EWP Bastard Sword (silly)

[Magic Slim]

Let's take this scenario: Greg the human wizard just reached 3rd level. He has a Str of 13. He picks up EWP(Bastard Sword). Greg can now swing a Bastard Sword in one hand. Can he swing the Bastard Sword in 2 hands without penalty, or does he suffer a -4 penalty for not being proficient with it?

Thanks in advance

Slim

 

[AuraSeer]

I would not apply the nonproficiency penalty.Someone proficient in the one-handed longsword can choose to swing it two-handed, to do extra damage; I'd treat your wizard example the same way.

 

[orbitalfreak]

You don't need to factor in a non-proficiency penalty in this case. Any weapon you are proficient in using one-handed can be used two handed. Thus, if you are one-handed-proficient in a Bastard Sword, you can use it in two hands without penalty.

 

[Corwin]

If I were DM, I wouldn't let him take it.

EWP (Bastard Sword or Waraxe) is, IMO, taking your skill with the weapon past two-handed proficiency and into one-handed 'mastery'. I wouldn't let you skip the first step.

So if you want it, first you need to be proficient in it as a Martial Weapon.

This weapon (and feat) is, to me anyway, a perk for fighter types who may want to upgrade damage a bit. To let a non-warrior type skip to the front of the class for the same expenditure on only one feat is unfair, IMO.

That's my take on it.

 

[Camarath]

If I were DM, I wouldn't let him take it.

EWP (Bastard Sword or Waraxe) is, IMO, taking your skill with the weapon past two-handed proficiency and into one-handed 'mastery'. I wouldn't let you skip the first step.

So if you want it, first you need to be proficient in it as a Martial Weapon.

That is a fine house rule. But the rules as wriiten do not require Martial Weapon Proficiency as a prerequisite for Exotic Weapon Proficiency.

 

[Corwin]

That is a fine house rule. But the rules as wriiten do not require Martial Weapon Proficiency as a prerequisite for Exotic Weapon Proficiency.

Wow, you picked up on all those subtle, cryptic references to "if I were DM", "to me anyway" and the various "IMO"s. How sharp of you.

 

[Darkness]

I would not apply the nonproficiency penalty.Someone proficient in the one-handed longsword can choose to swing it two-handed, to do extra damage; I'd treat your wizard example the same way.

Hm. Good enough for me.

- 'course, I wanted to allow it but couldn't quite explain why it should be allowed Darkness

 

[Ranger REG]

Can he swing the Bastard Sword in 2 hands without penalty, or does he suffer a -4 penalty for not being proficient with it?

He can swing the bastard sword with 2 hands without penalty.

 

[Xorial]

If I were DM, I wouldn't let him take it.

EWP (Bastard Sword or Waraxe) is, IMO, taking your skill with the weapon past two-handed proficiency and into one-handed 'mastery'. I wouldn't let you skip the first step.

So if you want it, first you need to be proficient in it as a Martial Weapon.

This weapon (and feat) is, to me anyway, a perk for fighter types who may want to upgrade damage a bit. To let a non-warrior type skip to the front of the class for the same expenditure on only one feat is unfair, IMO.

That's my take on it.

It's not letting a nonwarrior skip to the head of the line. A non-warrior is getting proficient in just one weapon. He also has to have a +1 BAB to take this feat, so he has some combat experience. Being smart enough to want to have a little more ummf in your attack shouldnt be penalized.

 

[smetzger]

Wow, you picked up on all those subtle, cryptic references to "if I were DM", "to me anyway" and the various "IMO"s. How sharp of you.

And you picked up on the subtle reference that this is the Rules Forum and _not_ the House Rules forum.