D&D 3E/3.5 Complaining about 3.5 weapon size rules

[taliesin15]

In 3.0, what is the size of a Colossal creature's greatsword?In 3.5, the answer is "Colossal greatsword".
In 3.0, what is the size of a halfling's short sword? [Trick question?]
In 3.5, the answer is "Small short sword".
In 3.0, what is the size of an ogre's dagger? [Trick question?]
In 3.5, the answer is "Large dagger".
Quasqueton

see, this epitomizes part of the problem with the 3.5 change and directly addresses why it makes it far more complex, rather than simpler. Now you don't simply have daggers, short swords, long swords, and so on, but each of these for each size category

why not just have a system where a long sword is just a long sword?

 

[Hypersmurf]

see, this epitomizes part of the problem with the 3.5 change and directly addresses why it makes it far more complex, rather than simpler.

I don't agree at all.

Before, determining how a weapon was wielded required comparing the size category of the weapon to the size category of the creature. Ogre with a longspear? The Ogre is Large, and the longspear is Large, so he can use it in one hand. Cloud Giant with a Gargantuan Morningstar? The giant is Huge, and Huge is one size category smaller than Gargantuan, so it's a two-handed weapon.

Now, we can assume that most creatures will use a weapon designed for their size category, so it's a simple case of saying "A longsword is a one-handed weapon".

And if someone does use an inappropriately-sized weapon, it's no harder to figure out than the old sizing system.

-Hyp.

 

[mhensley]

It's not necessarily the length of the grip that matters, as the girth.

That's what my wife tells me anyway.

 

[kenobi65]

Gandalf weilded a longsword AND a double weapon (his staff), and still managed to cast spells. How ever you want it...

Ehh, those weren't spells, they were spell-like abilities, with no somatic component.

 

[werk]

why not just have a system where a long sword is just a long sword?

Because a longsword that is normal human sized is a longsword for a human, but not a pixie or a giant.

All equipment must exist in all the size categories in the game, because creatures do, and equipment manufacturers do.

 

[taliesin15]

I don't agree at all.
-Hyp.

I think then it has to be a matter of opinion. Personally, I think one chart rather than several is simpler. In any case, I think you would have to agree that this is clearly not a settled matter, there's a significant number of us who object.

 

[Hypersmurf]

In any case, I think you would have to agree that this is clearly not a settled matter, there's a significant number of us who object.

I think it's a settled matter that all weapons have sizes in 3.5. For those of you who object, there are variant rules provided.

-Hyp.

 

[RigaMortus2]

There used to be this great pic someone did up that compared a huge dagger to a medium greatsword. It was a pic of Conan the Barbarian wielding each weapon, and how silly the huge dagger looked as he was wielding it...

 

[TracerBullet42]

There used to be this great pic someone did up that compared a huge dagger to a medium greatsword. It was a pic of Conan the Barbarian wielding each weapon, and how silly the huge dagger looked as he was wielding it...

You mean this one? (From post #71 in this very thread.)