D&D 5E Giant Weapons

[steeldragons]

Part and parcel of magic items & devices: rings, cloaks, anything "worn," but particularly armor and weapons (as far as we always did/used in 1e, anyway. Not sure, now, if that was in the "rules" somewhere or just a houserule), is that they "resize" to match their current user/wielder.

Obviously, the giants (for example) great massive multi-ton thick sword that did 3d12 + whatever to the party can't do that for the PCs. It will shrink down -maybe with a slightly wider blade or a slightly longer pommel or something that marks it as "giantish" in make or design. But (DM has to decide) it will do damage as a normal Longsword or broadsword or -at least- down to a two-handed (for a Medium critter even if the giant used it with one hand) sword +whatever magical properties/bonuses it possessed.

 

[Elderbrain]

Now I have to go check my older books, but I'm pretty sure that in previous editions - at least pre-3rd - that only magic ARMOR resized for the wearer, while magic WEAPONS did not, with a few exceptions. Always thought that was odd...

 

[Oofta]

Find a friendly merchant and have a Giant Sale!

Some items may just not be useful, or at least not apparently useful at the time. It may be possible to find a buyer at some point, or perhaps trade it.

But you also have to consider if it's worth it - how heavy is this thing? How are they carrying it around.

Personally I wouldn't allow a PC to wield it, it would just look silly

 

[Ganymede81]

I came up with this as a trade-off for wielding a Two-handed weapon one-handed....You could apply it to giant weapons in 2-hands in the same way, perhaps??

1) You cannot take reactions: Wielding the weapon effectively takes too much effort and cencentration
2) You cannot benefit from any Fighting Style benefits (2-weapon fighting, duelling, GWF)
3) You cannot wield a 2nd weapon.

Why jump through all these hoops when you could just use the improvised weapon rules? If a giant's shortsword is vaguely the equivalent of a human greatsword, why not just apply the improvised weapon rules?

 

[Jester David]

Yeah... I don't see that being easy to wield.

 

[Hillsy7]

View attachment 86153

Yeah... I don't see that being easy to wield.

Aaaaactually.......

If that frost giant is 15' tall, that axe in the picture is approx. 7-8ft long....agreed not easy. If however you take the view that a Greatsword is analogue to a traditional claymore, and a greataxe something like a danish/sparth axe, that puts length in the region of 5-5.5ft. A particularly strong individual (in D&D parlance, 20 STR puts someone stronger than an ogre), could in theory chop a foot or so off the haft and use the weapon two handed.

In theory.....

However, from the weight alone you'd want some kind of penalty I would say. If you were desperate to allow it. And if there was good reason in narrative terms.

[NB: I'm largely being contrary here. I'm just saying that verisimilitude in D&D is a really flexible thing and in a slightly crazy, Megasword style game, then having a houserule in the back pocket for crazy-size weapons isn't to worst thing in the world...]

 

[Hillsy7]

Why jump through all these hoops when you could just use the improvised weapon rules? If a giant's shortsword is vaguely the equivalent of a human greatsword, why not just apply the improvised weapon rules?

I'm not against that - I was just saying I'd personally come up with a houserule to allow traditionally Heavy weapons to be used 1 handed, and he might like to have a look at them to see if they fit his game perhaps a little better than the Improvised weapon rules....

 

[MarkB]

Right. That said, some of them might shrink to human-size because magic. (I wouldn't have them all do that, though. Some of them will just end up as heavy, unwieldy* loot.)

As a twist, you could have a magic weapon that resizes the wielder to match the weapon.

 

[Ganymede81]

I'm not against that - I was just saying I'd personally come up with a houserule to allow traditionally Heavy weapons to be used 1 handed, and he might like to have a look at them to see if they fit his game perhaps a little better than the Improvised weapon rules....

I actually misread your post to be about PCs using giant-sized weapons, not PCs using two-handed weapons in one hand.

 

[Jester David]

Aaaaactually.......

If that frost giant is 15' tall, that axe in the picture is approx. 7-8ft long....agreed not easy. If however you take the view that a Greatsword is analogue to a traditional claymore, and a greataxe something like a danish/sparth axe, that puts length in the region of 5-5.5ft. A particularly strong individual (in D&D parlance, 20 STR puts someone stronger than an ogre), could in theory chop a foot or so off the haft and use the weapon two handed.

In theory.....

However, from the weight alone you'd want some kind of penalty I would say. If you were desperate to allow it. And if there was good reason in narrative terms.

[NB: I'm largely being contrary here. I'm just saying that verisimilitude in D&D is a really flexible thing and in a slightly crazy, Megasword style game, then having a houserule in the back pocket for crazy-size weapons isn't to worst thing in the world...]

Giants aren't large like in 3e-4e. They're huge. Three times as tall. 27 times the mass. A giant's greatsword would have a ten-foot blade, longer than most claymores. A giant's longsword would be the length of a claymore, but have a width closer to a ridiculous anime sword (and a much shorter hilt than most claymore).

It'd have to be a giant's shortsword or dagger to be weildable by a human. Which can work. Just say the giant's shortsword does damage like a greatsword.