Large Bastard sword on an enlarged player.


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 60 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Greetings. I have allowed a bit too much and now I am regretting it. I am DM'ing a game and my player is a power gamer. So he sent me this text message and I wanted to get a few opinions on this. There are two parts to this question. The first is large/huge weapons issue, the second is the Universal wizard ability to conduct a ranged 'melee' attack with his weapons and instantly have it return.

So my player who has the following stats due to game and equipment. He is 4 lvs rogue, 3 levels fighter and 1 level mage (so he can cast enlarge, and get the universalist throw weapon ability.)

Str 20
Dex 22
Int 18
Wis 10
Cha10
Con14

He is a Tiefling

He is going for 'huge bastard sword' with exotic proficiency so he can use it as a two handed weapon and get the 2d8 dmg spread. He claims he can enlarge himself and his weapon would become 'huge' and he would be 'large' and still use it at 3d8 dmg. Is this within the written rules?
He claims that he would do with vital strike the following dmg on a sneak attack, critical hit...9d8+2d6+24, seems a bit high for someone who is only 3 lvls of fighter or will be 4.

Ok here is the real kicker. He is enlarged and 'throws' his huge bastard sword at someone and it does dmg or misses, he really does not care. It returns to his hand as a 'large weapon and he can now 'dual wield with it. Is this allowable?

The Exchange

19 people marked this as a favorite.

you could tell him that because he is a native outsider that he can not cast enlarge on himself and it would have no effect =P


countchocula wrote:
you could tell him that because he is a native outsider that he can not cast enlarge on himself and it would have no effect =P

There is always this.

Aside from that it seems fairly legit...little cheesy but not too bad.

As for the damage, I really wouldn't use his potential damage on a crit+vital strike+sneak attack strike as a gauge for anything.

6d8+12 with another 2d6 sneak attack as your only attack in a round at level 8? it's good but not especially broken. Not to mention the -2 he takes to all his attacks like that...

Sczarni

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Even if you allowed him to Enlarge, which would be a houserule, the moment his sword leaves his hands it shrinks.

And only during the surprise round could he get Sneak Attack off like that.

There are better, more damaging builds out there. Doesn't sound too worrisome to me.

The Exchange

also remember that he wasting a full round casting along with the fact that armor has a spell failure chance. Also take in effect that this is generally when most casters hit a spike in damage or control spells (black tentacles) so this may not be a problem unless your group is horribly unoptimized


Thanks all of you for the very quick replies. Ok, so he is a block of velveta but not really breaking the rules. I was not aware of the armor breaking on enlarge, I will take a look at that...


He also mentioned using 'true strike' for an automatic hit....


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Looking that over...

+6/+1 BAB, +9/+4 from Str and oversized weapon, for 2d8+7 damage (6d8+14 vital strike critical). He can't be affected by enlarge person. Even if he could, I make it +9/+4 (increased Str cancels out size penalty) for 3d8+9 (9d8+18 vital strike critical). Not sure where he's getting the extra +3 damage from.

But the long and short of it is that as a tiefling he can't benefit from enlarge person, so he's stuck at 2d8+7, which isn't overpowered at all (average 1 point higher than a greatsword wielder who will hit more often due to not suffering the -2 for oversized weapon).

Edit: just realised it could be Power Attack, but at his BAB it would be -2/+4 (+6 for a two-handed weapon), so he would reduce his attack to +7/+2 for 2d8+13. Still likely to trail behind a greatsword on hit probabilities, though.

Sczarni

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

No, no, his armor doesn't break when he casts Enlarge, it's that Enlarge Person only works on Humanoids, and a Tiefling isn't a Humanoid (it's a "Native Outsider").


Which would take another standard action, he's now using 3 rounds to pull this trick off.

I'm pretty sure countchocula was talking about the arcane spell failure chance of his armor. If he has heavier armor there is a decent chance he'll fail to even cast either spell :P


Yes, this seems to work.

Ok, let's clarify, to make sure I understand what's going on. The character starts out Medium. The bastard sword starts out Large.

The Rules said wrote:


Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies.

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. 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.

(http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons)

As I understand it, your player's argument (with my commentary in parentheses) is like this:

1. The bastard sword is a one-handed weapon, with which he is, by default, not proficient. (He cannot wield it in one hand, even with a -4 nonproficiency penalty; this is different from the way nonproficiency works with most weapons. See http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons/weapon-descriptions/sword -bastard.)
2. Taking Exotic Weapon Proficiency makes him proficient with it. (Rather than removing a nonproficiency penalty, as with most weapons, this now lets him wield it one-handed.)
3. The fact that the weapon is Large, on a Medium wielder, alters the measure of how much effort it takes to use it by one step up, thus making it two-handed. He can wield it two-handed, with a -2 penalty (see first paragraph of quote above).

When he enlarges with the weapon in hand, it enlarges with him; since the difference in the size category of weapon and wielder does not change, the above reasoning likewise stays unchanged.

Then, when he throws it, and it reduces in size, it comes back to him, now a Large weapon on a Large wielder. It remains a one-handed weapon by default (as bastard swords always are); he remains proficient with it (thus able, by default, to wield it one-handed); and it is now the same size as he is, thus not changing either of those things from their defaults. He can now wield the sword as a one-handed weapon with no penalty; he does not (while enlarged) incur the -2 penalty from wielding an inappropriately sized weapon.

As for the damage calculation... his Strength bonus is +5. (+6 when enlarged). Thrown weapons add 1x Strength modifier to damage. On a critical hit, that would be +12. Four levels of fighter get him Weapon Specialization (I assume), for another +2 (+4 on crit). That's +16. Where are we getting the other +8?

That aside, keep in mind that if your player were using a longsword instead of a bastard sword, those numbers would be very similar; a Large longsword does 2d6 damage, and a Huge one does 3d6. I'm not quite sure that I'd spend a feat on EWP, given those numbers, but otherwise, and contingent on the damage calculation being correct, the trick seems to work.


It is hardly a good build. If he was human he could enlarge him self, but since he outsider he cannot, there is a armor porperty that will allow him to do it, but it is fairly expenise.

Also hand of the apprentice(range wizard attack from universal school) does not work with vital strike, as both standard action to preform.

he is correct the the size will change when returning and he could dual wield, but he be at -6 to attack on primary hand -10 attack on off handed off handed does half str mod damage and if he does not have two weapon fighting and useing two bastards words if off hand is light weapon it is still -4 on primary and -8 on off handed. weak sauce. Dual weilding requires a lot of feats to be effective. he already waste 1 on the bastard sword, and another on vital strike which does not work in his combo.

be glad he is not 100% mobile fighter dual wielding Kuri. That is nasty. He could be full attack -1 attack at max bonus and moving his full movement. and had more feats to add even more damage.

your guy is not a good power gamer he thinking large dice = power, that is not the case, lots of static damage is more effective then random damage. +5 weapon are better then any +2 flaming, vicious, holy weapon.
power attack = more damage over time then any feat out there. espical on a high critical range weapon like a Kuri.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nefreet, so his entire plan to use Enlarge on himself is invalid because he is NOT a humanoid?

Anyone else rule on the use of Enlarge on a Tiefling?

Silver Crusade

Don't forget that when he tries to dual wield with it then he takes a -4 attack penalty on all attacks even if he has the TWF feat. This would be reduced to -2 it the off-hand weapon is light for him.

Even if he was of a race that could benefit from enlarge person, this combo is not game breaking. It takes expendable resources to set up (spell, actions), limits his choice of armour or risks arcane spell failure, and is no more powerful than other builds.

The trick is to carefully add up all those cumulative attack penalties!

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Keep in mind as well that Enlarge Person specifically states that a projectile or thrown weapon instantly returns to its normal size. So it doesn't wait until it returns to him to become a large weapon. So he suffers the size penalty of it being improperly sized when he throws it but when it hits it only does damage as a large weapon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Doing 50 damage as a standard action at level 8 isn't all that powerful for a character with high stats. (And he looks like he has weaknesses, like a terrible Will saves.) Enlarge Person (which takes a round to cast and has a short duration), then throw sword, then dual wield is a combo that takes a while to get going.
Note that if you are house-ruling it that he can be affected by Enlarge Person you should also be taking away his immunity to Hold Person, Charm Person, etc.

Shadow Lodge

larsenex wrote:

Nefreet, so his entire plan to use Enlarge on himself is invalid because he is NOT a humanoid?

Anyone else rule on the use of Enlarge on a Tiefling?

That is correct. He cannot target himself with that spell. He is Outsider(Native) not Humanoid.

Enlarge Person wrote:


School transmutation; Level sorcerer/wizard 1
Casting Time 1 round
Components V, S, M (powdered iron)
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target one humanoid creature
Duration 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw Fortitude negates; Spell Resistance yes
This spell causes instant growth of a humanoid creature, doubling its height and multiplying its weight by 8. This increase changes the creature's size category to the next larger one. The target gains a +2 size bonus to Strength, a –2 size penalty to Dexterity (to a minimum of 1), and a –1 penalty on attack rolls and AC due to its increased size.


It may be a tiny bit nit picky but I have always thought that because the text in enlarge person states that "items worn or carried" become large that when an enlarged creature picks up a weapon it magically resizes. I admit this doesn't make too much literal sense, but it came up in my group the other day thusly:

An enlarged battle cleric of Gorum was disarmed and went to pick up his sword. I had to look up the wording of the spell and since it didn't say it explicitly I had to look at the previously cited wording and asked myself: "Is he carrying it?" and since the answer was "yes" I ruled that his sword became large again, since it was now, by definition an "item worn or carried"

Also, Enlarge Person definitely doesn't work on outsiders, giants, etc. It explicitly states "one humanoid creature"

Shadow Lodge

ZeroCharisma wrote:

It may be a tiny bit nit picky but I have always thought that because the text in enlarge person states that "items worn or carried" become large that when an enlarged creature picks up a weapon it magically resizes. I admit this doesn't make too much literal sense, but it came up in my group the other day thusly:

An enlarged battle cleric of Gorum was disarmed and went to pick up his sword. I had to look up the wording of the spell and since it didn't say it explicitly I had to look at the previously cited wording and asked myself: "Is he carrying it?" and since the answer was "yes" I ruled that his sword became large again, since it was now, by definition an "item worn or carried"

Also, Enlarge Person definitely doesn't work on outsiders, giants, etc. It explicitly states "one humanoid creature"

Nope items you are carrying reresize when the spell is cast and change back to normal size when they leave possession. New objects picked up do not get resized including objects that were released and reverted to normal size.

Silver Crusade

Enlarge Person wrote:
Target: one humanoid creature

Humans are Humanoid(human).

Elves are Humanoid(elf), as are drow.

Orcs are Humanoid(orc).

Ond so on....

...but tieflings....?

Bestiary wrote:
Outsider(native)

Outsider.

Not humanoid.

Therefore, not a valid target for the enlarge person spell.


Well this entire post has been VERY VERY informative. I am an old fart and have been playing since 79' I love the game and we play usually once a month. My friends who is comprised of my two best friends (38 & 48) and their sons (15 & 19) play when we can.

It is very refreshing to get outside opinions on stuff.

Power attack for the win!

Liberty's Edge

ZeroCharisma wrote:


Also, Enlarge Person definitely doesn't work on outsiders, giants, etc. It explicitly states "one humanoid creature"

Close. It doesn't work on outsiders, but does work on giants. Giants are type Humanoid (giant) in PF, not a type of their own as they were in 3.5.

So, while his tactic doesn't work for him, it does work for the NPC ogre or cloud giant they are about to encounter. ;)

Sczarni

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
ZeroCharisma wrote:
Also, Enlarge Person definitely doesn't work on outsiders, giants, etc. It explicitly states "one humanoid creature"

*cough*

Giants are Humanoids...

*cough*

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

NINJA GOAT!!


if the player give you in gripe not be able to vital strike with the wizard ablity, look at this FAQ


Mind you that targeting only applies to spells and SLAs. The Growth subdomain lets you use a Supernatural ability that gives you the effect of Enlarge Person, applied to yourself only as a swift action and lasting 1 turn. Since you're bypassing the targeting restriction, that (and, as a rule of thumb, other SU or EX abilities that spoof Enlarge person) would work. So maybe a Tiefling Crusader Cleric with Growth subdomain if he wants... under a deity with Bastard Sword as their favored weapon as an added benefit, though I don't think any deities share the weapon and the Growth subdomain. It'd either need to be a houserule or forego the favored weapon benefit.


My player is arguing that his Tiefling IS humanoid and qualifies to be able to use the spell. IS there any official ruling on Teiflings and being humanoid in the Advanced players guide?

I need to be very clear here.

Shadow Lodge

larsenex wrote:

My player is arguing that his Tiefling IS humanoid and qualifies to be able to use the spell. IS there any official ruling on Teiflings and being humanoid in the Advanced players guide?

I need to be very clear here.

PRD wrote:

Tiefling Racial Traits

+2 Dexterity, +2 Intelligence, –2 Charisma: Tieflings are quick in body and mind, but are inherently strange and unnerving.

Native Outsider: Tieflings are outsiders with the native subtype.

Tieflings are NOT humanoids.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I am always amazed that the GM has to bring proof to the table for her ruling.
Let him bring the source where it DOES say tieflings are humanoids. Sheesh.
Otherwise just point him here. <-- what PW quoted.

Edit: Ninja'ed.

Ruyan.

Silver Crusade

tieflings in APG

tieflings in Bestiary

Notice that Tieflings have Type(Outsider) and Subtype(Native). They are not listed as humanoid anywhere.

Silver Crusade

The game mechanics use Type and Subtype.

Humans are Humanoid(human). They have the Humanoid type and the (human) subtype.

Tieflings are Outsider(native). They have the Outsider type and the (native) subtype.

The target line of enlarge person, as well as the text of the spell, specify Humanoid. This refers to the type.

This is not accidental. Tieflings and other Outsiders, including any creature which happens to have two legs/two arms/one head/etc., may be described as 'humanoid' in real life, but as a game mechanic term a creature is the type the bestiary says it is.

Refer to the Bestiary p.317, 'Appendix 8: Monsters By Type'.


Malachi thanks. That is exactly what I wanted. Granted I agree with you Ruyan, I should not have to bring 'proof' but we have been playing for 30 years and the arguments fly.


Howie23, you must be a certain DM I gamed with here in Ventura County. I am glad to see you again! Oh and you played with him before Howie....


Humans are Animals, biologically speaking. Tieflings are Humanoids, morphologically speaking (unless they have distinctly non-Humanoid features such as tails, extra appendages, heads, etc). There are several Fungi listed as Plant types even though Fungi and Plant are different kingdoms. Dragons are their own type and not included under Animals or even Magical Beasts. Those are all matters of biology and morphology. But mechanically speaking, Humans don't qualify as Animals and Tieflings don't qualify as Humanoids. Fungi count as Plants and Dragons don't count as Animals. Kathasa, a naturally four-armed race, counts as a Humanoid. Hell, even Monstrous Humanoids like Hags don't qualify as Humanoids. Don't conflate mechanical conventions with realism.

