Maybe I just got a bit of hope regarding what is in my opinion the worst weapon in the game, the lance. Emphasis on the maybe.
This hope comes from a poor knowledge of a specific rule so you will probably destroy my theory with you so called facts and logic but for just a bit of time i will believe.
Can the Thaumaturge use Implement Empowerment on a lance wielded in one hand on horseback thanks to the jousting trait? Or does it still count as a two handed weapon? Give me hope people, my knightly dreams are in shambles
Maybe I just got a bit of hope regarding what is in my opinion the worst weapon in the game, the lance. Emphasis on the maybe.
This hope comes from a poor knowledge of a specific rule so you will probably destroy my theory with you so called facts and logic but for just a bit of time i will believe.
Can the Thaumaturge use Implement Empowerment on a lance wielded in one hand on horseback thanks to the jousting trait? Or does it still count as a two handed weapon? Give me hope people, my knightly dreams are in shambles
It will count as a one-handed weapon as long as you hold it in one hand.
It will count as a one-handed weapon as long as you hold it in one hand.Maybe I just got a bit of hope regarding what is in my opinion the worst weapon in the game, the lance. Emphasis on the maybe.
This hope comes from a poor knowledge of a specific rule so you will probably destroy my theory with you so called facts and logic but for just a bit of time i will believe.
Can the Thaumaturge use Implement Empowerment on a lance wielded in one hand on horseback thanks to the jousting trait? Or does it still count as a two handed weapon? Give me hope people, my knightly dreams are in shambles
you mean that I could play a decent lance weilding character in pf2e? You might be crazier than I am, I like you.
It will count as a one-handed weapon as long as you hold it in one hand.
I would disagree. Since choice of item to use as an Implement is a rather long-term choice, you would need to have the item qualify through its inherent stats, not temporary ones. Weapon Implement would need to be an actual 1 hand weapon. That is also why 1+ hand weapons like a shortbow wouldn't work either.
That doesn't mean I couldn't be talked into it as a houserule in order to make a particular character concept work.
Also, other Thaumaturge things that require a 1 hand weapon - such as Implement's Empowerment - would work with a lance wielded in one hand.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the OP was asking about Implementat Empowerment, not Weapon Implement.
I think the OP was asking about Implementat Empowerment, not Weapon Implement.
Correct but I still find breithauptclan's comment relevant for the viability of the lance, having it be the implement would sure make it better
It will count as a one-handed weapon as long as you hold it in one hand.Weapon Implement would need to be an actual 1 hand weapon. That is also why 1+ hand weapons like a shortbow wouldn't work either.
A bow is intrinsicly a 1h weapon and a lance is a 1h weapon when using it mounted, so if you think the implement needs to be an intrsinsic 1h weapon then bow works but lance doesn't and if you think it is while using it then the reverse applies.
Pages 279–280 (Clarification): If I hold a weapon that requires 1 hand in 2 hands, is it a 2-handed weapon?
There are two answers to this.
For abilities that count the number of hands for a weapon while you're using it, such as an action with "Requirements You are wielding a one-handed melee weapon," count the actual number of hands you're using at the time. If you're holding a bastard sword in two hands, you couldn't use it with that ability. Weapons with the "1+" notation in their description, such as most bows, use both your hands when shooting, but leave you with a hand free for other actions the rest of the time.
Anything that's an intrinsic part of the weapon, such as a shifting rune, works differently. Reference the weapon's "Hands" entry in the weapons table—a bastard sword requires 1 hand, even though it gets a benefit in two hands from the two-hand trait. If you were holding a shifting bastard sword in two hands and activated it, you could turn it into a longsword (which you'd still be holding in two hands), but couldn't turn it into a greatsword (which requires 2 hands). For this purpose, "1" and "1+" are the same (though this doesn't matter for shifting since "1+" appears ranged weapons).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A bow is intrinsicly a 1h weapon and a lance is a 1h weapon when using it mounted, so if you think the implement needs to be an intrsinsic 1h weapon then bow works but lance doesn't and if you think it is while using it then the reverse applies.
OK. I'll go for that. You could pick a 1+ hand weapon as Weapon Implement with the clarification noting that 1 and 1+ have the same inherent status for weapon handedness.
But you couldn't use Implement's Empowerment with it because while you are holding only weapons and implements, you aren't wielding the weapon as a 1 hand weapon at the time you are Striking with it.
