EWP Bastard Sword (silly)

[Corwin]

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.

But there is a skip. If a non-warrior can go straight to using a bastard sword or waraxe one handed, by spending one feat, then who among them will ever bother with longswords or battleaxes?

And no, IMO, we aren't talking about "flavor". RP and style isn't the issue. We are talking the mechanics of getting a one-handed, 1d10 weapon by skipping the weaker melee weapon equivelants. All this with the same feat expenditure that someone who can already use the martial weapons has to spend to get the same thing.

 

[Corwin]

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

Go police some other thread , Smetz.

In case you haven't noticed, most threads here on the Rules Forum have non-rules and/or house rules comments in them.

You may want to get started, you have a heck of a lot of work ahead of you snapping everyone back on "topic" around here.

Hmmm, I wonder if I could go searching for any threads where you've posted a personal rules interpretation or house rule here in this forum...

Look, don't get pissy and start acting all uppity with claims of "rules only". If you don't like my opinion, move on. If you have an issue with it, address its merits (like Xorial did). But don't come in and try to dismiss it as being in the wrong forum. That's just weak.

 

[LokiDR]

And no, IMO, we aren't talking about "flavor". RP and style isn't the issue. We are talking the mechanics of getting a one-handed, 1d10 weapon by skipping the weaker melee weapon equivelants. All this with the same feat expenditure that someone who can already use the martial weapons has to spend to get the same thing.

Would you allow the wizard to pick up EWP in spiked chain? That can have a lot more advantages for the wizard with enlarge and polymorph. Choosing bastard sword is more flavor than anything.

 

[Corwin]

Would you allow the wizard to pick up EWP in spiked chain? That can have a lot more advantages for the wizard with enlarge and polymorph. Choosing bastard sword is more flavor than anything.

Good question. But, IMO (uh oh, there's those pesky "imo"s again, ), a spiked chain has the disadvantage of being a two-handed weapon. For a spellcaster, that can be a disadvantage. Whereas the (EWP) bastard sword is a superior weapon compaired to its martial cousin, the longsword, and yet still usable one-handed.

I'm just posing the notion that it may not be entirely fair to allow a character to bypass the whole martial weapon proficiency in a weapon and get the superior choice out of the gate. After all, we are really talking about a martial weapon that you can train further in to eventually use one-handed, right? At least, that's how the weapon is described in the PH.

 

[LordAO]

I think it is dumb that the Bastard Sword is an exotic weapon in the first place. But maybe that's just me.

 

[Corwin]

I think it is dumb that the Bastard Sword is an exotic weapon in the first place. But maybe that's just me.

Yeah, that's kinda the point. Though it is in the exotic weapons catagory, the sword is really a martial weapon that has two levels of proficiency.

If it had been classed as martial, but had a special note, in its description, that stated that you could take a second martial feat with it to use it one-handed, we wouldn't be questioning whether a mage could take just the one feat and gain the benefits of both the basic two-handed and improved one-handed use. Would we?

 

[Darkness]

Go police some other thread , Smetz.

Eh, let it go, everybody.

- Darkness

 

[LokiDR]

Good question. But, IMO (uh oh, there's those pesky "imo"s again, ), a spiked chain has the disadvantage of being a two-handed weapon. For a spellcaster, that can be a disadvantage. Whereas the (EWP) bastard sword is a superior weapon compaired to its martial cousin, the longsword, and yet still usable one-handed.

Two handed isn't a disadvantage. You can, according to the FAQ, take one hand off a weapon as a free action, do something, then put your hand back on the weapon again as another free action. This is fine unless you know some way to AoO with a spell.

I have no problem letting a character spend one feat for all forms of combat with a single weapon. That wizard is far less broken with the bastard sword than he is with some metamagic or item creation feats.

 

[Corwin]

Two handed isn't a disadvantage. You can, according to the FAQ, take one hand off a weapon as a free action, do something, then put your hand back on the weapon again as another free action. This is fine unless you know some way to AoO with a spell.

Except that spellcasters like to use rods, wands, staves, scrolls, etc.

What do you do with that wand or rod when you want to swing your chain? Drop it? Put it away?

I have no problem letting a character spend one feat for all forms of combat with a single weapon. That wizard is far less broken with the bastard sword than he is with some metamagic or item creation feats.

This is a different issue. I'm saying, let the wizard take longsword (or battleaxe) if he wants to spend one feat on a sword or axe. Why does he get to jump straight to the bigger guns? If a fighter wants to use a bastard sword or waraxe one-handed he has to spend a feat. And he's already familiar with the darn things (insomuch as he can use them two-handed as martial weapons). The mage has no such familiarity before jumping in to it. Yet the same one feat expenditure nets him the same benefits.

[in a thick, tacky, Scotish accent] I just don' like it. It dun't sit right in me belly.[end accent]

Again, to me, those particular weapons are perks to warrior types who want to upgrade from the martial equivelant. From that, I based my opinion.

 

[Ranger REG]

But there is a skip. If a non-warrior can go straight to using a bastard sword or waraxe one handed, by spending one feat, then who among them will ever bother with longswords or battleaxes?

Elves, who have automatic proficiency in longswords, for one. Anyone who does not have Str 13 or more yet. Anyone who knows that the majority of magic weapons found in treasure are usually longswords.

And no, IMO, we aren't talking about "flavor". RP and style isn't the issue. We are talking the mechanics of getting a one-handed, 1d10 weapon by skipping the weaker melee weapon equivelants. All this with the same feat expenditure that someone who can already use the martial weapons has to spend to get the same thing.

We could disallow fighters and combat-oriented classes (who are proficient in all martial weapons) the use of bastard swords as a two-handed weapon. That way, they're all in the same boat. But, AFAIC, fighters and combat-oriented classes can use the bastard sword two-handed without penalty and does not have to spend a feat for it, while wizards and noncombat-oriented classes must spend a feat. They can't use it as a two-handed nor as a one-handed weapon without applying the penalty.