Looking for some advice,
I have a PC who would like to select monkey grip as a feat for his fighter. I've been more on the conservative side when it comes to allowing outside material in my PF campaign, but when a PC has a request that doesn't seem overpowering than I try to be flexible.
I personally think the monkey grip concept is cool, and useful if you carry a shield. Because of the -2 on atk rolls, it seems like it is not too over-powered. Does anyone have any thoughts, or preferably experience GMing a PF game, where monkey grip was allowed?
|
There's been a lot of discussion on that feat across the different gaming forums. It looks good most at first, but the math wizards point out that on average you're better off Power Attacking for 2 than using it. You take the same penalty and actually get more damage. Sure, the Monkey Grip character will deal a higher total if he maxes the rolls, but if he rolls min, the Power Attacker is doing more damage.
Yes, I have some experience with monkey grip. It starts to border on abusive under the wrong circumstances. For instance, a goliath race fighter-type (large frame racial trait) using a monkey grip to wield a huge weapon. it only gets worse if someone casts enlarge person on them.
Granted it is up to the DM's decision whether or not to allow goliath characters to weild weapons that large. It's a cool concept but it can get a little ridiculous, especially on critical hits.
Personally, if a player wanted to use monkey grip for a single handed weapon because he has a shield in the other hand - I don't find that too overpowering.
|
|
Yes, I have some experience with monkey grip. It starts to border on abusive under the wrong circumstances. For instance, a goliath race fighter-type (large frame racial trait) using a monkey grip to wield a huge weapon. it only gets worse if someone casts enlarge person on them.
Granted it is up to the DM's decision whether or not to allow goliath characters to weild weapons that large. It's a cool concept but it can get a little ridiculous, especially on critical hits.
Personally, if a player wanted to use monkey grip for a single handed weapon because he has a shield in the other hand - I don't find that too overpowering.
Even then, not that bad. Power attacking for the penalty to hit generally does better damage. Monkey grip seems overpowered because of the number of dice that gets rolled...but honestly, it's pretty sub-par in the longrun.
There's been a lot of discussion on that feat across the different gaming forums. It looks good most at first, but the math wizards point out that on average you're better off Power Attacking for 2 than using it. You take the same penalty and actually get more damage. Sure, the Monkey Grip character will deal a higher total if he maxes the rolls, but if he rolls min, the Power Attacker is doing more damage.
But does Pathfinder's changes to Power Attack, that you now cannot change/vary the modifier affect the maths?
Looking for some advice,
I have a PC who would like to select monkey grip as a feat for his fighter. I've been more on the conservative side when it comes to allowing outside material in my PF campaign, but when a PC has a request that doesn't seem overpowering than I try to be flexible.
I personally think the monkey grip concept is cool, and useful if you carry a shield. Because of the -2 on atk rolls, it seems like it is not too over-powered. Does anyone have any thoughts, or preferably experience GMing a PF game, where monkey grip was allowed?
See Bloodworts post for heavy abuse, but other than that and the Orge sword (G something or other) its an ok feat. Some of my munchkins in the past have tried to abuse it, but overall its pretty cool. Think Cloud from Final Fantasy(Bastard sword). Plus, You can use it as well!
Just make sure that they can justify it for the character(Super strong, raised by orges, etc)
Thanks gang, great feedback! Whenever I allow outside mods I always put in the blanket disclaimer 'if it gets out of hand or abused, I reserve the right to remove it from the campaign'
Thanks gang, great feedback! Whenever I allow outside mods I always put in the blanket disclaimer 'if it gets out of hand or abused, I reserve the right to remove it from the campaign'
Exellent rule! Keep those pesky Pcs in their place!
|
|
Yes, I have some experience with monkey grip. It starts to border on abusive under the wrong circumstances. For instance, a goliath race fighter-type (large frame racial trait) using a monkey grip to wield a huge weapon. it only gets worse if someone casts enlarge person on them.
