Okay, I'm going to come out right now and say that I'm not a powergamer, nor am I an optimizer, and this character decision was made entirely for flavor.
I have a TWF Ranger with Quick Draw who wields a scimitar and dagger. However, as a backup weapon, he also carries a greatsword - the reasoning being that sometimes, one large hit will do when several small ones don't. (Also, if he can't take a full attack action and can only strike once, it might as well be with the biggest sword.)
So far this strategy has worked out pretty well. However, I don't want to sink any feats into the greatsword - but at the same time, I want it to remain useful. Are there any feats I could take that would benefit my two-weapon fighting and my occasional greatsword swing equally?
However, I don't want to sink any feats into the greatsword - but at the same time, I want it to remain useful. Are there any feats I could take that would benefit my two-weapon fighting and my occasional greatsword swing equally?
Monkey grip!
It exist in 3.5 and it might become available in PF too.it does not work for a normal logsword, but would allow you to wield a large sized longsword (2d6 dmg) onehanded. Basically you can focus on develping the longsword and benefit from it even when using the large longsword with two hands.
Exotic weapon proficiency (bastardsword).
On its own it is a decent THW but can be used with TWF for 1 additional point in damage (av.)
The two suggestions above can also be combined for a large bastard sword (2d8).
(The other problem, is monkey grip doesn't allow both hands, and if your going to go that far, it would be ideal to get the Oversized Two weapon fighting feat and put one in each.)
Any character can use a onehanded weapon one size larger with the penalty from the inappropiate size rule.
But yes - the penalties start stacking!
I totally thought this was going to be about thri-kreen.
And the fact that statisically Power Attacking gives you the same benefit. It's just not as sexy as saying 'I hit him with a sword the size of a dining table.' :)
I think for viability this might be a long shot, but is best done with a fighter, who has the feats to do all of the above.
|
Something about this rule got me thinking ...
Draw or Sheathe a Weapon
Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item.
If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you may draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move. If you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, you can draw two light or one-handed weapons in the time it would normally take you to draw one.
Drawing ammunition for use with a ranged weapon (such as arrows, bolts, sling bullets, or shuriken) is a free action.
According to the write up you would be inclined to think that drawing and sheathing a weapon are identicle in this article. However if you look at the Actions table Drawing a weapon (3) is listed seperately from sheathe a weapon. The (3) refers to a footnote stating the +1 BAB ability to use as a free action which is not present after sheathe a weapon.
this leads me to believe that quick draw is exclusive to drawing weapons, not when you sheathe a weapon. so to draw your greatsword he must send 2 move actions sheathing the scimitar and dagger (and a free action drawing the greatsword) or drop one entirely. For a character using two weapon fighting this would be VERY inconvenient.
You could throw the dagger (standard action), sheathe the scimitar (move action), Draw the greatsword (free action) ready to use next round and simply draw a new dagger when switching back.
Okay, I'm going to come out right now and say that I'm not a powergamer, nor am I an optimizer, and this character decision was made entirely for flavor.
I have a TWF Ranger with Quick Draw who wields a scimitar and dagger. However, as a backup weapon, he also carries a greatsword - the reasoning being that sometimes, one large hit will do when several small ones don't. (Also, if he can't take a full attack action and can only strike once, it might as well be with the biggest sword.)
So far this strategy has worked out pretty well. However, I don't want to sink any feats into the greatsword - but at the same time, I want it to remain useful. Are there any feats I could take that would benefit my two-weapon fighting and my occasional greatsword swing equally?
I have to agree with Vital Strike and Power Attack. If you're only going to be able to make one strike it might as well be double (base) damage. Though this doesn't help the two weapon fighting much.
Power attack is always usefull, especially with the high return on damage vs attack penalty.
|
this leads me to believe that quick draw is exclusive to drawing weapons, not when you sheathe a weapon. so to draw your greatsword he must send 2 move actions sheathing the scimitar and dagger (and a free action drawing the greatsword) or drop one entirely. For a character using two weapon fighting this would be VERY inconvenient.You could throw the dagger (standard action), sheathe the scimitar (move action), Draw the greatsword (free action) ready to use next round and simply draw a new dagger when switching back.
The same table, Drop a Item is a free action... so as long as you remember to pick up your weapons after the fight you can drop them to the ground and draw the greatsword, but when that happens you've thrown away the use of TWF for the rest of the fight...
