Large Longsword = Greatsword (for Medium PC)
Medium Longsword = Longsword (for Medium PC)
Smal Longsword = Shortsword (for Medium PC)
Or do I realy get a -2 when I use this "Large" Longsword as a Greatsword?
(I get a +1 on attacks with longswords with the
Sword Scion
You have lived all your life in and around the city of Restov, growing up on tales of Baron Sirian Aldori and the exploits of your home city’s heroic and legendary swordlords. Perhaps one of your family members was an Aldori swordlord, you have a contact among their members, or you have dreamed since childhood of joining. Regardless, you idolize the heroes, styles, and philosophies of the Aldori and have sought to mimic their vaunted art. Before you can petition to join their ranks, however, you feel that you must test your mettle. Joining an expedition into the Stolen Lands seems like a perfect way to improve your skills and begin a legend comparable to that of Baron Aldori.
Benefit: You begin play with a longsword or Aldori dueling sword and gain a +1 trait bonus on all attacks and combat maneuvers made with such weapons.
RAW you would get the bonus when you wielded a small longsword or a large longsword (along with the -2 penalty for inappropriate weapons).
As ErrantPursuit intimates, the difference in the weapon is not merely the damage. One specific would be the hilt girth for a halfling's hand being vastly different than that for an ogre's hand.
A greatsword is actually constructed differently than a longsword.
Even a Large Longsword? Yes there could be a differenz for the hilt (bigger), but I think, there are also Longswords with big and smal hilts, too.
Just creating oversized versions of smaller weapons does not equate a different weapon, even if they are very similar. You still get -2 as far as I am aware.
A Large Longsword is a two handed sword (like the greatsword) and has the same DMG as the greatsword... so why the -2 penality?
On the other hand, the bastardsword is a "exotic one hand sword" which could be used without penality as two handed weapon ...
Do you mean in regards to the trait, or are you thinking of creating a houserule for inappropriately sized weapons?
Yes in regard to the trait - I think the trait should allow to use shortswords and greatswords, too.
But I also think the rules for inappropriately sized weapon is a little strange/broken. Because the large longsword is very, very similar to a greatsword. And you can get more DMG through taking bigger light weapons:
1-handed Weapon -> large version (two handed) DMG: 1D10 -> 2D8
light weapon -> hugh version (two handed) DMG: 1D8 -> 2D6 -> 3D6
(only -2 attack for more DMG)
btw.: I also think that not every 1-handed longsword could be used 2-handed. There are "1,5 handed" longswords, which could be used in both ways, like the bastardsword.
As ErrantPursuit intimates, the difference in the weapon is not merely the damage. One specific would be the hilt girth for a halfling's hand being vastly different than that for an ogre's hand.
Yes, but there are also humans / elves / ... with verry big and verry smal hands, too. (I am a tall man with smal hands, so I use a longsword with a slim, short hilt, too.)
Again, RAW a greatsword is a different sword to a longsword. Just as a bastardsword and shortsword are all different.
|
The rules for inappropriately sized weapons are fitting.
The weapons are shaped for different sized creatures, and would have things like differently sized handles.
The weapons, no matter the size, count as the weapons they are, and never a different weapon. Small Longsword and Large Longsword, count as a Longsword, no matter who wields them.
The trait effects any Longsword or Aldori Dueling Sword you wield, no matter the size.
Yes the rules are clear about a dagger / shortsword longsword / bastardsword / greatsword (...) but the rules about greater/smaler versions also say that:
Every weapon has a size category. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed.
A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon's size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.
Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies.
The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder's size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. For example, a Small creature would wield a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon. If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.
light weapon (medium shortswort 1d6) -> 1-handed weapon (medium longsword 1d8) -> 2-handed weapon (medium greatsword 2d6)
-> like in the "Table: Tiny and Large Weapon Damage", same for smal creature short- (1d4), long- (1d6), greatsword (1d8)
... with Jotungrip (Ex) you can use a 2-handed weapons as a 1-handed weapon
The trait effects any Longsword or Aldori Dueling Sword you wield, no matter the size.
I can wield a large longsword (2d6) with -1 or take a greatsword (2d6) without penality ... the stats are the same.
In the trait there is no "sized for you" like in weapon finesse or duelling sword. So why can I use a large longsword but no greatsword (with trait bonus)?
