Double Bastard Sword possible?

[Virindi]

I have a player that is two weapon fighter Ranger. He was interested in the Adventure's Vault page 9-10 using a double sword. However he wants a double bastard sword.
I cannot find where that is even an option. In the Adventure's Vault (AV). A double sword is d8/d8. Bastard swords are d10. Would allowing a d10/d10 be over powered? The AV double axe is a d10/d10 but its proficiency is only +2 versus that of a +3 double sword or Bastard sword. I need to know if I allow this weapon will I be opening a Pandora's box of enhancement questions, damage probabilities or prerequisite issues?

 

[On Puget Sound]

Would allowing a d10/d10 be over powered?

Yes.

Taking any weapon and improving it without giving it a balancing cost or flaw makes that weapon "the best" weapon. This means everyone (who uses weapons) must choose that weapon or be worse off for making a different choice. Decreasing the viable choices players can make reduces fun and makes characters more alike.

 

[SableWyvern]

I'd suggest just treating a double bastard sword as mechanically identical to carrying two individual bastard swords.

Double Bastard Sword:

+3 Prof, d10/d10, heavy blade. Due to the weapon's bulk, it does not have the off-hand and defenisve properties of other doulbe weapons. Special: can only be wielded by characters with dual weapon fighting style and bastard sword proficiency. Each end is enchanted seperately.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I'd suggest just treating a double bastard sword as mechanically identical to carrying two individual bastard swords.

I'd go the other route, personally. Make it mechanically identical to the double-axe, and just say that the extra weight/bulkiness is why it's only got +2, rather than +3.

 

[SableWyvern]

I'd go the other route, personally. Make it mechanically identical to the double-axe, and just say that the extra weight/bulkiness is why it's only got +2, rather than +3.

That sounds like an equally valid and balanced option to me.

 

[Virindi]

I'd go the other route, personally. Make it mechanically identical to the double-axe, and just say that the extra weight/bulkiness is why it's only got +2, rather than +3.

Yeah mechanically I was thinking of using the double axe. d10/d10 +2 prof. heavy blade. Also double weapons give a defensive property (+1 AC) which is the main reason why i think my player wants to use this type of weapon. but I am making sure I am not over looking something that will make this ranger over powered.

 

[DracoSuave]

He wants his cake and to eat it too. He wants d10s on each hand, then he gives up the defensive bonus.

Or he rolls bugbear.

 

[doctorhook]

Yeah mechanically I was thinking of using the double axe. d10/d10 +2 prof. heavy blade. Also double weapons give a defensive property (+1 AC) which is the main reason why i think my player wants to use this type of weapon. but I am making sure I am not over looking something that will make this ranger over powered.

I agree that mimicking the double-axe is the best and simplest way to do it. (Changing "axe" to "heavy blade" obviously.) If your player doesn't like losing the extra +1 proficiency bonus, tell him to just use two bastard swords or a normal double-sword.

There's no obvious way to balance an actual "double-bastard-sword" (the way we assume your player wants it) against other Superior Weapons, barring the invention of a "Superior Superior Weapon" category, which would require two feats for proficiency. (And would likely be a waste of a feat, too.)

 

[Virindi]

I agree that mimicking the double-axe is the best and simplest way to do it. (Changing "axe" to "heavy blade" obviously.) If your player doesn't like losing the extra +1 proficiency bonus, tell him to just use two bastard swords or a normal double-sword.

There's no obvious way to balance an actual "double-bastard-sword" (the way we assume your player wants it) against other Superior Weapons, barring the invention of a "Superior Superior Weapon" category, which would require two feats for proficiency. (And would likely be a waste of a feat, too.)

Ok one more question on this subject. if I do allow this weapon modeled mechanically after the double axe ( +2 prof, d10/d10).

When it comes to enhancements. Do I allow heavy blade enhancements or since this is modeled after the heavy axe I restrict to axe, and any melee enhancements?

I have noticed that some enhancements for heavy blade do not have axe too, and their are some axe enhancements that don't have heavy blade. Examples from the Adventurer's Vault. are (Acidic, axe isn't mentioned as a category weapon to enhance, and Rending is an axe only enhancement)

I guess my goal is one to decide if allowing this weapon is even worth the trouble of allowance.
Two, if I do allow this weapon to keep this weapon from being a superior superior melee. And 3 try to give my player something of what they envision.

Thanks everyone for your advice on this matter.

 

[DracoSuave]

Well if it's 'something they envision' then tell them a doublesword is fricken huge, and +3 d8/d8 is more than appropriate. If that doesn't work, then they're envisioning rolling large amounts of dice, not a cool character concept.

Double weapons aren't just two weapons glued at the pummel, one side makes the other work differently. If he argues this point, have him hold onto a stick or broom in the basic katana stance (in front of him), and then say 'See, if this were a double sword, you've cut your balls off' and send him back to whiney town.