Strength Damage Bonus for Lance?

[Lord Pendragon]

The way I see it: You're house ruling the FAQ is wrong until someone tries to TWF a lance.
The way you see it: The FAQ is wrong, but you'll house rule it's right when someone tries to TWF a lance.

No, the way I see it: the PH is right, and there's no need to House Rule it until someone tries to TWF a lance.
The way you see it: The FAQ is right.

I think it boils down to: We agree to disagree.

I agree.

 

[Ranger REG]

How so?

Well, if the rules are blatantly spelled out correctly, we wouldn't be having this split debate, now would we?

 

[Jdvn1]

Also, I think it's worth mentioning that none of the lance-using sample characters in any of the books (cavalier and halfing outrider are the first two I saw), use 1.5x Str for the lance. So, at the very least, WotC says 1x Str.

 

[isoChron]

Also, I think it's worth mentioning that none of the lance-using sample characters in any of the books (cavalier and halfing outrider are the first two I saw), use 1.5x Str for the lance. So, at the very least, WotC says 1x Str.

Hmm, Cavalier with STR 19 (+4), Weapon Spezialisation Lance (+2) and a +1 Lance does 1W8+6 ???
In my book this is at least +7 (STRx1), RAW +9 (STRx1.5).
That much about Wizards calculating stats correctly ... (Take a look a the second errata for MM III ).
The example fight in Sword and Fist did use STRx1.5 for the charging paladin. Well, but that was 3.0 and a bad written book, granted.

The example Halfling Outrider has STR12. Would not make any difference if he uses/would use STRx1.5. :\

BYE

 

[Hypersmurf]

A TWF build on horseback, getting 1.5 Str in each hand, isn't right.

Recall (as mentioned earlier in the thread), there's a rule that melee weapon wielded in the off-hand adds half Str bonus to damage.

So if you're wielding a lance in your off-hand, you have a rule stating 1.5x (since it's a two-handed weapon), and a rule stating .5x (since it's your off-hand).

As a DM, I'd personally rule that the .5 takes precedence (so with TWF lances, I'd say 1.5 / .5 primary / off-hand). But as mentioned earlier in the thread, I wouldn't argue with a DM who ruled 1.5 / 1.5 or 1.5 / 1, since I could see reasoning for all three.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Can't this be used with any two-handed weapon though? Like Greatsword? Can you TWF and Monkey Grip 2 Great Swords at once? Not sure if the rules changed on Monkey Grip?

If you can... they both get 1.5 Str? If not... well nevermind then

Monkey Grip in 3.5 applies to weapons one size category larger than you.

If you're Medium, you can apply it to Large weapons - Large shortsword, Large Longsword, Large greatsword. Not to Medium weapons.

So if you apply it to a Large longsword, you can wield it in one hand... because you continue to treat it as a one-handed weapon. Which means you get 1x Str bonus to damage.

You can't apply it to a Medium greatsword, so you never wield a two-handed weapon in one hand with Monkey Grip.

-Hyp.

 

[glass]

So my position is really quite simple. The RAW (IMO) say exactly what I want them to say. That's how I rule it. If and when a player is silly enough to try and dual-wield lances on horseback, I'll House Rule away that loophole.

I don't think you necesarily need to house rule any loopholes. I am at work so I can't check the exact wordings, but are there any rules for dual wielding 2H weapons? I wouldn't think so, and if their aren't, then you can't do it! (or the DM is free to asign whatever penalties he thinks are suitable ).

For those of us who believe that a lance is a 2H weapon however it is used, there is no problem with dual wielding lances because it can't be done. It is actually ruling that a lance used in one hand is a one handed weapon that creates the (in my mind ridiculous) possibility of a lance TWFer.


glass.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

I don't think you necesarily need to house rule any loopholes. I am at work so I can't check the exact wordings, but are there any rules for dual wielding 2H weapons? I wouldn't think so, and if their aren't, then you can't do it! (or the DM is free to asign whatever penalties he thinks are suitable ).

For those of us who believe that a lance is a 2H weapon however it is used, there is no problem with dual wielding lances because it can't be done. It is actually ruling that a lance used in one hand is a one handed weapon that creates the (in my mind ridiculous) possibility of a lance TWFer.

Even better. Thank you for pointing this out.

 

[Jdvn1]

Well, Monkey Grip does change the size of the weapon. Which is odd, unless you take the "number of hands is a convenience" idea.

"For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed wapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat."

Note it's not written: "is wielded in two hands for a Medium creature that does not have this feat." So the size category changes magically? Or, actually, would you say that you'd still get 1.5x Str for a 2H weapon in one hand and ignore the wording?

 

[Hypersmurf]

I am at work so I can't check the exact wordings, but are there any rules for dual wielding 2H weapons?

There are rules for wielding two weapons, and the distinction is made on whether or not the off-hand weapon is light.

Not "Whether the off-hand weapon is light or one-handed", but "Whether the off-hand weapon is light, or not light".

A lance is not light.

"For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed wapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat."

Yes. But we're not talking about a Medium creature that does not have this feat. We're talking about a Medium creature that does have this feat.

For him, the Large longsword is a one-handed weapon, not a two-handed weapon. So when he wields it in one hand, he's wielding a one-handed weapon in one hand, so his damage bonus is 1x Str bonus.

For a Medium creature without the feat, he wields the Large longsword as a two-handed weapon... and can't wield it in one hand.

-Hyp.