Excluding looking specifically at things through the lens of the thaumaturge, I think the lance is not a bad weapon.
It has reach and deadly d8 traits, and is abase d8 weapon. Of the reach d10 weapons I don't think any of them is outright better, they simply have different traits you might like for a specific build. And I personally think deadly d8 on a d8 weapon is better than a base d10 weapon.
I think the glaive and fauchard are roughly equal weapons, depending on how you value the forceful, jousting, and sweep/trip traits.
I'd be curious to hear why you think a d8 weapoon, with reach, and deadly d8 is bad. The jousting trait is situational, but if you're going to be mounted it does provide an option to reduce your damage and grab a shield if you decide you need to.
Excluding looking specifically at things through the lens of the thaumaturge, I think the lance is not a bad weapon.
It has reach and deadly d8 traits, and is abase d8 weapon. Of the reach d10 weapons I don't think any of them is outright better, they simply have different traits you might like for a specific build. And I personally think deadly d8 on a d8 weapon is better than a base d10 weapon.
I think the glaive and fauchard are roughly equal weapons, depending on how you value the forceful, jousting, and sweep/trip traits.
I'd be curious to hear why you think a d8 weapoon, with reach, and deadly d8 is bad. The jousting trait is situational, but if you're going to be mounted it does provide an option to reduce your damage and grab a shield if you decide you need to.
Except that it looses reach the exact moment you get on your horse unless you are small. Also no, it is not better, I did some math. Even a fighter performs better with a d10 weapon. Deadly needs a bigger dice to be relevant in this sense.
Excluding looking specifically at things through the lens of the thaumaturge, I think the lance is not a bad weapon.
Go back and read this discussion
A designer weighs in and he make some points. But really it is not enough. It is a classic part of the genre and it is inadequate to the extent that no one uses it.
Excluding looking specifically at things through the lens of the thaumaturge, I think the lance is not a bad weapon.Go back and read this discussion
A designer weighs in and he make some points. But really it is not enough. It is a classic part of the genre and it is inadequate to the extent that no one uses it.
I'm not even talking about using it on horseback specifically, as either your making a mounted character and your weapons will have the drawbacks of being mounted. It's not specific to the lance necessarily. Though the lance bills itself as a mounted weapon, you could use it only for deadly d8 and reach. If you do make a mounted character, the jousting trait will give you a slight damage bonus sometimes (when you move).
A d8 weapon with deadly d8 with reach really isn't any worse than any of the d10 reach weapons depending on how you value certain additional traits.
As for a comparison on d10 vs d8 with deadly...d10 is 5.5 average damage vs 4.5 average damage. It's one point of damage per die, which could scale up to 3 dice...so 3 damage. Deadly d8 (when it activates) will grant you an additional 4.5 damage per weapon die, potentially up to 13.5 damage. Now, it only happens on a crit. 13.5 damage is 4.5 times more than 3, but you also have to account for likelihood to crit. Which is affected by class (fighter's have extra attack bonus) and debuff's applied to the enemy. It's not a super easy or straight forward thing to calculate because the circumstances are going to potentially different for each enemy you fight.
Personally, I find the idea of bursting for 13.5 more damage more enticing than getting 3 extra damage per base hit. However I'm also playing a sprite fighter, so reach is very important to me too.
If I'm ignoring reach, well it will probably depend on the exact needs of the character but I could default to greatsword/greataxe.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not simply a comparison of d8 deadly d8 vs d10. There are multiple d8 deadly d8 reach weapons other than the lance - the fauchard, glaive, and naginata, as of right now on Nethys - and they each have properties beyond being d8 deadly d8 and reach: sweep+trip, forceful, and versatile P, respectively (and I think the naginata is a bit under-budgeted, if anything).
It's not the end of the world to use a lance over these, but it's definitely a weak weapon.
The end of the lance is the fact than a human knight on a horse loses his reach. It is not a lance feature, it is a mount rule problem.
Historically the raison d'etre for a lance is reach. It is extremely odious that this doesn't work at all in PF2. I can not bear to play in this totally disfunctional area of the game. I am not alone in this opinion.
As a side note, it's +4 damage on the base Strike, as weapon damage dice scale up to 4, and that +4 damage gets doubled on a crit, so it's 5.5 extra damage on a crit (13.5-8) vs 4 extra on a hit. Which means you need your crit chances to be very high relative to your hit chances to break even on average - off the top of my head, I want to say you need to hit on a 3.
