Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Jay_Ibero_911 01-13-07, 08:58 PM	To qualify for Master Thrower, you need weapon focus in a thrown weapon. If you have the Throw Anything feat, does that mean that any melee weapon would count as a thrown weapon for the purposes of the PrC?
bhale187 01-13-07, 09:28 PM	I would say no because the PHB glossary gives a definition of a thrown weapon as "a ranged weapon that a character hurls at an enemy, such as a spear, as oposed to a projectile weapon"
Jay_Ibero_911 01-14-07, 12:39 AM	I would say no because the PHB glossary gives a definition of a thrown weapon as "a ranged weapon that a character hurls at an enemy, such as a spear, as oposed to a projectile weapon" Well by that definition, if you have Throw Anything, every melee weapon becomes a weapon that a character hurls at an enemy...Technically, even without Throw Anything anything falls into the category of thown weapons, because you can still throw anything without the feat, you just take a penalty. It's just a matter of having weapon focus in "a ranged weapon that a character hurls at an enemy"...It boils down to whether master thrower requires that the weapon is intended to be thrown, or if the master thrower just needs to be able to throw the weapon...
ShinAkuma2 01-14-07, 01:50 AM	I'd be inclined to say that being a thrown weapon is a function of the weapon, not the wielder. The weapon must be designed to be thrown to qualify as a "thrown weapon". In a home game, however, I'd allow it.
Jay_Ibero_911 01-14-07, 01:58 AM	That would certainly dissappoint one player I've met who's been chucking large Fullblades (Yes he got access to large fullblades...)...
haferka 01-14-07, 02:15 AM	Lets look at all the rules... (p113 PH, left collum half way down) "It is possible to throw a weapon that isn't designed to be thrown (that is, a melee weapon that doesn't have a numeric entry in the Range Increment column on Table 7-5), but a character who does so takes a -4 penalty on the attack roll. Throwing a light or one-handed weapon is a standard action, while throwing a two-handed weapon is a full round action. Regardless of the type of weapon, such an attack scores a threat (a possible critical hit) only on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a critical hit. Such a weapon has a range increment of 10 feet." (p113 PH, right collum at bottom) "Improvised Weapons: Sometimes objects not crafted to be weapons nonetheless see use in combat --People fight with anything from broken bottles to chair legs to thrown mugs. Becouse such objects are not designed for this use, any creature that uses one in combat is considered to be nonproficient with it and takes a -4 penalty on attack rolls made with that object. To determine the size category and appropriate damage for an improvised weapon, the DM should compare its relative size and damage potential to the weapon list to find a reasonable match. For instance, a table leg is sumilar to a club, while a broken bottle is similar to a dagger, An improvised weapon scores a threat (a possible critical hit( on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a critical hit. An improvised thrown weapon has a range increment of 10 feet." (p CW, left collum at top) "Benifit: You can throw a melee weapon you are proficient with as if it were a ranged weapon. The range increment of weapons used in conjunction with this feat is 10 feet." Conclusion: - Without the "Throw anything" feat, you CAN throw anything .. (with non-proficient and/or improvised weapon penalties) - ALL "Master Thrower" class abilities require you to pick a thrown weapon with which you have "Weapon Focus"... which requires proficiency... which the "Throw anything" feat does NOT grant, in fact it REQUIRES proficiency to qualify for the feat. - "Master Thrower" abilities work fine with any NON-improvised weapon, provided you apply the standard penalties for throwing weapons which are NOT intended for that purpose... (see PH excerpt above). Some people may suggest taking levels of "Drunken Master" to gain proficiency with "Improvised Weapons"... but this does NOT work.. the class removes the non-proficiency penalty, but never states that you gain proficiency.. and states very bluntly... (p28 CW left collum middle) "Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Drunken masters gain no proficiency with any weapon or armor." SOMTHING REALLY STUPID... If you you "throw anything.." and monk levels.. you can dismember humanoid creatures.. and "throw" them as "unarmed strikes" since that weapon is listed on Table 7-5 of the PH. SOMETHING COOL... You can also "throw" arrows & bolts.. but since they have no listed damage.. you would need to take levels of "Drunken Master" to deal "unarmed strike" + another die (d4 - d8 based on lvl) as damage. You can also throw defeated foes to deal "Unarmed Strike" at range... "I pick up the orc and toss him so he headbutts the other orc." This could potentially allow a "Sacred Fist" to attack at range without violating his vow to NEVER wield a manufactured weapon. SOMETHING IRRITATING... 3.0 version of "Exotic Weapon Master" granted proficiency with ALL Exotic & Improvised weapons.. but the 3.5 version does not. They completly changed the purpose of the class, but kept the same name... I believe the current version fits the name of the class... but they need to create an update of the 3.0 version with a seperate (more fitting) name.. like "Improvised Weapon Master"
Mithreinmaethor 01-14-07, 03:50 AM	That would certainly dissappoint one player I've met who's been chucking large Fullblades (Yes he got access to large fullblades...)... Even with monkey grip this is impossible. Fullblades are already LARGE weapons. So one that is even 1 size larger, a Medium sized player could not use. Its basically a bastard sword for large sized creatures. They can use it 2 handed as a martial weapon or 1 handed if they take the EWP feat for it.
