Monster Manual IV needs errata before its publishing?

[Egres]

No, he can't. He can get proficiency with each martial weapon that he knows about, possibly even each martial weapon proficiency that exists in the game (or will ever exist), but he can never get MWP (Bastard Sword) because it does not exist. The only way to get martial proficiency with a weapon that is not a martial weapon to be proficient with all (not each) martial weapons.

Emphasis mine

Do you have a source for this statement?

I don't think you'll find one.

That's the point.

I agree. As an observer, I must say this: glass, calypso, Hypersmurf, you gave it your honest best try. You stated the facts and tried to use examples reasonably, but no matter what you said, Egres ignored most everything and tried to pursue one analogy with the Bard and the proficiencies that even there you guys were correct. Bottom line--There are some times where there are definitely two sides to an argument and either could be correct. This is not one of those times, but by this point, it is clear that Egres is not going to give it up. I think it is clear to other observers (or at least to me) the side that has obviously been trying to make cogent useful points on the matter for over 100 posts, so it should be okay to just leave it at this and end the debate. Just my two cents.

You might want to notice two things:

1) I'm not the only one on this side of the issue

2) Your attempt sounds like I'm stubbornly stating something I know is wrong, but this is not the case, and I'll admit I don't find it very polite, but maybe it's me.

Still, at least I learned a new word.

In my language is a common word for lawyers, like me.

 

[Voadam]

It is irrelevant how many martial weapon feats the bard takes, the question is whether bastard sword is a martial weapon or not.

Taking all the individual martial weapon feats does not give a bard the ability to wield without proficiency penalties a different exotic weapon he is not proficient in that has a special descriptor saying it can be used as a martial weapon.

If the bastard sword is a martial weapon then it is irrelevant whether the bard has every other martial feat. If he has every martial weapon feat and the bastard sword is a martial weapon then he has proficiency in it.

The bastard sword IS an exotic weapon. By my reading it is not a martial weapon, it is an exotic weapon that can be USED AS a martial weapon.

From the srd:
Sword, Bastard
A bastard sword is too large to use in one hand without special training; thus, it is an exotic weapon. A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.

 

[Egres]

It is irrelevant how many martial weapon feats the bard takes, the question is whether bastard sword is a martial weapon or not.

Taking all the individual martial weapon feats does not give a bard the ability to wield without proficiency penalties a different exotic weapon he is not proficient in that has a special descriptor saying it can be used as a martial weapon.

If the bastard sword is a martial weapon then it is irrelevant whether the bard has every other martial feat. If he has every martial weapon feat and the bastard sword is a martial weapon then he has proficiency in it.

The bastard sword IS an exotic weapon. By my reading it is not a martial weapon, it is an exotic weapon that can be USED AS a martial weapon.

From the srd:
Sword, Bastard
A bastard sword is too large to use in one hand without special training; thus, it is an exotic weapon. A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.

And?

No one here has any doubt about what you wrote. :\

 

[Infiniti2000]

2) Your attempt sounds like I'm stubbornly stating something I know is wrong, but this is not the case, and I'll admit I don't find it very polite, but maybe it's me.

It is just you. Rystil's trying to politely point out that you are at least close to violating the following forum rule, with my emphasis:

4) Ultimately, none of us has the single, final right answer on any rules question. We don't even have a firm agreement on what a right answer looks like: some people operate according to a Rules As Written approach, while others believe that a looser interpretation based on perceived intent and overall coherence of the rules is the best way to derive the right answer. If you and another poster can't find common ground, it's perfectly okay to agree to disagree, instead of insisting on making the other poster see that they're wrong and you're right.

You're repeating the same thing over and over again while refusing to even acknowledge many opposing points, demanding that people acknowledge your strawman (called previously a rhetorical device by someone else) as valid.

Just agree to disagree.

But, did you get what you wanted out of the thread? What was the purpose, just to point out an error in the MMIV? Was it a snide remark about WotC?

 

[glass]

The only way to get martial proficiency with a weapon that is not a martial weapon to be proficient with all (not each) martial weapons.

Do you have a source for this statement? I don't think you'll find one. That's the point.