He'll open up combat with the greatsword out, attacking with it until the opportunity comes for him to make a full attack action, and then use his scimitar and dagger instead - he'll drop the greatsword (as a free action), draw his two weapons (free action), and make the full attack. He'll then fight with the two weapons until he can pick up the greatsword again, but he won't go out of his way to get it back.
He'll open up combat with the greatsword out, attacking with it until the opportunity comes for him to make a full attack action, and then use his scimitar and dagger instead - he'll drop the greatsword (as a free action), draw his two weapons (free action), and make the full attack. He'll then fight with the two weapons until he can pick up the greatsword again, but he won't go out of his way to get it back.
To be honest, if I where you I would ditch the greatsword.
Go with a spear. It is much more versatile.
It is a decent melee weapon doing 1d8+1½str. mod. /x3.
It can be braced against a charge.
And is an excelent ranged weapon (20' range increment).
With quickdraw you can even charge an enemy, throwing the spear as part of the charge, and finish by drawing both blades to be ready for melee. I have used it a lot and I find it to be a good way to close in on most enemies, even ones with 10' reach.
Charge to within 15' throw and draw. The enemy steps up 5' and attacks with reach (10'). On your next turn you 5' step and make a full-attack with TWF.
Works well most of the time (though not as much against enemies with reach AND multiple attacks.
If you go for the longspear you have similar advantage changing the throw for reach.
You could even take the exotic heavy spear (1d10 or 1d12 dmg, not sure which).
But... greatsword.
Weapon focus heavy blades would help the scimitar and the great sword.
Weapon focus heavy blades would help the scimitar and the great sword.
Weapon Focus applies to a single type of weapon (i.e. Scimitar), not to a weapon group. Weapon Training, the Fighter Class feature, is what you're looking for here.
Monkey grip! allow you to wield a large sized longsword (2d6 dmg) onehanded.No, it allows you to use a Large Greatsword two handed for 3d6 damage.
It does both. You can use a two-handed weapon one-handed, or wield a two-handed weapon of a size one size larger.
So :
A Large long-sword would normally be a two-handed weapon for a medium creature. Monkey grip allows you to wield it one handed (just like a great sword).
A Large greatsword is not wieldable by a medium creature at all, unless they have monkey grip, in which case it is a two-handed weapon.
In both cases, there is a penalty of course.
I thought that Pathfinder considered heavy blades to be a type of weapon of which the scimitar is one.
I thought that Pathfinder considered heavy blades to be a type of weapon of which the scimitar is one.
It is one of the Weapon Groups that Fighters may choose for their Weapon Training class ability. That's the only place that the categorization applies though.
It does both. You can use a two-handed weapon one-handedAgain, you are absolutely 100% wrong. CWar p103 makes it abundantly clear the effort to use the weapon doesn't change. So you can not a two handed weapon in one hand with Monkey Grip.
I'm sorry, but you are wrong. But you'll have to go to the Wizard's FAQ to see it.
A two-handed medium weapon is a 1-handed weapon for a large creature (with a penalty of -2). Because it is a one-handed weapon for a large creature, and monkey grip allows you to wield a one handed weapon for a large creature in one hand, you can wield a two-handed medium weapon in one hand (again, as I said earlier, there is a -2 penalty for doing so). I should have said 'In addition to the normal -2 from Monkeygrip'.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I'm sorry, but you are wrong. But you'll have to go to the Wizard's FAQ to see it.
You are either confused or we are not communicating.
I'm aware of the FAQ, but I'm also aware of Monkey Grip and evidently you have not recently read page 103 of Complete Warrior.
Monkey Grip doesn't provide any change to the effort required to use the item.
Monkey Grip absolutely 100% does not allow you to wield a two handed medium weapon in one hand because the weapon is not a Large sized weapon (and not usable with Monkey Grip) and since the -2 rules for incorrectly sized weapons don't allow you to take a -2 to use in one hand you can't do what you wish.
I don't make the rules, I just quote them. You are incorrectly reading the FAQ (6/30/08 page 56) and incorrectly interpreting CWar p130.
I'm sorry, but you are wrong. But you'll have to go to the Wizard's FAQ to see it.You are either confused or we are not communicating.
I'm aware of the FAQ, but I'm also aware of Monkey Grip and evidently you have not recently read page 103 of Complete Warrior.
Monkey Grip doesn't provide any change to the effort required to use the item.
