Dewl barsturd swordz yo!

[Kzach]

*shrug* I didn't call anyone dumb. I just stated an opinion and said I'm not going to be swayed from that opinion. You tried to sway me and then get bent out of shape when I insist that I'm not interested in being swayed.

As I said, the topic is open, discuss as you see fit. But nobody should be telling anyone else how they should be playing their game. I'm certainly not saying you should agree with me. I'm just saying I don't care if you do or not.

 

[Donovan Morningfire]

In regards to dual-wielding bastard swords, if the player is willing to spend a feat to do it at 1st level (which means they're passing on fun things like Lethal Hunter), I say go for it.

Does it make sense? Not really, but it certainly would be entertaining to watch.

Is it realistic? Heck no, but really, just how much 'realism' should one expect from a game witih a mythical/fictional creature in the title?

Personally, I'm sorely tempted to make a Dwarf Ranger w/ DWT that dual-wields battleaxes

Axel McBeard shall live once more!!!

 

[proto128]

I'm dual wielding bastard swords, your argument is invalid.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfCool

 

[mattdm]

wait, so...

There is a point when the verisimilitude of a system can only be pushed so far and this breaks through the 'ok, it's far-fetched, but...' barrier and out the other side into Ridiculous World.

Of all the elements of D&D, this is the thing which breaks your abiltiy to suspend disbelief?

 

[Halivar]

Dude. You can dual-wield bastard swords? I am so making my first character a ranger.

 

[Tehnai]

Well, if you would consider a bastard sword something like a katana, there is such a thing as wielding dual katanas in some martial art ( I'm thinking of gum do (I think it's written that way) that as one or two dual-sword forms).

It actually depends more on the fighting style and thew weapon's balance then the weight (If you are trained to support a weapons weight, and the PCs are, then it's not an issue).

In the end, it's all about balance and momentum. Get a nice stance and get your blades swinging in the right direction. It can be done, just not in a european-knight-ish "I SWING MAH SWORD AT CHOO" rellying mostly on brute force kinda way.

Granted, 2-sword fighting is borderline suicidal, but c'mon, the PCs are heroes!

 

[ethandrul]

I have spent some time learning to fight with Italian long swords (bastard swords)

yeah, they don't weigh much but they are balanced towards the tip so they are unwieldy.

Usually you use them with 2 hands- but there are several situations where you want to swap power for speed and attack one handed.

The idea of attacking with 2 bastard swords is just plain unrealistic.
But I suppose feat with a pre req of dex 16, strength 18 might make it
acceptable for those who need to pretend they are "Leonardo" from the ninja turtles (sometimes he used daisho, sometimes he used twin katanas)

 

[SaffroN]

Of all the elements of D&D, this is the thing which breaks your abiltiy to suspend disbelief?

That made me laugh out loud.

Anywho, I don't see why dual bastard sword wielding rangers should break your suspension of disbelief.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

You see, it's all about burst damage vs. damage over time. Having a slower off-hand means you'll deal more damage every time you hit, while a faster yields you better DPS.

... sorry, I couldn't help myself.

Like many things, this rule was probably made for simplicity's sake (not using multiple weapon die types on an attack) as much as for a "neat" factor.

Rangers look pretty awesome as-is... I don't think an off-hand weapon restriction is going to hurt them much. But I just don't find it as absurd as you do.

 

[Dacileva]

You see, it's all about burst damage vs. damage over time. Having a slower off-hand means you'll deal more damage every time you hit, while a faster yields you better DPS.

That's only applicable if you ignore instant attacks. For those, you want the main hand weapon to have the highest max damage so your instants do more damage, and the offhand to be as fast as possible (within the same dps) so you have more attacks likely to apply poison...

... sorry, I couldn't help myself.

Woops, wrong board.

Back on topic, I'd have to agree that mechanically, there's probably little difference between allowing or disallowing it. I'd base my decisions on it on motive... If the player wants to dual-wield bastard swords for a mechanical advantage, perceived or actual, I'd be inclined to address with that player whether it's physically possible or reasonable (i.e. bring up the conceptual aspect). If the player wants to dual-wield them for style, appearance or concept, I'd weigh whether I care enough about it being silly or not, and likely allow it anyway.