Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Doyen 05-18-07, 01:57 PM	What is the source on the decsion that it is not stackable?
jaelis 05-18-07, 02:13 PM	From the Skills and Feats FAQ (sticky) Can I combine Monkey Grip and Powerful Build? Do they stack? No. Powerful build says that it treats the character as being one size category larger in many ways. And then it lists them: - he is treated as one size larger, if doing so is advantageous to him, when he is subject to a size modifier or special size modifier for an opposed check. - he is considered to be one size larger when determining whether a creature’s special attacks based on size can affect him. Now, he is not treated as one size larger for the purpose of wielding weapons. Rather, he can wield weapons designed for a creature one size larger without penalty. Monkey Grip(MG) would give him the same advantage, but with a -2 penalty. Monkey Grip(MG) allows you to use a weapon of larger size than yours without changing the effort you need to wield it, but with a -2 penalty to attack rolls. The Half-Giant and the Goliath, being Medium creatures, would be allowed to use weapons designed for Large creatures with a -2 penalty, penalty that they can avoid simply using their Powerful Build ability.
riftdragon 05-18-07, 08:27 PM	but them it would be advantageous to be large and thus able to wield giant size weapon or whatever the next size increase is
mythSSK 05-18-07, 08:35 PM	but them it would be advantageous to be large and thus able to wield giant size weapon or whatever the next size increase is It says: "He is treated as one size larger, if doing so is advantageous to him, when he is subject to a size modifier or special size modifier for an opposed check." It does NOT say: "He is treated as one size larger if doing so is advantageous to him".
Einvaldurinn_mikli 05-18-07, 08:36 PM	but them it would be advantageous to be large and thus able to wield giant size weapon or whatever the next size increase is It's like not being able to use two coupons in the same transaction.
risner 05-19-07, 09:56 PM	What is the source on the decsion that it is not stackable? Logic and the text of the two abilities. If you are medium, each effectively say "you can use Large weapons."
Beckett 05-20-07, 09:28 AM	They said no in Sagely Advice and whatever the online rules tips thingy here is. No you can't do it. Mostly just because it boils down to two things. Possibly three. One it's too powerful for a first level character to be able to do. Two, it's not logical. Your imagining a sword with a huge blade and a normal tiny (normal sized) grip. A Huge sword has a pommel the size of a medium sized creature. Maybe bigger. Three. . .to many FF wannabees
Zyrusticae 05-20-07, 09:35 AM	Pffft... Even Cloud's buster sword is only the size of a medium-sized greatsword. Really, nobody should ever really need monkey grip. It sucks as a feat, anyways.
Zalakhiel 05-20-07, 09:41 AM	...Unless you want to weild Sephiroth`s Masamune... :P
Taureus_Drakken 05-20-07, 01:31 PM	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. Are people forgetting that you already take a -2 penalty for each size category difference when wielding a weapon either bigger or smaller than you? All Monkey Grip does is restate something from the PHB if you are going to be using a weapon that is only one size category larger than you.
jaelis 05-20-07, 04:02 PM	All Monkey Grip does is restate something from the PHB if you are going to be using a weapon that is only one size category larger than you. No, with the PHB rules, a weapon one size larger than you also moves up one step in effort class. So a Large dagger would be a 1H weapon, a Large longsword would be a 2H weapon, and a Large greatsword is unusable. Monkey grip keeps the penalty, but the weapon stays the same effort class. So you can use a Large longsword as a 1H weapon.
Muktar 05-20-07, 07:13 PM	Pffft... Even Cloud's buster sword is only the size of a medium-sized greatsword. Really, nobody should ever really need monkey grip. It sucks as a feat, anyways. Cloud's buster sword is about as long as a greatsword but cloud's sword is much wider and uses more metal than a greatsword. In fact if Cloud's sword existed in RL, virtually no one could wield it. Let alone with any proficiency.
Itachi666 05-20-07, 08:38 PM	Are there any preReqs. for Powerful build? Also, what book is full blade in, as I've heard that is a large Greatsword.
Einvaldurinn_mikli 05-20-07, 08:44 PM	Are there any preReqs. for Powerful build? Also, what book is full blade in, as I've heard that is a large Greatsword. 1. Powerful Build is a racial ability, not a feat. 2. It's a large Bastard Sword.
risner 05-20-07, 10:18 PM	Are there any preReqs. for Powerful build? Also, what book is full blade in, as I've heard that is a large Greatsword. Full Blade is a large greatsword (two handed) that can be used by a Medium character. So a Fullblade, Monkey Grip, and Powerful Build can't stack because they all allow you to use a Large Two Handed weapon. You could not use a Large Fullblade, since it is Huge weapon and can not be wielded with any of the three.