Goliaths cannot benefit from Monkey Grip. Both Powerful Build and Monkey Grip say 'may wield weapons one size larger than you are'. Since Goliaths are Medium, that lets them wield Large weapons. You have to use Enlarge Person to get a benefit. Even enlarged, they can only wield Huge weapons.
But does Pathfinder's changes to Power Attack, that you now cannot change/vary the modifier affect the maths?
It only changes the window that Monkey Grip is better. 3.5, Monkey Grip is better for the one level before you get a +2 BAB to trade for damage. PF, it takes until you hit +4 BAB. The only other factor I see is that PF Power Attack gives more damage to onehanded weapons than 3.5 Power Attack, making it even better for onehanders than before, completely knocking Monkey Grip out. Actually, there may be no window for Monkey Grip now that I think of it, since you get 2 for 1 from the start no matter what you use in PF, onehanded or two.
Even then, not that bad. Power attacking for the penalty to hit generally does better damage. Monkey grip seems overpowered because of the number of dice that gets rolled...but honestly, it's pretty sub-par in the longrun.
+1
Goliaths cannot benefit from Monkey Grip. Both Powerful Build and Monkey Grip say 'may wield weapons one size larger than you are'. Since Goliaths are Medium, that lets them wield Large weapons. You have to use Enlarge Person to get a benefit. Even enlarged, they can only wield Huge weapons.
+1, also Monkey Grip only really starts to get on par with Power Attack when you're large or larger it may even be huge or large in Pathfinder but I haven't seen it yet. I've always seen Power Attack as the better feat for dealing damage and Monkey Grip as more of a flavor thing for the person that wants to play Cloud, Sephiroth, or some other Final Fantasy and/or anime character with a weapon that seems to big for them, although I have no problem with it because honestly, who doesn't want a super big weapon?
I've always seen Power Attack as the better feat for dealing damage and Monkey Grip as more of a flavor thing for the person that wants to play Cloud, Sephiroth, or some other Final Fantasy and/or anime character with a weapon that seems to big for them, although I have no problem with it because honestly, who doesn't want a super big weapon?
I admit, I did throw together a half-ogre fighter-barbarian with EWP: Fullblade, Monkey Grip, and a set of those bracers that let you up your weapon size by one. True it took me a while to save up for the bracers, but at first level (ECL3) I was doing something like 4d8+12 (I'm not sure exactly but I'm too lazy to look it up) per hit with my Huge Fullblade (which was size equivilant to a gargantuan greatsword...by the time I got the bracers I was wielding an adamantine gargantuan fullblade, which is sizewise the same as a collosal greatsword). This was before I even got PA. We had to have the wizard design an Inuyasha-style scabbard-of-holding for me to carry it around. Man was I pissed that the same wizard had to keep a wand of shrink item around for those tight dungeon corridors.
My suggestion: No.
Monkey grip is munchkin and ridiculous to think about.
Others may disagree but I stand by my opinion.
|
Also something I should point out, you likely don't have a race with Powerful Build or the Strongarm bracers (Magic Item Compendium) in your campaign, but it's a common misunderstanding that those stack. All of them let you wield one weapon larger than 'your size' one size larger than your size is still one size larger than your size, no matter how many times you apply it.
This, must be the most common misconception I've seen on here.
My suggestion: No.
Monkey grip is munchkin and ridiculous to think about.Others may disagree but I stand by my opinion.
And just look at all those reasons for your opinion.
All zero of them
I've let folks use this feat before and while I think it's silly, it didn't break the game. The Ranger used it so she could wield Longswords akimbo. The group had an extra one lying around and she used it in her off hand with the penalty for a level or two and when she had an open feat claimed that she had been training hard with it soooooo, now she could compensate the weight.
She opened Pandora's Box for the Barb who now wields his Large sized Greatsword ( which he calls Vera ) to the dismay of many bad guys!
Again, I think the concept is silly / manga / MMO but it makes the Ranger smile and the Barb giggle like a little boy on Christmas. So, it makes up for my personal vision.
Have Fun out there!!
~ W ~
|
|
My suggestion: No.
Monkey grip is munchkin and ridiculous to think about.Others may disagree but I stand by my opinion.
