Weapon Sizes and the Bastard Sword

[Brother Shatterstone]

This is why I fervently hate the way they changed it in 3.5--they claim to have removed the weapon sizes to avoid confusion, but all they've done is made them implicit and kept them there, which causes even more confusion.

No need to fret, RA. Judging by the reaction to this thread the weapon size rules are even more confusion than they use to be.

 

[Thanee]

So if you take the EWP feat, your sword loses half its hit points?`

Nope, as explained above.

Besides, this would already happen with every weapon, if you hand it to someone of a different size.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Hmm?

I'm not sure what you mean. The designation change doesn't apply to a bastard sword if you're not a creature of a different size to the bastard sword.

I mean, that the change of effort derived from a change in size would also apply to the 'special rule'.

If not, then a creature of any size can use a colossal bastard sword in two-hands, because it is written black on white, that this is possible.

If you're a Small creature, it's a two-handed weapon. What the 'too large to use in one hand' changes to in this case isn't specified; DM fiat must apply.

Right. And the only reasonable approach is to shift that in the same way IMHO (also the other special rule about two-handed use, of course).

Bye
Thanee

 

[Hypersmurf]

If not, then a creature of any size can use a colossal bastard sword in two-hands, because it is written black on white, that this is possible.

See the hooked hammer example above.

Right. And the only reasonable approach is to shift that in the same way IMHO (also the other special rule about two-handed use, of course).

I agree - it's reasonable to say that a one-handed weapon too large to use in one hand without special training is treated as a two-handed weapon too large to use in two hands without special training, when used by a creature one size smaller.

I'd consider using the variant rules from Savage Species to allow a Small creature to wield a Medium bastard sword (a two-handed weapon too large to use in two hands without special training) three- or maybe four-handed as a martial weapon, though.

-Hyp.

 

[Thanee]

The damage in the gnome hooked hammer text is just an example for the typical size, of course, to explain the 1d6/1d4 entry in the table.

Same as the 'special rule' in the bastard sword example only applies to the medium-sized one as written and has to be altered accordingly, which means, that a medium-sized wielder cannot use a large bastard sword at all, without EWP, that is.

Bye
Thanee

 

[apesamongus]

I think correctly, the bastard sword should have two entries...

two-handed martial weapon and one-handed exotic weapon

...and specify, that you cannot use the exotic entry (not even untrained) unless you possess the feat.

However, I think the part I put in bold up there makes clear, that the EWP feat is actually relevant, since it changes how the weapon is designated in relation to the wielder, and that designation is what is important.

Wouldn't that mean that it was cheaper of someone with the feat to buy a silvered version of the weapon?

 

[Starglim]

If a medium sized character has the exotic weapon proficiency Bastard sword and he comes across a large bastard sword would he be able to wield it two-handed cause of the EWP or not?

The PHB shows that the bastard sword is a one-handed exotic weapon that has the special quality that it can be wielded two-handed as a martial weapon.

Therefore a Large bastard sword can be wielded as a two-handed exotic weapon at a -2 penalty, by the normal rules for increasing size.

If the character does not have the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat, he has a total -6 penalty to do so (-4 non-proficiency, -2 wrong sized weapon).

 

[Hypersmurf]

If the character does not have the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat, he has a total -6 penalty to do so (-4 non-proficiency, -2 wrong sized weapon).

Would you allow a Medium character without the EWP to wield a Meidum bastard sword in one hand at -4, or not at all?

-Hyp.

 

[Starglim]

Would you allow a Medium character without the EWP to wield a Meidum bastard sword in one hand at -4, or not at all?

By the RAW, yes, a non-proficient wielder could take a -4 to use it one-handed.

I really can't see a case to do this as a constant fighting tactic. If you had a large shield in your off hand, you could easily be caught out for multiple rounds when you met an opponent with high enough AC for a -4 attack penalty to shut down your ability to attack it. If you had a magic item in your off hand you'd probably have to drop it in the same circumstance.

 

[Hypersmurf]

By the RAW, yes, a non-proficient wielder could take a -4 to use it one-handed.

How?

"A bastard sword is too large to use in one hand without special training."

If you don't have special training, it's too large to use. Not too large to use well, or too large to use without a penalty; too large to use.

-Hyp.