Xanthia 05-21-07, 01:04 AM	I thought that we had already established that they didn't stack years ago...
Beckett 05-21-07, 08:54 AM	Not a crappy feat. Why would you say that? In a 30th level game we are playing, my girlfriend is lugging around this massive sword she can not use that's about her size. The thing is, no one knows shes a freaking werewolf pack lord, and if it ever goes to hell in a handbasket, she is going to instantly shoot up to a Huge rabbid Hybrid with a sword that just happens to fit perfectly in her bloodthirsty little hand.
Aiden_Bautista 05-22-07, 12:23 AM	Since we're all going by text and logic this adds to the "It's okay" side. The benefits of this racial trait stack with the effects of powers, abilities, and spells that change the subject’s size category. Oh well I guess.I suppose it would be crazy bad to wield a huge greatsword at about level two.
GhostStepper 05-22-07, 02:20 AM	Since we're all going by text and logic this adds to the "It's okay" side. The benefits of this racial trait stack with the effects of powers, abilities, and spells that change the subject’s size category. And monkey grip doesnt change your size category, thus it does not stack.
claypigeons 05-22-07, 05:39 AM	Not a crappy feat. Why would you say that? In a 30th level game we are playing, my girlfriend is lugging around this massive sword she can not use that's about her size. The thing is, no one knows shes a freaking werewolf pack lord, and if it ever goes to hell in a handbasket, she is going to instantly shoot up to a Huge rabbid Hybrid with a sword that just happens to fit perfectly in her bloodthirsty little hand. Monkey Grip, as most people use it, sucks. Going from Medium -> large weapons sucks. The damage increase isn't as beneficial as power attack (same penalty for lower return)... Going from Large -> Huge is nice. Anything bigger than that and it gets to be quite good. So, it is both bad, and good, depending on the base size of the creature taking it.
Nezkrul 05-22-07, 09:44 AM	the sizing of the fullblade you chaps were talking about earlier is 3.0 weapon sizing rules. In 3.5, the weapon's size is for the intended wielder - ie. a medium greatsword is meant to be used by a medium sized creature, and has the stats of a normal greatsword in the PhB. A medium fullblade has the normal stats for a fullblade and is designed for a medium sized wielder - who takes exotic weapon proficiency. A fullblade is a fullblade - it has its own special rules. It is similar to a large bastard sword.
Frugal 05-22-07, 10:06 AM	the sizing of the fullblade you chaps were talking about earlier is 3.0 weapon sizing rules. In 3.5, the weapon's size is for the intended wielder - ie. a medium greatsword is meant to be used by a medium sized creature, and has the stats of a normal greatsword in the PhB. A medium fullblade has the normal stats for a fullblade and is designed for a medium sized wielder - who takes exotic weapon proficiency. A fullblade is a fullblade - it has its own special rules. It is similar to a large bastard sword. Nope, the FAQ says that a fullblade for 3.5 would be a large weapon with the special property that it can be wielded by a medium creature with the appropriate EWP. Consider that a large creature can wield one 2-handed as a martial weapon with no penalty or 1-handed as an EWP at no penalty. Then again, the best ruling is to just say that the fullblade is an artefact of the 3.0 system and has no place in 3.5. I think that's the best way to handle it because it really doesn't fit into the 3.5 weapon sizing system no matter what size category you say the weapon is and there's no need for it to exist since now you can just use the same weapons sized for the size of the wielder it's intended for rather than having to come up with a whole new set of bigger weapons for big guys (or smaller weapons for small guys).
lion93 05-22-07, 10:12 AM	And don't forget what Monkey Grip is... It's grabbing a weapon like a monkey would and swinging it around full-armed at your opponent. It's thumbless knuckle dragging fun... I envision a little guy with a big sword dragging in the dirt behind him and then he swings his whole body in a circle while yelling 'take THAT!' So will that kind of behavior stack with what you want to do? Is dragging around a HUGE sword better than dragging around a LARGE one? Will the NPCs make fun of that character for being an anime freak? Heck, I'd let a player in my game do it just so magistrates and duelists could snicker whenever that person walked by. I know people always say 'but it doesn't say that in the book...' but really, what DOES it say in the book? If you don't intend to swing things around like a monkey, don't buy a feat that is called Monkey Grip.
