I have no problem with oversize weapons and Monkey Grip from a game balance perspective. Indeed, I'd rather have a feat that says "Take this feat with a weapon type, and its effective size for damage purposes is increased by 1 step when wielding one of them," and you wouldn't even have an attack penalty. That would not hurt my feelings at all.
I have no problem with the fact that mythological heroes occasionally pick up outrageously giant stuff and hit people with it.
I don't know anything about Anime, so I won't comment on that specifically, either, except as it feeds into what follows.
My problem with oversized weapons is the exact same problem I had with the Driz'zt clones a while back. Come ON, people! Find a new gimmick! Look at Amiri; the mercenary guy in Pathfinder #1; the earthbreaker pictures where the hammer head part is like 5 feet across; half the people I see at Ren-Fest have got a sword cut out of cardboard or plywood with a blade that's 3 feet wide. Every PC doesn't need them, too. Especially when the mechanical advantages are negligible and they're doing it solely to jump on the popularity bandwagon. A giant weapon does not make you unique. It makes you like every other gimmick copycat out there.
As DM, I reserve the right to request that you not roll up a 2-scimitar-armed, good-aligned drow ranger with a pet kitty-cat, especially if there are already 15 of them in the game world. Likewise, I reserve the right to question whether you *really* need that "Cloud Buster Sword" thing that you think is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL that every single one of your characters has to have one.
So far to date, I have made exactly ONE character that had an over-sized weapon, and that was simply because i rolled two 18's when i was rolling a fighter. When all was said and done, i figured a 20 Str and 18 Con was a legit reason for using a massive weapon; My character had incredible strength and stamina, so why not make use of that? Not every Monkey Grip using character out there is built because oversized weapons are "SOOOOOOOOOOOOO COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!". All of the ones i've seen (all of 3 including mine) are built around the idea of a character with incredible strength and stamina, exactly what springs to mind when I think of a Fantastic or Mythological fighter.
I realize some folks think this it's an incredibly overused trope and, really, it probably is. But c'mon, if it makes so many people happy, you should have the feat in there.
You don't have to like anyone that uses it, and you don't have to allow it in your group, but there's really no reason to make the ability not exist just because you think it's silly or cliche.
Give players the option to decide for themselves if they want to use it or not.
My only real complaint about it is the name, which isn't really descriptive of what the Feat does.
You would think something like Oversized Weapon Proficiency would make more sense.
"Ummmm I love the smell ol Necromacy in the Morning, well In the Evening to, afternoon as well. Just well not when I am baking you see. Well ok, sometimes when I am baking, but not always. Necromacy seem to make the yest do odd things"
Pish posh. This one was only dormant for six months. I've reanimated far older threads than this!
Blame Google and the Advanced Race Guide. While trying to create a race of Cloud-Giant Kin I thought that ye old "Oversized Build" would be the perfect way to represent their parent race's Massive Weapons ability, but was disappointed to find that wasn't an available racial ability.
So I figured, "Hmm, maybe I can just give them a free feat like Monkey Grip. Does Pathfinder even have that feat?"
One Google: "Pathfinder Monkey Grip" later, and here we are.
There is a way to make Monkey Grip Mechanically good. But it requires leaving core. Look at the size progression:
2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6
So, size becomes worth a -2 to attack after 3 increases. A half-giant Psychic Warrior wielding a great-sword, using monkey-grip and enlarge person deals 6d6 damage. Monkey grip is worth +7 damage here which is about 1 power attack step.
You don't have to like anyone that uses it, and you don't have to allow it in your group, but there's really no reason to make the ability not exist just because you think it's silly or cliche.
Don't get me wrong; I wouldn't want for it to be banned for everyone. I'm merely stating why I question it pretty closely in my own game, with hopes that the insight may explain to others why the feat isn't automatically embraced by everyone else with the enthusiasm of the fanboys.
To say "people who don't like it hate fighters" may be true of SOME misguided people, but not all. To say "people who hate it are ignorant of mythology" again may be true of SOME less well-read people, but not all. To say that "people who don't like it are trying to ridiculously force realism into a fantasy game" may be true of some people in this thread, but again, not all.
Some people -- myself included -- dislike the feat merely because they're really, really tired of seeing giant weapons, and want to get a break from them.
Speaking historically...If one were to create a Templar Knight, they would use a 2 handed sword. They would use them with one or two hands and even from horseback.
I just mention it for creating something historically accurate in game, instead of dropping it (because it only exists in 3.0, as far as I know).
There is a way to make Monkey Grip Mechanically good. But it requires leaving core. Look at the size progression:
2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6
So, size becomes worth a -2 to attack after 3 increases. A half-giant Psychic Warrior wielding a great-sword, using monkey-grip and enlarge person deals 6d6 damage. Monkey grip is worth +7 damage here which is about 1 power attack step.
Monkey grip and powerful build do not stack in 3.5. So monkey grip on a half-giant is a wasted feat.