Monkey Grip absolutely 100% does not allow you to wield a two handed medium weapon in one hand because the weapon is not a Large sized weapon (and not usable with Monkey Grip) and since the -2 rules for incorrectly sized weapons don't allow you to take a -2 to use in one hand you can't do what you wish.
I don't make the rules, I just quote them. You are incorrectly reading the FAQ (6/30/08 page 56) and incorrectly interpreting CWar p130.
I'm not sure what the disconnect is either. It's plain as day to me.
A) Monkey Grip lets you use a weapon as if it were your size based on it's larger size.
B) The rules clearly state that a weapon of a given size is usable as a weapon of another size (WITHOUT ANY FEATS). In this case, a one-handed weapon may be used as a light weapon or a two-handed can be used as a one-handed.
C) Medium Great Sword : Medium (Two-H) -> Large (One-H) (-2 Penalty)
E) Monkey Grip absolutely 100% DOES allow you to wield a Large One-Handed weapon with a (-2) penalty.
F) A Medium Great Sword is a Large One-Handed weapon (See the FAQ and chart).
G) A Medium Character with Monkey Grip can wield a Great Sword with one hand, but takes a total (-4) penalty.
You are using the phrase 'doesn't change the effort required to use' as your reason for saying it doesn't work. But, that phrase means that the Medium creature has to exert the same effort as the Large creature. The Large creature has to exert a -2 penalty to use the weapon like that, which means the Medium creature has to exert the same -2 penalty to use the weapon. That is absolutely consistent with the feat.
I'm sure the next argument will be : Nothing in the Feat or off-sized weapon rules say they work together.
Rebuttle : Nothing in the feat or the off sized weapon rules say they don't work together either.
When you have rule A and rule B, and there is nothing in the rules that specify how they work together, which happens quite often, you have to see if they can be made to consistently work together. These two rules do work together consistently. The Medium creature with Monkey Grip has the same penalties to use the weapon in the same manner as the Large creature without it. The penalty from Monkey Grip is a constant to all weapons, and does not affect whether the Medium creature is using the same effort to use the weapon in the same way as the Large creature.
If two rules which don't reference each other in any other way work consistently together, then the rules are compatible.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
A) Monkey Grip lets you use a weapon as if it were your size based on it's larger size.
B) The rules clearly state that a weapon of a given size is usable as a weapon of another size (WITHOUT ANY FEATS). In this case, a one-handed weapon may be used as a light weapon or a two-handed can be used as a one-handed.
Found it.
A) Monkey grip ONLY allows you to use a weapon one size larger than you, in this case a Large Greatsword.
B) You are not correctly interpreting this. With a size change comes a -2 and a effort change. You are generalizing more than the rules and the FAQ allow. A Medium One Handed Weapon can be used by a Large sized player as a Light with a -2 penalty, but a Medium One Handed Weapon can not be used by a Medium player as a Light with a -2 penalty.
Monkey Grip is very explicit, the weapon must be one (and only one) size larger than you. You can not, for instance, take a Medium Greatsword and treat it as a Large Longsword at -2 then add Monkey Grip to use the "Large Longsword" at an additional -2 as a Medium weapon because the Medium Greatsword is still a Medium weapon (regardless of how it is being treated) and ineligible for use with Monkey Grip.
So, to restate, you are using Monkey Grip incorrectly as per CWar p103. You can not (by RAW) take a -4 to use a Medium Greatsword in one hand.
It isn't a matter of they "can't" combine so much as you are not applying the rules correctly.
Right so a Core feat that will work well for the OP:
Power Attack -- Two weapon fighting? That's fine you get x2 damage on the primary x1 damage on the secondary... that's 3x the penalty in damage bonus. Two handed fighting? Not a problem x3 damage on the attack, either way you get 3x the penalty in damage so you don't really lose anything at any time.
Also we should consider weapon enchancements that you might like such as:
Dancing -- put it on your greatsword and it's no longer a question of what mode... you can have both at once! Slightly expensive though.
A) Monkey Grip lets you use a weapon as if it were your size based on it's larger size.
B) The rules clearly state that a weapon of a given size is usable as a weapon of another size (WITHOUT ANY FEATS). In this case, a one-handed weapon may be used as a light weapon or a two-handed can be used as a one-handed.
Found it.
Great, page and paragraph reference then please? Or FAQ page or subject title where these two rules are discussed, or the specific situation?
