Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Calico_Jack73" data-source="post: 1521326" data-attributes="member: 14403">I agree... there was nothing wrong with the previous weapon size system of allowing a race to wield any weapon the race's size or smaller with one hand.&nbsp; A Halfling could wield a Dagger or Short Sword just fine with one hand but a Long Sword (size M) would be wielded with two hands by the same halfling where a human (size M) could wield the same weapon with one hand.&nbsp; A Large creature could wield a Great Sword (size L) one handed and wield a Long Sword in the other hand for Paired Weapons with minimal penalties with the proper feats.&nbsp; I AM glad that they got rid of Ambidextrous as an understood prerequisite for Two-Weapon fighting.&nbsp; If I remember right (and I may be wrong) florentine fencing made great use of two weapons and I refuse to believe that every person in history who practiced that style would be considered truely Ambidextrous.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Calico_Jack73, post: 1521326, member: 14403"] I agree... there was nothing wrong with the previous weapon size system of allowing a race to wield any weapon the race's size or smaller with one hand. A Halfling could wield a Dagger or Short Sword just fine with one hand but a Long Sword (size M) would be wielded with two hands by the same halfling where a human (size M) could wield the same weapon with one hand. A Large creature could wield a Great Sword (size L) one handed and wield a Long Sword in the other hand for Paired Weapons with minimal penalties with the proper feats. I AM glad that they got rid of Ambidextrous as an understood prerequisite for Two-Weapon fighting. If I remember right (and I may be wrong) florentine fencing made great use of two weapons and I refuse to believe that every person in history who practiced that style would be considered truely Ambidextrous. [/QUOTE]

Verification