Shadow Lodge

Kazaan wrote:
Humans are Animals, biologically speaking. Tieflings are Humanoids, morphologically speaking (unless they have distinctly non-Humanoid features such as tails, extra appendages, heads, etc). There are several Fungi listed as Plant types even though Fungi and Plant are different kingdoms. Dragons are their own type and not included under Animals or even Magical Beasts. Those are all matters of biology and morphology. But mechanically speaking, Humans don't qualify as Animals and Tieflings don't qualify as Humanoids. Fungi count as Plants and Dragons don't count as Animals. Kathasa, a naturally four-armed race, counts as a Humanoid. Hell, even Monstrous Humanoids like Hags don't qualify as Humanoids. Don't conflate mechanical conventions with realism.

I hadn't heard that before and it is relevant a current game I am in. Do you have a reference for that by chance?


or if you must get to the realism part - tieflings may appear humanoidal, but it's their magical nature that counts for magic, and their magical nature is that of an outsider


PatientWolf wrote:
Kazaan wrote:
Humans are Animals, biologically speaking. Tieflings are Humanoids, morphologically speaking (unless they have distinctly non-Humanoid features such as tails, extra appendages, heads, etc). There are several Fungi listed as Plant types even though Fungi and Plant are different kingdoms. Dragons are their own type and not included under Animals or even Magical Beasts. Those are all matters of biology and morphology. But mechanically speaking, Humans don't qualify as Animals and Tieflings don't qualify as Humanoids. Fungi count as Plants and Dragons don't count as Animals. Kathasa, a naturally four-armed race, counts as a Humanoid. Hell, even Monstrous Humanoids like Hags don't qualify as Humanoids. Don't conflate mechanical conventions with realism.
I hadn't heard that before and it is relevant a current game I am in. Do you have a reference for that by chance?

The fact that if you go to the bestiary and look at the second line under the name of any hag it says monstrous humanoid instead of humanoid. It works just like the Tiefling Outsider deal does. Only, there is some possible congfusion since humanoid and monstrous humanoid seem similar, but they are two separate and distinct creature types.

*Note, oddly the Annis Hag and Green Hag are monstrous humanoids, the Night Hag is an outsider?!

Shadow Lodge

Claxon wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Kazaan wrote:
Humans are Animals, biologically speaking. Tieflings are Humanoids, morphologically speaking (unless they have distinctly non-Humanoid features such as tails, extra appendages, heads, etc). There are several Fungi listed as Plant types even though Fungi and Plant are different kingdoms. Dragons are their own type and not included under Animals or even Magical Beasts. Those are all matters of biology and morphology. But mechanically speaking, Humans don't qualify as Animals and Tieflings don't qualify as Humanoids. Fungi count as Plants and Dragons don't count as Animals. Kathasa, a naturally four-armed race, counts as a Humanoid. Hell, even Monstrous Humanoids like Hags don't qualify as Humanoids. Don't conflate mechanical conventions with realism.

I hadn't heard that before and it is relevant a current game I am in. Do you have a reference for that by chance?

The fact that if you go to the bestiary and look at the second line under the name of any hag it says monstrous humanoid instead of humanoid. It works just like the Tiefling Outsider deal does. Only, there is some possible congfusion since humanoid and monstrous humanoid seem similar, but they are two separate and distinct creature types.

*Note, oddly the Annis Hag and Green Hag are monstrous humanoids, the Night Hag is an outsider?!

Thanks. I'm betting the GM of that game just houserules that they count as humanoid but at least I can bring it up.

Sczarni

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Hmm. There's a PFS scenario where a Gnoll drinks a potion of Enlarge Person as part of his tactics.

I know authors sometimes get things wrong, but that was one reason why I always thought spells like that worked on Monstrous Humanoids.

Lantern Lodge

larsenex wrote:

My player is arguing that his Tiefling IS humanoid and qualifies to be able to use the spell. IS there any official ruling on Teiflings and being humanoid in the Advanced players guide?

I need to be very clear here.

Tiefling Racial Traits

+2 Dexterity, +2 Intelligence, –2 Charisma: Tieflings are quick in body and mind, but are inherently strange and unnerving.

Native Outsider: Tieflings are outsiders with the native subtype.

Theres your answer from the PRD


Nefreet wrote:

Hmm. There's a PFS scenario where a Gnoll drinks a potion of Enlarge Person as part of his tactics.

I know authors sometimes get things wrong, but that was one reason why I always thought spells like that worked on Monstrous Humanoids.

Gnolls are Humanoids with the Gnoll subtype in pathfinder. It works just fine on them.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Derp. In my haste while checking the PRD before that post my dyslexia must have kicked in and I read "Medium Humanoid" as "Monstrous Humanoid" =P


Weird- you guys are totally right on the giant thing. I could have sworn I had a GM (since Pathfinder came out)at one point who wouldn't let our party use Hold Person (I think) on giants. But I wasn't in the habit of questioning my GM so his quirky ruling superseded my belief in what was correct and sort of stuck.

Anyway, thanks for the clarification on dropped items. I honestly think I might keep ruling it the way I described in my games just for personal preference (I don't see it as massively game-breaking, after all) but I do appreciate the input.

Definitely reminds me of why I used to enjoy this community so much to see such a lively, helpful discussion.


noone seemed to pick up on this but in the ops example the pc is using hand of tge mage to throw the weapon?

not only can it not be used with vital strike but the users str and dex are not really relevant.

Liberty's Edge

larsenex wrote:
Howie23, you must be a certain DM I gamed with here in Ventura County. I am glad to see you again! Oh and you played with him before Howie....

Yeah, that's me. I didn't even notice your screen name. Just threaten to roleplaying a little light dinner conversation on the nature if good and evil if he keeps arguing stuff that is unambiguous. Should solve the problem one way or another. ;)


Mojorat wrote:

noone seemed to pick up on this but in the ops example the pc is using hand of tge mage to throw the weapon?

not only can it not be used with vital strike but the users str and dex are not really relevant.

I did mentioned it twice =(, that was actual the main thing the character was doing. the enlarge thing was only a minor part but everyone noticed that frist. the character whole build plan is broken, it does not work on any level with his current character.

He went to power game with out reading the rules and end up with a completely broken nerfed character.

Lots of dice are fun to roll but in most instances it is not as good as a good old fasion +1 or +2


I don't even think it's really that cheesy, even if enlarge person worked.

He paid for it (feat)
He took a penalty (-2 for oversized weapon)
He spent an action (enlarge person)
He took a level dip.

That's more than fine. Most of that doesn't work with thrown or projectile weapons however, so that part of his plan is null and void but for melee, sure.


The problem is that being an Outsider makes you immune to detrimental effects based on type. A Humanoid can use this tactic because, while he can use Enlarge Person, he is also subject to Charm Person and Hold Person. A Tiefling isn't subject to Charm Person or Hold Person but, at the same time, isn't subject to Enlarge person or Reduce Person, for better or for worse. It doesn't make sense to say, since he paid a feat, took a penalty, and took a level dip, that he can benefit from Enlarge Person while still being immune to Charm and Hold Person. Now maybe, if you want to houserule this, make some equivalent to Scion of Humanity (the Aasimar Racial trait) to apply to him; that would make him subject to spells that must affect Humanoids because he would be both Outsider and Humanoid. But don't just hand him the ability to use Enlarge Person without any other drawback to compensate for removing a balancing feature against being immune to other spells.


To sum up:

No enlarge.
Even enlarged, non-enlarged damage.
No vital strike (action action vs. standard action).

Open question on using Hand of the Apprentice with a two-handed weapon. Throwing a weapon with two-hands is normally a full-round action, but then throwing a weapon is normally an attack action, not a standard.

Shadow Lodge

Majuba wrote:

To sum up:

No enlarge.
Even enlarged, non-enlarged damage.
No vital strike (action action vs. standard action).

Open question on using Hand of the Apprentice with a two-handed weapon. Throwing a weapon with two-hands is normally a full-round action, but then throwing a weapon is normally an attack action, not a standard.

Hand of the Apprentice just specifies melee weapon.

1 to 50 of 60 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Large Bastard sword on an enlarged player. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.