My DM decided to try something different. He made the bastard sword do 1d8 when used one handed, and 1d10 when used two handed, and eliminated the feat requirement to use it one handed.
His logic was as it stood in the rules it made no sense why someone without a STR bonus would do the same damage with a bastard sword when used one handed or two handed?
I see where he is coming from. The only flaw comes from a game-min/max angle and that is why use a longsword then? You could make arguments on size, min STR required, etc? But still we will see how his new house rule works. Our group is not min/max types so I think it will workout with us.
I always thought the reason why they did how they did it was to agree with pure rules mechanics, but the reality was lacking. I mean lets be honest, a bastard sword is not a difficult weapon to wield (I'm 5'10", 200#, athletic and strong) in one hand ... but a flail on the other hand ... I could understand making that an exotic weapon that required a feat to use
I will say this, the bastard sword, like the ranger class, are two things that are hard to get right in a fantasy game system. I think the one game system that did them both well was the old ICE RoleMaster system ("Rollmaster"), but thats an entirely different beast