Der Origami Mann
You can twist the words however you like, but the RAW answer isn't going to change.
A large sized longsword =/= A medium sized greatsword.
So as it pertains to your original question, the Sword Scion trait bonus only applies for longswords and Aldori duelling swords.
You can twist the words however you like, but the RAW answer isn't going to change.
A large sized longsword =/= A medium sized greatsword.
I don´t want to twist the words, I want to understand the meaning and the idea, why a large longsword =/= medium greatsword.
Perhaps the trait Sword Scion should be get a FAQ with: "You begin play with a longsword or Aldori dueling sword and gain a +1 trait bonus on all attacks and combat maneuvers made with such weapons sized for you."
|
|
Because the medium longsword, short sword, and great sword all have a hilt diameter that is roughly the same and determined by the size of the medium hand that is holding it, while small creatures have hands half as large. Thus a human using a halfing longsword as a medium shortsword is holding a shortsword that has a hilt sized for a child. It may be long enough, but it is too thin to get a good grip on it like he would normally do.
FLite has most of the reasoning for why - from a reasoned fluff perspective.
The crunch RAW reason is simply because they are stated as different things.
I don't think the trait needs a FAQ, it's pretty straightforward to understand.
For the simplest raw answer that you haven't swat down: each of those weapons do different kinds of damage. A greatsword can only do slashing damage, while a long sword can do slashing and piercing, and the short sword can do piercing. You can try to argue about how that might be due to size, but the precedent is set well enough with the fact that a dagger can do slashing while a short sword can't.
Another way to look at it is this: Can you effectively wield a fire extinguisher as a club in real life? No, it is to wide and awkward to hold properly, so it is just a metal bludgeon rather than all the advantages of leverage found in a normal club.
|
Dagger/short sword/longsword/greatsword are not the same weapon at different sizes!
No matter their similarities (they are all bladed weapons), they are different weapons with different characteristics.
Just because two different weapons happen to do 2d6 damage, this doesn't make them the same weapon!
A longsword and a greatsword are different weapons, even if the longsword is made the same size as a greatsword.
Thus a human using a halfing longsword as a medium shortsword is holding a shortsword that has a hilt sized for a child. It may be long enough, but it is too thin to get a good grip on it like he would normally do.That´s my problem with it:
Yes, but there are also humans / elves / ... with verry big and verry smal hands, too. (I am a tall man with smal hands, so I use a longsword with a slim, short hilt, too.)
I can handle a "child sword" better than the most "normal swords", AND it´s no problem to make the hilt a little bigger, too. A good drip is a thing of training (I do kendô and european sword fighting in my freetime).
Just because two different weapons happen to do 2d6 damage, this doesn't make them the same weapon!
I don´t speak over making a longsword in a club (and yes, some fighter handle a sword like a club), even if you can do B-damage with a longsword (in real) it´s not the "normal way" to handle it ...
(...) each of those weapons do different kinds of damage. (...)
this is a good point, but I don´t think, that you can do pircing damage with a large longsword (if you can´t do it with a greatsword).
Can you effectively wield a fire extinguisher as a club in real life? No, it is to wide and awkward to hold properly, so it is just a metal bludgeon rather than all the advantages of leverage found in a normal club.
I would say that a so big item like a fire extinguisher is bigger/taler than a 2-handed weapon
->|
|
|
--> Again. I want to understand the meaning and the idea, why a large longsword =/= medium greatsword. Ok there is a differenze between the hilt (like by all weapons that not made for one person) and the damage type (S and P), but that´s it.
In 3.0 they actually were the same IIRC.
(It had to come at some point in a thread like this)
Weapon size:Every weapon has a size category. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed.A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon's size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.
Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies.
The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder's size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. For example, a Small creature would wield a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon. If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.
You bolded the wrong part. Read that sentence. It's the rule. What's the issue here?
They were, but you ended up with some odd situations like... there exists no longsword for huge creatures. Oh, sure there were probably stats in the monster manual (I don't have it to hand) for things like Storm Giants, but a greatsword was a light weapon for them. The 3.5 solution is much more elegant and openly inclusive.
To take a little look at the maths of it all, though, and using a much cleaner example (short spear versus long spear), here we go.
A large creature of the same proportions as a human will have hands that cover four times the area of a human hand. The area gripped by the hand on a weapon will be proportional for a creature the weapon is designed for.
