The Lance

[Storyteller01]

Humor note: The Quint. Fighter has combat styles that gain exta bonuses for particular weapons. One of the advanced bonuses for the lance was the ability to simulate the mage hand spell, with a 10 lb limit.

Is it me, or does anyone else have flashbacks of Peter Griffin (Family Guy) using his lance to butter toast?

Granted, he was a novice...

 

[Felix]

...I'll treat the RAW with as much reverance as others treat the FAQ...

If that's the case, then what's the point in participating in a Rules discussion at all, where the purpose of the thread is to figure out what the rules say? Not what someone feels should be the case... not what someone thinks is in accord with the physics of real life... and it's certainly not a race to see who can find an illustration to support their point.

I don't have a problem with Rule 0, which can allow halflings to dual wield medium greatswords from horseback, but that's the province of the House Rules Forum, and buddy, this ain't it.

 

[werk]

Don't think you can, if using a shield. IIRC, the armor spikes only threaten the area within 5 ft as an off-hand attack, per this thread.

Doesn't mean you can shield bash the #$%& out of someone within 5 feet, using the same mechanics (provided you have the right feats, of course).

Or you could always say your kicking the closer enemy with your spiked boot.

I didn't say shield bash, just shield.

So threaten with lance and spikes and use the shield for AC. Great with whirlwind.

 

[Storyteller01]

I didn't say shield bash, just shield.

So threaten with lance and spikes and use the shield for AC. Great with whirlwind.

And it makes a nice visual *Paladin rides around screaming "BOOT TO THE HEAD!!"*

 

[Brother MacLaren]

If that's the case, then what's the point in participating in a Rules discussion at all, where the purpose of the thread is to figure out what the rules say? Not what someone feels should be the case... not what someone thinks is in accord with the physics of real life... and it's certainly not a race to see who can find an illustration to support their point.

Well, from a certain point of view, this is a forum for discussion about the rules. It's not like the only question you can ask is "What is the strict constructioninst interpretation of these rules."

That is, it's also fair game to ask (without saying that Storyteller is asking any one of these) "What is the implication of this rule," "What is the reasoning behind this interpretation of the rules," "Why does this rule exist," and "What call seems to be in the spirit of the rules."

 

[Storyteller01]

(without saying that Storyteller is asking any one of these) "What is the implication of this rule," "What is the reasoning behind this interpretation of the rules," "Why does this rule exist," and "What call seems to be in the spirit of the rules."

I am, in a round about way I suppose . I suggested a means for a more equivalent comparison of the glaive/longspear/lance, based on an interpretation of the improvised weapons rules. Guess it didn't turn out the way I intended.

 

[Laman Stahros]

This may be a hijack, but . . .

I have never had a player use a lance in 3e (hell, they use horses to get to the fight, then jump off), so I'm going to ask a question that may seem stupid.

Lance deals 1d8 damage, x2 during a charge, x3 with Spirited Charge.
Lance deals x3 on a critical.

Assuming a +2 lance and a Strength of 18, what is the damage on a confirmed critical?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Assuming a +2 lance and a Strength of 18, what is the damage on a confirmed critical?

Assuming a Spirited Charge, I presume?

5d8 + 30.

Triple-triple = x5, by D&D maths.

-Hyp.

 

[Felix]

5d8 + 30

And by 5d8 + 30 I think you mean 5d8 +40... what with getting 1.5 STR mod for damage on a lance and all.

That is, it's also fair game to ask (without saying that Storyteller is asking any one of these) "What is the implication of this rule," "What is the reasoning behind this interpretation of the rules," "Why does this rule exist," and "What call seems to be in the spirit of the rules."

Fair enough. But in order to have any kind of discussion like those, you first have to agree on a starting point. By that I mean you have to agree with what the RAW have to say on the subject. Then you can start talking implications of those rules.

[You can, of course, have a thread comparing the implications of two different rule possibilities... "if the rule were A, then how would the game-play compare were the rule B". But only if you first clearly define what A and B are. The original poster here just wanted to know what the RAW rule was for the lance.]

But if you disagree on the starting point, then you'll have a heck of a time going anywhere with it. Which is what we're doing right now: having a heck of a time.

 

[Hypersmurf]

And by 5d8 + 30 I think you mean 5d8 +40... what with getting 1.5 STR mod for damage on a lance and all.

Remembered the x1.5 - missed the enhancement bonus!

-Hyp.