Can I use a two-bladed sword as a longsword?

[candidus_cogitens]

If a character comes into posession of a two-bladed sword but does not have the exotic weapon proficiency feat, can he still use one blade of the sword as a single attack, essentially treating it like a longsword?

The same question could be asked concerning the orc double axe. I've seen DMs allow players to use one end of it, but I'm not sure if it is really by-the-book.

 

[Caliban]

If a character comes into posession of a two-bladed sword but does not have the exotic weapon proficiency feat, can he still use one blade of the sword as a single attack, essentially treating it like a longsword?

The same question could be asked concerning the orc double axe. I've seen DMs allow players to use one end of it, but I'm not sure if it is really by-the-book.

No, because it's a two-handed weapon if you use only one end, not a one-handed weapon. It's closer to a greatsword than a longsword in that respect, but it's not weighted like either. You would get a -4 non-proficiency penalty.

 

[Spatzimaus]

By the core rules, no. In the basic rules, you take a -4 nonproficiency penalty to use any weapon without its Feat. Certain Exotic weapons will have an additional clause that allows them to be used in a certain way as a Martial weapon (Bastard Sword, for example), but those are the exception to the rule.

Frankly, this is stupid. Someone who picks up a Repeating Crossbow should be able to fire it just fine, because aiming it is the same as a Light Crossbow; it's the reloading that they should have problems with. Someone who picks up a two-bladed sword (which is just two longswords stuck together) SHOULD be able to use it like you said, and only have to use a little care not to jab themselves with the back end. And so on.

This is just one of the many things that, IMHO, was done badly in the switch to 3E; the AD&D-style "proficiency group" system had problems, but it was a lot better in most ways than the current system. IMC, we split all weapons into 8 groups (like Blades, Projectile, etc.), so a two-bladed sword would be a Bladed weapon that can be used as a double weapon if you also take EWP (Double Weapons); without the EWP, you can still jab with it like a sword.

There have been plenty of House Rule posts suggesting fixes to this over the years. The system we use IMC has been great for us, and we've never gone back to the core method.

 

[Darklone]

Ehem... Spatzimaus, sorry to disagree... but a two bladed sword is just silly IRL. Even allowing it with Exotic Weapon Proficiency is a stretch IMHO

 

[Gort]

I don't think two-bladed swords are so terrifically silly. Darth Maul and his two-bladed lightsaber give a decent example of how you'd use one.

Of course, if you're after REALISM...

 

[frankthedm]

Of course, if you're after REALISM...

The level of belivability / realism for a D&D game is a subjective to the playing group. Some don't mind a stretch while others are up in arms over non magical weapons that would not work in real life.

in my own games cutting the two bladed sword in half works just fine if you need a longsword or two.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

I don't think two-bladed swords are so terrifically silly. Darth Maul and his two-bladed lightsaber give a decent example of how you'd use one.

Of course, if you're after REALISM...

If it isn't a historical weapon, then it's probably because its use wasn't great. There is a great difference between darth maul's twin lightsaber and a double sword. The lightsaber doesn't have an edge. The sword does. I'd say wielding a twin lightsaber was more akin to wielding a quarterstaff than a double-sword.

Regarding the original post and Spatzimaus' response, it isn't possible wielding a double-sword as a one-handed weapon (unless you are large). It isn't possible to wield a double-sword proficiently if you don't have the appropriate EWP. Only using one end of the double-sword is quite diffrent from wielding a normal longsword, unless said longsword has a 4-foot sharpened handle

AR

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

in my own games cutting the two bladed sword in half works just fine if you need a longsword or two.

Now THAT I agree.

AR

 

[Wilphe]

Um, if you are using it as normal sword - don't you have a 3-4 foot sword blade sticking into you out of the grip?

 

[Ranger REG]

Frankly, this is stupid. Someone who picks up a Repeating Crossbow should be able to fire it just fine, because aiming it is the same as a Light Crossbow;...

Heh. Only if you're shooting a crossbow from the hip. A crossbowman who never come across a repeating crossbow in his life will have to aim it differently than what he is used to because of the "magazine" cartridge full of bolts sticking out from the top, unless said cartridge have a built-in "gunsight." Hence, the -4 nonproficiency penalty.

This is just one of the many things that, IMHO, was done badly in the switch to 3E; the AD&D-style "proficiency group" system had problems, but it was a lot better in most ways than the current system. IMC, we split all weapons into 8 groups (like Blades, Projectile, etc.), so a two-bladed sword would be a Bladed weapon that can be used as a double weapon if you also take EWP (Double Weapons); without the EWP, you can still jab with it like a sword.

If you want to add a weapon type familiarity rule in which the non-proficiency penalty is lessened for similar weapon-types, by all means go ahead. My suggestion is to reduce the penalty by 2.

There have been plenty of House Rule posts suggesting fixes to this over the years. The system we use IMC has been great for us, and we've never gone back to the core method.

Good for you. While the core method presented in 3e is not enough to satisfy you fully, I personally feel they made great improvement over the previous editions. So what if I had to fine-tune it to my personal flavor? In my 15 years of playing, no two D&D games are exactly alike. And that's fine with me.