And just look at all those reasons for your opinion.
All zero of them
To be fair, if he doesn't want to discuss it, he doesn't have to give reasons. But he shouldn't expect us to take that as a reason not to use the feat.
"Apple pie is ridiculous to think about." Okay, but I'm still going to enjoy my pie.
My suggestion: No.
Monkey grip is munchkin and ridiculous to think about.Others may disagree but I stand by my opinion.
And just look at all those reasons for your opinion.
All zero of them
I had started to respond, writing a paragraph on leverage and how large and huge swords would become near impossible to swing without magical assistance (which this feat does not give) and how that would be silly to affect only the wielding of a weapon and nothing else (like unarmed combat, what you can lift, climbing ability, etc).
Then I asked myself: "Why am I responding to trolling?"
How about a paragraph on how near impossible it is to cast spells?My suggestion: No.
Monkey grip is munchkin and ridiculous to think about.Others may disagree but I stand by my opinion.
And just look at all those reasons for your opinion.
All zero of them
I had started to respond, writing a paragraph on leverage and how large and huge swords would become near impossible to swing without magical assistance (which this feat does not give).
Then I asked myself: "Why am I responding to trolling?"
Ah the automatic dismissal, classic. I guess you didn't read the part "without magical assistance".
Its OK for you to have your opinion of "its fine" but its not OK for me to have mine of "its not fine"?
If monkey grip had a strength prerequisite in the 20s then I would say its a style issue only, as the character is WELL above the human norm.
And the argument that the math is not that different means its purely a style issue right? You either want anime type swords in your game or you don't.
Edit:
I've let folks use this feat before and while I think it's silly, it didn't break the game....
Again, I think the concept is silly / manga / MMO but it makes the Ranger smile and the Barb giggle like a little boy on Christmas. So, it makes up for my personal vision.
+1
My experience exactly. I played in a campaign that spanned 1st to 22nd level, and the party fighter took Monkey Grip to fight with a Large greatsword around level 2 or 3. It wasn't unbalanced in any way.That said, anything beyond Medium sized character wielding a Large weapon (i.e. trying to stack multiple racial/magic item effects and/or using exotic Fullblades) could quickly become out of whack. But just to use a weapon one size larger is pretty tame. Somewhat silly, but not a game-breaker by any means.
|
|
My suggestion: No.
Monkey grip is munchkin and ridiculous to think about.Others may disagree but I stand by my opinion.
And just look at all those reasons for your opinion.
All zero of them
I had started to respond, writing a paragraph on leverage and how large and huge swords would become near impossible to swing without magical assistance (which this feat does not give) and how that would be silly to affect only the wielding of a weapon and nothing else (like unarmed combat, what you can lift, climbing ability, etc).
Then I asked myself: "Why am I responding to trolling?"
Course you'd be wrong. If the weapon is designed for a 10 foot critter, then the grip may need to be shaved down so you can hold it, but I can swing [url]http://www.albion-swords.com/swords/albion/nextgen/sword-medieval-danish-2- hander.htm [/url] that sword one handed. I would say with a beefier grip that is what a D&D large longsword is. And I have held some cloud swords that was designed well and could swing quite nicely.
Course you'd be wrong. If the weapon is designed for a 10 foot critter, then the grip may need to be shaved down so you can hold it, but I can swing that sword* one handed. I would say with a beefier grip that is what a D&D large longsword is. And I have held some cloud swords that was designed well and could swing quite nicely.
*Fixed link
Yeah, sorry to rain on your parade but that sword would be about half the weight of a large longsword. Add another 3-4 lbs and increase the length by a foot or so. If your wrist or shoulder doesn't pop after attempting to halt one swing then colour me impressed.
|
|
Course you'd be wrong. If the weapon is designed for a 10 foot critter, then the grip may need to be shaved down so you can hold it, but I can swing that sword* one handed. I would say with a beefier grip that is what a D&D large longsword is. And I have held some cloud swords that was designed well and could swing quite nicely.
