The Lance

[Infiniti2000]

Question: do the RAW include errata?

Absolutely. That's why it's so important for WotC to release errata if they truly mean statements like, "What the rules should have said is..." Otherwise, WotC doesn't really mean it.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Also, it's not clear where the damage bonus comes from. If I understand this correctly (and I'd like Hyp's interpretation) the RAW say a greatsword wielded in one hand by a character with Monkey Grip will do 2x Power Attack damage and receive 1.5x STR bonus. Here's why:

You can't do that with Monkey Grip.

Monkey Grip would allow the character to wield a Large Longsword (a one-handed weapon), but not a Medium Greatsword (a two-handed weapon), in one hand.

EDIT:

Yes, the RAW include Errata. In fact, that is the only "Official" thing not from the core books that they do include. The Sage, the Rules of the Game articles, and anything else Wizards puts out is considered a secondary source - useful if it clarifies a strange interaction of the rules, to be dismissed if it contradicts the RAW.

 

[Seeten]

Originally Posted by the Weapon Categories section of "Equipment" in the SRD
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.

Here is the trick, this applies to the lance, due to the special text, "Can be wielded in one hand from horseback." It is still treated as a 2 handed weapon, and you cant just hop off your horse and go charge a guy on foot, lance in one hand, and do big damage. Clearly. However, on a horse, with lance in hand, you do 1.5x str dmg with a lance, as its a special case, a 2 handed weapon which in limited circumstance, can be wielded in 1 hand with NO penalties. Anyone can go ahead and wield a weapon too big for them, or which they arent proficient with. The extra text just signifies the usual penalties of doing such a thing do not apply.

If they had also added an additional "And retains all benefits of being a 2 handed weapon" would have been redundant, but I find a lot of the RAW redundant as is, so maybe there is a reason for it.

 

[Felix]

...RL mechanics...

The jury is still out on which is the official FAQ for real life, and what the Author's intent was in all of this when He originally wrote it.

It's not a case of using the weapon without penalty, it's whether using the weapon one handed will still allow the 1.5 str bonus for using a weapon classed as two handed.

Two-handed weapons get 1.5 STR on damage, with no regard paid to how it is wielded. Crystal clear here.
The Lance is a two-handed weapon. This is Waterford quality.

1 + 1 still equals 2 in my book. (or 1.5 in this case.)

...is the extra damage needed? Especially when it goes against rational thought...

Brother MacLaren's example shows how without the benefit of 1.5x damage the lance is on average less effective than a weapon not designed specifically for mounted combat. The lance off of a horse is a sub-standard weapon compared to other weapons. But it shines at its own ballywick. That's the purpose of allowing 1.5x... to make sure that the lance is the optimal damage dealing choice for mounted characters.

Did people use other weapons from horseback? Sure... the chinese hero Guan Yu from Three Kingdoms wielded a glaive from horseback. Aparrently that character's player decided he prefered to be able to fight as effectively from the ground as on the back of a mount.

But if you have a player interested in dealing the most possible damage from a mount you want to have the rules model the lance's effectiveness in this arena. The 1.5 rule does this. NOT having the 1.5 rule tosses it out the window, as Brother MacLaren shows. The 9 points of damage that you dismiss is merely the result, and not the express purpose, of the attempt at modeling the lance's ability from horseback.

"Goes against rational thought" my butt.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Did people use other weapons from horseback? Sure... the chinese hero Guan Yu from Three Kingdoms wielded a glaive from horseback. Aparrently that character's player decided he prefered to be able to fight as effectively from the ground as on the back of a mount.

Don't forget Lu Bu! He had a ... spear ... thing.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Also, it's not clear where the damage bonus comes from. If I understand this correctly (and I'd like Hyp's interpretation) the RAW say a greatsword wielded in one hand by a character with Monkey Grip will do 2x Power Attack damage and receive 1.5x STR bonus.

As noted, Monkey Grip doesn't allow that.

If you have some other feat, ability, or whatever that allows you to wield a greatsword in one hand, it depends on how it allows you to do it.

If it says "Allows you to wield a two-handed weapon in one hand", then it gets 1.5 and 2-for-1.

If it says "Allows you to treat a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon", then it gets 1x and 1-for-1.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Oh, no. There's definitely a problem. Thanks to the weapon equivalency table on page 27 of the DMG, that large longsword is equivalent to a medium greatsword.

The Weapon Equivalency table is an optional variant, isn't it?

Under default 3.5 rules, a large longsword and a medium greatsword are completely different weapons.

-Hyp.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

So we're debating RAW over RL mechanics because of NINE POINTS OF DAMAGE!?
*leaps out tall building window...*

It was a mid-level example to make it accessible to readers. Here's an extreme example:

Fighter10/Cavalier10, Str 26, doing full Power Attack on Unstoppable Charge, with +5 weapon and +5 misc bonuses (such as specialization, Prayer, or Inspire Courage):
Lance 1x: (1d8 +8 Str +20 PA +5 weapon +5 misc)*5 = 5d8+190
Glaive: (1d10 +12 Str +40 PA +5 weapon +5 misc)*4 = 4d10+248
Lance 1.5x: (1d8 +12 Str +40 PA +5 weapon +5 misc)*5 = 5d8+310

Now we're talking 120 pts. (Power attack+.5 Str bonus)*(charge multiplier) = 120.

The problem is that Spirited/Deadly/Unstoppable Charge each make the lance less marginally advantageous than other weapons (at the end, 25% advantage as opposed to the 100% advantage the lance starts out with). With no Spirited Charge, the lance will always be best even at 1x, because it gets 2xStr and 2xPA on a charge where a glaive gets 1.5xStr and 2xPA. (Assuming Str is at least +2 bonus, in order to balance out the base damage difference)

 

[Storyteller01]

If it says "Allows you to wield a two-handed weapon in one hand", ...

If it says "Allows you to treat a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon", ...
-Hyp.

In any other forum (non D&D anyway), these two phrases would mean the exact same thing. .

Not a barb, just an observation.

 

[Bront]

At this point, we're arguing semantics.

Honestly, I feel the rule is ambiguous enough, that it probably just requires a GM ruling. This is getting bitter, and doesn't seem to be going anywhere at this point.

At least I feel justified in being confused about the issue.