Monkey grip and powerful build do not stack in 3.5. So monkey grip on a half-giant is a wasted feat.There is a way to make Monkey Grip Mechanically good. But it requires leaving core. Look at the size progression:
2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6
So, size becomes worth a -2 to attack after 3 increases. A half-giant Psychic Warrior wielding a great-sword, using monkey-grip and enlarge person deals 6d6 damage. Monkey grip is worth +7 damage here which is about 1 power attack step.
Where did you get that ruling?
A half-giant is also considered to be one size larger when determining whether a creature’s special attacks based on size (such as grab or swallow whole) can affect him. A half-giant can use weapons designed for a creature one size larger without penalty. However, his space and reach remain those of a creature of his actual size. The benefts of this racial trait stack with the effects of powers, abilities, and spells that change the subject’s size category.
That's straight from the Half-Giant racial breakdown. And i know for sure that Goliaths from 3.5 had the same clause, because i've had to check that ruling myself when a player made a Monkey Grip using Goliath that wielded two-step larger Fullblades. He was basically hitting people with small cars, with an edge.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because both of them say 'can use weapons designed for a creature one size larger without penalty'. Neither or them actually change his size. Which means your bolded text does not apply. You have two abilities that say you can wield Large weapons as a Medium character. Nothing in either says 'if you can already wield Large weapons, you can now weild Huge weapons'.
If I really, really feel the need to wield a weapon as tall and broad/taller and broader than my character, I play Exalted.
Just sayin.'
Because both of them say 'can use weapons designed for a creature one size larger without penalty'. Neither or them actually change his size. Which means your bolded text does not apply. You have two abilities that say you can wield Large weapons as a Medium character. Nothing in either says 'if you can already wield Large weapons, you can now weild Huge weapons'.
Indeed, the bolded text is there so if you can some how enlarge a half-giant, say with the psychic warrior ability expansion.
I'd leave monkey grip as is, with the addition that using a 2 hander with one hand makes it a one handed weapon for STR damage bonus and power attack purposes.
It's only bad if you also bring over the oversized offhand weapon feat.
I think it should be worded something similar to:
"Increases the player's effective size catagory in reguards to wielded weapon sizes by one size".
So A 1-handed weapon becomes a light weapon, a 2-handed weapon becomes a 1 -handed weapon, and a weapon 1 size too large to be wielded becomes a 2-handed weapon.
And make sure to state clearly that it doesn't stack with any other effect that lets you wield a weapon larger than your size would normally allow(for example, a Cloud Giant's Oversized Weapon ability).
However, it would still stack with something that increases a weapons weight without increasing it's size(Lead Blades spell) and it will still stack with something that actually enlarges the wielder(Enlarge Person spell).
From my perspective, my first experience with monkey grip came just recently, long after 3.5 had lain in its coffin. An associate started up a group with his friend, and his two sons, whom all have only been exposed to 3x dnd. the 'friend' was DM, who claimed planning, prepared nothing, and brought in an npc to aid with 'heavy' combat. The npc was one of his characters from way back when, a multiclass barbarian/fighter with monkey grip and two greatswords, dual wielding.
so yea, not a fan. period. Too many people go for the min/max this gives them, not the thematic element.
The npc was one of his characters from way back when, a multiclass barbarian/fighter with monkey grip and two greatswords, dual wielding.
so yea, not a fan. period. Too many people go for the min/max this gives them, not the thematic element.
I guess just don't see why that's such a huge amount of min/maxing. The difference between a longsword and a greatsword is an average of 2.5 damage per hit.
I don't see how that's not fair for the cost of a feat. Especially one that gives you -2 to hit.
Then again, I consider this not an issue in Pathfinder anymore, anyone who wants to wield some uber-weapon can do it with 2 or more levels in the Titan Mauler barbarian archetype using class.
While Titan Mauler will allow you to use what used to be a 2-handed weapon on only one hand, it doesn't allow you to use a weapon that's normally too large for you in two hands.
A medium sized titan mauler can wield only LIGHT HUGE weapons, but must wield them as two-handed weapons AND suffers a -4 penalty, which would be reduced by "Massive Weapons".
Using a HUGE light mace would do - what? - 2d6, 20/x2? (1d6 increased two times = ?)
You would be better of using a LARGE Longsword used as a two-handed weapon with only a -2 penalty (reduced by 1 / 3 levels), doing 2d6, 19-20/x2.
And still, why not simply use a MEDIUM Greatsword for the same damage but without the penalty OR as a one-handed weapon with -2 (thanks to "Jotungrip")
Massive Weapon really is only good for when you ACTUALLY lose your weapon and must replace it by looting a slain giant.
"Massive Weapons" at level 3 of TM allows weapons normally too large to be used in two hands.
No it doesn't.
There's a whole thread on this where the guy who wrote the rule was even like "Oops, it doesn't really let you do that. I meant it to, but RAW it doesn't let you."
both the logic and the author intent also make it clear how Massive Weapons should work
I agree. I'm just saying, RAW, it doesn't work that way. Even the new errata'd version doesn't allow the use of larger weapons than your character could normally use in two hands.