*Fixed link
Yeah, sorry to rain on your parade but that sword would be about half the weight of a large longsword. Add another 3-4 lbs and increase the length by a foot or so. If your wrist or shoulder doesn't pop after attempting to halt one swing then colour me impressed.
And my REAL bastard sword weight nowhere near 6 lbs that PF says it does. In fact they weight about 3 lbs. My arming swords (aka longswords in the game) weight as less as 2 lbs although 2.5 lbs is more average. So don't give me the BS weight argument. The game's weights for weapons and armor are so far off base that it isn't even funny.
|
And my REAL bastard sword weight nowhere near 6 lbs that PF says it does. In fact they weight about 3 lbs. My arming swords (aka longswords in the game) weight as less as 2 lbs although 2.5 lbs is more average. So don't give me the BS weight argument. The game's weights for weapons and armor are so far off base that it isn't even funny.
Well, encumberance used to be a measure not only of an object's actual weight, but also how easy or awkward it actually is to carry.
|
|
And my REAL bastard sword weight nowhere near 6 lbs that PF says it does. In fact they weight about 3 lbs. My arming swords (aka longswords in the game) weight as less as 2 lbs although 2.5 lbs is more average. So don't give me the BS weight argument. The game's weights for weapons and armor are so far off base that it isn't even funny.Well, encumberance used to be a measure not only of an object's actual weight, but also how easy or awkward it actually is to carry.
Yes but the argument was about weight...not encumberance. I can accept boosting weight for encumberence...but that also fails since if that was the case, things like longbows and crossbows should have high numbers as they are pretty gnarly to carry around while your dungeon crawling.
And my REAL bastard sword weight nowhere near 6 lbs that PF says it does. In fact they weight about 3 lbs. My arming swords (aka longswords in the game) weight as less as 2 lbs although 2.5 lbs is more average. So don't give me the BS weight argument. The game's weights for weapons and armor are so far off base that it isn't even funny.Course you'd be wrong. If the weapon is designed for a 10 foot critter, then the grip may need to be shaved down so you can hold it, but I can swing that sword* one handed. I would say with a beefier grip that is what a D&D large longsword is. And I have held some cloud swords that was designed well and could swing quite nicely.
*Fixed link
Yeah, sorry to rain on your parade but that sword would be about half the weight of a large longsword. Add another 3-4 lbs and increase the length by a foot or so. If your wrist or shoulder doesn't pop after attempting to halt one swing then colour me impressed.
Ah. I'm sorry that you pointed out an example and stated its what you imagine a 'large' longsword would be like and then I pointed out the part of the game that said it wasn't. My bad.... apparently.
Ah. I'm sorry that you pointed out an example and stated its what you imagine a 'large' longsword would be like and then I pointed out the part of the game that said it wasn't. My bad.... apparently.And my REAL bastard sword weight nowhere near 6 lbs that PF says it does. In fact they weight about 3 lbs. My arming swords (aka longswords in the game) weight as less as 2 lbs although 2.5 lbs is more average. So don't give me the BS weight argument. The game's weights for weapons and armor are so far off base that it isn't even funny.Course you'd be wrong. If the weapon is designed for a 10 foot critter, then the grip may need to be shaved down so you can hold it, but I can swing that sword* one handed. I would say with a beefier grip that is what a D&D large longsword is. And I have held some cloud swords that was designed well and could swing quite nicely.
*Fixed link
Yeah, sorry to rain on your parade but that sword would be about half the weight of a large longsword. Add another 3-4 lbs and increase the length by a foot or so. If your wrist or shoulder doesn't pop after attempting to halt one swing then colour me impressed.
How about this. It's a fantasy game and the moment you pick up the dice realism goes out the window. Multiple sentient races living in the same world, shooting fireballs from your bottom, flying, invisible, bringing the dead back to life, these things you're okay with. Someone wielding a weapon a bit too big for him breaks your suspension of disbelief though?
If the players want to play Guts or Cloud let them. The small bonus to damage you'll net is not worth the -2 to all attacks with it IMO. Though I have done it before for purely stylistic reasons.