risner 05-22-07, 12:59 PM	Nope, the FAQ says that a fullblade for 3.5 would be a large weapon with the special property that it can be wielded by a medium creature with the appropriate EWP. Consider that a large creature can wield one 2-handed as a martial weapon with no penalty or 1-handed as an EWP at no penalty. I don't understand anything you have written, but I can say the text you are responding to is 100% correct. The only part he left out is that medium Full Blade is actually a Large Two Handed weapon (which is what you seem to be pointing out), but it doesn't change anything he wrote and I've no idea what you mean by the second sentence. Since we're all going by text and logic this adds to the "It's okay" side. The benefits of this racial trait stack with the effects of powers, abilities, and spells that change the subject’s size category. Oh well I guess.I suppose it would be crazy bad to wield a huge greatsword at about level two. Which has squat to do with the subject since there is nothing to stack. The text you quoted is for things like Enlarge Person which say "you become one size larger."
Frugal 05-22-07, 01:33 PM	I don't understand anything you have written, but I can say the text you are responding to is 100% correct. The only part he left out is that medium Full Blade is actually a Large Two Handed weapon (which is what you seem to be pointing out), but it doesn't change anything he wrote and I've no idea what you mean by the second sentence. He said the fullblade is a medium exotic 2-handed weapon that deals 2d8 19-20/x2. The FAQ says it's actually a large weapon which can be wielded by a medium creature with the appropriate exotic weapon proficiency (sorry for the abbreviation last time). The rules for the fullblade in Arms and Equipment Guide (and not overruled by the 3.5 FAQ) state that a large creature can wield a fullblade as a 2-handed martial weapon or 1-handed exotic weapon, both at no penalty. If it were a medium 2-handed exotic weapon then a large creature with the exotic weapon proficiency would be able to wield one 1-handed but at a -2 penalty (standard rules for inappropriately sized weapons).
KoraktheBarbarin 05-22-07, 02:09 PM	Can someone tell me which book the Monkey Grip Feat is in?:)
Zyrusticae 05-22-07, 03:02 PM	Complete Warrior, page 103.
KoraktheBarbarin 05-22-07, 03:10 PM	Complete Warrior, page 103. Thank You very much!:)
GhostStepper 05-22-07, 10:54 PM	Part of the issue may be that instead of actually using the 3.5 rules and saying the fullblade is an exotic weapon made for whatever sized creature its intended for, the FAQ author chose to make it a special case and tried to keep the 3.0 size rules regarding the weapon. What Nezkrul is advocating is the most logical and elegant way of making the weapon legal in 3.5.
Frugal 05-23-07, 08:09 AM	Part of the issue may be that instead of actually using the 3.5 rules and saying the fullblade is an exotic weapon made for whatever sized creature its intended for, the FAQ author chose to make it a special case and tried to keep the 3.0 size rules regarding the weapon. What Nezkrul is advocating is the most logical and elegant way of making the weapon legal in 3.5. Except that by making it a medium weapon you'd allow someone with monkey grip to wield a large one and deal 3d8 damage (at -2 to hit penalty) whereas the FAQ states it's a large weapon that deals 2d8 damage and that you'd have to be a large creature to wield a huge fullblade (or have powerful build) to get the 3d8 damage. No matter which size you make it though it still won't fit within 3.5 sizing without some kind of exception because if it's a medium weapon you have to make exceptions for large creatures wielding it with no penalty and if it's a large weapon you have to handle medium creatures being able to wield it. Personally I stand by the argument that the weapon has no place in 3.5 and is simply an artefact from the 3.0 weapon sizing system.
GhostStepper 05-23-07, 12:36 PM	Except that by making it a medium weapon you'd allow someone with monkey grip to wield a large one and deal 3d8 damage (at -2 to hit penalty) whereas the FAQ states it's a large weapon that deals 2d8 damage and that you'd have to be a large creature to wield a huge fullblade (or have powerful build) to get the 3d8 damage. I realize what the FAQ says, but its akward and nonsensical to try to keep the sizing rules from 3.0. In any case, even if you kept the 3.0 rules a medium sized creature would still be able to wield the 3d8 version at -2 with monkey grip if a medium sized creature with powerful build can. No matter which size you make it though it still won't fit within 3.5 sizing without some kind of exception because if it's a medium weapon you have to make exceptions for large creatures wielding it with no penalty and if it's a large weapon you have to handle medium creatures being able to wield it. Personally I stand by the argument that the weapon has no place in 3.5 and is simply an artefact from the 3.0 weapon sizing system. Why not just make it work like every other 3.5 weapon and have a medium sized fullblade be accessable to medium sized creatures with the EWP? There really is no point in giving it a special quallity that lets Large creatures wield it without penalty since Large bastard swords exist in 3.5.
