Tulwar and/or Sabers
Arkhandus
First Post
They just use scimitar stats, cuz they're effectively the same (remember, the 3E rules don't usually differentiate between multiple cultural styles of the same weapons, with a few exceptions; thus why katanas, despite being rather differently shaped from war swords/long swords/broad swords, and varying in size, are just classified as 'bastard swords' in 3E because it's part of the 3E design philosophy).
The saber, though, could represent it I guess. It's statted in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book, as a weapon used by the Tuigan and Nars. Sabers in the FRCS are medium, martial, melee weapons (in 3.5 they'd be classified as one-handed weapons, BTW), that deal 1d8 slashing and piercing damage, with a threat range/multiplier of 19-20/x2, weighing 4 pounds and costing 20 gold pieces. Plus the saber yields a +1 circumstance bonus on attack rolls with it when mounted. So in other words it's kinda broken, a longsword that gets an extra +1 on mounted attack rolls without any balancing drawbacks. :\
Kinda like the Forgotten Realms in general.
The saber, though, could represent it I guess. It's statted in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book, as a weapon used by the Tuigan and Nars. Sabers in the FRCS are medium, martial, melee weapons (in 3.5 they'd be classified as one-handed weapons, BTW), that deal 1d8 slashing and piercing damage, with a threat range/multiplier of 19-20/x2, weighing 4 pounds and costing 20 gold pieces. Plus the saber yields a +1 circumstance bonus on attack rolls with it when mounted. So in other words it's kinda broken, a longsword that gets an extra +1 on mounted attack rolls without any balancing drawbacks. :\
Kinda like the Forgotten Realms in general.
It's already in the meatshield's best interest to protect the squishy guys as they can either nuke them 'till glow or heal/raise them.Arkhandus said:Anyway, you got item creation feats available; you can solicit the party's wizard or cleric to magic up your masterwork saber, and just pay him and promise continued protection of his frail personage.
Elder-Basilisk
First Post
Nor are D&D Falchions falchions. D&D falchions are some kind of great scimitar. Real life falchions were heavy one-handed chopping swords.
wildstarsreach
First Post
Arkhandus said:They just use scimitar stats, cuz they're effectively the same (remember, the 3E rules don't usually differentiate between multiple cultural styles of the same weapons, with a few exceptions; thus why katanas, despite being rather differently shaped from war swords/long swords/broad swords, and varying in size, are just classified as 'bastard swords' in 3E because it's part of the 3E design philosophy).
The saber, though, could represent it I guess. It's statted in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book, as a weapon used by the Tuigan and Nars. Sabers in the FRCS are medium, martial, melee weapons (in 3.5 they'd be classified as one-handed weapons, BTW), that deal 1d8 slashing and piercing damage, with a threat range/multiplier of 19-20/x2, weighing 4 pounds and costing 20 gold pieces. Plus the saber yields a +1 circumstance bonus on attack rolls with it when mounted. So in other words it's kinda broken, a longsword that gets an extra +1 on mounted attack rolls without any balancing drawbacks. :\
Kinda like the Forgotten Realms in general.
Should be exotic then. A saber requires more technological and skill. Otherwise it would have turned up earlier in our history. Personally a d6 with those same benefits would be more appropriate with a martial weapon. I've personally loved the idea of twin sabers. It would be hard to master and it would be considered more of a show off style. People love the twin scimitars of Drizzit. The problem with them if you handled them and compare to the saber, the saber is slightly smaller and much more weildy than the scimitars making a 2 weapon style easier to master IMHO.
Arkhandus
First Post
Darklone said:
Which is exactly what I said, just in a different way. I said that the 3E design philosophy is why katanas are just considered bastard swords in 3E; they use the same stats and all (just with the addition of being masterwork, which doesn't really make sense anyway since katanas varied in quality too). Similarly, the scimitar should encompass all similar historical weapons, except for the much larger/longer ones, which the falchion should encompass.
Yes, I know D&D falchions aren't the same as historical falchions, but historical accuracy isn't really D&D's focus anyway, heheh.
And I mentioned how the saber is Forgotten Realms material; FR stuff just has to be more powerful than core stuff, otherwise it wouldn't be the Realms, now would it? :\ It could easily have just been a scimitar in D&D stats, but that would be inconsistent with the escalation of power in the Realms compared to non-Realms material....
Just like you can't kick a random pebble in the Realms without hitting Elminster's This, or Elminster's That, or Elminster's Simulacrum, or Elminster's Old Vorpal Left Shoe +5, or Elminster himself.
*shrug*Arkhandus said:
You get a +1 to attacks when mounted. I've never seen a mounted character last too long in a campaign because of the difficulty of keeping the damned mount alive. That, and to be an effective mounted character, you need feats; feats that would otherwise be spent on getting better at your longsword. It's also 5gp more than a longsword or scimitar; not that it would matter for a PC, but it would matter for an army equipping its forces: only the mounted guys would get sabers, and then only the folks who weren't wielding lances or spears.
It's really a wash. I'd drop the piercing damage (can't imagine how a saber is supposed to pierce more than a longsword), but other than that it's fine.
... they do?wildstarsreach said:
Similar Threads