Guys keep your fantasy out of my Realism Simulation Tabletop Game >:|
Wait no, that's not what it is.
Where were you going with this?
Incidentally, you called it munchkin. I'm...not seeing how this is mechanically broken. At all. At. All. At all. Not in any way. Because it's not. Even though that's what munchkin means. It's not.
What I'm saying is, the use of "munchkin" should be an automatic banning from everywhere on the internet until we nerds can stop using it to mean "thing I don't like."
Mary Sue, you're on my list, too >:|
Incidentally, regarding anime swords, someone should tell 16th century Germany that they were LIVING IN AN ANIME! WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH~ :O
ya know munchkin is not always mechanically broken right? It's really all in the setting and tone of the game, sometimes large swords might fit right in , other times it brakes the feel of the game.
I wouldn't allow it but I am not sure I want to allow the large bastard sword loophole as it just gives the wrong feel to me. So really it comes down to do you want folks using sword roughly twice as big as they are or not.
ya know munchkin is not always mechanically broken right? It's really all in the setting and tone of the game, sometimes large swords might fit right in , other times it brakes the feel of the game.
I wouldn't allow it but I am not sure I want to allow the large bastard sword loophole as it just gives the wrong feel to me. So really it comes down to do you want folks using sword roughly twice as big as they are or not.
You mean like real life soldiers have done.
Not uncommonly either.
This is what really bugs me - this isn't anime esque, this is real life. Weapons the size of the wielder were what greatswords averaged out to - with many going larger then that. 16th century germany loved their swords that were 6 feet long on average. On average! Some were bigger!
There is no "that's anime" because anime isn't a single genre. Hell, Vinland Tales would make all of standard medieval D&D into "something anime," but I never hear that bandied around. Calling something anime isn't just wrong, it's also stupid, and it's fundamentally intellectually dishonest. As if western mythology never went over the top! We whine and angst and go "Oh please you're just a Bleach character" about someone holding a very large and powerful weapon - and yet one of King Arthur's enemies had a blade so large it could be used as a bridge. Beowulf wielded a giant sword created by the giants when he defeated Grendel's Mother. "Wow, that Bleach character is so lame and anime with his massive sword, not like the proper western Gregor Clegane who wields a massive greatsword in one hand! They're totally different!"
It's the very opposite of Orientalism, and it's no less disgusting - this idea that anything you personally disprove of has to be "foreign" and, thus, "bad."
I'm assuming the bolded part is a typo but you might want to fix that lol.As if western mythology never went over the top! We whine and angst and go "Oh please you're just a Bleach character" about someone holding a very large and powerful weapon - and yet one of King Arthur's enemies had a bridge so large it could be used as a bridge. Beowulf wielded a giant sword created by the giants when he defeated Grendel's Mother. "Wow, that Bleach character is so lame and anime with his massive sword, not like the proper western Gregor Clegane who wields a massive greatsword in one hand! They're totally different!"
Blade, bridge, they're close ;p
|
|
Blade, bridge, they're close ;pI'm assuming the bolded part is a typo but you might want to fix that lol.As if western mythology never went over the top! We whine and angst and go "Oh please you're just a Bleach character" about someone holding a very large and powerful weapon - and yet one of King Arthur's enemies had a bridge so large it could be used as a bridge. Beowulf wielded a giant sword created by the giants when he defeated Grendel's Mother. "Wow, that Bleach character is so lame and anime with his massive sword, not like the proper western Gregor Clegane who wields a massive greatsword in one hand! They're totally different!"
I'd be more impressed if someone was using a bridge as a sword, to be honest.
I'm kind of surprised that no one pointed out this sword was an actual sword used to kill a horse and rider. Although it wasn't used very much, some guy would sit in a tree with it, jump down, and cut a horse and rider in half (but likely miss) and then pull out something they could swing more than once. I'm with meatrace though, why is carrying an over sized sword not allowed when people can shoot fire/lightning/cold, fly, revive the dead, etc. And if you want an example from real life look at William Wallace, he was 7ft tall and carried a 10ft sword, could shoot fire from his eyes and lightning from his arse :P
Incidentally, regarding anime swords, someone should tell 16th century Germany that they were LIVING IN AN ANIME! WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH~ :O
You sure know how to be a .... wait not gonna do that.
