Search Posts
I'm not debating the intent nor am I implying one way or the other is wrong. Just pointing out that the CRB and the FAQ seem to be at odds with each other.
I'll add my two cents to the OPs predicament as to not totally derail this thread. To me, your GM is not handling the issue. Your GM needs to bring balance to the group. As others have already said that can mean limiting character sources, controlling character creation (rolling of ability scores, for example), and decisively ruling on vague or confusing rules. Your GM needs to create a reasonable yet flexible expectation for all players. Not always easy to do, for sure. Mixing new, inexperienced players with veterans is always dicey. But in the end, if the group balance is not there and your GM (or the players themselves) cannot find a solution, maybe it's best to move on...
My interpretation of the FAQ is a bit different, due to one simple line: "Note that normally you can't wield a two-handed weapon in one hand". To me this suggests that the FAQ confirms that a bastard sword is a 2H weapon, with or without EWP, and that having EWP only only allows you to wield the 2H bastard sword with one hand in this one special case. But the CRB lists the bastard sword under "Exotic Weapons - one handed", which contradicts the FAQ (my interpretation, at least), and indicates that the bastard sword is indeed a one handed weapon. The intent can be debated for sure, and I now see that's what this is about :)
I see your point, and thus the disparity between the FAQ and CRB.
I cannot see how everyone can blindly misinterpret the FAQ. The FAQ does not say anywhere that a bastard sword becomes one handed if you have EWP. All it says is that you can *use* it in one hand if you have EWP. The FAQ answers one question only, and that question is: Can I use a bastard sword one handed without EWP if I take the -4 non proficiency penalty? The FAQ clearly answers this: no In fact, the FAQ supports Malachi. The reason that you cannot use it one handed at a -4 penalty without EWP is because it is a *two handed weapon*. You cannot use a two handed weapon in one hand, plain and simple. The FAQ does describe the bastard sword as a special case - a bending of the rule (you cannot use a 2H weapon one handed) - if you take EWP you can use it one handed. That's it. Nothing else. The weapon does not magically transform into a one handed weapon. Since it is a two handed weapon, you cannot wield a large version of the sword, regardless of EWP, unless you have another feat or power that allows you to do so. All EWP does, on its own, is allow you to use a bastard sword (of your size category) one handed.
If a player presented a character as posted by the OP they are handicapping themselves. To me it is a extreme example of over-multiclassing and thankfully doesn't happen very often (I've never seen it to this extent). In lesser extreme scenarios I would be willing to help my players overcome some of the drawbacks, but it would depend on the player's intent. However, it would come with the disclaimer that I will adjust the character down the road if I feel that it unbalanced my game. The core rules are guidelines at my table and I am willing to listen to and work with my players in order to make the game exciting and fun for everyone (within reason). 12 class levels in different classes seems like overkill to me and I would wonder what the intent behind it was.
Personally I believe there should be penalties for stacking that many multi-class levels. Arriving at level 12 with a BAB of +0 is no one's fault but the person playing the character. If someone arrived at my table and slapped down a character sheet with twelve classes as described by the OP, I would have no sympathy for them. Take your BAB +0 or roll a new character. Multi-classing is meant to provide a character with more options, sure, but in my opinion it is not intended to create a swiss army knife of skills on a single character sheet. |