Jay_Ibero_911 01-14-07, 04:49 AM	Even with monkey grip this is impossible. Fullblades are already LARGE weapons. So one that is even 1 size larger, a Medium sized player could not use. Its basically a bastard sword for large sized creatures. They can use it 2 handed as a martial weapon or 1 handed if they take the EWP feat for it. Remember, the full blade is from a 3.0 book, when weapons were a specific size independent of the wielder. With 3.5 rules, if you have Exotic Weapon Proficiency, a Full Blade sized for a medium character is a 2 handed weapon. With Exotic Weapon Proficiency AND Monkey Grip, a Large Full Blade would be a 2 handed weapon for a medium sized character. In 3.5 a large bastard sword is just a large bastard sword.
bhale187 01-14-07, 04:58 PM	Well by that definition, if you have Throw Anything, every melee weapon becomes a weapon that a character hurls at an enemy...Technically, even without Throw Anything anything falls into the category of thown weapons, because you can still throw anything without the feat, you just take a penalty. It's just a matter of having weapon focus in "a ranged weapon that a character hurls at an enemy"...It boils down to whether master thrower requires that the weapon is intended to be thrown, or if the master thrower just needs to be able to throw the weapon... Yes but the definition says a ranged weapon, which is also defined the the PHB as a weapon designed for range attacks.
Mithreinmaethor 01-14-07, 05:06 PM	Sorry Jay but since I didnt quote it in my 1st post let me just post if here for you. FAQ page 38 states: "My stonechild (from Races of Stone) fighter wields a fullblade (from Arms and Equipment Guide). If he increases the weapon’s size by one category, can he still wield it, and would it give him reach? First of all, your stonechild couldn’t wield such a weapon. While a stonechild (as a Medium creature) can wield a normal fullblade as a two-handed weapon thanks to the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (fullblade) feat, he couldn’t wield a fullblade of a larger size category at all, even with the feat. (Although the fullblade is described in Arms and Equipment Guide as a “Huge” weapon, this is a reference to the 3.0 rules for weapon size. Using the 3.5 rules for weapon sizes, the fullblade used by Medium creatures is actually a Large twohanded weapon with a special rule that allows a Medium creature to wield it with two hands.) Normally, the smallest creature that could wield a Huge fullblade (that is, a fullblade sized for two-handed use by a Huge creature) would be a Large creature. A Medium creature with the powerful build racial trait, such as a goliath or halfgiant, with the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (fullblade) feat could also wield a Huge fullblade. As to the second issue, regardless of the wielder’s or the weapon’s size, a fullblade is not a reach weapon. Even a Medium creature with powerful build who wields a Huge fullblade can use it only against creatures at a distance of his natural reach (typically 5 feet), but no more than that." You will also want to reference the Weapon and Wielder size chart. Maybe this will help your friend.
haferka 01-14-07, 05:08 PM	Yes but the definition says a ranged weapon, which is also defined the the PHB as a weapon designed for range attacks. Correct, and the feat modifies EVERY weapon which does not already have a range increment .. making it 10' thrown, it is still the same weapon.. so the same proficiencies & Weapon feats apply, Treat the weapon as if it had always had a 10' thrown range increment.
Mithreinmaethor 01-14-07, 05:28 PM	The feat does not change the Melee weapon into a Thrown weapon. It allows a Melee weapon to be thrown with a range increment of 10'. So having Weapon Focus Battle Axe and Throw Anything would not give you the feats needed to enter into that PRC.
