-1 for two-handed weapons.
The Lance is a two-handed weapon.
"wield a lance in one hand" and "a lance becomes a one-handed weapon" are not the same.

How am I being subjective? Because I don't agree with the majority of players you've encountered (including the Sage)?

 

[Legildur]

It means that you are possibly not looking at something objectively (i.e. that you are biased by your own viewpoint).

And you are??? At least Felix and others are basing their interpretations on a strict published rules basis. And as Hypersmurf has demonstrated, the Sage's answer is fundamentally flawed. Whilst your opinion is based on a limited sample of players and a flawed Sage's response. Who is being objective/subjective?

 

[Legildur]

While it is clear to me that lances benefit from the 2-1 bonus from Power Attack, I found, in reviewing all the rules, that it is not as evident what strength bonus to damage to apply?

Is it 1x Str Bonus or 1.5x?

I say 1.5x, but I could be convinced otherwise with a sound argument.

From the SRD:

Wielding a Weapon Two-Handed
When you deal damage with a weapon that you are wielding two-handed, you add 1½ times your Strength bonus. However, you don’t get this higher Strength bonus when using a light weapon with two hands.

Two-Handed Weapons
Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1½ times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.

Two-Handed Melee Weapons (from equipment table)
Lance 10 gp 1d6 1d8 ×3 — 10 lb. Piercing

Lance
A lance deals double damage when used from the back of a charging mount. It has reach, so you can strike opponents 10 feet away with it, but you can’t use it against an adjacent foe.
While mounted, you can wield a lance with one hand.

Power Attack
If you attack with a two-handed weapon, or with a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, instead add twice the number subtracted from your attack rolls.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I say 1.5x, but I could be convinced otherwise with a sound argument.

There's no contradiction unless you wield the lance in your off-hand.

We know that you can add 1.5x Str bonus to damage if you are:
a. wielding a weapon two-handed, other than a light weapon (combat section)
b. wielding a one-handed weapon in two hands (equipment section)
c. wielding a two-handed weapon (equipment section).

We know that you only add .5x Str bonus to damage if you are wielding a weapon in your off-hand (combat section).

So if you are wielding a two-handed weapon and it is not in your off-hand, it's 1.5 - this is not contradicted by a rule that tells you you may also add 1.5x Str bonus to damage if you are wielding a non-light weapon in two hands, in much the same way that a rule telling us we lose Dex bonus to AC while blind is not contradicted by a rule that tells us we also lose Dex bonus to AC while stunned.

But if you are wielding a two-handed weapon in your off-hand, it's 1.5 and .5 at the same time. The DM must determine which rule takes precedence.

I personally rule that the off-hand rule takes precedence in this case... so a mounted character with a lance in each hand adds 1.5x Str bonus to damage with his primary hand, and .5x Str bonus to damage with his off-hand.

-Hyp.

 

[Dross]

Does - or should - Power Attack apply to lances when charging? Or even when not charging? Isn't this what the Spirited Charge is for? Since you're using the momentum of the mount. Just as PA isn't used with bows. Note that I don't have any issue with lances when not mounted.

Also, should lances be finessable? In the film Exaclibur, there's a scene where a mounted Lancelot keeps nobbling an unmounted King Arthur with his lance. Isn't that a clear case of Weapon Finesse? Or would you count that an Epic Feat?

Quartz,
You have my sincere apologies for having this thread so badly hijacked that it would take 1,000 SWAT members to get it back.

In my view/reading of the rules: Yes PA applies when used it all situations for a lance. The group I play with uses the rule: PA Damage bonus applies to how many hands are weilding the weapon.

My reading of WF leads me to beleive that lances and other large, bulky, 2-handed ( ) weapons cannot be finessed and should nnot be finessed. I'd also go so far to say that the two are mutually exclusive (though I'm not supported by RAW AFAIK).

 

[Legildur]

So if you are wielding a two-handed weapon and it is not in your off-hand, it's 1.5

Thank you.

 

[javcs]

My reading of WF leads me to beleive that lances and other large, bulky, 2-handed ( ) weapons cannot be finessed and should nnot be finessed. I'd also go so far to say that the two are mutually exclusive (though I'm not supported by RAW AFAIK).

The only finesseable 2handed weapons that I know of ... spiked chain, and possibly depending on how you read the text, the 'secondary' side of a double weapon, which isn't really 2handing it. With almost all finesseable weapons, the primary exception being the spiked chain and the elven "x-blade" (court, thin, etc., etc.) other exceptions may exist among splatbooks - but I'm not going to bother to list all the exceptions, you get no real benefit for wielding them in 2 hands as opposed to one hand, at least, you gain no additional strength bonuses.
It is, IMO, a logical extension, that most finesseable weapons that gain PA benefits do not gain double PA benefits for 2h usage. This is not supported by RAW, but it is to my mind a reasonably safe inference.

--------------------------------
On thread topic.

If it's not a light weapon or it does not explicitly say in the weapon description that it can be used with weapon finesse, it cannot be finessed. The lance is not a light weapon, and in the weapon description for the lance it does not say that the lance can be used with weapon finesse.
--------------------------------
We now return to your regularly scheduled thread-jacking.

 

[Darklone]

Thus, we might "meet in between" and say cavalry ruled for nigh to a millenium, but no more.

Your numbers (1.600+ years!) are not supported by historical evidence. No offense meant, of course.

No offense taken, your examples are really nice. I agree with your analysis that it wasn't a "Cavalry is the best" time. I'd just like to consider battles like e.g. Waterloo where the cavalry still played a decivisive role, without ruling the battlefield any longer.

And well... the successor to the cavalry, the modern tank, is still doing a pretty good job even though aircrafts came up to be more important.