Search results

I love how diplomatic he is in that posting. He carefully skirts around the outcry against DRM. :)

Sorry, I had meant 2d8.

I see a reason to update it. In 3.0, someone could use this weapon with the feat at no penalty. If you just turn it into a large bastard sword, you are still required to take the feat, except regardless, you have a penalty to attack. Why not just re-introduce the fullblade at 2d6 damage in 3.5?

No, weapon finesse only works on light weapons (and those others listed in the feats or items description). A quarterstaff is a two handed weapon. In the items description, the line that says you fight like having a one handed weapon and a light weapon ONLY applies to the penalties involved...

It's based on the size of the monk, just like all weapon damage. Small people do less damage with their weapons in D&D. And no, a halfling, a human, and a ogre would all do different damage if the shortswords were properly sized, or the halfling and the orge would be taking a penalty to hit...

By the same token, a bastard sword isn't supposed to be used in one hand, it's just that some people can use it that way. A bastard sword is not much less damaging then a Large longsword. Why not just bring in a fullblade, reduce it's damage to 2d6 if need be, and allow it as a two handed...

Don't try to overthink D&D, it's NOT supposed to be realistic. It's a land of absolutes and polar opposites.

Spot AND listen? I dont know of anything from an offical source.

But why not just bring in a 3.5 fullblade, with no penalty for attacking? A 2d8 two handed exotic weapon isn't game breaking.

The only problem is that assumes that a Large bastard sword can use the same feat as a medium bastard sword, which effectivly lets a person get two weapons for one feat. While that's ok, it makes it the only weapon I can think of that allows a person to use the same weapon of different sizes...

Actually, I was reading the table in the PHB improperly.

Well, a Large greatsword would impose an akward size penalty on a medium sized character who used it, while a fullblade would not. If you are going to compare weapons of the same size, a Large greatsword does 2d8 damage while a large fullblade would do 4d6, if you don't try to compensate for...

Nope. 1d8 becomes 2d6 when a weapon scales up. 1d6 moves up to 1d8. So in all, 2d8 becomes 4d6, which becomes 4d8, which becomes 8d6.

Physical. Strength, consitution, and dexterity and PURELY physical, they don't really depend on the mind to function. Intelligence, wisdom, and charisma are purely mental. You're body could be twisted into a preztel and all your bones could be broken, and your mental stats wouldn't be harmed...

Well, in 3.5, a fullblade would be a medium two handed exotic weapon, damage 2d8. For a Large person, it'll be 4d6. For a Huge, 4d8. For a Gargantuan, 8d6. A Huge half giant could use it.

Temple of Elemental Evil. Despite the random crashes, I am loving it. Knights of the Old Republic for the third time. Morrowind, just picked up the GOTY edition after giving my old original copy to a friend over a year ago.

apparently I am alone in this line of thought, but I like the sort of "generic emptiness" of Greyhawk as seen through the 3rd ed books.

Still looking. :) I am looking for a 3.5 group, don't really care what setting. Been playing RPGs for 10 years, but haven't had a chance to play in a while, and I miss it.

A Huge half-giant psionic warrior with a Gargantuan fullblade (8d6 base damage). *sigh*

I wouldn't, since someone can already take Skill Focus and Persuasion to boost up a dinky intimidate skill.