Jay_Ibero_911 01-14-07, 07:48 PM	Sorry Jay but since I didnt quote it in my 1st post let me just post if here for you. FAQ page 38 states: "My stonechild (from Races of Stone) fighter wields a fullblade (from Arms and Equipment Guide). If he increases the weapon’s size by one category, can he still wield it, and would it give him reach? First of all, your stonechild couldn’t wield such a weapon. While a stonechild (as a Medium creature) can wield a normal fullblade as a two-handed weapon thanks to the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (fullblade) feat, he couldn’t wield a fullblade of a larger size category at all, even with the feat. (Although the fullblade is described in Arms and Equipment Guide as a “Huge” weapon, this is a reference to the 3.0 rules for weapon size. Using the 3.5 rules for weapon sizes, the fullblade used by Medium creatures is actually a Large twohanded weapon with a special rule that allows a Medium creature to wield it with two hands.) Normally, the smallest creature that could wield a Huge fullblade (that is, a fullblade sized for two-handed use by a Huge creature) would be a Large creature. A Medium creature with the powerful build racial trait, such as a goliath or halfgiant, with the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (fullblade) feat could also wield a Huge fullblade. As to the second issue, regardless of the wielder’s or the weapon’s size, a fullblade is not a reach weapon. Even a Medium creature with powerful build who wields a Huge fullblade can use it only against creatures at a distance of his natural reach (typically 5 feet), but no more than that." You will also want to reference the Weapon and Wielder size chart. Maybe this will help your friend. There are some severe problems with that FAQ entry...first of all, if for a medium character, a full blade is still considered a large two handed weapon, a medium PC would take a -2 penalty to attack rolls for wielding an innappropriately sized weapon. I think the FAQ may have to rethink itself in that case, because if that is how they intend it to be played, then there is no between a full blade and a large bastard sword in 3.5. On the other hand, if you do FULLY convert the weapon to 3.5, then a full blade sized for a medium creature with exotic weapon proficiency would be a normal two handed weapon dealing 2d8, 19-20/x2, and with monkey grip one could wield a full blade sized for a large creature, taking a -2 penalty to attacks, and dealing 3d8, 19-20/x2. So, to clarify, in 3.5 there are 2 possible ways for this to work: 1)Full blade IS identical to a large bastard sword. or 2) It is in fact an entirely separate and distinct exotic weapon that when sized for a medium creature, is a 2 handed weapon that deals 2d8 damage at 19-20/x2. It's just like the difference between a medium character wielding a large longsword vs. a medium greatword.
Mithreinmaethor 01-14-07, 08:58 PM	I think it explains it rather well. I made the mistake of comparing it to a bastard sword. But it is a Large 2 handed weapon. A large creature with an EWP feat can use it in 1 hand. A medium sized character with the same EWP feat can use it in 2 hands. Making it 1 step larger would make it a Huge weapon. By the chart in the FAQ pg 39 the Large creature would be able to use it in 2 hands but the Medium creature could not use it at all. They should have updated this weapon in Complete Warrior.
Jay_Ibero_911 01-14-07, 09:57 PM	I think it explains it rather well. I made the mistake of comparing it to a bastard sword. But it is a Large 2 handed weapon. A large creature with an EWP feat can use it in 1 hand. A medium sized character with the same EWP feat can use it in 2 hands. Making it 1 step larger would make it a Huge weapon. By the chart in the FAQ pg 39 the Large creature would be able to use it in 2 hands but the Medium creature could not use it at all. They should have updated this weapon in Complete Warrior. There is still the problem that if in 3.5 the 2d8 version is for a large sized creature, than a medium creature with the exotic weapon proficiency would take the -2 penalty for wielding an innapropriately sized weapon. By your argument (and by the description in the A&EG) it is IDENTICAL to a bastard sword sized for a large creature, the ONLY difference in LG being that Bastard Swords are core access... You have to remember that in 3.0, weapon size was independant of creature size. It was the difficulty of use that varried by user size. For example, in 3.0 a small creature could not normally wield a greatsword, but would instead have to resort to using a longsword, which was a 2 handed weapon for a small creature. In 3.5 that all changed. Now every creature can wield every weapon, as long as the weapon is sized for them, and instead of difficulty of use changing based on user's size, weapon damage changes based on weapon size. Another thing to consider when trying to determine how a Full Blade is wielded in 3.5 is how does it, as an exotic 2 handed weapon dealing 2d8, 19-20/x2 and no other abilities, stack up to other exotic two handed weapons for a medium character? So again, the full blade is by either a bastard sword sized for a large creature by default and under a different name, or it's own unique exotic two handed weapon that when sized for a medium creature does 2d8 damage, that would go to 3d8 for a large creature. If the former is the case, then there is no reason to use the weapon over a bastard sword, as they are mechanically identical in every respect. There would be even less reason to use a full blade than there is to choose between a Dwarven Waraxe and a Maul, as in that case the damage type is at least different.