Frugal 05-23-07, 01:03 PM	Why not just make it work like every other 3.5 weapon and have a medium sized fullblade be accessable to medium sized creatures with the EWP? There really is no point in giving it a special quallity that lets Large creatures wield it without penalty since Large bastard swords exist in 3.5. Again, because then someone with a need to overcompensate for something will try to wield a large fullblade with monkey grip for 3d8, by making it a large weapon with a special property that can't happen. By your logic, you could just as easily say there's no need for a fullblade because you could say that someone with EWP (bastard sword) treats a bastard sword as a 1-handed weapon, therefore a medium creature can wield a large bastard sword 2-handed at -2 penalty. I'll say it again, there's no need for a fullblade to exist in 3.5, it existed in 3.0 because weapon size was absolute so there was a need for larger weapons for larger creatures. In 3.5 we have much better weapon sizing rules and there is the facility for a medium creature to wield a 2d8 weapon within those rules so there's no need for it to exist.
GhostStepper 05-23-07, 01:23 PM	Again, because then someone with a need to overcompensate for something will try to wield a large fullblade with monkey grip for 3d8, by making it a large weapon with a special property that can't happen. Im not seeing the issue. So a medium sized creature takes monkey grip and uses the 3d8 version at -2. The FAQ already shows a medium sized creature with powerful build using the 3d8 version so the medium creatuer with monkey grip and the 3d8 version would already be legal if you followed the FAQ as is. By your logic, you could just as easily say there's no need for a fullblade because you could say that someone with EWP (bastard sword) treats a bastard sword as a 1-handed weapon, therefore a medium creature can wield a large bastard sword 2-handed at -2 penalty. Thats actually the antithesis of my logic since i was saying we should actually use the 3.5 rules and what your proposing holds onto the 3.0 mechanic that im trying to drop. Im saying make the fullblade an exotic weapon sized to fit whatever creature its intended for and get rid of the dumb "large creatures can wield it without penalty" quality since there already is a weapon that fits that mechanically. I'll say it again, there's no need for a fullblade to exist in 3.5, it existed in 3.0 because weapon size was absolute so there was a need for larger weapons for larger creatures. In 3.5 we have much better weapon sizing rules and there is the facility for a medium creature to wield a 2d8 weapon within those rules so there's no need for it to exist. There is the facility for a medium creature to wield a 2d8 weapon, but only with a penalty. The fullblade would still have a niche within 3.5 as it would be the only 2d8 19-20/x2 slashing weapon available to a medium sized creatures without a penalty.
Frugal 05-23-07, 01:42 PM	Im not seeing the issue. So a medium sized creature takes monkey grip and uses the 3d8 version at -2. The FAQ already shows a medium sized creature with powerful build using the 3d8 version so the medium creatuer with monkey grip and the 3d8 version would already be legal if you followed the FAQ as is. Fair enough, I just think fullblades are stupid. Thats actually the antithesis of my logic since i was saying we should actually use the 3.5 rules and what your proposing holds onto the 3.0 mechanic that im trying to drop. Im saying make the fullblade an exotic weapon sized to fit whatever creature its intended for and get rid of the dumb "large creatures can wield it without penalty" quality since there already is a weapon that fits that mechanically. Wait a minute, using the 3.5 rules for inappropriately sized weapons is holding to the 3.0 mechanic? 3.5 weapon sizing rules state that you can wield a larger weapon but the effort increases 1 step and you take a cumulative -2 penalty for each size difference. So a medium creature can wield a large 1-handed weapon as a 2-handed weapon but at a -2 penalty. So medium creature with EWP (Bastard sword) makes bastard sword a 1-handed weapon, therefore wields a large bastard sword as a 2-handed weapon at a -2. How is this clinging to 3.0 rules? There is the facility for a medium creature to wield a 2d8 weapon, but only with a penalty. The fullblade would still have a niche within 3.5 as it would be the only 2d8 19-20/x2 slashing weapon available to a medium sized creatures without a penalty. Again, aside from players that want to overcompensate for something I don't see the need for this weapon to exist. And if they want to overcompensate, they'd be better off using monkey grip to get a large greatsword. I really don't see the need for a 2d8 medium weapon.
