Medium character, huge bastard sword

[Hypersmurf]

as this sort of thing was certainly allowed in 3.0

Well, there was confusion about the bastard sword in 3E as well.

Let's go to the 3E Main FAQ:

If you’re Medium-size, you have to be proficient with a bastard sword to use it in one hand; if you’re not proficient, you don’t have the option to use the sword one-handed at all.

A bastard sword is a Medium-Size weapon. It follows all the rules for Medium-Size weapons, except that a Medium-Size creature wielding the sword in one hand takes a –4 attack penalty with it unless she has Exotic Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword). A Small creature using the sword in two hands is just like a Medium-Size creature wielding it in one hand. So, your halfling (or gnome) takes a –4 attack penalty when using the sword two-handed and takes no attack penalty if she has Exotic Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword) and uses two hands; because the sword is Medium-Size, a Small character cannot use it one-handed.

So the two directly contradict each other on whether a Medium creature without the EWP can use the sword in one hand. Which leaves us with some doubt as to the accuracy of the second half of the second answer...

But it seems intuitive and what the writer intended.

I've never thought so!

-Hyp.

 

[mvincent]

I've never thought so!

Even in 3.0?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Even in 3.0?

Who had Powerful Build in 3E?

-Hyp.

 

[mvincent]

Who had Powerful Build in 3E?

I was actually alluding to monkey grip there.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I was actually alluding to monkey grip there.

Monkey Grip was entirely different in 3E.

In 3E, it allowed you to wield a two-handed weapon in one hand. So no wielding extra-big greatswords like you can in 3.5; that's wielding an oversized weapon in two hands, not wielding a two-handed weapon in one hand.

The wording (working from memory) was "wield a weapon one size category larger than you in one hand" - in 3E, that meant a Large weapon (like a greatsword, greataxe, falchion) for a Medium character. A greatsword sized for a Fire Giant (what would be called a Large greatsword in 3.5) was a Huge weapon, and not covered by the 3E Monkey Grip feat.

In 3.5, a weapon one size category larger than you means a weapon of any sort - light, one-handed, two-handed - designed for a creature larger by one category. In 3E, a weapon one size category larger means, basically, something that's a two-handed weapon for you.

-Hyp.

 

[Nikub]

a quick question

im playing a medium creature that can use huge weapons. my question is in using a huge bastard sword does my reach go up to 10?

 

[Summer-Knight925]

He could do it IF he was on PCP

 

[domino]

im playing a medium creature that can use huge weapons. my question is in using a huge bastard sword does my reach go up to 10?

No, monsters who get reach with big freaking swords get reach because they're huge monsters. A Monster with a medium dagger would get the same reach. Thus, you still get to only attack monsters next to you, even though your sword barely fits in the room.

 

[emoplato]

Reach goes up to 10 feet for just wielding a large weapon, so that is a definite yes. See if you can get a actual reach weapon of that category, under the ruling of Savage Species reach weapons increase in range by 5 ft per level from medium. So, if you did that you would have a reach of 20.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I asked WotC this directly.

1) Domino is correct by RAW.

2) Emoplato's interpretation is consistent with RAI/Spirit of the rules.

The key is picking a ruling and sticking with it consistently.