Assuming that the hand holding the weapon forms a perfect cylinder (it makes the maths easier), and knowing that the surface area of a cylinder is 2 x Pi x r x l, we can see that for a human hand covering area Y, a large creature's hand covers area 4Y, and we can solve. (r is the radius of a human grip, R is the radius of a large creature's grip.)
Y = 2 x Pi x r x l
Is equivalent to
4Y = 2 x Pi x R x 2l
or Y = Pi x R x l
Therefore 2 x Pi x r x l = Pi x R x l
Cancelling down, we see that R = 2r
Conclusion: the grip-radius of a large creature is twice that of a medium creature.
It is reasonable to assume that the grip-radius is directly proportional to the haft radius of the weapon for an appropriately sized creature. So, for a short spear, the haft-radius for a large creature will be twice that of a medium creature. The same holds true for the long spear.
We're interested in the case of the large creature's short spear = medium creature's long spear question, though.
For this, make an assumption: a medium short spear has an optimal haft-radius for a medium creature, and that while a long spear may well have a greater haft-radius, it must still allow the medium creature to grip comfortably and wield it effectively.
For me, my maximum haft-radius is pretty damn near 1 inch, maybe a little larger. That's about the biggest long spear I could wield effectively. Conversely, a half-inch radius (about that of a thin marker pen) would be utterly ineffectual in a four-foot spear.
Conclusion: a long spear has less than twice the haft-radius of a short spear.
Taking those points together, a large creature's short spear has twice the haft-radius of a medium creature's long spear, and a medium creature's long spear has less than twice the haft-radius of a medium creature's short spear.
Conclusion: a large creature's short spear is too large to wield effectively as a long spear for a medium creature.
How to solve? Apply a penalty when people try.
Yes, I'm aware that I made some huge assumptions (especially relating to the haft-radius proportions of short and long spears), but the basic conclusion is, I believe, valid.
Because the medium longsword, short sword, and great sword all have a hilt diameter that is roughly the same and determined by the size of the medium hand that is holding it, while small creatures have hands half as large. Thus a human using a halfing longsword as a medium shortsword is holding a shortsword that has a hilt sized for a child. It may be long enough, but it is too thin to get a good grip on it like he would normally do.
The length of the hilt is also an issue; a greatsword has a much longer hilt in proportion to its blade than a longsword. There are some greatsword techniques that rely on this (you separate your hands for more leverage, or you "choke up" on the sword to adjust the balance and get a little more speed. Can't do that without a full-length greatsword hilt.
Indeed, the hilt of a greatsword itself was used as a striking surface; when you've got six feet of unsharpened steel (few greatswords were sharpened all the way from the point to the hilt; many weren't sharpened at all), you can easily grab halfway down the blade with your left hand and use your the mace-like flange at the end of the hilt that the blacksmith so kindly put there to bash your opponent. But a typical longsword doesn't have that flange, and it would mess up the balance if it did.
So, yeah, more reasons why Large longsword != Medium greatsword.
Why does the large cylinder have to multiply it's height by 2?
The width of a large creature's hand is twice that of a medium creature. That's actually the part that lets us equate the two formulae simply: I've used "l" to be the width of a medium creature's hand (making it the length of the simple cylinder I used), so a large creature's hand is 2 x l.
A : The swallow may fly south with the sun or the house martin or the plover may seek warmer climes in winter, yet these are not strangers to our land?
S #1: Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?
A : Not at all. They could be carried.
S #1: What? A swallow carrying a coconut?
A: It could grip it by the husk!
S #1: It's not a question of where he grips it! It's a simple question of weight ratios! A five ounce bird could not carry a one pound coconut.
A: Well, it doesn't matter. Will you go and tell your master that Arthur from the Court of Camelot is here.
S #1: Listen. In order to maintain air-speed velocity, a swallow needs to beat its wings forty-three times every second, right?
A: Please!
S #1: Am I right?
A: I'm not interested!
S #2: It could be carried by an African swallow!
S #1: Oh, yeah, an African swallow maybe, but not a European swallow. That's my point.
S #2: Oh, yeah, I agree with that.
A: Will you ask your master if he wants to join my court at Camelot?!
S #1: But then of course a-- African swallows are non-migratory.
S #2: Oh, yeah...
S #1: So they couldn't bring a coconut back anyway...
Sorry this is where this post is heading in my mind.