Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Pendragon" data-source="post: 2070843" data-attributes="member: 707">So I've been rethinking my position on the lance, trying to get to the bottom of why my gut instinct regarding the lance is so counter to Caliban's.  The rules aren't an issue for me at this point.  I believe I know what they are, and I can understand and respect the opposing interpretation.So at this point I'm basically discussing the "idea of the lance."  Feel free to ignore it as such, for those who still believe there is room to discuss the rules or balance of the issue.For me, it comes down to a simple fact.  I've seen jousting, and I can't rationalize how holding the lance in two-hands would give the blow any greater force or power.  All the force is generated by the mount's power and the knight bracing himself in the saddle.  Unlike the way a longspear might be wielded in a mounted charge, a lance is built to be couched against the body at the elbow.  Putting another hand on the shaft isn't going to do anything.So in game terms--since in my mind there's no difference in the amount of strength that can be brought to bear between a one-handed lance charge and a two-handed lance charge--there's only one designation: how much strength bonus should a lance get when used in a mounted charge?  I opt to go with the two-handed weapon precedent, because it seems as appropriate to the lance in a mounted charge as it does to a longsword wielded in two hands.</blockquote>

Verification