Wielding a Thunderlance two handed

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

What provoked me to ask the question is that the wording of Thunderlance makes it seem like wielding it two-handed instead of one-handed means something. That said, it could be that they simply meant to clarify that you could wield it one-handed. Anyway, from the 3.5 RAW thread:

Q 399
If you wield a Thunderlance (SpC) in two hands do you add 1.5 times to damage?

(Also, rhetorical question, if it's a lance of thunder shouldn't be made of electricity or sonic or both, not force?)


A 399 No. The bonus for wielding a weapon in two hands is specific to a non-light melee weapon and Strength bonus. Wielding a spell effect with Intelligence or Charisma bonus offers no greater damage if you use two hands.


RE: A 399 Read the spell in question in SpC pg 220. It creates a weapon that can be wielded in one or two hands and replaces strength mod to attack and damage with the casting stat mod of the caster.


Yes, I understand that. However, it creates a "deadly lance of force", which is a spell effect that does not match any standard weapon. Weapons need to be designated as non-light in order to add 1½ x Strength modifier to damage. [I]Thunderlance does not specify the characteristics necessary to allow other than the default behavior for weaponlike spells.

"Instead of using your Strength modifier, you use the higher of your Intelligence modifier or Charisma modifier as a bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls."

You follow the description of the spell, rather than inferring extra capabilities not stated.

From Rules Compendium on page 136:

"Strength modifiers on damage rolls and magical effects that increase weapon damage don’t increase damage from a weaponlike spell unless the spell’s description says otherwise. ...
Unless the spell description says otherwise, a weaponlike spell that can threaten a critical hit does so on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage if the critical hit is confirmed."


Well the spell most definitely defines itself as an exception to most weapon-like spells in its description. It gives its own listed threat range, and it specifically says it uses the caster's int/cha mod instead of a strength mod for purposes of strength and damage. That would indicate that its int/cha mod applies as a strength mod would on damage normally for a weapon would it not?

Anyway the real difference in interpretation is whether it qualifies for 1½x damage for being wielded two handed. You say it has to be specifically designated as a weapon other than light to gain the extra damage. I read this bit,

"Wielding a Weapon Two-Handed

When you deal damage with a weapon that you are wielding two-handed, you add 1½ times your Strength bonus. However, you don’t get this higher Strength bonus when using a light weapon with two hands."

as meaning the weapon in question just needs to not be a light weapon. The spell specifies that the thunderlance can be wielded either one handed or two handed, but nowhere does it mention that it is light. So I suppose the disagreement comes down to whether the "weaponlike" spell can be wielded like a weapon and whether it's considered light or not. I'd say it's ambiguous enough that if we want to continue the argument, we should start another thread.

[Keld Denar]

I'd say you COULD wield it 2handed, but because 1.5x +Damage is a function of Str, you wouldn't gain 1.5x +Int or +Cha with it. I mean, you don't get +1.5x Int with Insightful Strike, and you don't get 1.5x +Dex with Shadow Blade or Champion of Corellion2. You could still 2:1 PA with it, if you were wielding it in both hands, since it speicifically states that you can 2hand it and doesn't carry the same stipulation that Rapiers and Spinning Swords do.

Interestingly enough...could you duel wield Thunderlances? Cause that would be about sexy. Since its NOT Str related, you would get your full caster stat on your offhand attack as well, which COULD be really fun. I don't see why you couldn't, since Thunderlance doesn't affect YOU, it simply creates a spearlike beam in your hands. Thus, it wouldn't fall under the "same spell affect" clause of spell stacking. Its not AFFECTING you, its just existing.

EDIT: Too bad TL doesn't do slashing damage. Then you could Whirling Blade it. That would be smexy with a capital exy!

[jiriku]

You would not add 1.5 x casting stat, because there is no rule multiplying casting stat to damage with a two-handed weapon. That rules exists only for Strength. However, I'm with Keld Denar on this one. You could still power attack for all you're worth at a 2:1 exchange rate, and that's pretty groovy. In this respect, the thunderlance is working just like other spells that create wieldable weapons, such as flame blade, ice axe, moonblade, or blade of pain and fear.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

It's a standard action rounds/level spell, so only an incantatrix (or a factotum, woo standard actions) is going to be able to dual wield before combat is mostly over. That said, smexy indeed.

The thing that gets me is that the spell description explicitly states it replaces the strength bonus to attack and damage with int/cha bonus. Before Curmudgeon stomped on my dreams it seemed like you would treat the int/cha bonus like it was the str bonus, but that's that.

I'll have to keep the 2:1 Power Attacking in mind for future gishy purposes.

[Geigan]

In the spell it states

You can wield a thunderlance in one or two hands, dealing base 3d6 points of damage(crit 20/x3). Instead of using your strength modifier, you use the higher of you intelligence modifier or charisma modifier as a bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls.

It's the instead of part that gets me. I would think that means you treat it as you would your strength modifier, though it could also be interpreted as just saying ,"instead of using it like a normal weapon use it like this." If it replaces your strength mod it'd work the same as your strength mod would on any weapon getting multiplied 1½x when wielded 2 handed. If it's just saying you use the thunderlance like this instead of like a normal weapon I suppose I would be mistaken. Weird spell is weird. Though it is shiny...:thog: