Is a falcata treated as a 2H martial with no EWP?<boggles>They're both ONE handed exotic weapons. Honestly, they are.</boggle>100% correct. For a falcata, not for a bastard sword.
It truly matters not. This actually makes the bastard sword EASIER to use than most exotic weapons, since you can't use most all other exotic one handed weapons proficiently in 2H w/out the EWP.
However, both weapons ARE one handed melee weapons. They can be used in one hand by a proficient user AND a non-proficient user. The non-proficient user is just going to miss more often (20% more).
Is a falcata treated as a 2H martial with no EWP?<boggles>They're both ONE handed exotic weapons. Honestly, they are.</boggle>100% correct. For a falcata, not for a bastard sword.
It truly matters not. This actually makes the bastard sword EASIER to use than most exotic weapons, since you can't use most all other exotic one handed weapons proficiently in 2H w/out the EWP.
However, both weapons ARE one handed melee weapons. They can be used in one hand by a proficient user AND a non-proficient user. The non-proficient user is just going to miss more often (20% more).
It actually matters quite a bit, apparently.
As non-optimized as the iconic characters seem to be, yet Amiri still has the EWP: Bastard Sword feat.
Isn't doing 2d6 19-20 without the -2 penalty to hit and being a feat ahead (because you don't need exotic weapon prof to use a great sword) much better math wise than large bastard sword with a -2 and the 2d8? Going for the larger base dice doesn't seem like the most powerful option. To be honest the 2d4 18-20 from falchion at higher levels seems to be the best option.
If people really want a bigger sword why not just use the full blade from 3.5? [url=http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Fullblade_(3.5e_Equipment)]
It gives you the 2d8 without the -2 seems like a much fairer trade off for spending an exotic weapon feat.
|
Well, everyone and their mother takes heirloom weapon, even if they don't need the proficiency... so the feat is unnecessary in PFS.
As to fullblade, it is not PF and never should be... +2 damage for no penalty is a fighter exclusive. But -2 or even -1 and it becomes a bad tradeoff, so maybe it should be OK.
Is a falcata treated as a 2H martial with no EWP?<boggles>They're both ONE handed exotic weapons. Honestly, they are.</boggle>100% correct. For a falcata, not for a bastard sword.
It truly matters not. This actually makes the bastard sword EASIER to use than most exotic weapons, since you can't use most all other exotic one handed weapons proficiently in 2H w/out the EWP.
However, both weapons ARE one handed melee weapons. They can be used in one hand by a proficient user AND a non-proficient user. The non-proficient user is just going to miss more often (20% more).
It actually matters quite a bit, apparently.
As non-optimized as the iconic characters seem to be, yet Amiri still has the EWP: Bastard Sword feat.
The iconics are non-optimized, not completely non-effective. Giving Amiri a large bastard sword at 1st level w/out the feat to wield it proficiently would give her -6 to hit. That cripples most any melee at early levels.
I'm going to try one more tack, before giving up here.
Let's say Bob finds a bastard sword and a long sword and wants to try them out in combat. Bob happens to be a wizard and has next to no weapon training at all (no martial or exotic weapon feats).
Now, both weapons are considered non-proficient for Bob. Can we agree on that? Also, the non-proficiency penalty as described in the equipment chapter lists this as being -4 to hit. Can we also agree on this?
Bob takes the long sword in one hand, and swings it in combat...and most likely misses. It's a one handed weapon that Bob has no training in. Bob wanting to get more oommph with his next swing decides to swing the sword in two hands. It's still a martial weapon that he's non-proficient in, but if he hits he gets to add a bit of STR to it (if he didn't dump it like most wizards). He still suffers the same non-proficiency penalty on attacks, since he's not proficient in martial weapons.
Seeing his usefulness with a long sword being minimal, Bob decides to try a slightly bigger weapon. He's seen the weapon wielded by a smaller elven swordsman in one and two hands, so he figures he can do the same (though ineptly).
He takes the bastard sword in two hands, and swings mightily, but misses. He's still non-proficient with martial weapons and takes a -4 to hit. Giving up the chance to swing for the fences, he decides he wants to try and fence a little bit, and goes to a one handed grasp on the sword. While the sword is longer, and a bit more difficult to wield single handed, he is still able to suffer through and use it ineptly. Now it is being treated as a one handed exotic weapon. Bob is still not proficient in the weapon, and even though it's exotic not martial, he still only takes the non-proficiency penalty -4 to hit.
