Monkey Grip in CW

[Bouncer]

Just a quick question.

My Dwarven fighter can "monkey grip" a LARGE dwarven waraxe for 2D8 of damage one-handedly.

Can he using this feat grip a HUGE dwarven waraxe two-handedly for 3D8 of damage?

And of course, when enlarged, he gives 4D8 of damage with this HUGE waraxe?

Thanks.

 

[Anabstercorian]

Just a quick question.

Sure.

My Dwarven fighter can "monkey grip" a LARGE dwarven waraxe for 2D8 of damage one-handedly.

Yes.

Can he using this feat grip a HUGE dwarven waraxe two-handedly for 3D8 of damage?

No.

And of course, when enlarged, he gives 4D8 of damage with this HUGE waraxe?

No.

Thanks.

Sure.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Can he using this feat grip a HUGE dwarven waraxe two-handedly for 3D8 of damage?

As Anabstercorian says - CW Monkey Grip only allows a Medium creature (like a dwarf) to use Large weapons. It doesn't allow you to use a Medium greatsword in one hand; it doesn't allow you to use a Huge longsword or a Gargantuan shortsword at all.

What it does let you do is wield a Large longsword in one hand (even though some might say that's a very similar weapon to a Medium greatsword), or a Large greatsword in two hands (even though some might say that's a very similar weapon to a Huge longsword).

A Large greataxe or greatsword does 3d6 damage; if you use one of those and are Enlarged, you would do 4d6 damage.

-Hyp.

 

[Bouncer]

Thanks Anabstercorian & Hypersmurf

Thanks for clarification

The best weapon I can find to monkey grip for a massive two handed damage is Mercurial Greatsword (2d8/3d8 when monkey gripped).

Is there any other suggestion about a good damage-dealing monkey gripped weapon anyone can share?

Bouncer

 

[Hypersmurf]

The best weapon I can find to monkey grip for a massive two handed damage is Mercurial Greatsword (2d8/3d8 when monkey gripped).

2d6. You're using the pre-errata figure. Mercurial Greatsword is 2d6S, 20/x4 critical.

-Hyp.

 

[Camarath]

Is there any other suggestion about a good damage-dealing monkey gripped weapon anyone can share?

Try a Heavy Fullblade which I believe would be 6d6 (2d8 with two increases) for a medium character. Heavy is from Magic of Faerun and the Fullblade is from A&EG.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Try a Heavy Fullblade which I believe would be 6d6 (2d8 with two increases) for a medium character. Heavy is from Magic of Faerun and the Fullblade is from A&EG.

It depends how you convert Fullblade to 3.5, though.

As written in 3E, it still makes no sense in A&EG (its third incarnation!); it should be Large, not Huge, under the 3E sizing system.

In 3.5, it makes the most sense to call it a Large Bastard Sword... which means that it behaves almost identically to the Large Dwarven Waraxe he originally asked about, and does less damage than a Large Greatsword or Greataxe.

-Hyp.

 

[Camarath]

It depends how you convert Fullblade to 3.5, though.

As written in 3E, it still makes no sense in A&EG (its third incarnation!); it should be Large, not Huge, under the 3E sizing system.

In 3.5, it makes the most sense to call it a Large Bastard Sword... which means that it behaves almost identically to the Large Dwarven Waraxe he originally asked about, and does less damage than a Large Greatsword or Greataxe.

-Hyp.

I argee it should have been a Large weapon in 3e. But in 3e it could be wielded by a Medium sized character as a Two-Handed weapon and so when sizing it for 3.5 I think it should be a Medium Two-Handed weapon. That also seems reasonable to me because the Fullbalde is a 2d8 19-20/x2 Exotic weapon and thus one damage step above the Martial Greatsword.

I think it might make the most sense to allow Bastard Swords and Fullblades a dual existence as either Bastard Swords (Martial Two-Handed/Exotic One-Handed) of a certain size or Fullblades (Exotic Two-Handed) of one sized smaller. Thus a Medium Fullblade would also be a Large Bastard Sword and a Medium Bastard Sword would also be a Small Fullblade. I believe I may use this House Rule in my games.

If you don't want do deal with a Fullblade the Sharktooth Staff from Savage Species is a fun weapon.

 

[Hypersmurf]

But in 3e it could be wielded by a Medium sized character as a Two-Handed weapon and so when sizing it for 3.5 I think it should be a Medium Two-Handed weapon.

It should be a Large One-Handed weapon. Large One-Handed weapons can wielded by Medium characters, but they are considered Two-Handed weapons.

Given that they say the Fullblade is called an "Ogre's Greatsword", it should be designed for an Ogre - as in size Large (even though it mechanically looks more like a Large Bastard Sword than a Greatsword).

I think it might make the most sense to allow Bastard Swords and Fullblades a dual existence as either Bastard Swords (Martial Two-Handed/Exotic One-Handed) of a certain size or Fullblades (Exotic Two-Handed) of one sized smaller.

That's fine if you're using the "Weapon Equivalency" variant rule, but otherwise, it doesn't make sense with the 3.5 Weapon Sizing system.

A Medium creature can already wield a Large Bastard Sword as a Two-Handed weapon with the EWP... taking a -2 penalty for inappropriately-sized weapon.

Under default 3.5, a Large longsword and a Medium greatsword are not the same weapon. Under the Weapon Equivalency variant rule, they are.

Under default 3.5, the Fullblade is pointless. Call it a Large Bastard Sword and all problems are solved.

-Hyp.

 

[Camarath]

Under default 3.5, the Fullblade is pointless. Call it a Large Bastard Sword and all problems are solved.

The point of a Fullblade for a Medium creature was that it did more damage than the greatsword. All the chaff about Large creatures and how they might weilded the weapon is completely irrelevant to medium creatures and IMO was a rather ill inspired.

Given that they say the Fullblade is called an "Ogre's Greatsword", it should be designed for an Ogre - as in size Large (even though it mechanically looks more like a Large Bastard Sword than a Greatsword).

I believe that to be "flavor text". The mechanics for a medium creature who uses the weapon are very simple it is an Exotic Two-Handed weapon. I see no reason why it would best to represent it use by a medium creature in 3.5 in any other way then allowing its use as a Medium Two-Handed weapon.