Mithreinmaethor 01-14-07, 10:15 PM	That is the problem with granting access to stuff from the books that never got updated. But it is really a Bastard sword with a different name. Medium Bastard Sword 1d10 19-20/x2 (EWP allows Medium sized to wield 1 handed otherwise Medium sized can wield it 2 handed as a martial weapon. Small sized creature cannot use it all without EWP but then it has to be used 2 handed) Large Full Blade 2d8 19-20/x2 (EWP allows a Large sized creature to wield 1 handed otherwise it can weild it 2 handed as a martial weapon. Medium sized creature cannot use it at all without EWP but then it has to be used 2 handed) And a Large Bastard Sword goes from 1d10 to 2d8. Either way we know they make mistakes because it is impossible to keep track of thousands of pages from books written. When a question comes up they research it and make a ruling. So we can argue semantics of this all day. But according to their ruling within the Official FAQ your friend or you can not do what you have previously described.
Jay_Ibero_911 01-14-07, 11:39 PM	That is the problem with granting access to stuff from the books that never got updated. But it is really a Bastard sword with a different name. Medium Bastard Sword 1d10 19-20/x2 (EWP allows Medium sized to wield 1 handed otherwise Medium sized can wield it 2 handed as a martial weapon. Small sized creature cannot use it all without EWP but then it has to be used 2 handed) Large Full Blade 2d8 19-20/x2 (EWP allows a Large sized creature to wield 1 handed otherwise it can weild it 2 handed as a martial weapon. Medium sized creature cannot use it at all without EWP but then it has to be used 2 handed) And a Large Bastard Sword goes from 1d10 to 2d8. Either way we know they make mistakes because it is impossible to keep track of thousands of pages from books written. When a question comes up they research it and make a ruling. So we can argue semantics of this all day. But according to their ruling within the Official FAQ your friend or you can not do what you have previously described. It's not semantics, it's a matter of the difference between 3.0 and 3.5 rules. Both your examples are incorrect. First of all, a small character with exotic weapon proficiency can wield a bastard sword 1 handed as easily as a medium or large character, it's just a matter of the weapon being sized for the character. The same goes for any other weapon in 3.5, including the Full Blade. The question with the full blade becomes how many hands does it take for a character with exotic weapon proficiency to wield a full blade sized for them, and how much damage does it do at that size? Just using exotic weapon proficiency and a large bastard sword gets you the same effect exotic weapon proficiency and a "standard" sized full blade (whatever that is). With Monkey Grip, the bastard sword wielder can wield that 2d8 weapon 1 handed.
Mithreinmaethor 01-14-07, 11:56 PM	No my examples are exactly correct: A Small creature with the EWP Bastard Sword feat still has to use a Medium Bastard sword 2-handed. It can use a Small sized Bastard Sword 1-handed. If the small creature also had the Monkey Grip feat it could use the Medium sized Bastard Sword in 1 hand. A Medium creature with the EWP Fullblade feat has to use the Fullblade 2-handed. If the Medium sized creature also had the Monkey Grip feat it could use the Fullblade in 1 hand. However taking a Fullblade up to another size category removes it from the ability of the Medium sized character to use it even in 2 hands. Since the fullblade is already a Large weapon (1 size category above Medium) it would not allow the Medium sized creature to use this weapon 1 size category larger than it is... i.e Huge And who cares how 3.0 dealt with it. This is 3.5 and it has been ruled on.
Jay_Ibero_911 01-15-07, 12:33 AM	No my examples are exactly correct: A Small creature with the EWP Bastard Sword feat still has to use a Medium Bastard sword 2-handed. It can use a Small sized Bastard Sword 1-handed. If the small creature also had the Monkey Grip feat it could use the Medium sized Bastard Sword in 1 hand. A Medium creature with the EWP Fullblade feat has to use the Fullblade 2-handed. If the Medium sized creature also had the Monkey Grip feat it could use the Fullblade in 1 hand. However taking a Fullblade up to another size category removes it from the ability of the Medium sized character to use it even in 2 hands. Since the fullblade is already a Large weapon (1 size category above Medium) it would not allow the Medium sized creature to use this weapon 1 size category larger than it is... i.e Huge And who cares how 3.0 dealt with it. This is 3.5 and it has been ruled on. Ok, granted I missed that you specified weapon sizes, that still doesn't get rid of the problem that remains. Are you conceding that it is in 3.5 identical in every respect to a bastard sword except in name, and is therefor a completely redundant weapon? It sounds like that's what you are trying to argue, I just wanna make sure we are both on the same page. If that is the case, then anything that grants access to Full Blade in LG would only grant access to small or medium varieties without additional access, a medium one dealing 1d10 points of damage...
Mithreinmaethor 01-15-07, 01:00 AM	Granting access to it isnt a problem. I have probably 20 different accesses to Large weapons on AR's. Its just should not be a weapon given access to outside of on an AR. And it should be noted that it is a large weapon somewhere, maybe the LGCS or a Dispel Confusion