GhostStepper 05-23-07, 02:06 PM	Wait a minute, using the 3.5 rules for inappropriately sized weapons is holding to the 3.0 mechanic? 3.5 weapon sizing rules state that you can wield a larger weapon but the effort increases 1 step and you take a cumulative -2 penalty for each size difference. So a medium creature can wield a large 1-handed weapon as a 2-handed weapon but at a -2 penalty. So medium creature with EWP (Bastard sword) makes bastard sword a 1-handed weapon, therefore wields a large bastard sword as a 2-handed weapon at a -2. How is this clinging to 3.0 rules. I guess i missed the -2 penalty part of what you said. Actually, what you proposed is how it does work already in 3.5.
Frugal 05-23-07, 02:56 PM	I guess i missed the -2 penalty part of what you said. Actually, what you proposed is how it does work already in 3.5. Nope, the FAQ says a fullblade is a large weapon with the special property that a medium creature can wield it at no penalty, it's odd. The fact is that if you want all the qualities of the 3.0 version it just doesn't work unless you make it a special case: 3.0 sized huge (translates to 3.5 large) Wieldable by large creature as a 2-handed martial or 1-handed exotic at no penalty (only works if we make it large) Wieldable by a medium creature as a 2-handed exotic at no penalty (only works if we make it medium) We can make it a medium weapon and choose to ignore the large creature issues because of the large bastard sword existing to fill that niche but then we ignore all the normal translations of 3.0 weapon sizes to 3.5 sizes and also ignore the fact that the 3.0 weapon was usable by both sizes without penalty as a single weapon (but that's a concept that's gone from 3.5 anyway).
GhostStepper 05-23-07, 03:32 PM	Nope, the FAQ says a fullblade is a large weapon with the special property that a medium creature can wield it at no penalty, it's odd. i realize that and thats not what i was talking about in what you quoted. I was refering to a medium sized creature with EWP (bastard sword) wielding a Large bastard sword 2-handed at -2. Thats is how it works in 3.5. Take a look again at what i was responding to.
risner 05-23-07, 08:50 PM	Why not just make it work like every other 3.5 weapon and have a medium sized fullblade be accessable to medium sized creatures with the EWP? There really is no point in giving it a special quallity that lets Large creatures wield it without penalty since Large bastard swords exist in 3.5. Because it is already outside the scope of a 3.5 weapon damage for medium sized weapons. You simply can not make it a medium weapon without dropping it to 2d6 or making it an EWP Large weapon with a "may be used as EWP by medium" rule. If you don't see this, you may be confused as to why this was done (making it an EWP Large weapon with a rule for Medium use.) Im not seeing the issue. So a medium sized creature takes monkey grip and uses the 3d8 version at -2. The FAQ already shows a medium sized creature with powerful build using the 3d8 version so the medium creatuer with monkey grip and the 3d8 version would already be legal if you followed the FAQ as is. A missing point that you failed to highlight is the Powerful Build character is using a larger version of the fullblade to gain access to the 3d8 damage and must be paid via a feat (EWP). The EWP and Monkey Grip combo will not combine because the size of the weapon does not change by taking EWP.
Yadot 05-23-07, 09:01 PM	But the difference between 2d6 and 2d8 is on average 2 damage. Isn't that balanced as one feat (EWP)?
GhostStepper 05-23-07, 10:00 PM	Because it is already outside the scope of a 3.5 weapon damage for medium sized weapons. You simply can not make it a medium weapon without dropping it to 2d6 or making it an EWP Large weapon with a "may be used as EWP by medium" rule. If you don't see this, you may be confused as to why this was done (making it an EWP Large weapon with a rule for Medium use.) Is there a rule somewhere that says there cant be an exotic weapon that does 2d8? Thats really not bad considering you have to spend a feat to get your extra 2 points average damage over the greatsword you can wield without a feat. A missing point that you failed to highlight is the Powerful Build character is using a larger version of the fullblade to gain access to the 3d8 damage and must be paid via a feat (EWP). The EWP and Monkey Grip combo will not combine because the size of the weapon does not change by taking EWP. That might make sense if powerful build didnt say: "A half-giant can use weapons designed for a creature one-size larger without penalty." If the 3d6 fullblade really is a weapon designed for a Huge creature then a Medium sized powerful build creature shouldnt technically be able to wield it. You could just as easily have said "the EWP and Powerful Build combo will not combine because the size of the weapon does not change by taking EWP" by the same logic that you denied that combo to a Monkey Gripper. The FAQ says otherwise though and if you let half-giants wield 3d8 fullblades with the EWP you must allow those with monkey grip and the EWP to as well because apparently it counts as a Large weapon according to the FAQ.