A) Monkey grip ONLY allows you to use a weapon one size larger than you, in this case a Large Greatsword.B) You are not correctly interpreting this. With a size change comes a -2 and a effort change. You are generalizing more than the rules and the FAQ allow. A Medium One Handed Weapon can be used by a Large sized player as a Light with a -2 penalty, but a Medium One Handed Weapon can not be used by a Medium player as a Light with a -2 penalty.
Monkey Grip is very explicit, the weapon must be one (and only one) size larger than you. You can not, for instance, take a Medium Greatsword and treat it as a Large Longsword at -2 then add Monkey Grip to use the "Large Longsword" at an additional -2 as a Medium weapon because the Medium Greatsword is still a Medium weapon (regardless of how it is being treated) and ineligible for use with Monkey Grip.
So, to restate, you are using Monkey Grip incorrectly as per CWar p103. You can not (by RAW) take a -4 to use a Medium Greatsword in one hand.
It isn't a matter of they "can't" combine so much as you are not applying the rules correctly.
I'll reply with 'You are interpreting it incorrectly and are not applying the rules correctly.'.
That is the crux of the problem. This can reasonably be interpreted either way. I will grant you that. My personal belief is that my interpretation makes more sense (A Med great sword is almost identical to a Large Long Sword, both in damage and weight, if you do the adjustments). The biggest difference between a Medium Great Sword and a Large Long Sword is the pommel. The reason you take penalties for off-sized weapons is the difference in the pommel size. You apparently believe your interpretation makes more sense.
Since the book in question is out of print, and the company that owns the IP is no longer supporting it, I'm afraid we're both out of luck on an 'official' ruling. So it comes down to individual GM's interpreting the rules as they think makes the most sense.
... You can use melee weapons one size catagory larger than you are with ...
Sorry, a medium creature with monkey grip wielding a medium sized greatsword is not wielding a weapon one size larger than they are. Thus monkey grip does not apply. Also, additionally for general info for folks, monkey grip does not stack with powerful build, because powerful build allows you to wield a weapon one size larger than you actually are and so does monkey grip, thus they overlap.
As for the original issue. Might I suggest a double-weapon. When you can only make one attack you two-handed it (and maybe power attack). When you can make a full attack you use both ends. This way you can focus your feat selections on just one weapon (yes you have to "waste" a feat getting proficiency, unless you go with a quarterstaff, or have a racial access) and you don't every have to worry about dropping weapons and then retrieving them and you can switch between fighting styles as the situation dicates.
Ninjaded by Press man (took me a bit to find my CW, and you posted while I was looking :p ). Besides what's the point of even trying to 'game' the system as described, you end up with a -4 penalty for the exact same damage you get by using a Large One-Handed weapon for the same job, in most cases. If anything it would be even better because if you had Weapon Focus you'd get the bonus to your Large 'back-up' version.
Funny, I was going to post from work and say the same thing about a Double weapon. I love double weapons and TWF rangers, although perhaps the new an improved fighter as TWF build would be even better these days.
The big advantage of double weapons is they can be changed up very quickly without having to carry additional equipment. They also allow you to focus more on single weapon (Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, and the like). In the end it could actually save a feat or two when trying to get the full value out of the weapon.
To bad Monkey Grip doesn't work with double weapons, called out in the last line of. Almost like an insult.
I never said it was an effective use, I just said it's valid. I still have seen nothing more than anyone's opinion that it doesn't work. Not one person has come up with anything in the feat or faq that invalidates them working together.
Why is it important? It's not, but telling me my interpretation is invalid without something other than 'Well, the feat doesn't say you can mix the two' is pointless. Either back it up with something concrete, or quit acting like your interpretations are any more valid than mine.
I agree, it would be better to just use a large long sword. I never argued using a medium great sword would be better, just said you could do it.
I again wait for something other than an opinion.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Great, page and paragraph reference then please? I'll reply with 'You are interpreting it incorrectly and are not applying the rules correctly.'.
This can reasonably be interpreted either way.
Complete Warrior page 103 for starters (which I've mentioned many times and you have yet to read or you wouldn't be continuing with this line of thinking.)
There is no way to reasonably interpret it your way without adding words to the rules, words that don't exist and should not be inserted.
You are both right and wrong.
Monkey grip does NOT allow you to use a Great Sword (2d6, 50 gold, 8 lbs) 1 handed.
Monkey grip DOES allow you to use a Large Longsowrd (2d6, 30 gold, 8 lbs) 1 handed
I have not discussed that, but you are 100% correct. The point is by RAW mdt can't do what he wants. The fact that he can get the same mechanical benefit is irrelevant.
