Which sword would you take?

[yennico]

My PC can not fight with a bastard sword but I will take both One for my cohort and the other for the fighter of the party.

 

[CRGreathouse]

The two seem fairly well balanced. I'd choose #1 if I had to make a choice, but only because I'm fire-aligned.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I think #1 is actually a better weapon, but I like #2 for the coolness factor.

 

[burnrate]

#2 for sure. I'm biased toward cold weapons, for no real reason. I really like the ability to dispel magical fires, the AC/Saves/Initiative is great, and Icy burst is a fantastic addition. Obviously the campaign would dictate the relative power of each, but I would grab #2 with all else being equal.

 

[The Human Target]

Depends on the character but I'd have to go with #2 for personal tastes. And I just like cold stuff.

 

[the Jester]

This is what I call a tough choice.

It would depend on the campaign and the type of pc I was playing.

...You sure I couldn't have them both?

 

[Numenorean]

They are both cool weapons. However the choice has been made, it is sword #1. That will be the blade that sees the light of day in the campaign.

 

[Liolel]

I would pick #1. The protection from evil while drawn seems really nice. You don't have to worry about charm and dominate spells which can be really nasty if your hit with one at the wrong time. Also if you are effected by a dominate spell while you don't have your sword drawn, the most likely command you would get would be to attack your party which would lead you to drawing the sword.

 

[Corsair]

#2! I <3 unnamed bonuses, and I would probably never use the defender ability. (I'm much more likely to dump those bonuses into power attack )

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Neither. I think sentient swords are one of the dumbest things in D&D.

I'm with the Munchkin's Guide to Power Gaming on this one. Your sword SHOULD NOT TALK. Never. Ever.

That being said, I'd go for # 1. I'm not a big fan of elemental damage on weapons.

Brad