This is how I see non-proficient use of a weapon.
It's listed as a one handed weapon. It also has a bonus, that allows characters with martial proficiencies to use it with 2 hands w/out the penalty that most exotic weapons would still have. However, any one can use any one handed weapon on the list. They just can't do so well.
The sizing rules follow after that.
Thank you.
I see the point you're trying to make, I simply don't agree.
Leaving the EWP out of it, a bastard sword is a 2 handed martial weapon.
It says as much in it's description. So, by RAW, a medium creature can not use a large 2 handed weapon.
With the EWP feat, the bastard sword becomes one handable, and a large bastard sword usable by a medium creature with said feat.
By RAW it's a one handed exotic weapon, as that's the listing for it in the weapon chart.
Sniggevert continues to get it right (I think, anyway) in that regard.
The feat doesn't change the size of the weapon, it only allows for it's use in a different manner.
Please, please, consider the following statement - if the weapon is a two handed sized weapon, it can not be wielded by a medium creature as a large weapon REGARDLESS of the exotic weapon proficiency. It would go from being a two handed weapon to too large to wield (a feat would not change that as it doesn't change the SIZE of the weapon.)
Trust me, from a design standpoint, if the weapon was two handed it would be in the martial two handed part of the weapon chart. And Amiri would NOT be using a large version of it.
That's the rules-y argument, below is the conceptually bothersome part of it.
It's also a bit wierd that the feat would matter at all as the ONLY benefit the feat grants conceptually is that you can wield it in one hand (impossible without special training). As you're not wielding it in one hand as a large weapon, clearly it's a martial weapon again...right? The same "Special Training" couldn't possible apply to something the size of a greatsword as you're clearly not wielding it "one handed".
By RAW it's a one handed exotic weapon, as that's the listing for it in the weapon chart.
Sniggevert continues to get it right (I think, anyway) in that regard.
The feat doesn't change the size of the weapon, it only allows for it's use in a different manner.
Please, please, consider the following statement - if the weapon is a two handed sized weapon, it can not be wielded by a medium creature as a large weapon REGARDLESS of the exotic weapon proficiency. It would go from being a two handed weapon to too large to wield (a feat would not change that as it doesn't change the SIZE of the weapon.)
Trust me, from a design standpoint, if the weapon was two handed it would be in the martial two handed part of the weapon chart. And Amiri would NOT be using a large version of it.
That's the rules-y argument, below is the conceptually bothersome part of it.
It's also a bit wierd that the feat would matter at all as the ONLY benefit the feat grants conceptually is that you can wield it in one hand (impossible without special training). As you're not wielding it in one hand as a large weapon, clearly it's a martial weapon again...right? The same "Special Training" couldn't possible apply to something the size of a greatsword as you're clearly not wielding it "one handed".
This could be a chart vs. description issue if you'd like.
This could be a chart vs. description issue if you'd like.By RAW it's a one handed exotic weapon, as that's the listing for it in the weapon chart.
Sniggevert continues to get it right (I think, anyway) in that regard.
The feat doesn't change the size of the weapon, it only allows for it's use in a different manner.
Please, please, consider the following statement - if the weapon is a two handed sized weapon, it can not be wielded by a medium creature as a large weapon REGARDLESS of the exotic weapon proficiency. It would go from being a two handed weapon to too large to wield (a feat would not change that as it doesn't change the SIZE of the weapon.)
Trust me, from a design standpoint, if the weapon was two handed it would be in the martial two handed part of the weapon chart. And Amiri would NOT be using a large version of it.
That's the rules-y argument, below is the conceptually bothersome part of it.
It's also a bit wierd that the feat would matter at all as the ONLY benefit the feat grants conceptually is that you can wield it in one hand (impossible without special training). As you're not wielding it in one hand as a large weapon, clearly it's a martial weapon again...right? The same "Special Training" couldn't possible apply to something the size of a greatsword as you're clearly not wielding it "one handed".
That's understandable, but even the description is invalid to support the opposing argument, as a bastard sword is a hand and a half sword and designed for use with one or both hands interchangably.
For my money, this is where being too focused on the RAW and what it ways leads to bad results. Basically, people are advocating using a feat that allow the character to wield a two-handed weapon with one hand to use a two-handed weapon that can't be wielded as a two-handed weapon.
I would simply treat the large bastard sword as too large to wield. If it's too large to wield as a two-handed weapon, then using two hands on it to use as an exotic weapon wouldn't fly in my game.
For my money, this is where being too focused on the RAW and what it ways leads to bad results. Basically, people are advocating using a feat that allow the character to wield a two-handed weapon with one hand to use a two-handed weapon that can't be wielded as a two-handed weapon.
I would simply treat the large bastard sword as too large to wield. If it's too large to wield as a two-handed weapon, then using two hands on it to use as an exotic weapon wouldn't fly in my game.
House rules are for that.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Is a large weapon useable by a medium creature?
1) Is it one handed?
--a) If Yes, then Yes it can be.
--b) If No, then No it can't be.
--c) It's a bastard sword.
------c1)Does the creature have the EWP feat?
---------aa) If yes, then it is considered a one handed weapon; go to a.
---------bb) If no, then it is considered a two handed weapon; go to b.
This is the logic I'm following.
For example, a Small creature would wield a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon. If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.
So, by RAW, the bastard sword is considered a one-handed weapon. Just like any other one-handed weapon barring the rapier, it can be swung with two hands. By making the bastard sword large, it becomes a two-handed weapon. So it would be impossible to wield in one hand at this point.
Which leads to the conundrum. If you only need EWP to wield it in one hand properly, but you can't wield it with one hand anymore because of its size, then why do you need the feat?
By RAW the sword can be used two-handed as a martial weapon, and it is considered a two-handed weapon if it is large. So case and point, having EWP is pretty pointless in this respect.
It's normally a 2 handed weapon. If you increase the size without the feat it goes from two handed to too big to use at all.What this guy said. With EWP you can wield a Large Bastard Sword it in two hands. Without, you cannot wield it at all.
Except the bastard sword is not a two-handed weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that can be wielded with two hands. Making it large turns it into a two-handed weapon, meaning it could be wielded without EWP.
|
Except the bastard sword is not a two-handed weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that can be wielded with two hands. Making it large turns it into a two-handed weapon, meaning it could be wielded without EWP.
I feel you have this backwards. If it was a one handed weapon, EWP wouldnt be needed. Its a larger (than a normal long sword, not size) sword that unless you have specific training (EWP Bastard Sword) you can only use it in two hands. So I feel its a 2 handed weapon you need special training to use 1 handed.
Description: Due to its size, a bastard sword is an exotic weapon. A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.
As I said, by RAW, it is classified as an exotic one-handed weapon. The weapon is exotic by default, which makes sense, since you need the feat to wield it one-handed. This can be mitigated by wielding it with two hands. This does not make it a two-handed weapon, because almost any one-handed weapon can be wielded with two hands.
So more accurately, it's a one-handed weapon that you can wield without without special training by using two hands.
|
|
The discussion has popped up elsewhere on the boards. In summary the RAW are (by popular default, not official interpretation I hasten to add) it's only possible to weild a large bastard sword if you have the exotic weapon proficiency.
I appreciate all the logical arguments sent out both ways, but sometimes logic just doesn't follow. Look at how a small greatsword's damage scales. Why d10 when its small rather than a D8? Why does it not do 2d8 if enlarged to medium as any other weapon would. There are always exceptions to the rules.
The description states, "it's too large to use in one hand without special training." You can't use it in one hand untrained, even with the non-proficient penalty.
Now I also agree that as a result you shouldn't beable to use a large bastard sword 2 handed even if you have the feat. Its an extension of logic, but not in the rules. As mentioned before, the iconic barbarian does it...
Sometimes the rules just don't follow logic...
Description: Due to its size, a bastard sword is an exotic weapon. A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.As I said, by RAW, it is classified as an exotic one-handed weapon. The weapon is exotic by default, which makes sense, since you need the feat to wield it one-handed. This can be mitigated by wielding it with two hands. This does not make it a two-handed weapon, because almost any one-handed weapon can be wielded with two hands.
So more accurately, it's a one-handed weapon that you can wield without without special training by using two hands.
Which is the same as any other 2 handed weapon, except there is no option to take a feat to use those one handed. So what's your point, exactly?
Which is the same as any other 2 handed weapon, except there is no option to take a feat to use those one handed. So what's your point, exactly?Description: Due to its size, a bastard sword is an exotic weapon. A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.As I said, by RAW, it is classified as an exotic one-handed weapon. The weapon is exotic by default, which makes sense, since you need the feat to wield it one-handed. This can be mitigated by wielding it with two hands. This does not make it a two-handed weapon, because almost any one-handed weapon can be wielded with two hands.
