Greatsword is dead!

[Bolongo]

Does the ranger's dual blade style allow him to off-hand a bastard sword? If so, I see a minotaur ranger in my near future....

Of course it does, as long as he has the proficiency. Say hello to my Dragonborn melee ranger. With the right powers and feats, he's the closest thing to a martial controller you'll find.

 

[med stud]

It's very difficuly to say that something sucks until you have played with the full rules for 1-2 months. It's almost impossible to say that something sucks when you don't have access to the full rules. Somethings that look bad on paper is very effective and vice versa.

See 3e monk or mystic theurge for example. The theory-crafters were up in arms about how imbalanced they were and nerfed them to hell, two months later people realized that monks really were underpowered.

I think this goes for these weapons as well.

 

[ferratus]

It's different, but I like it. Combined with some feats and heavy blade/light blade fighter powers from Fighter multiclass feats, the STR/DEX combo looks good for a Rogue that uses a bastard sword and a dagger or shortsword in his off hand some, most or all of the time.

Of course, a really good build for a two-weapon fighting rogue is a rapier/dagger. Rapiers do 1d8 points of damage, and are classified as light weapons. Scimitar/dagger might be a good choice as well for a rogue who wants to concentrate on the crits.

 

[MyISPHatesENWorld]

Of course, a really good build for a two-weapon fighting rogue is a rapier/dagger. Rapiers do 1d8 points of damage, and are classified as light weapons. Scimitar/dagger might be a good choice as well for a rogue who wants to concentrate on the crits.

But those aren't big swords.

 

[Mirtek]

Well okay, lets see, there really are some perks to two handed

power attack gives +2 dmg -2 hit, +3 w two handed and it scales with levels to: +4/+6 and +6/+9

Potent challenge feat for Con 15 fighters is very nice
adds +con bonus damage for attacks from the challenge ability
(kinda limited) only apllies to 2H

Reaping Strike deals full Str dmg on a miss (opposed to half)

Is this really all? I read about these benefits also on some other board and they also claimed that these are all the benifits there are.

They claimed that none of the other powers seems to give any bonus to 2handed fighting.

plus theres this whole 3W thing, they even suggest for the paladin to get a 2H for his high dmg powers...

Just take the feat for the bastard sword and use a shield and you gain +2 AC/Ref while all your 3[W] powers are just as powerfull as with a 2handed weapon.

Is all that is true I fear that 2handed fighting is dead

Having run 4e over the convention weekend several times, let me tell you that every +1 is crucial

So even more reason to use bastard sword + shield and do the same damage as with a greatsword and gain the crucial +2 AC/Ref?

I think a bigger issue then the greatsword is that some weapons are just plain superior to others, at least as far as fighters go.

Actually fighters are at least the ones who have some minor benefits whith using 2handed weapons.

What about a melee cleric or a warlord without even these breadcrumbs? Why should a cleric/warlord ever give up the +2 defence just to do the same damage he could do with this +2 defence?

 

[Imban]

What? I don't understand what you're arguing here. Fighter powers start with strength, then use other abilities for additional benefits. The player picks which abilities they use. While they hypothetically could pick to stat spread themselves between Str/Con/Dex/Wis, they could also choose not.

They could, but your choice of weapon determines what powers you can use and also conveniently weapon-specific powers are like 90% of the ones which require a stat other than Strength.

(Wisdom is only useful for Fighters in that it adds to their attack rolls for opportunity attacks.)

Just take the feat for the bastard sword and use a shield and you gain +2 AC/Ref while all your 3[W] powers are just as powerfull as with a 2handed weapon.

Is all that is true I fear that 2handed fighting is dead

I haven't made a sword-and-board character yet, but a bugbear with a maul is still a mean thing. At level 1 he can swing 6d8+2d6+4 damage once per day, and 4d8+2d6+4 damage plus slowing for one round in all the other encounters.

 

[pawsplay]

I hate to be cynical, but a few holes in the fighter repertoire is going to help sell copies of Martial Power, PHB2, etc. It's collectability.

Historically, greatsword could mean a lot of things, but in terms of a battlefield weapon, it generally meant a lot of control and the ability to attack armor at the joints. Hence, + hit. Because of the D&D abstract system, it should do plenty of damage, too; I do not agree at all that a greataxe would do tons more damage. The greatsword is faster and can be used more precisely, so they should be similar.

Worrying about 0.5 damage for a basic strike is truly trivial. How could you even bring yourself to care? The things to wonder about are, how does a greatsword do with various powers and feats? That's it's real output. As pointed out above, hitting with your encounter powers is nice.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

There are still some nice 2h bruisers... I'm looking at you, Mr. Maul. The Greatsword trades damage for a +1 to hit. Bonuses to hit are much rarer in 4e. The greatsword is still a valuable weapon because of this.

 

[That One Guy]

<throws down the snark>
The tradeoff... a feat to use a bastardsword one handed so you can hold that shield, or do you go two-handed w/ the greatsword and use that feat to snag something else... like I dunno'... plate? Some people'll say AC all the way, others're pro-putting the stabbity end into things. Whichever. Greatswords are less OP, but Mauls are the new damage/missy 2D6 hotsauce.

Rock.

...or do you bide your time and use the Martial Power book to make your two-hander kick it old school style?

<seems to have dropped his snark. Picks it up. Dusts it off before returning it to his pocketses>

 

[Felon]

It's very difficuly to say that something sucks until you have played with the full rules for 1-2 months. It's almost impossible to say that something sucks when you don't have access to the full rules. Somethings that look bad on paper is very effective and vice versa.

See 3e monk or mystic theurge for example. The theory-crafters were up in arms about how imbalanced they were and nerfed them to hell, two months later people realized that monks really were underpowered.

You certainly need access ot the full rules, but you certainly don't need to play exhaustively to make accurate projections. Of course, some people are better at making projections than others, and that's where you have people decrying the monk and mystic theurge. But don't lump all "theory-crafters" in with the bad ones.