Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 5311412" data-attributes="member: 15538">Some. But that only means that according to some experts, some tachis do not have the characteristics of a D&D bastard sword. It certainly doesn't make katanas large.Setting side that katana is a fairly late-era term, it does nothing to ease the incongruity of literally armies of NPCs unable to wield their own weapons without burning a feat on it.That's the excluded middle. Just because we can't categorize weapons absolutely doesn't mean we can't categorize them at all. My claim is as valid as saying a gladius "should" be a shortsword or that a bo "should" be a quarterstaff. Again, I'm not begin picky about terminology. I'm just pointing out that katanas (or samurai swords, or whatever you want to call them) are not four feet long and do not require extraordinary strength to use. They had an equivalent role in Japanese warfare as the sword had European warfare. Requiring a samurai to have EWP to use such a weapon is just nonsense. I don't know of any lore or myths about katanas that suggest they are unwieldly to use in one hand. The reason katanas are treated as bastard swords, as far as I can see, is that they can be used one- or two-handed, and the authors of 3e did not think as far as realizing that longswords and scimitars can, as well. Lacking experience in actually holding a katana, as that would require difficult "research" at a shopping mall, they blithely gave it the stats of the bastard sword, not realizing they were giving it the statistics of a much different, rather heavier weapon.</blockquote>

Verification