My Rage-domain cleric of Ragathiel is already using a Large bastard sword. A Medium bastard sword weighs 6# and is about 4' in overall length with a blade not more than 2" wide (probably a little less.)
A Large bastard sword weighs 12# and assuming it retains the proportions of the Medium version, is about 5' in length as well as being correspondingly wider (2.5") and thicker.
I'm considering having her sorceress cohort pick up the 3rd party spell overcompensation, which This would bring the weapon's base damage up to 3d8, with bonus damage from its enhancement bonus, from the cleric's rage-boosted STR and from the destructive smite domain ability.
Do Huge weapons weigh twice as much as Large ones, or should there be a greater multiplier, like 4x? If 2x, then a Huge bastard sword weighs 24# and would run about 6'4" long, with a 3.15" wide blade.
Seems like they should be bigger/heavier. A Huge creature -- say 16' tall with a 15' reach -- would be wielding a weapon less than half its height, which isn't usual for bastard swords.
In terms of length, I guess we're saying a bastard sword is approx 2/3 as long as a bipedal creature of the same size. So 4 ft long for a 6 ft human etc.
Huge humanoids are 16-32 feet tall. That would put a proportionately sized bastard sword at about 10-21 feet long.
We're wandering into the entire "giants are impossible because mass increases by the cube of height while cross-sectional area increases by the square" though. It's a fantasy game, the physics don't have to work properly.
Your answer is in the Enlarge Person spell:
"This spell causes instant growth of a humanoid creature, doubling its height and multiplying its weight by 8."
And
"All equipment worn or carried by a creature is similarly enlarged by the spell."
So gaining one size category means x2 its height (and other dimensions) and x8 its weight. I see no reason not to apply this logic to other spells or even to just figure out the dimensions of a normal item made by or for large, huge, gigantic, or colossal creatures.
So your bastard sword would be about 16 feet long and about 8 inches wide and would weigh 384 pounds. At least it would if it were a normal bastard sword made for a normal huge creature.
The spell you're using might alter this a bit. The dimensions would be correct but you can wield it normally, so it might really only weigh about 48 pounds due to the magic of the spell - that's up to you and your GM to decide.
Once I establish the overall weapon length (assuming I can, from RAW), my next question may be: does the exta length make it into a reach weapon? Can I now hit creatures not adjacent to me, but 5' farther away?
If the game doesn't model it that way, and the increased weapon length doesn't grant an extra 5' reach, that's fine, but either way I need to know, if possible by RAW/RAI but I'll take a reasoned opinion.
If the game defies the square-cube law and says that for each increase in size category, a weapon's weight and length both double, giving me an 8' long Large bastard sword and a 16' long Huge bastard sword, then there's really no value for this cleric in the overcompensation spell -- a 6' tall character can't expect to wield a 16' long sword no matter what the spell description says.
EDIT: I did not see DM BLake's reply before posting the above.
@ DM Blake What you say about enlarge person makes perfect sense...except that enlarge person has always been problematic on its own. The affected creature's size (2x) and mass (8x) increase, along with that of his equipment, fails to be matched by the mere +2 STR increase that the spell provides.
A Medium creature with 18 STR weighs, say, 250# equipped (a 170# character lugging 80# of gear, including a 48# Large weapon.) This puts him comfortably in his Light encumbrance category, wielding a weapon that takes up roughly one-sixth of his maximum load.
Enlarged, that creature and his equipment now weigh 2000# (640# of gear including his 384# weapon)...but the character's max load is only 400#. He's shifted from Light encumbrance to "I can lift it off the ground, but not over my head, and I can only move 5' a round with it."
It would attack at your natural reach. At huge size your natural reach is up to 15 ft.
If you were wielding a huge long spear you would not be able to attack at your natural reach, but would be able to attack squares 20,25, and 30 ft.
It would attack at your natural reach. At huge size your natural reach is up to 15 ft.
If you were wielding a huge long spear you would not be able to attack at your natural reach, but would be able to attack squares 20,25, and 30 ft.
Typical reach weapons like longspears and tridents can't hurt adjacent foes because those weapons deal damage only from their tips. A sword that does slashing damage is a threat along the entire length of its blade so I think it's a valid question whether a sufficiently long sword blade could target either the adjacent square or the one just beyond it.
My size remains Medium, so *my* natural reach is 5'. If I were using a normal-sized reach weapon, the weapon itself would give me 10' reach even though I didn't change size, due to the weapon's length. Again, trying to determine whether a sufficiently long non-reach weapon becomes a de facto reach weapon due to its increased length.
Although this may all be moot now, if DM Blake is correct about a Huge bastard sword being 16' long. However, outside of enlarge person, the footnotes for weapon tables have a different idea about its weight, at least:
The way the rules work the length of the weapon is not important. Either it has the "Reach" property or it does not. It could be a hundred feet long but without having reach it still only attacks at your natural reach.
EDIT: I did not see DM BLake's reply before posting the above.
@ DM Blake What you say about enlarge person makes perfect sense...except that enlarge person has always been problematic on its own. The affected creature's size (2x) and mass (8x) increase, along with that of his equipment, fails to be matched by the mere +2 STR increase that the spell provides.
A Medium creature with 18 STR weighs, say, 250# equipped (a 170# character lugging 80# of gear, including a 48# Large weapon.) This puts him comfortably in his Light encumbrance category, wielding a weapon that takes up roughly one-sixth of his maximum load.
Enlarged, that creature and his equipment now weigh 2000# (640# of gear including his 384# weapon)...but the character's max load is only 400#. He's shifted from Light encumbrance to "I can lift it off the ground, but not over my head, and I can only move 5' a round with it."
You're absolutely correct. the tiny STR gain from the spell doesn't match the load the character now much stagger under. Although, not many medium characters are wielding 48 pound swords before Enlarge Person is cast, but the problem is still the same - all their gear gets 8x heavier.
I always hand-waive it away: You get strong enough to carry your gear as easily as you did before but that mechanically translates to only a +2 STR for attacking or using STR-based skills. Doesn't entirely make sense, but hey, it's magic.
The way the rules work the length of the weapon is not important. Either it has the "Reach" property or it does not. It could be a hundred feet long but without having reach it still only attacks at your natural reach.
I won't say you're wrong, but if you're right, that rule is really bizarre, since it is the length of the listed reach weapons that make them reach weapons in the first place. Grrr!
Also, normal reach weapons don't attack at my natural (5') reach, they grant their own (usually 10') reach.
Large or larger creatures using reach weapons can strike up to double their natural reach but can't strike at their natural reach or less.
Despite what the equipment section says the weapon you wield will always attack at your natural reach range.
A medium humanoid has 5 ft natural reach
large humanoid 10 ft natural reach
huge 15ft natural reach
If your weapon has the reach property then
medium 5 ft dead zone 10 ft reach
large 5, 10 ft dead zone 15, 20 ft reach
huge 5, 10, 15 ft dead zone 20, 25, 30 reach
weapon size doesn't matter, only whether it has the reach quality.
Okay, since the reach property by definition creates a dead zone, then making a bastard sword bigger should not grant the reach property.
This alters the question to whether a sufficiently large weapon should allow attacking non-adjacent foes even though they lack the reach property. Corvino and Insain Dragon say no, and this is likely to be correct, though it flies in the face of common sense.
Common sense also says that I can't cast fireball, quicken a fireball, jog 30 ft, drop prone, and yell a short message to my allies. By the rules that's totally a valid tactic though.
Pathfinder isn't here to be a simulation, it's just a rule set to give structure to your adventures in a magical fantasy realm.