Got into another discussion/debate with my fellow DM/player once again. He posits that a character with a high Strength rating does NOT enjoy the 'to hit' or 'damage' bonuses whilst charging with a lance on a horse. His position is that the horse's momentum is what is at play here, and the reason for the double damage, and that the character is merely holding the lance and not using brute force in the attack. Thusly, the character does not benefit from a high Strength score.
I am included to agree, though semi-reluctantly. I guess a high Strength score only helps prevent the loss of the lance by dropping it upon impact (if it survives, of course).
First, a PC wielding a lance enjoys the bonuses of a high Strength score, whether wielding it on foot or on horseback. No rules says otherwise.
Second, a PC with a higher Strength score is able to grip it in a manner that prevents it from 'giving' when it strikes, in a similar manner to any other melee weapon that may want to 'give' when wielded in melee when hitting an opponent.
I would tend to agree that unless the rules state otherwise then high Strength bonuses should be honored, even during a charging attack. The rationale that my colleague gave, though, was a bit compelling to support his argument.
How, then, would a person with a high Strength actually be able to employ such brute force when, indeed, it is the momentum of the horse that is really at play?
I began perusing all my books on this issue but have not found anything written that supports, or refutes, this claim.
Okay, so it seems obvious that a strong baseball player can hit the ball farther than a weak one. For the same reason, a strong fighter can hit harder when wielding a melee weapon.
When couching a lance, it takes great strength not only to hold it at the correct angle, but to prevent the impact from ripping it from one's grip. A strong lancer can grip the lance more tightly, thus allowing more of the force of the hit to be transferred to the target. A weaker lancer will not be able to avoid 'giving' with the impact, thus lessening the amount of force transferred to the target. (Movies that show people targeted with a shotgun blast being blown off their feet and through a window while the shooter stands there unmoved really annoy me as they are so obviously inaccurate. The reason the lancer isn't knocked off the horse is because he is leaning forward with his feet braced in the stirrups and/or he is sitting in a military saddle, which has a high back for that exact purpose.)
You're a science teacher, right? Imagine someone who lacks the strength to hold a shotgun tightly into their shoulder versus an experienced (and stronger) shooter who holds the gun tightly. Though we may not be able to see much difference in damage done to a target with the naked eye, I bet a forensics team could show that the pellets from the tightly-couched shotgun penetrated deeper into the target than those from the loosely-couched shotgun.
The same holds true for the lance. The stronger wielder is going to deal more damage than the weaker wielder. The damage done because of the speed of the mount is represented by doubling or tripling the damage when used while mounted (according to the rules), which is done regardless of the strength of the wielder. The lance wielder's Strength bonus (or penalty) is added to that total.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises