AV: Double Sword: Light blade And Heavy blade?

[EvanHarpell]

Personally, I see no compelling flavor or mechanical reason for this weapon to be a light blade. I wonder what they were thinking.

No flavor or mechanical reason? I wonder what *you* are thinking. A weapon with slashing ends such as this is not some brute weapon that you simply use to "chop with". Like a staff the momentum from twisting the weapon about is where most of the force comes from. This requires not just the strength to wield the weapon but some sort of grace and coordanation to not lop off your own limbs.

As far as rules go, read the PHB. Page 215 under weapon groups and I quote "If a weapon falls into more than one group, you can use it with powers that require a weapon from any of its groups." End quote.

RAW benefits are there too for using a rapier as opposed to the Doublebladed sword. Swordmages for example, need that hand free for a extra AC bonus, greater than the one the doubleblade gives. Same for the Tempest Fighter build. There are still some loopholes to be found however, if you use the tempest build.

 

[Anguirus]

No flavor or mechanical reason? I wonder what *you* are thinking. A weapon with slashing ends such as this is not some brute weapon that you simply use to "chop with". Like a staff the momentum from twisting the weapon about is where most of the force comes from. This requires not just the strength to wield the weapon but some sort of grace and coordanation to not lop off your own limbs.

And that's why Heavy Blade feats use Dexterity, you unsurpassed genius.

A longsword is a heavy blade. A two-bladed sword is much more like a longsword than a short sword, a rapier, or a knife. More importantly, the double sword as heavy + light blade gives it unexpected (best weapon for rogues...yeah, that reflects history and fantasy) and undesired (best light blade in the game, clearly edging out rapier unless you want to use a shield) benefits. Moreover, why is the only sword that gets to play with both sets of feats the double sword? At least it makes sense for the khopesh or the urgrosh, but a double sword acts and looks just like two longswords stuck together.

 

[Cadfan]

I'm not going to allow any rogues to use this weapon, if they ask.

Allowing rogues to use it makes it strictly better than the rapier. I know its a two handed weapon, and the rapier isn't, but that doesn't actually matter. Letting go with one hand is a free action, meaning you can let go, draw and throw a shuriken or a dagger, then grab onto your weapon again. It is even more strictly betterer (??) than a rapier paired with a parrying dagger, because a parrying dagger costs an extra feat, and can't be sheathed and redrawn with a bunch of free actions.

I suspect that the double sword was set up like it was for the benefit if Fighters, not Rogues.

There's actually a whole list of rules I'm basically ignoring all related to matters like this- versatile weapons in the hands of characters who get benefits from wielding weapons one handed, for example. The whole hand-slot issue is something that really should have been cleaned up in 4e, but wasn't.

 

[Armisael]

Actually, the double sword is NOT a two-handed weapon. Notice it's not on the two-handed weapons table? That means it does not count as a two handed weapon at all. Period.

Additionally, CustServ was asked about the double weapons. They replied that the Urgrosh has each side of the weapon have a single group, but every other weapons has two groups. That should clear it up.

 

[yesnomu]

All I have to say on this issue is that double weapons are a terminally stupid idea, and I'm not letting my players use them. They are my least favorite thing in the AV.

I do like the idea of removing the "light blade" keyword, that makes a lot of sense. The rapier ought to be useful.

 

[DracoSuave]

And that's why Heavy Blade feats use Dexterity, you unsurpassed genius.

A longsword is a heavy blade. A two-bladed sword is much more like a longsword than a short sword, a rapier, or a knife. More importantly, the double sword as heavy + light blade gives it unexpected (best weapon for rogues...yeah, that reflects history and fantasy) and undesired (best light blade in the game, clearly edging out rapier unless you want to use a shield) benefits. Moreover, why is the only sword that gets to play with both sets of feats the double sword? At least it makes sense for the khopesh or the urgrosh, but a double sword acts and looks just like two longswords stuck together.

No.

If you, for example, do a downward slash with a double blade like you would with a longsword, the other side would impale your gut. You would disembowel yourself, and you would likely die.

Again.

A DOUBLE WEAPON IS NOT TWO WEAPONS STUCK TOGETHER WITH CRAZY GLUE.

A double-sword is closer to a quarterstaff in how it is used and fought with than any of the weapons you mentioned above.

And attacks with a double-weapon do not act like attacks with 'single weapons.' The weapon has multiple angles of attack, and a proficient fighter does not go 'I hit you with this pointy end exclusively.' That is simply not how it works. The entire weapon is used. Even in a series of blows ending with the use of the 'primary end' if you are not using the 'secondary' end you are simply not using the weapon correctly. (Read: Non-proficiently)

That is why double-weapons function as both sides at all times, because in order to use one side, you -have to- use the other side as well, even if you're not 'attacking' with both in your power.

 

[Saeviomagy]

The double weapon rules are all kinds of silly and broken. My guess (based on them not being mentioned with the other two weapon qualities) is that they were a late addition.

Regardless, the best thing to do is to ignore them and just let players who desperately want to wield a double weapon to describe their dual-wielded weapons as linked together.

 

[garyh]

Regardless, the best thing to do is to ignore them and just let players who desperately want to wield a double weapon to describe their dual-wielded weapons as linked together.

Sword-chucks, yo!

 

[Anguirus]

No.

If you, for example, do a downward slash with a double blade like you would with a longsword, the other side would impale your gut. You would disembowel yourself, and you would likely die.

Again.

A DOUBLE WEAPON IS NOT TWO WEAPONS STUCK TOGETHER WITH CRAZY GLUE.

A double-sword is closer to a quarterstaff in how it is used and fought with than any of the weapons you mentioned above.

And attacks with a double-weapon do not act like attacks with 'single weapons.' The weapon has multiple angles of attack, and a proficient fighter does not go 'I hit you with this pointy end exclusively.' That is simply not how it works. The entire weapon is used. Even in a series of blows ending with the use of the 'primary end' if you are not using the 'secondary' end you are simply not using the weapon correctly. (Read: Non-proficiently)

That is why double-weapons function as both sides at all times, because in order to use one side, you -have to- use the other side as well, even if you're not 'attacking' with both in your power.

A "real-life" "double sword" resembles the thing (which does in fact look the crazy glue was involved) that appears in the 3E PHB and the 4E AV like a cat resembles a bicycle. I've seen similar weapons that might work but they look more like double-ended spears...you are correct in that you would need a lengthy bit in the middle that you can actually, you know, hold. However, the relative lack of such weapons in the archaeological record should tell us all something.

Closer to a quarterstaff, eh? So it should have the staff weapon group? Or are you simply making an accurate but irrelevant point? My only point is that there is no repeat no reason for the double sword to be the only blade in the game that counts as heavy + light simultaneously, and no reason for it to destroy the rapier.

EDIT: I don't know if the double weapon rules are "broken" considering some of the crazy stuff you can already pull off in this game, but they are rather stupid and poorly worded. Not to mention that one of my favorite parts about the 4E PHB was the lack of such monstrosities as the "double axe" and "double sword."

 

[Obryn]

I really, really dislike double weapons. I always have, ever since doing some mock combat a while back.

With that said, if I can deal with fireballs and ninjas, I can deal with double flails... At this point, though, I really don't like how they fit into 4e. I came to accept them as mechanically sound in 3e, but the 4e keywords have some crazy implications for rogues that I'm not comfortable with right now.

-O