I never said it was an effective use, I just said it's valid. I still have seen nothing more than anyone's opinion that it doesn't work. Not one person has come up with anything in the feat or faq that invalidates them working together.
Why is it important? It's not, but telling me my interpretation is invalid without something other than 'Well, the feat doesn't say you can mix the two' is pointless. Either back it up with something concrete, or quit acting like your interpretations are any more valid than mine.
I agree, it would be better to just use a large long sword. I never argued using a medium great sword would be better, just said you could do it.
I again wait for something other than an opinion.
To quote Will Ferrell, "I feel like I'm taking crazy pills."
I posted the relevant part of the feat above. I will do so again and bold the key part.
... You can use melee weapons one size catagory larger than you are with ...
Again, a medium character wielding a medium greatsword is not wielding a weapon one size catagory larger than them. Thus monkey grip (at least the 3.5 version, you could always fall back to the 3e version) does not function here.
You've asked for actual rules. The rules have been provided.
CW p. 103 wrote:
... You can use melee weapons one size catagory larger than you are with ...
Again, a medium character wielding a medium greatsword is not wielding a weapon one size catagory larger than them. Thus monkey grip (at least the 3.5 version, you could always fall back to the 3e version) does not function here.
You've asked for actual rules. The rules have been provided.
Seems like we're going down the rabbit hole again. I responded to this way up above, try scrolling back.
I never argued that was what the feat states. What I stated was, another rule says that a Medium Great Sword is a one-handed weapon for a Large creature.
The Medium Great Sword is both a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature and a One-Handed weapon for a Large creature. It is both things simultaneously. You can't divorce the MGS from the off-sized weapons rule because you want to.
I have agreed with you, the feat says 'A melee weapon one size category larger'. I said that earlier. And what you have not, nor has anyone else responded to, is the fact that a MGS is a Medium Two-handed weapon and a Large One-Handed weapon at the same time.
If you have a human with a MGS and he holds it in both hands, and then he hands it to a giant. The giant is a large creature, he holds it in one hand. The weapon has not changed, no magical fairy came down and waved a wand over the weapon. It didn't change at all, but it's still a large one-handed weapon (with an awkward pommel, thus -2). If the human above had Monkey Grip, the giant could hand it back to him, and he'd grab it in one hand. The pommel would still be awkward to hold in one hand, so it would get a -2 penalty (in addition to the monkey grip penalty).
Alternate scenario, the Giant has a Large Long Sword. He holds it in one hand. He hands it to the human. The human takes it two hands. The pommel is designed for one large hand, not two medium ones, the human takes a -2 penalty to wield it as a two-handed weapon. Again, the magic weapon fairy did not appear and sprinkle weapon dust on it. It is both a Large one-handed weapon, and a Medium two-handed weapon. It didn't change at all when passed back and forth. If the human had Monkey Grip, he'd grab it in one hand, just like the giant. The giant has no penalties to holding it one handed, neither does the human (just the penalty from the feat itself).
Notice that both scenarios are internally consistent within both rules? In both cases, the Medium creature with Monkey Grip had the same base penalties for using the weapon in the same fashion as the Large creature, plus the penalties for using Monkey Grip.
So, as I said, I agree, the monkey grip feat lets you use a weapon of another size exactly as if you were a creature one size category larger. Said Larger creature can use a medium weapon in certain ways, and so Monkey grip allows you to use those medium weapons as the large equivalent of them, including with all penalties.
Again, unless you have a specific bit of rule or errata that says 'Weapon sizing rules do not apply to monkey grip' then it just your opinion they don't. Just as it's my opinion the two rules do apply. They are internally consistent with each other. It's a bad way to get the effect, unless you're in a dungeon and all you have is a great sword and shield, but it works within the rules.
"Weapon Size: Every weapon has a size category. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed." -PFRD
I'm sorry mdt so far you have also failed to cite rules and/or FAQ that back your opion. So far in reading both the rules and weapon size rules I do not see how you are coming up with that ruling. A large weapon is a large weapon, that is rules defintion. A weapon designed for a large creature. A Medium weapon is one designed for Medium creature.
A Medium Two-handed weapon is not a one-handed weapon designed for a Large creature, and thus is not a Large One-handed weapon. Where you seem to be confusing the rule is on the effort it takes to use the the weapon.
