D&D 3E/3.5 (3.5) Small characters and weapons

[Cyclone Duke]

Hey there folks,

I am a DM running Red Hand of Doom with a group of 6 players. My guys recently killed Wyrmlord Saarvith, a goblin ranger who used (against my group) a +1 longbow.

However this guy is a small character. If a Greatsword for a halfling = a longsword for a human = a shortsword for an ogre, does that mean if any of my medium-sized players used this bow, it would be a +1 shortbow for the purpose of it's damage?

Thinking on it, I guess this is kind of already solved by the fact that a medium character using a weapon would smack with a bigger die than a smaller character (goblin using longbow = 1d6, human using longbow = 1d8), but what about the weapon size decreae?

If the goblin uses the longbow to do 1d6 damage, but as he's a small guy and has small arms, a "longbow" for his size is just the size of a shortbow for a human, who will also only do 1d6 damage?


This is the first proper campaign for all people involved in the group along with myself. I started the guys off at level 1 and they recently hit level 7, but we kind of wing it for a few things and some rules need clarification. This was the biggest question for me as I simply assumed the group's halfling bard would get the item as often they just use the bow all the time, but others in the group were interested.

Any help is appriciated.

 

[Dandu]

I wonder if we can invoke the "magic items resize to fit the user" clause?

 

[Cyclone Duke]

A good solution for this specific case, but I'm more wondering about it would work in general for a normal longbow. There's a quote in either the DMG or PHB1 that talk about an ogre's longsword being a human's greatsword, but I can't locate it atm in work.

 

[Empirate]

This being 3.5, you can only use a weapon as the kind of weapon it says in the description. A small sized Longbow is still a Longbow, although it does damage like a medium Shortbow. If a medium sized character wants to use this weapon, it will inflict a -2 penalty to his/her attack rolls. The weapon's range, however, is that of a Longbow.

You're probably thinking about 3.0 with the "Ogre's Longsword" etc.

 

[Herzog]

As Empirate, with the appropriate text:

Inappropriately Sized Weapons

A creature can’t make optimum use of a weapon that isn’t properly sized for it. A cumulative -2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn’t proficient with the weapon a -4 nonproficiency penalty also applies.
The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder’s size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. If a weapon’s designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can’t wield the weapon at all.

​

​

​

​

​

​

see also Weapons :: d20srd.org

or 3.5 PHB page 113​

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

OP, I think you're confusing 3.5's rules with 3.0's. In 3.0, it worked as you reasoned. A small longbow would be a medium shortbow and so forth. I preferred 3.0's because as you noted, it wouldn't be such a problem for your party. If it's any consolation, your medium sized party got a taste of the pain small PCs in 3.5 experience on a daily basis (how often do you honestly fight small enemies, and how often are they the types of classes to actually have good weapons and armor?). Shared experience of pain is a great first step towards having empathy towards the downtrodden.

 

[Cyclone Duke]

Thanks for the replies. If anyone has ran red hand of doom, you would know that Wyrmlord Saarvith is intended to mount his dragon ally Regeirax and shoot arrows from the air at the PCs. However it seems that longbows are not usable while mounted, though composite ones are.
I just houseruled longbows as fine to use as I can't see any reason not to but I wonder how the oversight got in.

 

[Empirate]

Red Hand of Doom, while a great module, has the taste of the slightly unfinished to it - e.g. some locations and battles come with great maps, while others are left completely blank (Rhest Belltower, anyone? Even that stupid Hydra got its own map...). Some oversights like that one are bound to occur even with good proofreading, though.

BTW, I changed the bow to a composite in my game. The Cleric has a small-sized cohort, so the bow actually sees some use from time to time (although, being a wildshape ranger, that cohort likes melee better).

 

[Cyclone Duke]

Changing it to a composite would have been possible if not for the bard having a -1 penatly to str, heh.

Yeah Rhest Belltower really stood at for not having a map for me.

One thing I am concerned about is the lack of deaths so far. I have read into RHOD before starting it and most of the posts concerning it were lamenting how it kills parties, but my own group has not had anyone close to death during it. There's been a few people knocked below 0 but the pure healer cleric is always able to get them up on their feet.

In trying to balance the enemies for my group of 6, perhaps I'm still being too gentle. It's hard though to make a 'one single tough enemy/boss' fight. They get one or two dangerous actions off before getting zerg rushed by 12 attacks in 2 rounds.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Changing it to a composite would have been possible if not for the bard having a -1 penatly to str, heh.

It could be a composite longbow without a Strength bonus.