I don't have a source that specifically says that in so many words, and if you need one to be convinced then I don't think you will ever be convince of anything in any rules debate. I am extrapolating from the ways of getting martial weapon proficiency that I know; one works, one doesn't, one might. If you know of another way, feel free to cite it.



glass.

 

[Egres]

It is just you. Rystil's trying to politely point out that you are at least close to violating the following forum rule, with my emphasis:
You're repeating the same thing over and over again while refusing to even acknowledge many opposing points, demanding that people acknowledge your strawman (called previously a rhetorical device by someone else) as valid.

May I ask you what points I did not reply to?

But, did you get what you wanted out of the thread? What was the purpose, just to point out an error in the MMIV? Was it a snide remark about WotC?

I'll admit I have hijacked my own thread.

If there's something wrong about it, I'm sure the mods will point it out.

But, really, I have nothing against WotC or anybody here.

Are you throwing mud at me only because I don't find your answers (the same answers repeated over and over again, let me note it please) satisfying?

You might want to notice that you talk about new books added, and refuse to admit that in one of those books, the FR campaign setting, there's a NPC with the martial weapon proficiency (bastard sword).

Is this the forum policy on EnWorld?

If a poster doesn't agree with most of his interlocutors isn't accepted?

I don't think so.

 

[Egres]

I don't have a source that specifically says that in so many words, and if you need one to be convinced then I don't think you will ever be convince of anything in any rules debate. I am extrapolating from the ways of getting martial weapon proficiency that I know; one works, one doesn't, one might. If you know of another way, feel free to cite it.

Ah, finally.

As I stated, you can't demonstrate your statement, just like anybody else in this thread on your side.

At least, you did admit it.

Thank you.

 

[saucercrab]

Because the bastard sword is not a martial weapon... but when it is being used in two hands, it can be treated as though it were.

While it is being used in two hands, it is, in effect, a phantom entry in the set of martial weapons. But while it isn't, it isn't.

No, he can't. He can get proficiency with each martial weapon that he knows about, possibly even each martial weapon proficiency that exists in the game (or will ever exist), but he can never get MWP (Bastard Sword) because it does not exist. The only way to get martial proficiency with a weapon that is not a martial weapon to be proficient with all (not each) martial weapons.

The bastard sword IS an exotic weapon. By my reading it is not a martial weapon, it is an exotic weapon that can be USED AS a martial weapon.

I've already listed two official sources that indicate that the bastard sword (two-handed) can be selected as a martial weapon proficiency feat.

 

[Kieperr]

Egres' point is valid. The arguments against MWP (Bastard sword) are based on the following points.

1. A bastard sword is an exotic weapon.

2. You cannot take MWP (Bastard sword) because it is not a martial weapon.

With the above points as an argument against MWP (BS), then a fighter, which is proficient with all martial weapons, would take the nonproficiency penalties when wielding a bastard sword two handed because it is still an exotic weapon. The argument against MWP (BS) because it is an exotic weapon also precludes the fighter from using it without penalty because fighters are proficient with all martial weapons, not exotic weapons.

Either all characters can use the bastard sword as a martial weapon, as stated in the sword's description, or none can. If a character can use it two handed as a martial weapon then all characters can take MWP (BS) to use it two handed without penalty. If characters cannot take MWP (BS) because it is an exotic weapon then it remains an exotic weapon for the fighter as well.

When there is a discrepency between a table and the text go with the text. There is a discrepency. The the table lists the bastard sword as a one handed exotic weapon. The bastard sword's text states that it is a one handed exotic weapon and a two handed martial weapon.

 

[Voadam]

I've already listed two official sources that indicate that the bastard sword (two-handed) can be selected as a martial weapon proficiency feat.

PH/SRD rules statements trump NPC examples and god favored weapon listings.

You cited a single NPC in the FRCS and a god in a LGJ with a favored weapon of BS.

Those are not rules sources, those are examples of rules being used. They contradict the rules as written.

The only rules involved are the definition of bastard sword and martial weapons. Bastard sword in its description says it is an exotic weapon and it is not listed on the martial weapons chart.

The rules say it is an exotic weapon. It specifically says it can be used two handed as a martial weapon but it does not say it is a martial weapon and it is not listed as a martial weapon anywhere in the core rules.