So more accurately, it's a one-handed weapon that you can wield without without special training by using two hands.
My point is that unless it is large, it is not a two-handed weapon. Two-handed weapons can never be wielded with one hand. It's quite possible that the bastard sword was written that way (one-handed weapon that penalizes you for using it one-handed) for this very reason.
My point is that unless it is large, it is not a two-handed weapon. Two-handed weapons can never be wielded with one hand. It's quite possible that the bastard sword was written that way (one-handed weapon that penalizes you for using it one-handed) for this very reason.Which is the same as any other 2 handed weapon, except there is no option to take a feat to use those one handed. So what's your point, exactly?Description: Due to its size, a bastard sword is an exotic weapon. A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.As I said, by RAW, it is classified as an exotic one-handed weapon. The weapon is exotic by default, which makes sense, since you need the feat to wield it one-handed. This can be mitigated by wielding it with two hands. This does not make it a two-handed weapon, because almost any one-handed weapon can be wielded with two hands.
So more accurately, it's a one-handed weapon that you can wield without without special training by using two hands.
This isn't as big of a distinction as you feel it is.
Because...Unless you have the EWP feat, it is treated as a 2 handed Martial weapon. So it might as well be a 2 hander.
Can a large 2 handed martial weapon be used by a medium creature?
This isn't as big of a distinction as you feel it is.
Because...
Unless you have the EWP feat, it is treated as a 2 handed Martial weapon. So it might as well be a 2 hander.
Can a large 2 handed martial weapon be used by a medium creature?
Sure, it might as well be a two-handed weapon. But it isn't. No, a large two-handed weapon cannot be used by a medium character, because that would modify it into a nonexistent weapon category.
Large one-handed weapons are wielded as two-handed weapons by medium characters. Bastard swords are one-handed weapons, with or without the feat. A large bastard sword is a two-handed weapon. By its own description, it can be used with two hands with only martial proficiency, which becomes irrelevant since it couldn't be wielded with one hand anymore anyway.
I guess you want me to say you're correct that the bastard sword is a one-handed exotic weapon.
It is, and you are correct on this point.
But the caveat of not having the feat required to do so, pushes it into the 2 hander category for rules' sake.
It physicly is a one handed weapon.
In the hands of the non-trained it is considered a two hander.
In the hands of the non trained, a large bastard sword is considered a large two hander, and unuseable.
I don't think there's wriggle room here, but I can agree to disagree.
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
As folks have noted, our iconic barbarian Amiri does this exact thing; she uses a Large bastard sword she got from a dead giant as her primary weapon. The ONLY way that she can wield such a weapon is by using it two-handed as an exotic weapon—thus, she has to have the Exotic Weapon (bastard sword) feat, and even then suffers a –2 penalty to attack rolls with it. Part of her story flavor is that she "can only properly wield the sword when she's raging" (as in, the +2 bonus to hit she gets cancels out her –2 penalty for wielding an oversized weapon).
If she didn't have the Exotic Weapon (bastard sword) feat, she can only use the weapon as a two handed weapon. Medium creatures simply cannot properly wield Large two handed weapons, so without the feat, she could CARRRY the sword but she couldn't use it. Best case scenario, I'd let a player who didn't have Exotic Weapon (bastard sword) use a Large bastard sword as a big improvised weapon that dealt like 1d6 damage and had a normal threat range.
If you want your character to use a Large bastard sword as a bastard sword and not a cumbersome improvised weapon in the same way you might wield a sofa or a dinner table, and you're playing in a home game, talk to your GM for final ruling.
If you're playing in the Pathfinder Society org play campaign, you need Exotic Weapon (bastard sword) as a feat to use it.
From the man himself!
Looks I was sorely mistaken, Kryzbyn. You win, have a cookie/soda/cake.
I'm honestly glad I was wrong.
This isn't as big of a distinction as you feel it is.
Because...
Unless you have the EWP feat, it is treated as a 2 handed Martial weapon. So it might as well be a 2 hander.
Can a large 2 handed martial weapon be used by a medium creature?
I think some folks are making leaps of logic without realizing it.
Exotic Weapons
One-Handed Melee Weapons
Sword, bastardSword, Bastard: A bastard sword is about 4 feet in length, making it too large to use in one hand without special training; thus, it is an exotic weapon. A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.
Let's examine the text and try not to make any leaps. We will assume that the text is written for an appropriately sized weapon relative to the character.
A bastard sword is about 4 feet in length, making it too large to use in one hand without special training; thus, it is an exotic weapon.
Without special training (I think we can safely assume EWP here), it can not be wielded in one-hand. This means that Sniggevert's (and others) suggestion that it could be wielded in one-hand without EWP, but you would take -4 non-proficiency penalty, is apparently wrong.
Now does this mean that it is not a one-handed weapon? No, there is no logical reason to come to that conclusion. It appears to be a one-handed weapon that can only be wielded appropriately (as a one-handed weapon) if the person has been trained in its use (EWP).
What does this say about larger versions? Nothing, only that an appropriately sized one can't be wielded in one-hand without the feat. Again, from this statement alone, there is no reason to assume that a larger version couldn't be wielded in two-hands without proficiency (at a total -6 penalty).
This passage can only be interpreted for an appropriately sized weapon being wielded in one-hand.
A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.
Two key parts in this sentence, "can" and "as a". This statement doesn't imply anything about the weapon itself, but merely how a potential wielder could treat it, if they so choose to. This statement is not saying the weapon is actually a two-handed martial weapon, only that it "can [be] use[d]" "as a [two-handed] martial weapon". That is a big difference.
If people really want a bigger sword why not just use the full blade from 3.5? Fullblade
Despite the implication of the site listed, the fullblade was not a 3.5 weapon, it was a 3ed weapon. With the changes in weapon sizing, there was actually debate as to the nature of a fullblade. From its description, many felt it was in fact a large sized bastard sword (which makes the conversation here relevant for it). Others felt it was its own unique weapon, a 2-1/2-hand sword. There are benefits and costs to either approach.
From the man himself!
Looks I was sorely mistaken, Kryzbyn. You win, have a cookie/soda/cake.
I'm honestly glad I was wrong.
No worries, mate. <hands Mahorfeus a beer>
...stuff...
Scroll up, mate.
...stuff...Scroll up, mate.
Yeah, I was writing and posting while he was, so I didn't see the post until mine went up. Of course Jacobs comment is only valid for offical PFS, and it does not actually have to hinge on any kind of valid interpretation of the rules (I am not saying that it is not a valid interpretation, merely that a PFS rule need not be). His comment does not make mine invalid, merely not official PFS.
Yeah, I was writing and posting while he was, so I didn't see the post until mine went up. Of course Jacobs comment is only valid for offical PFS, and it does not actually have to hinge on any kind of valid interpretation of the rules (I am not saying that it is not a valid interpretation, merely that a PFS rule need not be). His comment does not make mine invalid, merely not official PFS....stuff...Scroll up, mate.
Okie dokie.
If we really want to go by RAW, the Large Bastard Sword and the Medium Bastard Sword are effectively two different weapons. Full proficiency with the latter does not negate the problems with the former.By RAW it's a one handed exotic weapon, as that's the listing for it in the weapon chart.
Where do you get that by the RAW they are effectively two different weapons?
|
Except the bastard sword is not a two-handed weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that can be wielded with two hands. Making it large turns it into a two-handed weapon, meaning it could be wielded without EWP.It's normally a 2 handed weapon. If you increase the size without the feat it goes from two handed to too big to use at all.What this guy said. With EWP you can wield a Large Bastard Sword it in two hands. Without, you cannot wield it at all.
Wrong. It's a two-handed martial weapon AND a one-handed exotic weapon. Don't have the feat? treat it as two-handed, which means larging it makes it unusable for you. Case closed.
Edit: [looks up at a few posts above, takes the cake... :)]
As folks have noted, our iconic barbarian Amiri does this exact thing; she uses a Large bastard sword she got from a dead giant as her primary weapon. The ONLY way that she can wield such a weapon is by using it two-handed as an exotic weapon—thus, she has to have the Exotic Weapon (bastard sword) feat, and even then suffers a –2 penalty to attack rolls with it. Part of her story flavor is that she "can only properly wield the sword when she's raging" (as in, the +2 bonus to hit she gets cancels out her –2 penalty for wielding an oversized weapon).
If she didn't have the Exotic Weapon (bastard sword) feat, she can only use the weapon as a two handed weapon. Medium creatures simply cannot properly wield Large two handed weapons, so without the feat, she could CARRRY the sword but she couldn't use it. Best case scenario, I'd let a player who didn't have Exotic Weapon (bastard sword) use a Large bastard sword as a big improvised weapon that dealt like 1d6 damage and had a normal threat range.
If you want your character to use a Large bastard sword as a bastard sword and not a cumbersome improvised weapon in the same way you might wield a sofa or a dinner table, and you're playing in a home game, talk to your GM for final ruling.
If you're playing in the Pathfinder Society org play campaign, you need Exotic Weapon (bastard sword) as a feat to use it.
Sir,
Really appreciate your chiming in on this, it's good to have an official answer for these things. However, I can't help but notice that this is POORLY designed and worded, definitely a holdout from the 3.X days and that it would never fly in RPG superstar (arguably the benchmark by which design standards are set for the game)... any chance of seeing the wording cleared up officially? From a design perspective this is a bit of a nightmare, as the weapon's literal size is determined by the manner in which it's being wielded, making it break a universal size rule to be applicable to gameplay... which is still kind of cool as it makes the weapon a bit more unique. I hope you do something like this with other weapons in the future.
As always, thanks for stopping in and letting us know how things are.
|
|
Large Bastard Sword is 12 pounds... why does the weight only doubles for weapons? when you cast enlarge the weight goes (properly) up x8!! the more accurate weight for a sword like Amiri SHOULD be 6x8 = 48 lbs... look at the size of it and imagine the weight of a crowbar in your hands... Amiri's sword is safely the size of about 6 to 8 crowbars. THIS, IMHO, should really help someone understand why you can't wield a bloody large bastard sword in one hand! LOL!
PS: even swinging a bastard sword that would be 12 lbs would give most people a pause after about a minute... it would be completely exhausting...
Large Bastard Sword is 12 pounds... why does the weight only doubles for weapons? when you cast enlarge the weight goes (properly) up x8!!
Yeah that would get a little crazy with some of the other weapons. I think the warhammer and battleaxe are the same weight as the bastard sword, too.
Now, let's consider a smaller sized bastard sword.
If you have martial proficiency and not exotic proficiency, does that mean you can wield the weapon in two-hands and get 1-1/2 strength damage, like you would if it was a one-handed weapon?
If you have exotic proficiency, if you wield it in two-hands you get no benefit, because you treat it as a light weapon?
Now, let's consider a smaller sized bastard sword.
If you have martial proficiency and not exotic proficiency, does that mean you can wield the weapon in two-hands and get 1-1/2 strength damage, like you would if it was a one-handed weapon?
If you have exotic proficiency, if you wield it in two-hands you get no benefit, because you treat it as a light weapon?
Right? The logic on this one is really, really odd.
The rules for the bastard sword tell you how to treat it.
THe sizing rules are what change it.
What do the sizing rules say for using a weapon 1 size smaller?
EDIT:
It would seem after looking at the rules again it's talking about weapons your size or larger. The examples given are a small creature using a medium sized weapon.
A small bastard sword would, for a medium creature, no longer be large enough to require the EWP to use one handed, because at most, it's a one-handed weapon. It needs to be 2 sizes smalelr to be considered light:
A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon's size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.
So it'd need to be a tiny bastard sword before it'd be light.
That's my 2 cp.
The rules for the bastard sword tell you how to treat it.
THe sizing rules are what change it.What do the sizing rules say for using a weapon 1 size smaller?
EDIT:
It would seem after looking at the rules again it's talking about weapons your size or larger. The examples given are a small creature using a medium sized weapon.
A small bastard sword would, for a medium creature, no longer be large enough to require the EWP to use one handed, because at most, it's a one-handed weapon. It needs to be 2 sizes smalelr to be considered light:
A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon's size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.So it'd need to be a tiny bastard sword before it'd be light.
That's my 2 cp.
Right, so it would be two size categories smaller if it was one size category smaller. It would be 1 handed with no EWP and light with EWP.
Hilarious!
Right, so it would be two size categories smaller if it was one size category smaller. It would be 1 handed with no EWP and light with EWP.
Hilarious!
Add in things like Power Attack and it gets even better.
Human fighter without EWP(BS): Remember that pair of bastard swords we got from those gnomes, let's use them against these zombies.
Human fighter with EWP(BS): Sure.
*start swinging and power attacking zombie foes, untrainted fighter does more damage due to be able to benefit as if it was a one-handed weapon used in two-hands*
HF w/o EWP: Wow, I thought you were trained in using these things? I have just been swinging it like a messed up longsword and been rocking the foes.
HF w/ EWP: Yeah, sometimes knowing too much can be a pain.
The rules for the bastard sword tell you how to treat it.
THe sizing rules are what change it.What do the sizing rules say for using a weapon 1 size smaller?
EDIT:
It would seem after looking at the rules again it's talking about weapons your size or larger. The examples given are a small creature using a medium sized weapon.
A small bastard sword would, for a medium creature, no longer be large enough to require the EWP to use one handed, because at most, it's a one-handed weapon. It needs to be 2 sizes smalelr to be considered light:
A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon's size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.So it'd need to be a tiny bastard sword before it'd be light.
That's my 2 cp.
Right, so it would be two size categories smaller if it was one size category smaller. It would be 1 handed with no EWP and light with EWP.
Hilarious!
I don't think you're getting my point.
The reason it normally, for a medium bastard sword, needs to have the EWP to use one handed, is becasue of the size.If it's one size smaller, the feat is no longer needed to wield one handed, because well, it's a one-handed weapon already.
If you're a medium creature using a small bastard sword, nevermind the reasons, it's a one handed weapon or you can use it as a light in your off hand.
As a side note, I'd like to mention that jsut because the feat allows you to use the sword one-handed, it doesn't force you to do so.
You can still use it 2 handed if you wish.
No more than it forces you to use a small version with only one hand.
Right, so it would be two size categories smaller if it was one size category smaller. It would be 1 handed with no EWP and light with EWP.
Hilarious!
Add in things like Power Attack and it gets even better.
Human fighter without EWP(BS): Remember that pair of bastard swords we got from those gnomes, let's use them against these zombies.
Human fighter with EWP(BS): Sure.
*start swinging and power attacking zombie foes, untrainted fighter does more damage due to be able to benefit as if it was a one-handed weapon used in two-hands*
HF w/o EWP: Wow, I thought you were trained in using these things? I have just been swinging it like a messed up longsword and been rocking the foes.
HF w/ EWP: Yeah, sometimes knowing too much can be a pain.
Yeah, cuz like, it would totally work that way!
Yeah, cuz like, it would totally work that way!
Indeed it very well could. You could argue that the character with EWP, could act as if they did not have the feat, but isn't that just being munchkin at that point?
Yeah, cuz like, it would totally work that way!Indeed it very well could. You could argue that the character with EWP, could act as if they did not have the feat, but isn't that just being munchkin at that point?
No more than making a medium character wield a medium bastard sword one handed just becasue he has the feat, i reckon.
No more than making a medium character wield a medium bastard sword one handed just becasue he has the feat, i reckon.Yeah, cuz like, it would totally work that way!Indeed it very well could. You could argue that the character with EWP, could act as if they did not have the feat, but isn't that just being munchkin at that point?
That is a little different, you can wield one-handed weapons, at any time, with two-hands. I mean, yes, I would agree with your statement here, if one was mistakenly under the impression that they thought the second you put two-hands on it you HAD to treat it as a martial weapon.
Except the bastard sword is not a two-handed weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that can be wielded with two hands. Making it large turns it into a two-handed weapon, meaning it could be wielded without EWP.It's normally a 2 handed weapon. If you increase the size without the feat it goes from two handed to too big to use at all.What this guy said. With EWP you can wield a Large Bastard Sword it in two hands. Without, you cannot wield it at all.Wrong. It's a two-handed martial weapon AND a one-handed exotic weapon. Don't have the feat? treat it as two-handed, which means larging it makes it unusable for you. Case closed.
Edit: [looks up at a few posts above, takes the cake... :)]
...Except that's not the point that James refuted. He said that you require exotic weapon proficiency to wield a large bastard sword two-handed, which is what I was arguing against. Nowhere did he say that an ordinary bastard sword is considered a two handed weapon in any way.
A one-handed weapon can be wielded with two hands. The bastard sword was written in such a way that doing so is the only way to use it properly without exotic weapon proficiency. You can still wield it with one hand, just like any other weapon you're not proficient with. If it were considered a two handed weapon at that point, you wouldn't be able to do so.
|
Creative Director
|
Really appreciate your chiming in on this, it's good to have an official answer for these things. However, I can't help but notice that this is POORLY designed and worded, definitely a holdout from the 3.X days and that it would never fly in RPG superstar (arguably the benchmark by which design standards are set for the game)... any chance of seeing the wording cleared up officially? From a design perspective this is a bit of a nightmare, as the weapon's literal size is determined by the manner in which it's being wielded, making it break a universal size rule to be applicable to gameplay... which is still kind of cool as it makes the weapon a bit more unique. I hope you do something like this with other weapons in the future.
As always, thanks for stopping in and letting us know how things are.
Amiri looks cool with a big sword. The rules can bow to my needs to make it happen. ;-P
As for "clearing things up," that'd require a complete and total reworking of the way weapon sizes work and interact with the rest of the game. That's a subject for Pathifnder 2nd Edition to tackle. Until then... we all just have to grin and bear it. Personally, I don't have a problem at all with doing things this way at all in the slightest. If it's that big of a problem for someone else, they should either come up with their own solution and be happy with it... or honestly, just don't allow players in the game to use larger weapons. Just do a blanket "You Can Not Use Weapons Built For Larger Creatures Than You." It's heavy handed, sure, but if you're not willing to be flexible and interpret the rules without worrying about breaking them... you're already being heavy handed.
In any event, my intent was to lay down how things "officially" work as regards how you'll see this character concept function in published adventures from us, and how it'll work in the PFS game. How it works in your own game depends on you or your GM. If my description helps, great! If it doesn't, feel free to ignore it.
Except the bastard sword is not a two-handed weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that can be wielded with two hands. Making it large turns it into a two-handed weapon, meaning it could be wielded without EWP.It's normally a 2 handed weapon. If you increase the size without the feat it goes from two handed to too big to use at all.What this guy said. With EWP you can wield a Large Bastard Sword it in two hands. Without, you cannot wield it at all.Wrong. It's a two-handed martial weapon AND a one-handed exotic weapon. Don't have the feat? treat it as two-handed, which means larging it makes it unusable for you. Case closed.
Edit: [looks up at a few posts above, takes the cake... :)]
...Except that's not the point that James refuted. He said that you require exotic weapon proficiency to wield a large bastard sword two-handed, which is what I was arguing against. Nowhere did he say that an ordinary bastard sword is considered a two handed weapon in any way.
A one-handed weapon can be wielded with two hands. The bastard sword was written in such a way that doing so is the only way to use it properly without exotic weapon proficiency. You can still wield it with one hand, just like any other weapon you're not proficient with. If it were considered a two handed weapon at that point, you wouldn't be able to do so.
I agree with you for the most part, but I think a strict reading of the entry says that without EWP, you can't wield it at all with one-handed (assuming it is correctly sized). Notice the text says:
A bastard sword is about 4 feet in length, making it too large to use in one hand without special training; thus, it is an exotic weapon.Notice it doesn't say, to use "effectively" in one hand. Just use at all.
Really appreciate your chiming in on this, it's good to have an official answer for these things. However, I can't help but notice that this is POORLY designed and worded, definitely a holdout from the 3.X days and that it would never fly in RPG superstar (arguably the benchmark by which design standards are set for the game)... any chance of seeing the wording cleared up officially? From a design perspective this is a bit of a nightmare, as the weapon's literal size is determined by the manner in which it's being wielded, making it break a universal size rule to be applicable to gameplay... which is still kind of cool as it makes the weapon a bit more unique. I hope you do something like this with other weapons in the future.
As always, thanks for stopping in and letting us know how things are.Amiri looks cool with a big sword. The rules can bow to my needs to make it happen. ;-P
As for "clearing things up," that'd require a complete and total reworking of the way weapon sizes work and interact with the rest of the game. That's a subject for Pathifnder 2nd Edition to tackle. Until then... we all just have to grin and bear it. Personally, I don't have a problem at all with doing things this way at all in the slightest. If it's that big of a problem for someone else, they should either come up with their own solution and be happy with it... or honestly, just don't allow players in the game to use larger weapons. Just do a blanket "You Can Not Use Weapons Built For Larger Creatures Than You." It's heavy handed, sure, but if you're not willing to be flexible and interpret the rules without worrying about breaking them... you're already being heavy handed.
In any event, my intent was to lay down how things "officially" work as regards how you'll see this character concept function in published adventures from us, and how it'll work in the PFS game. How it works in your own game depends on you or your GM. If my description helps, great! If it doesn't, feel free to...
tsk tsk mr dinosaur, of course it helps. I did get a tear of joyful expectation at the thought of Pathfinder 2nd edition! And I absolutely agree that Amiri's badass and at least a portion (the not OMG Amiri's hawt portion) of her coolness is the sword.