Greatsword is dead!

[MortalPlague]

Or more likely, did they make it so no weapons use multiple dice for damage?

Mauls do 2d6. The Keep on the Shadowfell fighter uses one liberally.

 

[MindWanderer]

Plenty of weapons use 2dX for damage. All swords are indeed +3 to hit, vs +2 for nearly everything else.

How about swords that do 2dX? They'd be awfully handy for those exploding vorpal weapons. Although a vorpal greataxe isn't half bad.

 

[Starbuck_II]

The disappointing bit is the lack of "superior" weapons - I think there's a total of four in the PHB (bastard sword, rapier, katar, spiked chain)

Wait, wasn't the Katar (it was callede the Punching Dagger) a simple weapon in 3.5?

What is so good about it in 4E that they it superior?

 

[Spinachcat]

Improved Init + Greatsword is a vicious combo in this edition. That +3 vs. +2 becomes real meaningful when you miss by 1 with your encounter power. Being able to lay down your encounter power in the first round and deal slammage is quite awesome.

Having run 4e over the convention weekend several times, let me tell you that every +1 is crucial before you roll using an encounter power 'cuz it suxxors when you miss.

My concern is whether Reach is still important. If you feel lucky, then the high crit could be a lot of fun. Too bad it's not maximized, just rolled.

 

[pinbot]

Well, can't please everyone all the time.

... Plus, a lot of historical two-handed swords were meant either

A) purely for cleaving pole-arms, not for the sort of sword fights we think of, or

B) ceremonial purposes.

They were a little more legit than that suggests. Landskneckhts and scotsmen liked them as anti-cavalry weapons (the key move being to cut the horses legs out)

The were also good for fighting when outnumbered since they really did allow 'cleave' attacks.

Obviously, I live in the 21st century too, so I don't *know*--but that's the idea I've gotten. I don't remember any source on the first one, but the 2nd comes from one of those 15th century Italian fencing manuals.

 

[Mouseferatu]

They were a little more legit than that suggests. Landskneckhts and scotsmen liked them as anti-cavalry weapons (the key move being to cut the horses legs out)

The were also good for fighting when outnumbered since they really did allow 'cleave' attacks.

Some of 'em, yeah. That's why I said "a lot," not "all."

But I think you'll find that, beyond a certain point (uh, no pun intended), the longer the swords got, the more ceremonial and/or circumstantial their usage became.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

I asked this in another thread. Do versatile weapons count as two handed when you wield them two handed? at epic level one can get an extra 3 points of damage from a two handed weapon (with power attack). Does this mean long sword and bastard sword cannot benefit from feats or powers that say two handed weapon? If they cannot, they don't seem THAT versatile.... *snark* ;p

If they are not, the great sword still has a nice boost over long sword and bastard sword. I cant speak much about how it compares to axes though.

*on a separate note*, I have been taking German longsword fencing. I desperately want to make an effective long sword fighter.

 

[rhm001]

Some of 'em, yeah. That's why I said "a lot," not "all."

But I think you'll find that, beyond a certain point (uh, no pun intended), the longer the swords got, the more ceremonial and/or circumstantial their usage became.

So you're saying it's not the size of the greatsword, it's what you do with it...

 

[Moon-Lancer]

So you're saying it's not the size of the greatsword, it's what you do with it...

careful. if your greatsword is too long you have to sling it over your back, and its hard to unsheathe in combat, while a long sword can rest at your side and you can whip it out any time to you need to. sometimes the fight can be over in mire moments, so its vital to be able to act when you can, or when you see an opening.


yes i said it.

 

[ferratus]

Upgrading to a bastard sword isn't a "must take" option for a fighter using a longsword and shield, but it is a decent one.

Also, if a bastard sword gets +1 attack bonus over a longsword, that's obviously a huge deal. But I don't know for sure if that's the case. The analysis above of the damage stays true either way.

Nope they are both +3 to attack. Thanks for the rest of the explanation, I feel better about it now, since the advantage was explained to me.

That said, would it be unbalancing to grant High Critical (Double damage) and Versatile (use one handed or two handed), sort of a mix of the advantages of a scimitar and a longsword?

The scimitar, for those that don't know, has the property of "high critical". This basically means that on criticals they do max dmg on a crit + 1[W] at levels 1-10, +2[W] at levels 11-20 and +3[W] at levels 21-30. It seems to pay for it by only having a +2 to attack rather than the longsword's +3 and not being versatile.