Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kramis" data-source="post: 886523" data-attributes="member: 2084">size mattersMy rulings are based on the relative size and shape of an item. It's not that a long sword is necessarily less abusive than a great sword (depends on the enchantment) but that I try to make a more consistant ruling based on size so that there isn't room for strange abuses. I'll give an extreme example. If you allow a spiked chain because it meats the weight requirement and can be somehow &quot;held&quot; in one hand, then ok, what about a ten thousand mile long rope magically enchanted to weigh 20 lbs. If I stand on a bridge above a bottomless pit I &quot;can&quot; hold it in one hand without it touching anything else (which seems to be the only requirement the two handed weapon and spiked chain weilders make for a definition of holding it in one hand).To me the idea of the item is to be able to palm relatively small and light items in your hand. Relatively. A long sword seems ok in this regard, and I would problably even allow a bag of mice (in reference to an earlier post) although not too many mice. But mostly because I think it's entertaining.A spear just doesn't fit that concept to me, even if you are a proffesional juggle and can balance it on the tip of one finger. It's just too long. Same with most two handed weapons. I say most and probably since maybe a player will come up with a good argument for something I hadn't thought of and I'll allow it (like with the bastard sword ... I could see being flexible with that, though there are no bastard swords in my campaign so it's a bit moot).I wouldn't allow larger shields for the same reason. A buckler would probably be ok (I'd have to picture in my head exactly how big one is, something I don't have a clear idea of at the moment).Does that answer your questions?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kramis, post: 886523, member: 2084"] [b]size matters[/b] My rulings are based on the relative size and shape of an item. It's not that a long sword is necessarily less abusive than a great sword (depends on the enchantment) but that I try to make a more consistant ruling based on size so that there isn't room for strange abuses. I'll give an extreme example. If you allow a spiked chain because it meats the weight requirement and can be somehow "held" in one hand, then ok, what about a ten thousand mile long rope magically enchanted to weigh 20 lbs. If I stand on a bridge above a bottomless pit I "can" hold it in one hand without it touching anything else (which seems to be the only requirement the two handed weapon and spiked chain weilders make for a definition of holding it in one hand). To me the idea of the item is to be able to palm relatively small and light items in your hand. Relatively. A long sword seems ok in this regard, and I would problably even allow a bag of mice (in reference to an earlier post) although not too many mice. But mostly because I think it's entertaining. A spear just doesn't fit that concept to me, even if you are a proffesional juggle and can balance it on the tip of one finger. It's just too long. Same with most two handed weapons. I say most and probably since maybe a player will come up with a good argument for something I hadn't thought of and I'll allow it (like with the bastard sword ... I could see being flexible with that, though there are no bastard swords in my campaign so it's a bit moot). I wouldn't allow larger shields for the same reason. A buckler would probably be ok (I'd have to picture in my head exactly how big one is, something I don't have a clear idea of at the moment). Does that answer your questions? [/QUOTE]

Verification