I must have annoyed you and you sure are unpleasant but I will attempt to explain further. I was talking from my perspective. I called it munchkin because every player I have ever know that has taken or wanted that feat was because of mechanics and not character concept. They also wanted to do it even though the GM and most other players wanted to have some semblance of realism. In other words they did because of perceived benefit to their damage/reach to the detriment of others fun. I thought that was pretty much the definition of munchkin.If Monkey Grip was based off magic I would not have an issue. If its based off strength then it should not take a feat at all. It should just be a strength requirement to weild a weapon X times larger then you (which I would prefer).
And I didn't realize that the German two handed great swords (averaging around 8 lbs and 5'9") were wielded in one hand and even dual wielded often. Those zany Germans.
If it works for your game enjoy. But you keep trying to tell me I am wrong on something that is optional and based off of opinion.
If Monkey Grip was based off magic I would not have an issue. If its based off strength then it should not take a feat at all. It should just be a strength requirement to weild a weapon X times larger then you (which I would prefer).
If that were the case I'd suggest changing weapon finesse to a dex requirement and no feat too (mainly so I don't have to waist a feat every time I play a character dual wielding short swords or kukris)
There is no "that's anime" because anime isn't a single genre. Hell, Vinland Tales would make all of standard medieval D&D into "something anime," but I never hear that bandied around. Calling something anime isn't just wrong, it's also stupid, and it's fundamentally intellectually dishonest. As if western mythology never went over the top! We whine and angst and go "Oh please you're just a Bleach character" about someone holding a very large and powerful weapon - and yet one of King Arthur's enemies had a blade so large it could be used as a bridge. Beowulf wielded a giant sword created by the giants when he defeated Grendel's Mother. "Wow, that Bleach character is so lame and anime with his massive sword, not like the proper western Gregor Clegane who wields a massive greatsword in one hand! They're totally different!"
It's the very opposite of Orientalism, and it's no less disgusting - this idea that anything you personally disprove of has to be "foreign" and, thus, "bad."
Anime was a reference to the fact that those stupid amazingly think and wide heavy swords are pretty much originated from it.
I like some anime, dislike others. I have no problem playing an anime game and actually think some series would make a great basis for a game. I don't think 'foreign' equals bad or traditional European means good.
I have no problem what so ever with large two handed swords. I do have a problem with large one hand weapon.
If that were the case I'd suggest changing weapon finesse to a dex requirement and no feat too (mainly so I don't have to waist a feat every time I play a character dual wielding short swords or kukris)
If Monkey Grip was based off magic I would not have an issue. If its based off strength then it should not take a feat at all. It should just be a strength requirement to weild a weapon X times larger then you (which I would prefer).
Actually I got rid of the feat and just allowed any of the short, light or finesse weapons to be wielded that way at the characters choice if they are proficient with it.
Actually I got rid of the feat and just allowed any of the short, light or finesse weapons to be wielded that way at the characters choice if they are proficient with it.If that were the case I'd suggest changing weapon finesse to a dex requirement and no feat too (mainly so I don't have to waist a feat every time I play a character dual wielding short swords or kukris)
If Monkey Grip was based off magic I would not have an issue. If its based off strength then it should not take a feat at all. It should just be a strength requirement to weild a weapon X times larger then you (which I would prefer).
Well then I don't mind so much about the monkey grip thing because you made similar feats work that way :P
Question (might derail the thread): where is it said that Powerful Build (either Goliath or Jotunbrud) allows the character to wield oversized weapons? IIRC/AFAIK, it only allows you to consider your character one size larger for what is Combat Maneuvers, essentially. Was I wrong all that time?
ya know munchkin is not always mechanically broken right? It's really all in the setting and tone of the game, sometimes large swords might fit right in , other times it brakes the feel of the game.
