D&D 3E/3.5 The bastard sword in 3E

[atom crash]

Every other weapon works this way. Why not the bastard sword?

Because the bastard sword is a two-handed weapon. With special training, a character can wield it one-handed.

 

[Arkhandus]

If you make the bastard sword deal 1d8 damage one-handed and 1d10 damage two-handed, why not just wield a longsword or greatsword instead? They're cheaper, and more effective for their price/weight/size. Greatswords deal 2d6 wielded in two hands, so why bother with a bastard sword two-handed? That's why the bastard sword deals 1d10 damage one-handed, so there's actually a reason to use it; take Exotic Weapon Proficiency in it and you're better off than wielding a longsword, and can still use a shield.

If you still have quibbles with it, then perhaps simply change the bastard sword to 1d8 damage, but give it a x3 critical multiplier? Making it 1d8/19-20/x3. Or increase the threat range instead to 18-20 (1d8/18-20/x2).

 

[Rystil Arden]

I wouldn't go to 19-20/x3, no matter what. That way lies the madness of the AU swordaxe. It would basically be the most powerfully crittable weapon in the game. 18-20/x2 is better, but then its just a thinblade when wielded one-handed and a courtblade when wielded two-handed, both of which already exist.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Because the bastard sword is a two-handed weapon. With special training, a character can wield it one-handed.

That's a FAQ misconception.

The bastard sword is a one-handed weapon, that is too large to be wielded in one hand without special training.

As a Medium one-handed blade, it has 5 hp; not the 10 hp of a Medium two-handed blade.

The FAQ answer is in direct contradiction to the tables; "the tables are just there for convenience" is a ridiculous answer.

-Hyp.

 

[Bastoche]

Suggestion:

Greatsword: weapon wielded 2 handed, too large to be use one handed 2D6

claymore: weapon wielded 2 handed, basically a small greatsword. Awkward one-handed (exotic feat) 1D10

bastard sword: basically a long sword with a longer handle. Can be used 2 handed. 1D8

long sword: self-explanatory. Could rule it's not possible to use it 2 handed (like the rapier) 1D8

Still simple and address your issue.

 

[Zoatebix]

I happen to like the swordaxe, mechanically. At least it always sat better with me than mercurial weapons...

 

[apesamongus]

I see the logic they used but I don't think its solid in the case of the bastard sword. It still lacks the explanation why it would do base 1d10 when wielded one handed, whereas the longsword only does 1d8, and essentially a bastard sword is a longsword (maybe a couple inches longer ~2) with a longer handle.

Because it's an exotic weapon and you pay a feat to use it one handed.

 

[silentspace]

The exotic weapon master in Complete Warrior has an ability that lets you deal more damage with a bastard sword wielded with two hands. That might fit what you're looking for.

 

[Kisanji Arael]

To me this always really begged the question, and it has been begged in my mind so many times, of what exactly a flamberge does damage wise. You know, the six foot long swords that weighed maybe ten pounds? The ones with two different crossguards and handles for convenience?

 

[Terath Ninir]

That's a FAQ misconception.

The bastard sword is a one-handed weapon, that is too large to be wielded in one hand without special training.

As a Medium one-handed blade, it has 5 hp; not the 10 hp of a Medium two-handed blade.

The FAQ answer is in direct contradiction to the tables; "the tables are just there for convenience" is a ridiculous answer.

-Hyp.

If that is the case in 3.5, then someone has screwed things up at WotC. The bastard sword is supposed to be a hand-and-a-half weapon; you can use it either one-handed or two-handed. Either. I can live with them requiring a feat to use it one-handed, but saying that it isn't a two-handed weapon is just wrong.