When mounted you can use lance one handed despite it being a two handed weapon. Does this carry over to other two handed weapons, such as a halberd? I am aware that the lance is a special weapon
No. The Lance is a special weapon that does that because it is special. Other weapons don't have that special property.
Similarly, halberds cannot fire arrows as if they had the ammunition property of longbows, or be thrown like javelins, or use dexterity like rapiers. Weapon properties apply only to the weapon that has that property.
The lance for jousting from horse back has an actual hand guard or hilt to stop the lance from being pushed back out of the riders grip. No other weapon has this feature. It would not be nice to have the halberd head get jammed back into your hand, arm or even your chest because your hand slipped.
On horseback, a lance is held by the arm but also braced against the body and the leg, which is why it only needs one hand.
And...? What does that have to do with halberds not having the special property?
To add to this, halberds not only lack the special property but have the two handed property which requires two hands to attack with it. Even on horseback. Lance on the other hand lacks the two handed property but the special property description tells you that two hands are required when not on horseback.
According to RAW, no, a halberd is a two-handed weapon only. That's pretty well covered already in this thread.
Usable from horseback though? Well... maybe. The rider would need to be able to steer the mount by using only their legs... which is a real thing, apparently (or at least it used to be), so it wouldn't be totally unreasonable for a DM to allow it under those circumstances. Someone correct me if I'm wrong about this, but I don't see anything in the PHB that *specifically* mentions needing to use 1 or more hands to control a mount. However, for the mount to be controlled without using hands, it would probably need to be a trained mount, or maybe even a specially-trained one, and not just some random horse (unless "rule of cool," naturally).
I would say you could use them from horseback but not like a lance. No charging.
And if you think about it. Using the Halberd two handed means using it across your body for a strong grip and attack. What would happen if you were on a horse with the halberd across your body?
I'm thinking that ... it would be relevant to ask: Could a long spear be substituted for a lance, if you forgot to bring your lance to a joust?
I'd say the answer would be: Sure. If there were a rule in 5e about lances getting double damage on a mounted charge - and I can't find one - then I'd say your spear doesn't, because ... it's not a lance. It lacks the handguard and it weighs like a fraction.
Now, if you came to a joust, and oh my god, you forgot both your lance and your longspear - could you use a halberd instead?
What - no! A halberd is an axe, not a spear. No way.
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.
This isn't how D&D rules work, but if you really want to justify this with some kind of reality...
A halberd is a slashing weapon, essentially an axe on a stick. In order to get something that size and weight to actually slash, you need the leverage of two hands/arms swinging it. If you just rest it on your knee and ride with it, you reduce it to a less effective lance (since it also has a little point) and in that case I'd rule it has the properties of a spear while you use it that way.
A lance is a piercing weapon, it just has to thrust forward, not swing. When standing, your two arms provide the thrust. When riding, your horse's forward momentum provides some of the thrust, so you can get away with using it one handed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
When mounted you can use lance one handed despite it being a two handed weapon. Does this carry over to other two handed weapons, such as a halberd? I am aware that the lance is a special weapon
No. The Lance is a special weapon that does that because it is special. Other weapons don't have that special property.
Similarly, halberds cannot fire arrows as if they had the ammunition property of longbows, or be thrown like javelins, or use dexterity like rapiers. Weapon properties apply only to the weapon that has that property.
On horseback, a lance is held by the arm but also braced against the body and the leg, which is why it only needs one hand.
And...? What does that have to do with halberds not having the special property?
The lance for jousting from horse back has an actual hand guard or hilt to stop the lance from being pushed back out of the riders grip.
No other weapon has this feature.
It would not be nice to have the halberd head get jammed back into your hand, arm or even your chest because your hand slipped.
To add to this, halberds not only lack the special property but have the two handed property which requires two hands to attack with it. Even on horseback. Lance on the other hand lacks the two handed property but the special property description tells you that two hands are required when not on horseback.
According to RAW, no, a halberd is a two-handed weapon only. That's pretty well covered already in this thread.
Usable from horseback though? Well... maybe. The rider would need to be able to steer the mount by using only their legs... which is a real thing, apparently (or at least it used to be), so it wouldn't be totally unreasonable for a DM to allow it under those circumstances. Someone correct me if I'm wrong about this, but I don't see anything in the PHB that *specifically* mentions needing to use 1 or more hands to control a mount. However, for the mount to be controlled without using hands, it would probably need to be a trained mount, or maybe even a specially-trained one, and not just some random horse (unless "rule of cool," naturally).
But could you imagine?
"Anyone can smith at the cosmic anvil, yet only I can forge a weapon as good as thee."
My Homebrew Please click it, they have my family.
I would say you could use them from horseback but not like a lance. No charging.
And if you think about it. Using the Halberd two handed means using it across your body for a strong grip and attack. What would happen if you were on a horse with the halberd across your body?
I'm thinking that ... it would be relevant to ask: Could a long spear be substituted for a lance, if you forgot to bring your lance to a joust?
I'd say the answer would be: Sure. If there were a rule in 5e about lances getting double damage on a mounted charge - and I can't find one - then I'd say your spear doesn't, because ... it's not a lance. It lacks the handguard and it weighs like a fraction.
Now, if you came to a joust, and oh my god, you forgot both your lance and your longspear - could you use a halberd instead?
What - no! A halberd is an axe, not a spear. No way.
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.
This isn't how D&D rules work, but if you really want to justify this with some kind of reality...
A halberd is a slashing weapon, essentially an axe on a stick. In order to get something that size and weight to actually slash, you need the leverage of two hands/arms swinging it. If you just rest it on your knee and ride with it, you reduce it to a less effective lance (since it also has a little point) and in that case I'd rule it has the properties of a spear while you use it that way.
A lance is a piercing weapon, it just has to thrust forward, not swing. When standing, your two arms provide the thrust. When riding, your horse's forward momentum provides some of the thrust, so you can get away with using it one handed.