"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." - PFRD
This rule does not mechically change the weapons size. Large creature wielding a two-handed medium weapon uses it as one-handed weapon with a -2 penalty. At no point do the rules say it stops being a Medium weapon.
If you are seeing rules that direcly void that, please do as you have told us to do(and have done) and cite them, or better yet qoute there relvent section. I would be more then happy to reconsider my ruling views on this if I see some rules backing your opinion.
"Weapon Size: Every weapon has a size category. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed." -PFRD
I'm sorry mdt so far you have also failed to cite rules and/or FAQ that back your opion. So far in reading both the rules and weapon size rules I do not see how you are coming up with that ruling. A large weapon is a large weapon, that is rules defintion. A weapon designed for a large creature. A Medium weapon is one designed for Medium creature.
A Medium Two-handed weapon is not a one-handed weapon designed for a Large creature, and thus is not a Large One-handed weapon. Where you seem to be confusing the rule is on the effort it takes to use the the weapon.
"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." - PFRD
This rule does not mechically change the weapons size. Large creature wielding a two-handed medium weapon uses it as one-handed weapon with a -2 penalty. At no point do the rules say it stops being a Medium weapon.
If you are seeing rules that direcly void that, please do as you have told us to do(and have done) and cite them, or better yet qoute there relvent section. I would be more then happy to reconsider my ruling views on this if I see some rules backing your opinion.
Exactly. The size catagory a weapon falls into is not the same as the amount of effort it takes to use it. These are two totally different issues. That is why even though a large creature can use a medium greatsword as a one-handed weapon, they still are going to take a penalty for it. Unlike for an actual large sized one-handed weapon, which they take no penalty for. So clearly there is a difference between the two.
One thing to consider. A medium character monkey gripping a large longsword takes -2 penalty when he uses it one-handed, but he also takes a -2 penalty when he uses it two-handed as well. On the other hand if we allow a monkey grip to be used for a medium greatsword, then the wielder would be taking a -2 penalty when he used it one-handed, but no penalty when he used it two-handed. Clearly that is a more powerful choice than using the large longsword, which is probably at least part of the reason the weapon has to be a size catagory larger than you.
Hey peeps, the thread is about good choices for a ranger that wants to have options with a great sword without wasting feats, it is not about monkey grip so start a new thread or give the conversation up, either way back on topic.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Seems like we're going down the rabbit hole again.
MGS is a Medium Two-handed weapon and a Large One-Handed weapon at the same time.
There is no rabbit hole, a Medium Two Handed Weapon is at no point under no rule or FAQ a Large One Handed Weapon. It can be used as one, but at no point is it one buy RAW.
Your view, while unique, isn't proved and is directly contradicted by the rules.
If you want to continue discussing your unique view, post it in a new thread so we can get this tangential discussion out of this thread.
Back on topic...
Unless you're absolutely dying for an animal companion, favored enemy, or a handful of druidic spells, drop the range and build this guy as a fighter.
The couple of bonus TWF feats the ranger gets is nothing compared to the ton of bonus feats the fighter would get. And since you're considering dividing your combat prowess in two directions, you're going to want those bonus feats.
If, however, you are dying to get those other ranger abilities, then consider dropping the greatsword entirely.
Really now. You can spend one feat to get a decent 1H weapon that does almost as much damage. Then you can focus on feats that make you good with that weapon without having to split your feats to become good with a greatsword too.
Even better, you won't have to enchant, or find, 3 magic weapons.
Really, you're better off with a +4 Bastard Sword and 4 good ideal feats for it than you are with a +3 longsword with two ideal feats and a +3 greatsword with 2 different ideal feats.
Sure, all that is a powergamist approach - it does nothing to take into consideration that you want this character concept unchanged. If so, then I think this thread has, in between the raging debate about a feat that doesn't exist in Pathfinder rules, offered up the best suggestions anyway.
I would drop the Greatsword and the Scimitar... take Exotic Weapon: Bastard sword. Start combat 2-handed with Bastard sword, pull Dagger(or some other light weapon, Spiked Gauntlet?) 2nd round and two-weapon fight.
Seems like we're going down the rabbit hole again.
MGS is a Medium Two-handed weapon and a Large One-Handed weapon at the same time.There is no rabbit hole, a Medium Two Handed Weapon is at no point under no rule or FAQ a Large One Handed Weapon. It can be used as one, but at no point is it one buy RAW.