Deadly is nice but it is not worth a full weapon die size increase. I prefer the average damage anyway as it is mathematically better. Big crits are definitely fun though.
It's not simply a comparison of d8 deadly d8 vs d10. There are multiple d8 deadly d8 reach weapons other than the lance - the fauchard, glaive, and naginata, as of right now on Nethys - and they each have properties beyond being d8 deadly d8 and reach: sweep+trip, forceful, and versatile P, respectively (and I think the naginata is a bit under-budgeted, if anything).
It's not the end of the world to use a lance over these, but it's definitely a weak weapon.
The end of the lance is the fact than a human knight on a horse loses his reach. It is not a lance feature, it is a mount rule problem.
Historically the raison d'etre for a lance is reach. It is extremely odious that this doesn't work at all in PF2. I can not bear to play in this totally disfunctional area of the game. I am not alone in this opinion.
As a side note, it's +4 damage on the base Strike, as weapon damage dice scale up to 4, and that +4 damage gets doubled on a crit, so it's 5.5 extra damage on a crit (13.5-8) vs 4 extra on a hit. Which means you need your crit chances to be very high relative to your hit chances to break even on average - off the top of my head, I want to say you need to hit on a 3.Deadly is nice but it is not worth a full weapon die size increase. I prefer the average damage anyway as it is mathematically better. Big crits are definitely fun though.
Yeah, I really feel the void left by the first edition cavalier
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You get a lot of grimaces talking about the failings of the lance in regards to mounted combat. It has the Jousting and Reach traits, so not getting use out of that combo shuts down most consideration of the weapon. I've looked at it theorycrafting an L1 ranger with Horse animal companion looking to charge in for max damage. There's no point lowering your damage to d6 to get some circ dmg bonuses. You're better off with a maul.
It's a martial spear though. 2H but it has Reach. That's a plus. D8, the damage is poor for 2H, but at least it has strong crits thanks to Deadly d8. Then there's the overlooked crit spec effect. Spears inflict Clumsy 1 until the start of your next turn. That's nasty. Is this a viable weapon for your martial dungeon explorer? Absolutely.
No, this doesn't fix the mount-reach issue (sad, yes), but can you use it as your primary (reach) weapon and be effective? Absolutely.
It's not simply a comparison of d8 deadly d8 vs d10. There are multiple d8 deadly d8 reach weapons other than the lance - the fauchard, glaive, and naginata, as of right now on Nethys - and they each have properties beyond being d8 deadly d8 and reach: sweep+trip, forceful, and versatile P, respectively (and I think the naginata is a bit under-budgeted, if anything).
It's not the end of the world to use a lance over these, but it's definitely a weak weapon.
As a side note, it's +4 damage on the base Strike, as weapon damage dice scale up to 4, and that +4 damage gets doubled on a crit, so it's 5.5 extra damage on a crit (13.5-8) vs 4 extra on a hit. Which means you need your crit chances to be very high relative to your hit chances to break even on average - off the top of my head, I want to say you need to hit on a 3.
Yeah, I don't know where my head was at. It should really be 4.5*4 vs 4*2, because the additional 1 point of damage form base weapon dice will be doubled. So a d10 weapon will deal (@ level 20) 22 damage on average, and 44 on a crit. A d8 deadly d8 weapon will deal 18 damage on average hit (4 less) and 49.5 on a crit. So the deadly weapon crit will deal more damage, but we must factor in how often a crit happens. With the deadly weapon crit only dealing 5.5 points of damage more on a crit, but regularly doing 4 points of damage less...well I'm not doing the math properly but you'd need to crit almost all the time for it to even out, which you're not going to.
So to your point, the lance is weaker than a d10 reach weapon. Although I do find most of the extra traits on the d10 reach, and other d8 reach weapons to be...eh. Except for a specific build which might want to make use of them, but not enough to say they're absolutely better.
But yeah, the lance is weaker, but I still wouldn't call it unusable, which felt like the insinuation.
The main problem for the lance is how mounted combat rules work, causing you to lose reach, and the jousting trait not really making up for it. But this applies to anyone that would ride a large mount, not just lance users.
I agree that if they changed the jousting trait to allow you to use the full reach of your weapon, that would save the weapon for medium creatures on large mounts.