How can I walk softly and carry a BIG sword?

[Moon-Lancer]

I hope you also play with it being a 3d6 weapon as thats what a large great sword is in 3.5. This is a prime example of how not to convert things to 3.5.

The full blade wasn't designed to be a 3d6 weapon nor was it designed to take a -2 on attacks. Your picking and choosing if you rule that its still a 2d8 in 3.5. if it does take a -2 on attacks then its a 3d6 weapon strictly by the rules of it being a large great sword.

I see it as this. Its a exotic two handed sword that does 2d8 19-20x2 and take no penalty to wield two handed for a med creature. that shouldn't change in 3.5.

For balance though i think it should be its own weapon and a ogres great sword, as that creates more problems then one.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I hope you also play with it being a 3d6 weapon as thats what a large great sword is in 3.5.

I don't consider it to be a Large greatsword. I consider it to be a Large bastard sword.

3E Fullblade: 2d8. 3.5 Large Bastard Sword: 2d8.
3E Fullblade: Exotic one-handed weapon for a Large creature, can be wielded in two hands as a martial weapon. 3.5 Large Bastard Sword: Exotic one-handed weapon for a Large creature, can be wielded in two hands as a martial weapon.
3E Fullblade: Can be wielded by a Medium creature with EWP (Fullblade). 3.5 Large Bastard Sword: Can be wielded by a Medium creature with EWP (Bastard Sword) (as long as you ignore the FAQ answer that makes no sense anyway).

The 3E Fullblade fits the behaviour of the 3.5 Large Bastard Sword near-perfectly. The only thing it has in common with the 3.5 Large Greatsword is the nickname.

The full blade wasn't designed to be a 3d6 weapon nor was it designed to take a -2 on attacks. Your picking and choosing if you rule that its still a 2d8 in 3.5. if it does take a -2 on attacks then its a 3d6 weapon strictly by the rules of it being a large great sword.

What would you say if I call it a Large Bastard Sword, as I've done all through this thread?

I see it as this. Its a exotic two handed sword that does 2d8 19-20x2 and take no penalty to wield two handed for a med creature. that shouldn't change in 3.5.

The phrasing of the entry (rather, entries, since it was printed three different ways) in 3E indicates that it was designed for use by Large creatures, and Medium creatures were able to use it as a side effect. (Indeed, between the errata to Sword and Fist, and the release of A&EG, Medium creatures couldn't use it at all!) A weapon designed for use by Large creatures, in 3.5, is a Large weapon.

-Hyp.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

but its a large greatsword. Says so in the text. My point is that by calling it a bastard sword your changing the rules, even though they may fit well as a bastard sword. So why should it take a -2 on attacks? if we are applying the 3.5 rules blindly to the fullblade, it should be done fairly. You seem to be picking and choosing. Because this is the case, saying a fullbade doesn't take a -2 is just as valid if we are both going to twist the rules a tad.

*oops sorry for the edit*

 

[Hypersmurf]

but its a large greatsword. Says so in the text.

No, it says it's called an ogre's greatsword.

But an ogre couldn't use a greatsword sized for an ogre in one hand, even with an EWP; therefore, the weapon which is sometimes called an "ogre's greatsword" isn't, in fact, a greatsword sized for an ogre.

What it models marvellously well, on the other hand, is a bastard sword sized for an ogre.

My point is that by calling it a bastard sword your changing the rules.

Having a Fullblade in 3.5 at all is changing the rules. I elect to change them as little as possible, by simply mapping it to an existing weapon which fits it mechanically - the Large bastard sword. And as a Large weapon, it imposes a -2 penalty on a Medium wielder.

-Hyp.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

i changed my text a bit. I dident know you would respond so fast. anyway, having 3.0 stuff in 3.5 is not changing the rules. when 3.5 came out, wasn't their a statement that 3.0 is compatible with 3.5 if it wasn't updated.

 

[Thurbane]

AFAIK, Monkey Grip and Powerful Build do not stack, but do Strongarm Bracers stack with either of these?

 

[Hypersmurf]

when 3.5 came out, wasn't their a statement that 3.0 is compatible with 3.5 if it wasn't updated.