I wouldn't allow it but I am not sure I want to allow the large bastard sword loophole as it just gives the wrong feel to me. So really it comes down to do you want folks using sword roughly twice as big as they are or not.
You mean like real life soldiers have done.
Not uncommonly either.
This is what really bugs me - this isn't anime esque, this is real life. Weapons the size of the wielder were what greatswords averaged out to - with many going larger then that. 16th century germany loved their swords that were 6 feet long on average. On average! Some were bigger!
There is no "that's anime" because anime isn't a single genre. Hell, Vinland Tales would make all of standard medieval D&D into "something anime," but I never hear that bandied around. Calling something anime isn't just wrong, it's also stupid, and it's fundamentally intellectually dishonest. As if western mythology never went over the top! We whine and angst and go "Oh please you're just a Bleach character" about someone holding a very large and powerful weapon - and yet one of King Arthur's enemies had a blade so large it could be used as a bridge. Beowulf wielded a giant sword created by the giants when he defeated Grendel's Mother. "Wow, that Bleach character is so lame and anime with his massive sword, not like the proper western Gregor Clegane who wields a massive greatsword in one hand! They're totally different!"
It's the very opposite of Orientalism, and it's no less disgusting - this idea that anything you personally disprove of has to be "foreign" and, thus, "bad."
I actually agree with this.
Look up the Zweihander, its MASSIVE. Needed to be, it was used against pike formations, and had a sacond grip above the first so you could choke up on it and fight folks goin' sword and shield.
The oversized bastard sword isn't an exploitation of the rules, it's an allowable and mechanically sound use of them...not to mention one of the Iconics (amiri) does it.
Makes perfect sense to me.
Anime was a reference to the fact that those stupid amazingly thick and wide heavy swords are pretty much originated from it.
Stupid spelling mistakes...
Incidentally, regarding anime swords, someone should tell 16th century Germany that they were LIVING IN AN ANIME! WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH~ :OYou sure know how to be a .... wait not gonna do that.
I must have annoyed you and you sure are unpleasant but I will attempt to explain further. I was talking from my perspective. I called it munchkin because every player I have ever know that has taken or wanted that feat was because of mechanics and not character concept. They also wanted to do it even though the GM and most other players wanted to have some semblance of realism. In other words they did because of perceived benefit to their damage/reach to the detriment of others fun. I thought that was pretty much the definition of munchkin.If Monkey Grip was based off magic I would not have an issue. If its based off strength then it should not take a feat at all. It should just be a strength requirement to weild a weapon X times larger then you (which I would prefer).
And I didn't realize that the German two handed great swords (averaging around 8 lbs and 5'9") were wielded in one hand and even dual wielded often. Those zany Germans.
If it works for your game enjoy. But you keep trying to tell me I am wrong on something that is optional and based off of opinion.
What is wrong with taking a feat for mechanical reasons? I have never known a gamer who did not take some feats for mechanical reasons. Placement of stats is also mechanical. Selection of spells to survive is mechanical.
What is wrong with taking a feat for mechanical reasons? I have never known a gamer who did not take some feats for mechanical reasons. Placement of stats is also mechanical. Selection of spells to survive is mechanical.
Sigh. There are two parts to that not one.
I called it munchkin because every player I have ever know that has taken or wanted that feat was because of mechanics and not character concept. They also wanted to do it even though the GM and most other players wanted to have some semblance of realism. In other words they did because of perceived benefit to their damage/reach to the detriment of others fun. I thought that was pretty much the definition of munchkin.
Based off strength? Have a chart and we are all good.
Magic? Hand wave and... done.Why am I bothering? I'm really not sure anymore.
You mean like real life soldiers have done.
Not uncommonly either.
This is what really bugs me - this isn't anime esque, this is real life. Weapons the size of the wielder were what greatswords averaged out to - with many going larger then that. 16th century germany loved their swords that were 6 feet long on average. On average! Some were bigger!
Ok now double the size and use it,a pathfinder bastardsword is a little smaller then a twohander now double the size and use it. That is what we are talking about Your 6' long medium sized sword is now 10-12 feet long large sword.