Weapon Size Confusion

[Staffan]

Why bother with getting Martial Weapon Proficiency (greatclub) when you already have Simple Weapon Proficiency (large heavy mace)?

That's because the Greatclub is probably the suckiest of all sucky weapons in the book, and really should be a Simple weapon. A martial weapon ought to be on par with the greataxe.

 

[hong]

That's because the Greatclub is probably the suckiest of all sucky weapons in the book, and really should be a Simple weapon. A martial weapon ought to be on par with the greataxe.

Well, I chose greatclub because it's the closest thing to an oversized mace. But the point still holds if you substitute a greatsword or greataxe. A large heavy mace does 1d8 upsized which is either 2d6 or 1d12, depending on if/how the upsizing rules get changed.

 

[Duke Frinn]

So you can wield an oversized heavy mace (albeit with a -2 penalty), and deal the same damage you would with a greataxe - 1d12.

I think the MWP feat is worth it, if only for eliminating the penalty. But anyway -

If you actually had the Martial Weapon Proficiency feat, you could wield an oversized greataxe and deal 2d8 damage!

Seems balanced to me.

It is worth noting that wielding oversized weapons is almost never worth it - you can either wield a medium greatsword at a -2 from power attack, and deal 2d6+4 damage (average 11), or use a large greatsword with no power attack, but with a -2 penalty, and deal 2d8 (average 9).

 

[Privateer]

Well, I chose greatclub because it's the closest thing to an oversized mace. But the point still holds if you substitute a greatsword or greataxe. A large heavy mace does 1d8 upsized which is either 2d6 or 1d12, depending on if/how the upsizing rules get changed.

Well, it would just have a x2 critical range, and expanding the critical range or damage by one step is normally what happens when a weapon goes from simple to martial to exotic -- for instance, we have a simple heavy mace, 1d8 x2, and a martial longsword, with 1d8 19-20 x2. Similar things happen with the longsword and bastard sword (with damage, this time) and the club and the javelin (as they both remain throw-able). I think that's a perfectly good reason to pick up the martial proficiency, hong.

 

[Staffan]

Well, I chose greatclub because it's the closest thing to an oversized mace. But the point still holds if you substitute a greatsword or greataxe. A large heavy mace does 1d8 upsized which is either 2d6 or 1d12, depending on if/how the upsizing rules get changed.

That's my point. An upsized heavy mace (or morningstar) would be a simple weapon that does 1d12 or 2d6 damage with a crit multiplier of x2. An upsized warhammer would basically be a blunt greataxe. Instead, we get the stupid greatclub that does 1d10/x2 - hardly even fit to be a simple weapon, but it's considered martial!

 

[Grog]

I don't understand the reason for this change. I mean, what's the difference between a medium-sized longsword and a small greatsword?

It doesn't seem to me that this adds anything except some unnecessary complications.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I hate to sound like a broken record, but...

Wait until you see it.

So far, you've only heard one part of the system for classifying weapons. Trust me, when you look at the final product, it all makes sense. There's no confusion like "Wait, is the medium greatsword a large weapon?"

 

[Pbartender]

I don't understand the reason for this change. I mean, what's the difference between a medium-sized longsword and a small greatsword?

Simply put... the proportions are different.

Consider the difference between the hand of an ogre, and that of a human, or between a human and halfling. Weapons built for smaller creatures would necessarily have thinner, shorter grips, whereas weapons made for larger creatures would have longer, thicker grips... regardless of the actual size of the weapon.

The blade of a halfling longsword might be the same length as the blade of a human shortsword... But the halfling hilt would be a little too small for the human to wield comfortably, and the human hilt would be a little too thick for a halfling's hands... hence the -2 penalty.

 

[Ranger REG]

I don't understand the reason for this change. I mean, what's the difference between a medium-sized longsword and a small greatsword?

It doesn't seem to me that this adds anything except some unnecessary complications.

Probably because there is a difference with size of weapons when crafted for and used by races of various sizes, especially when weapon proficiency come into play.

A Giant's dagger is still a Giant's dagger, not an equivalent of a greatsword, while a Medium-sized person with simple weapon proficiency can use a dagger, he will find the sheer size of a Giant's dagger difficult to wield, hence the weapon size penalty but not the nonproficiency penalty (if said person do not have a martial weapon -- greatsword -- proficiency feat).

 

[Droogie]

Sure? A&EG has rules for changing range increments with weapon size...?

-Hyp.

Luckily I do have the A&EG. However, I swear I saw a thread in which Andy C mentioned that ranges won't change between sizes in the core books. I just thought that was odd.