Pact Blade Double Sword . . .

[fissionessence]

. . . and other two-handed weapons with weapon-restricted properties.

Are these legal? Pact blade requires a light blade, and a double sword is 'half' light blade. So it would seem like the half that gets the properties should be the light blade end, but the double weapon rules say the 'main' end gets the properties, which should then be the heavy blade end.

Any insight or affirmed answers?

~

 

[James McMurray]

I'd allow it. From a purely technical standpoint it's probably not legal, but they're spending a feat to know how to use the double weapon, and I don't see any balance issues beyond those that already exist for double weapons, at least until the view Mike Mearls expressed here is made official.

 

[Webby140]

I'd allow it... can't see any major reason why they shouldn't have it. Doesn't seem that unbalanced, seeing as you make 1 melee attack anyway, the double weapon just gives you a defensive bonus etc.

 

[Asmor]

The entire weapon is both a heavy blade and a light blade. There's no rules reason to disallow it, and there's no balance reason to disallow it. I fail to see the problem.

 

[aurance]

By RAW, a double sword is not "half" anything. It's all heavy blade and all light blade. So yes, Pact Double Sword would be legal.

 

[cmbarona]

I've been seeing a lot of discussion of the double sword as both heavy and light blade. I'd invite you to take a look at the picture of it in the AV. For those without access, it looks similar to the "swords" used by elves in the Lord of the Rings movie when initially fighting Sauron, before Isildur took his ring (I forget the name of the battle; anyone?). The point is, it's best to imagine it in a similar sense as the Khopesh, which is both heavy blade and axe. Each blade on a double sword is thick enough to be swung like a heavy blade, yet thin enough to be thrust like a light blade. Both ends are identical, it just requires 2 hands to fight with it effectively (although I think the elves had shields in LotR; again, anyone?).

 

[aurance]

I've been seeing a lot of discussion of the double sword as both heavy and light blade. I'd invite you to take a look at the picture of it in the AV. For those without access, it looks similar to the "swords" used by elves in the Lord of the Rings movie when initially fighting Sauron, before Isildur took his ring (I forget the name of the battle; anyone?). The point is, it's best to imagine it in a similar sense as the Khopesh, which is both heavy blade and axe. Each blade on a double sword is thick enough to be swung like a heavy blade, yet thin enough to be thrust like a light blade. Both ends are identical, it just requires 2 hands to fight with it effectively (although I think the elves had shields in LotR; again, anyone?).

You mean this thing? LotR movie sword It's not a double sword. The name of the fight is Battle of Dagorlad.

I can't imagine any way you'd use a supposed "double sword" that would be more efficient than a regular sword. The second blade would extremely limit your range of motion and reach. That aside (as I suppose this is fantasy, not reality), the fact that one weapon allows access to all heavy blade feats, light blade feats, has defensive and off-hand property is mechanically overkill. Too many things in one bag, as it were.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Then there's the most recent sage advice ruling that it does indeed count entirely as a light blade, entirely as a heavy blade and so on. So, it becomes a no-brainer for a tempest fighter? +4/+4 proficiency to hit, 1d8+2 in each hand and +2 AC, +1 Ref, whereas not spending the feat leaves you with +4/+4, 1d6+2 in each hand and +1 AC, +1 Ref with shortswords, or +3/+4, 1d8+1, 1d6+2, +1 AC, +1 Ref with longsword/shortsword. Oh and the poor sword and boarder has one more reflex than you, and much less damage.