Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ZansForCans" data-source="post: 1399693" data-attributes="member: 8059">You seem to be implying that without EWP or MWP you can indeed wield it one-handed with two hands in an non-proficient manner (taking the -4). I disagree. You are wielding it two-handed (non-proficiently) in a very similar manner to being at a size differential with a weapon (see below). The wording clearly says two-handed, not with two hands. The lance entry, by contrast, is clearly different, saying that you can wield it with one hand (and not one-handed). It's tempting to make weapon encumbrance a static element of the weapon. I agree that somewhere in the rules someone decided that some facet of this quality should be the case, as is evidenced by the hardness/hp rules you pointed out above. However, in the very section that defines the encumbrance rules:and then mere sentences later, Weapon encumbrance is primarily intended to be a relative term between the weapon and the wielder. The fact that hardness/hp are linked by that table does not imply that the terms are static to a weapon. By your own example in this thread, a Large creature wielding a Medium greatsword is using a one-handed weapon and does not get the +4 Disarm bonus. The fact that it's one-handed for the Large creature doesn't change the weapon's material qualities.Let's pull your scenario out above about getting handed a torch, which is right in pointing out that the inherent weapon quality doesn't change. If this encumbrance quality is singular and static, you (being Medium) instead hand a Medium greatsword to your ogre sidekick, and it suddenly breaks since the encumbrance has been altered and the hardness/hp table says it has suddenly become weaker. Obviously, although clearly not stated in the rules, there is a 'default' encumbrance class that the weapon's material qualities are based on, namely the one it appears under in the main weapons table. But this classification can change relative to the wielder for purposes of combat.In the same vein, there is nothing static preventing the bastard sword from sloshing around from one-handed to two-handed encumbrance based on training through MWP. I wouldn't fault a ruling that it's meant to be read as "with two hands", but I personally think the "two-handed" wording is intentional.But I want to reiterate at this point that I completely agree that wielding a two-handed weapon and a one-handed weapon with two hands are completely separate. Again, it's not how the weapon is being used (implied by the Sage's answer to one question), but how much effort it takes (clearly stated in the rules), a condition that can be modified by the weapon's and your size, and (by my reading) occasionally by weapon proficiency for specific weapons.</blockquote>

Verification