large weapon: reach and sunder

[xelloss_ssj]

I'm playing a duskblade who recently decided to go around with a large greatsword (obviously thanks to monkey grip). Even if it could be considered a waste of a feat (I already had power attack, which would've made the best use of the -2 penalty) it added the flavour I was looking for, and I was content with it. Now though I'm beginning to see some potential advantages of this choice, but I'm not sure about what the rules say (actually I can't find any explicit reference).

First: I can't see it mentioned anywhere, but if I think about a large greatsword it isn't so difficult to imagine it having a reach like a guisarme. So, it's that true?

Second: a creature a category larger than medium gets a +4 on sunder attack roll: I'm inclined to think that this is a direct consequence of the size of the weapon, and not of the size of the creature itself. The main reason behind my idea is that one character using a large weapon already get a -2 on attack roll: since the "clumsiness" of using such a weapon is already taken in account it seems strange to me if you'd get another penalty. What I mean is that aside the -2, and because of it, any character should be considered for this two aspect exactly as a large creature.

Sorry if the topic has already been discussed, but I couldn't find anything.
Thanks in advance for any explanation you'll give me.

 

[DarkJester]

Unfortunately you will not gain excess reach when using a larger weapon. You are still limited to 5 foot reach even if you managed to wield a huge greatsword.

I don't recall any rule saying large creatures get a +4 to sunder. I do remember the two handed weapons getting a +4 to sunder rule, which would apply to you even if it was a normal sized greatsword.

EDIT: Found it, nevermind me. I don't believe you would gain the bonus to sunder though, as It seems like that'd come from the larger creature using his mass for the bonus, which you don't have.

 

[MarkB]

I'm playing a duskblade who recently dediced to go around with a large greatsword (obviously thanks to monkey grip). Even if it could be considered a waste of a feat (I already had power attack, which would've made the best use of the -2 penalty) it added the flavour I was looking for, and I was content with it. Now though I'm beginning to see some potential advantages of this choice, but I'm not sure about what the rules say (actually I can't find any explicit reference).

First: I can't see it mentioned anywhere, but if I think about a large greatsword it isn't so difficult to imagine it having a reach like a guisarme. So, it's that true?

No.

Second: a creature a category larger than medium gets a +4 on sunder attack roll: I'm inclined to think that this is a direct consequence of the size of the weapon, and not of the size of the creature itself. The main reason behind my idea is that one character using a large weapon already get a -2 on attack roll: since the "clumsiness" of using such a weapon is already taken in account it seems strange to me if you'd get another penalty. What I mean is that aside the -2, and because of it, any character should be considered for this two aspect exactly as a large creature.

No.

Sorry if the topic has already been discussed, but I couldn't find anything.
Thanks in advance for any explanation you'll give me.

Monkey Grip gives you precisely the bonuses described in the feat. You are effectively asking to gain some of the bonuses of being a Large creature as a result of wielding a Large weapon, and that isn't an option the feat grants.

 

[Hypersmurf]

First: I can't see it mentioned anywhere, but if I think about a large greatsword it isn't so difficult to imagine it having a reach like a guisarme. So, it's that true?

Second: a creature a category larger than medium gets a +4 on sunder attack roll: I'm inclined to think that this is a direct consequence of the size of the weapon, and not of the size of the creature itself. The main reason behind my idea is that one character using a large weapon already get a -2 on attack roll: since the "clumsiness" of using such a weapon is already taken in account it seems strange to me if you'd get another penalty. What I mean is that aside the -2, and because of it, any character should be considered for this two aspect exactly as a large creature.

As written, no, and no.

The feat lets you treat the weapon as a two-handed weapon, and you are Medium; thus, you get +4 for using a two-handed weapon, but your size category is still Medium; your Sunder is thus slightly worse than if you were using a Medium greatsword, since that would also give you the +4 (for a two-handed weapon), but not the -2.

(In 3E, Sunder took no account of weapon or wielder size, but Disarm included a modifier based on the size category of the weapon, so in 3E if you managed to wield an ogre-sized greatsword, you'd be +4 up on someone wielding a human-sized greatsword for disarming... especially since there were no -2s for inappropriate size. But in 3.5, it's based around wielder size, plus a modifier for a weapon's designation... and Monkey Grip lets you change the designation.)

And wielding a Large non-reach weapon doesn't give you reach. Someone recently asked about a combination of third-party feats and materials that let him wield a Gargantuan greatsword. Strictly, this would be a sword slightly over fifty feet long, and it would still not, technically, be a reach weapon.

-Hyp.

 

[the Jester]

Hmmm, a feat with Monkey Grip as a prereq that would allow you some of the benefits of being one size greater might be verry interesting. *ponders*

 

[DarkJester]

I actually wouldn't mind seeing a feat tree that eventually gave you all the benefits of being large, with the first feat having to be taken at first level. I'm not sure on the spacing of the abilities though.

 

[xelloss_ssj]

I was skeptical myself about the first question, since even if a large greatsword could be about as long as a guisarme you'd still be trying to hit with the middle of the blade, and not with the tip.
The second though was a bit unexpected: it seemed strange to me that I would get a global penalty of -6, when compared to a large combatant wielding the same blade with the same strenght modifier. However the explanation concerning the use of the wielder mass is rather convincing, even if it is a concept that's not commonly found in the rules.
Well, I wasn't really going to smash precious weapons anyway, eheh, I was just curious... thanks again!

 

[phindar]

It was my understanding (and I may be way, way off base with this) that larger Reach weapons had a greater reach, that a Large Guisarme had a 10' Reach rather than the Medium Guisarme's 5'. Okay, that's on PHB pg 112, reach weapons for larger creatures double their reach. (An ogre with a Reach weapon can attack opponents 15 or 20 feet away, but not opponents within 10'.) So a Medium creature with Monkey Grip wielding a Large Reach weapon would threaten opponents 15' feet away, but not 10' or adjacent?

I think I had to suss all this out when I was making a Large creature who used Monkey Grip to wield a Huge polearm a couple of months ago. I had forgotten it all in the meanwhile, and the rules on using larger Reach weapons do seem kind of ambiguous.

But all this only applies to Reach Weapons. Large Greatswords aren't Reach Weapons, so none of this really applies. Monkey Gripping Reach weapons do make MG slightly more attractive. At least it gives you something you couldn't do otherwise.

 

[Hypersmurf]

So a Medium creature with Monkey Grip wielding a Large Reach weapon would threaten opponents 15' feet away, but not 10' or adjacent?

Per the Core rules, no; the Large reach weapon will still double the rech of the Medium wielder.

The system I prefer is a modified-for-3.5 version of the one laid out in Savage Species. The heart of it is that a reach weapon effectively 'shifts' the character's natural reach outwards by a certain amount. So under this system, as you say, the Medium creature with a Large longspear would threaten 15', but not 10' or 5'; the Large creature with a Medium longspear would threaten 15' and 10', but not 5' or 20'.

-Hyp.