Your view, while unique, isn't proved and is directly contradicted by the rules.
If you want to continue discussing your unique view, post it in a new thread so we can get this tangential discussion out of this thread.
No, I've had it with the rabbit hole. I've stated my stance, it's been mocked several times, and my arguments blown off as 'wrong and not RAW' and the answers have never pointed to any rules, only other peoples interpretations of rules which are being stated as RAW. As I said earlier in the thread, this is a situation not explicitly covered by the rules, and both interpretations are valid. The difference is, I acknowledge this, and you and Spam Man don't. I see no reason to keep going around in circles, dragging out my 3.5 books and going through the Arms & Equipment guide and every rule book stating every reference which will then be mocked and called 'MDT's wrong reading'.
If you wish to consider this 'your win' go ahead. It's not worth any more of my time.
No, I've had it with the rabbit hole. I've stated my stance, it's been mocked several times, and my arguments blown off as 'wrong and not RAW' and the answers have never pointed to any rules, only other peoples interpretations of rules which are being stated as RAW. As I said earlier in the thread, this is a situation not explicitly covered by the rules, and both interpretations are valid. The difference is, I acknowledge this, and you and Spam Man don't. I see no reason to keep going around in circles, dragging out my 3.5 books and going through the Arms & Equipment guide and every rule book stating every reference which will then be mocked and called 'MDT's wrong reading'.If you wish to consider this 'your win' go ahead. It's not worth any more of my time.
Sorry for the tone of this. I've been having trouble with people using sarcasm and mocking anything I post in other threads. That kind of spilled over into this one.
Anyway, I honestly haven't seen any of your arguments directly counteract mine, and I don't think we're going to convince each other. I've pointed out my sections of the RAW and given my interpretation of how they interact, you have quoted yours and given your interpretation. I don't agree with yours, and you don't agree with mine. I don't think either of us is going to convince the other, and it's not worth the effort to just keep regurgitating the same arguments over and over again in a new thread.
Hey peeps, the thread is about good choices for a ranger that wants to have options with a great sword without wasting feats, it is not about monkey grip so start a new thread or give the conversation up, either way back on topic.
Who appointed you to the Internet Police? Threads go off-topic. That's the nature of the beast. I'll note that your post is just as off-topic as theirs.
Are there any feats I could take that would benefit my two-weapon fighting and my occasional greatsword swing equally?Cleave?
I'd think not. The idea is that you want feats that boost both in full attack and single attack settings. PF cleave doesn't work for your full attacks.
Power Attack, despite it not being so hot for the one super melee damage attack is still going to help both the TWF and great sword sides. Likewise the Critcal Focus based feats could so you very well and still apply to both attack forms.
Again, we should be looking for feats and options that will for both attack forms.
Another option form my personal arsonal of Ranger TWF is the Armor spike. This is a rather cheap meta-tactic but it works. Armor spikes free up your actual off-hand to use two-handed weapons.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I've stated my stance
situation not explicitly covered by the rules, and both interpretations are valid.
going through the Arms & Equipment guide
You stated a stance, but you never pointed to a rule that proves or suggests your side is valid. If you are looking at A&EG that is the problem, as it used 3.0 rules for weapon sizes which PROVE your side (but only for 3.0 games and not in 3.5 games.)
So it comes down to this:
In 3.0 games your rules interpretations are (to the best of my memory) correct.
In 3.5 games, your rules interpretations have no rule to hold them up.
You asked for rules, I'll post 3.p rules. The 3.5 FAQ doesn't agree with your interpretation, but for simplicity sake let us ignore all 3.5 FAQ and just deal with the rules (CWar p103) we need while using 3.p base rules.
PRPG p141: "Weapon Size ... keyed to the size of the intended wielder."
PRPG p144: "A Creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it ... The measure of how much effort it takes ... 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 is designed."
So, in short and sweet terms:
You can't take a -2 to wield a Medium Two Handed Weapon in One Hand if you are a Medium because to gain the ability to wield (and the -2) you need to change the effort one step in the direction of your size. Since you are also Medium there is no step to take.
Monkey Grip explicitly needs a weapon one size larger than you, which a Medium Two Handed (if allowed to be wielded in one hand) is not Large sized and not valid use for Monkey Grip.
If you know me well (like from WotC forums) you would know that I am very liberal in the "there are two interpretations" department, but in this case there simply isn't any alternate interpretation that matches your view.