Except that the bastard sword requires a feat. It's harder to wield properly, so that's why it's Superior Melee.
I thought the same thing initially - the the 2H sword is weak by comparison. And it is, until you take into account that you have to spend a feat to get it.
AND - that a two-handed weapon specialty fighter cannot benefit from the +1 bonus to attack with the bastard sword since it is a one-handed weapon. You get more damage (by +1) but you don't get the +1 to attack.
That is unless you use a shield and are one-handed weapon specialized, in which case you don't get the +1 damage until you drop your shield.
Really, the more I tried to pull this apart, the more I realized that it makes absolute mechanical sense as written.
Let's be sensible and remember we
aren't only talking about Fighters here, Mercutio. There are specific ways in which a 2h-sword is slightly better for a Fighter, as you outlined, but do any of them apply to any other classes? Or are they all, in fact, better off using a bastard sword than a 2h?
Also, as I don't have my books with me, am I correct in assuming that it costs the same amount of feats to buy proficiency in the Bastard Sword as it does for the 2H sword if you're a character not naturally granted either? Is there some restriction I've forgotten.
So the question, for me, still remains, as I'm concerned about more than just Fighters.
Another bookless idiot question - is there a heroic-tier Feat the 2h sword fighter could buy to make his 2h sword equal the bastard sword in damage? I mean, I can understand that a feat is probably worth 1 damage (or more), but I can't understand why a person using a bigger, meaner sword can't buy a feat to up his damage too.
Maybe that's all the house-ruling we need? Greatsword Master, req. 13 Str, 13 Dex, +1 damage (or +2?) with two-handed swords used two-handed. Maybe it needs to be specific to size M creatures or something, because I imagine the +2 damage feats for Dwarves and Eladrin are only balanced because they are size M.
