Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Felix" data-source="post: 1288635" data-attributes="member: 3929">Ah. Reality. Sure. I completely agree with you about that. After a charge the lance becomes less useful. So they switch to a sword or mace. Particularly if the lance is still skewering the enemy footman.Perhaps I misunderstand your problem. Is yours a mechanics complaint, or a flavor complaint? I can see it as a valid flavor complaint since very few horsemen wielded the two-handed axe that hauscarls on foot used. Ok.But as a DnD mechanic I don't see the problem. It's a sub-optimal build. You compare it to mounted archery, but there is a huge difference: Mounted combat still requires the character to close to melee range. Mounted Archery combines attacking from distance with high maneuverability. Thus the need to balance it. The rules balance it further by not allowing Longbows to be used while mounted; thus the archers must close the distance even more. The penalty mounted melee with a 2-handed weapon has upon it is that you must go toe-to-toe with an enemy. Even if you have Ride by Attack, readied attacks on you will be (should be) used so you don't get away unscathed. And similar to two handed weapon combat on foot, you have less AC than someone with a longsword-and-shield. There's your penalty for you.It's a flavor a player might enjoy. It doesn't disrupt anything except your view of verisimillitude. So what? If the player likes it, and it's a very individual flavor, let him get away with it.</blockquote>

Verification