So, first up, apologies if this is the wrong section for the question.
Second: this concerns a monster type in Shadow of the Dragon Queen. If you think such a topic is a spoiler, well...SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT.
.....
SPOILER ALERT
With that done....
I am going about making some HF mini's for our Shadow of the Dragon Queen game, and am trying to put the figures together to be as reflective of the creatures as possible. For most of them, I've been basing my designs roughly on art and other existing minis, with my own spin being thrown in too.
Now, here's the issue: I noticed some weird discrepancies in the sheets. In this case, specifically, the Dragon Army Officer has their armor listed as:
Armor Class 19 (splint, shield)
Great. Then we look over to their attacks, which is listed as:
Multiattack. The officer makes two Vicious Lance attacks and uses Assault Orders if it’s available.
Vicious Lance. Melee Weapon Attack: +5 to hit, reach 10 ft., one target. Hit: 8 (1d10 + 3) piercing damage plus 2 (1d4) fire damage.
Great. Except, the description for what a vicious lance is goes as follows:
Weapon (lance), rare
When you roll a 20 on your attack roll with this magic weapon, the target takes an extra 7 damage of the weapon’s type.
Proficiency with a lance allows you to add your proficiency bonus to the attack roll for any attack you make with it.
You have disadvantage when you use a lance to attack a target within 5 feet of you. Also, a lance requires two hands to wield when you aren't mounted.
I am specifically getting tripped up over the mention of a shield AND lance being used, presumably on foot, as there is no mention of this creature type being mounted. Which begs the question as to whether the on-foot variant is supposed to NOT have a shield factored into their AC, or if they are somehow one-handing a lance on foot.
What's everyone's take here? Just a thing to not overthink, or is this an oversight that one should correct?
Dragon Army Officer is mentioned a few times being mounted in the actual adventure IIRC like in Wheelwatch outpost, not the stat block directly.
I imagine the AC should have two values, like the mage statblocks who can cast mage armour.
Also a Lance would be a d12, not a d10. This is one of the few books I don't have a hard copy have so I don't know if its an error with the Statblock as printed or DDB's input of it.
Curious about the lance. Both Beyond and the hardcopy of the book list it as d10, yet, as you suggest, the Player's Handbook (physical) says d12. I guess they tweaked it?
How interesting. Personally, I'd just equip Dragon Army Officers on foot with a Vicious Spear. Bam.
=)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
That deffo crossed my mind as well, but there is no one handed weapon that does d10, let alone with a reach of 10ft. I'd probably keep it as a Lance but up it to a d12 so it matches the other rules, then edit their AC if they are on foot and in melee.
There are a few ways around this problem, or tbh, the stat block can be run as it is. :)
That deffo crossed my mind as well, but there is no one handed weapon that does d10, let alone with a reach of 10ft. I'd probably keep it as a Lance but up it to a d12 so it matches the other rules, then edit their AC if they are on foot and in melee.
There are a few ways around this problem, or tbh, the stat block can be run as it is. :)
Yea, but using a lance unmounted rubs me the wrong way. It's not a footman's weapon, but a horseman's. I'd give them glaives (basically a spear, sort of) and no shield, or spear and a shield.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Oh it can be run as is, sure. It just struck me as odd, and left me wondering if I'm missing something, or if this a goof, or... I don't know, something else.
Also, I agree @Acromos, a full on lance as a footman's weapon is strange, so I'm just skinning this as more of a spear like thing than a Western European lance. Figure it works just as well..
So, the dragonlance itself is described as being a lance or pike. A pike is a d10 weapon. I'd say the officer is using a pike and the stat block is just calling it a lance because it's more evocative of a mounted combatant on dragonnel back
I wonder if it was partly designed with the 2024 version of the lance already in mind. The new version is functionally identical to a pike, but with a different weapon mastery option and a special rule which negates the two-handed feature when mounted.
Dragon Army Officers presumably have special training to use their Vicious Lances one handed when dismounted.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, first up, apologies if this is the wrong section for the question.
Second: this concerns a monster type in Shadow of the Dragon Queen. If you think such a topic is a spoiler, well...SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT.
.....
SPOILER ALERT
With that done....
I am going about making some HF mini's for our Shadow of the Dragon Queen game, and am trying to put the figures together to be as reflective of the creatures as possible. For most of them, I've been basing my designs roughly on art and other existing minis, with my own spin being thrown in too.
Now, here's the issue: I noticed some weird discrepancies in the sheets. In this case, specifically, the Dragon Army Officer has their armor listed as:
Great. Then we look over to their attacks, which is listed as:
Great. Except, the description for what a vicious lance is goes as follows:
I am specifically getting tripped up over the mention of a shield AND lance being used, presumably on foot, as there is no mention of this creature type being mounted. Which begs the question as to whether the on-foot variant is supposed to NOT have a shield factored into their AC, or if they are somehow one-handing a lance on foot.
What's everyone's take here? Just a thing to not overthink, or is this an oversight that one should correct?
Hmm, Good eye!
Dragon Army Officer is mentioned a few times being mounted in the actual adventure IIRC like in Wheelwatch outpost, not the stat block directly.
I imagine the AC should have two values, like the mage statblocks who can cast mage armour.
Also a Lance would be a d12, not a d10. This is one of the few books I don't have a hard copy have so I don't know if its an error with the Statblock as printed or DDB's input of it.
Curious about the lance. Both Beyond and the hardcopy of the book list it as d10, yet, as you suggest, the Player's Handbook (physical) says d12. I guess they tweaked it?
How interesting. Personally, I'd just equip Dragon Army Officers on foot with a Vicious Spear. Bam.
=)
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
That deffo crossed my mind as well, but there is no one handed weapon that does d10, let alone with a reach of 10ft. I'd probably keep it as a Lance but up it to a d12 so it matches the other rules, then edit their AC if they are on foot and in melee.
There are a few ways around this problem, or tbh, the stat block can be run as it is. :)
Yea, but using a lance unmounted rubs me the wrong way. It's not a footman's weapon, but a horseman's. I'd give them glaives (basically a spear, sort of) and no shield, or spear and a shield.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Oh it can be run as is, sure. It just struck me as odd, and left me wondering if I'm missing something, or if this a goof, or... I don't know, something else.
Also, I agree @Acromos, a full on lance as a footman's weapon is strange, so I'm just skinning this as more of a spear like thing than a Western European lance. Figure it works just as well..
So, the dragonlance itself is described as being a lance or pike. A pike is a d10 weapon. I'd say the officer is using a pike and the stat block is just calling it a lance because it's more evocative of a mounted combatant on dragonnel back
I wonder if it was partly designed with the 2024 version of the lance already in mind. The new version is functionally identical to a pike, but with a different weapon mastery option and a special rule which negates the two-handed feature when mounted.
Dragon Army Officers presumably have special training to use their Vicious Lances one handed when dismounted.