And if so, then as a weapon designed for a Large creature, when you port it into 3.5, Medium creatures take a -2 penalty.

I suppose to fit the 3.5 weapon system, you could introduce a Medium version. The Medium Fullblade would be a 1d10 19-20/x2 Slashing Exotic One-Handed Melee Weapon, too large to use in one hand without special training, which could be used two-handed as a martial weapon. A Medium creature would take no -2 penalty using the Medium Fullblade, only the Large one.

-Hyp.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

that a bastard sword. A fullbade is a twohanded weapon for a medium creature. You also change the flavor entirely.

Having a Fullblade in 3.5 at all is changing the rules. I elect to change them as little as possible, by simply mapping it to an existing weapon which fits it mechanically - the Large bastard sword. And as a Large weapon, it imposes a -2 penalty on a Medium wielder.

-Hyp.

However i see this as changing the intent of the fullbade itself. bastard swords were in 3.0, so whats the need for a fullbade? Why did it not say that instead of wielding a bastard sword in one hand it lets you wield a large bastard sword in two? I dont think your 3.5 conversion works well as their is already monkygrip. Monkygrip is extremely sub par but not only that, monkygrip at least lets you apply it to all weapons while exotic weapon fullblade does not. This is why I do not think your conversion works well.

the fullblade without penalty does not break the game, and is balanced with power attack.

how about this conversion

its a two handed exotic weapon 2d8 19-20x2. its med and a tad on the heavy side. I dont see how you could say adding a -2 penalty were one did not exist before is a clean conversion.

It has the same mechanics as before and it interacts with the rules in the same way that it would have in 3.0.

 

[Hypersmurf]

that a bastard sword. A fullbade is a twohanded weapon for a medium creature.

Only if they take the EWP feat.

... like, say, a Large Bastard Sword.

However i see this as changing the intent of the fullbade itself. bastard swords were in 3.0, so whats the need for a fullbade?

In 3E, it was uncommon for there to be an odd-sized weapon. Halflings didn't use halfling-sized greatswords; they used a longsword. They didn't use halfling-sized longswords; they used a shortsword. Outsized weapons existed, but because of the way the sizing system worked, they weren't the first stop.

The Fullblade in 3E, however, worked identically to how a bastard sword in 3E, increased one size, would have worked. So in 3.5, I treat it identically to a Medium bastard sword, increased one size.

You ask "What's the need for a Fullblade?" I answer "Exactly!"

-Hyp.

 

[irdeggman]

Re: fullblade.

I think this will be useful.

First the weapon was reclassified to a huge exotic weapon in the Arms and Equipment Guide (it has the same text description as was in Sword and Fist). I think that helps to clarify its intended use. And 3.0 Monkey grip wouldn't allow a human to use it one-handed anymore since it is now 2 sizes larger.

Also here is a 3.5 FAQ entry related to it.

From 3.5 FAQ:

My stonechild (from Races of Stone) fighter wields a fullblade (from Arms and Equipment Guide). If he increases the weapon’s size by one category, can he still wield it, and would it give him reach?

First of all, your stonechild couldn’t wield such a weapon. While a stonechild (as a Medium creature) can wield a normal fullblade as a two-handed weapon thanks to the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (fullblade) feat, he couldn’t wield a fullblade of a larger size category at all, even with the feat.

(Although the fullblade is described in Arms and Equipment Guide as a “Huge” weapon, this is a reference to the 3.0 rules for weapon size. Using the 3.5 rules for weapon sizes, the fullblade used by Medium creatures is actually a Large twohanded weapon with a special rule that allows a Medium creature to wield it with two hands.)

Normally, the smallest creature that could wield a Huge fullblade (that is, a fullblade sized for two-handed use by a Huge creature) would be a Large creature. A Medium creature with the powerful build racial trait, such as a goliath or halfgiant, with the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (fullblade) feat could also wield a Huge fullblade.

As to the second issue, regardless of the wielder’s or the weapon’s size, a fullblade is not a reach weapon. Even a Medium creature with powerful build who wields a Huge fullblade can use it only against creatures at a distance of his natural reach (typically 5 feet), but no more than that.