The Lance

[Storyteller01]

No problem, I was just hoping to reighn it in. Ultimately, it's a rules discussion about a game. No need to take anything personaly

And I wasn't ranting at anyone in particular, more in general, so don't think I was singling you out or anything.

I'm arguement prone. Better safe than sorry...

 

[Storyteller01]

The glaive can't be used one-handed. It isn't allowed. Not with a -4; not with a feat; not at all. (Pre-Epic, anyway.)

The only two-handed weapon that can be used in one hand by a creature of the appropriate size is the lance.

-Hyp.

Improvised weapon (or weapon use anyway) don't you watch kung-fu movies

Besides, other than the RAW stating otherwise, why is this such a bad analogy?

 

[Diirk]

Improvised Weapons: Sometimes objects not crafted to be weapons nonetheless see use in combat. Because such objects are not designed for this use, any creature that uses one in combat is considered to be nonproficient with it and takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls made with that object. To determine the size category and appropriate damage for an improvised weapon, compare its relative size and damage potential to the weapon list to find a reasonable match. An improvised weapon scores a threat on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a critical hit. An improvised thrown weapon has a range increment of 10 feet.

Doesn't matter if its improvised or not, its too big to use in one hand.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Improvised weapon (or weapon use anyway)

Doesn't work.

To determine the size category and appropriate damage for an improvised weapon, compare its relative size and damage potential to the weapon list to find a reasonable match.

So I compare the relative size and damage potential of a glaive-used-as-an-improvised-weapon to the weapon list. The most reasonable match I come up with is... a glaive.

So a glaive-used-as-an-improvised-weapon matches a Medium two-handed weapon dealing 1d10 slashing damage (20/x2 crit, -4 on attack rolls). As a two-handed weapon, it can't be wielded in one hand.

Besides, other than the RAW states otherwise, why is this such a bad analogy?

If the RAW don't allow it, how can it possibly be a good analogy?

-Hyp.

 

[Storyteller01]

Doesn't work.

To determine the size category and appropriate damage for an improvised weapon, compare its relative size and damage potential to the weapon list to find a reasonable match.

So I compare the relative size and damage potential of a glaive-used-as-an-improvised-weapon to the weapon list. The most reasonable match I come up with is... a glaive.

So a glaive-used-as-an-improvised-weapon matches a Medium two-handed weapon dealing 1d10 slashing damage (20/x2 crit, -4 on attack rolls). As a two-handed weapon, it can't be wielded in one hand.



If the RAW don't allow it, how can it possibly be a good analogy?

-Hyp.

So go beyond the RAW. The lance is supposed to be the premier charging weapon. This helps explain why. It might get relagated to house rules, but at least it makes sense.

 

[Storyteller01]

Doesn't matter if its improvised or not, its too big to use in one hand.

So is a lance, but they manage...

since we're arguing semantics, compare the glaive to the lance: a two handed, reach weapon. Appropriate size, and close to appropriate damage (it doesn't say the damage has to be exact, just appropriate). One does piercing while the other slashing.

If the glaive is not to your liking, try the longspear. Two-handed reach weapon, piercing, 1d8 to damage.

I choose to charge with either, one handed, as an improvised lance.

Not only do you take a -4 to hit, you do less damage (per the glaive), and you have a reduced crit threshold. But per the wording, it's possible (even plausible).

Would these weapons would also gain the 1.5 str bonus i used in this manner?

 

[Hypersmurf]

So is a lance, but they manage...

A lance is only too big to use in one hand if you aren't mounted.

I choose to charge with either, one handed, as an improvised lance.

You can't. An improvised weapon is compared to the weapon list for size category and for damage, not for special properties. Even if you choose to compare it to the lance, that makes it an improvised two-handed weapon, not an improvised two-handed weapon that can be wielded in one hand while mounted.

But per the wording, it's possible (even plausible).

No, it isn't.

Would these weapons would also gain the 1.5 str bonus i used in this manner?

They can't be used in this manner.

-Hyp.

 

[Storyteller01]

No, it isn't.



-Hyp.

Not to be overly arguementative, but why not? Your long spear is statistically identical to to a lance, an glaive isn't too different either. The listing doesn't specifically say that a weapon can't be used as another improvised weapon, or that an improvised lance cannot be used one handed. There's nothing in the RAW that says it cannot be done.

Matter of fact, there is a precident: fighting to subdue a critter incurs a -4 penatly. You've effectively used the weapon as an improvised sap.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Not to be overly arguementative, but why not? Your long spear is statistically identical to to a lance, an glaive isn't too different either.

It's not statistically identical. For example, a lance can be wielded in one hand by a mounted character; a longspear can't. A longspear is a simple weapon; a lance is a martial weapon. A lance deals double damage on a mounted charge; a longspear doesn't. A longspear deals double damage when set against a charge; a lance doesn't. A lance weighs 10lb; a longspear weighs 9lb.

You can't just chop and change and say "This weapon is kinda a longspear and kinda a lance". It's one or the other.

The listing doesn't specifically say that a weapon can't be used as another improvised weapon, or that an improvised lance cannot be used one handed. There's nothing in the RAW that says it cannot be done.

There are rules for improvised weapons. They do not include gaining special properties of other weapons. Damage. Size category. Threat range and critical multiplier. Range increment. Not special properties.

Matter of fact, there is a precident: fighting to subdue a critter incurs a -4 penatly. You've effectively used the weapon as an improvised sap.

No, you're not. You're using it as a longspear (or whatever) that's dealing non-lethal damage. It retains its 20/x3 critical, which an improvised weapon does not. It still deals double damage set vs a charge, which an improvised sap does not. It still has reach, which an improvised sap does not.

The longspear still functions as a longspear in every way except dealing non-lethal damage, with a -4 attack penalty. Not like a sap.

-Hyp.

 

[Bront]

No, you're not. You're using it as a longspear (or whatever) that's dealing non-lethal damage. It retains its 20/x3 critical, which an improvised weapon does not. It still deals double damage on a charge, which an improvised sap does not. It still has reach, which an improvised sap does not.

There is something inherantly wrong with charging with a lance to do non-lethal damage
Not against the RAW or anything, but that's just wrong.