risner 05-24-07, 05:47 AM	1) Is there a rule somewhere that says there cant be an exotic weapon that does 2d8? 2) "the EWP and Powerful Build combo will not combine because the size of the weapon does not change by taking EWP" by the same logic that you denied that combo to a Monkey Gripper. The FAQ says otherwise though and if you let half-giants wield 3d8 fullblades with the EWP you must allow those with monkey grip and the EWP to as well because apparently it counts as a Large weapon according to the FAQ. 1) Convention and exiting items. 2) I play that way, btw. In my games EWP and Powerful Build doesn't stack. His reasoning was that Powerful Build allows weapon designed for 1 size larger and EWP Fullblade is a larger weapon designed for use by one size smaller. Huge Two Handed ("large fullblade") with EWP is a weapon designed for Large use. Powerful Build "allows one size larger" weapons, so this weapon designed for Large can be used by Medium with Powerful Build. I disagree. The important text is: "A half-giant can use weapons designed for a creature one size larger without penalty." and "You can use melee weapons one size category larger than you are" Those two abilities are have very different function in the special case of a Fullblade. P.B. sees Large Fullblade (Huge Two Handed) as a weapon designed for Large players and valid for Medium characters (only when they have EWP.) M.G. sees Large Fullblade as a Huge weapon and not valid for a Medium character. The RAW supports the FAQ author's view. I just don't like the concept of P.B. Medium players running around with 3d8 weapons, so apply the P.B. without allowing the EWP to stack with P.B.
Frugal 05-24-07, 07:54 AM	I agree that powerful build shouldn't work for wielding a huge fullblade (3d8 weapon, just so we're clear because of the sizing issues). I agree that he might be reading the "designed for creatures one size larger" clause and that the fullblade can be used by a creature 1 size smaller than its size would suggest might be the reasoning but it gets weird. Elsewhere though, the FAQ incorrectly says that powerful build considers you as large for the purposes of wielding a weapon and that could be the source of the reasoning around the huge fullblade. However, the trait says no such thing and if you were treated as large for the purposes of wielding a weapon then you'd suffer a -2 penalty for wielding a medium weapon. The RAW clearly shows that it's not being treated as large for wielding weapons but allows for wielding weapons designed for a creature 1 size category larger. So yes, I also disagree with the FAQ ruling on the fullblade and powerful build.
GhostStepper 05-24-07, 01:03 PM	1) Convention and exiting items. Except there is a ranged weapon that does 2d8 when designed for medium creatures in races of stone (with a range of 120 ft. and 18-20/x2 crit). Actually, since the bastard sword does 1d10 as a 2 handed martial weapon and an exotic weapon proficiency allows it to be wielded one handed for the same damage, making a statistically equivalent version that can be wielded 2 handed with an EWP with a one step damage increase fits weapon conventions perfectly. 2) I play that way, btw. In my games EWP and Powerful Build doesn't stack. His reasoning was that Powerful Build allows weapon designed for 1 size larger and EWP Fullblade is a larger weapon designed for use by one size smaller. Huge Two Handed ("large fullblade") with EWP is a weapon designed for Large use. Powerful Build "allows one size larger" weapons, so this weapon designed for Large can be used by Medium with Powerful Build. I disagree. Ok, i thought you were saying it was illegal with MG but valid with PB. I can see why you might not rule the the EWP makes it count as "large" if your keeping it a "huge" weapon and if that is what you find then neither combination will work. The important text is: "A half-giant can use weapons designed for a creature one size larger without penalty." and "You can use melee weapons one size category larger than you are" Those two abilities are have very different function in the special case of a Fullblade. P.B. sees Large Fullblade (Huge Two Handed) as a weapon designed for Large players and valid for Medium characters (only when they have EWP.) M.G. sees Large Fullblade as a Huge weapon and not valid for a Medium character. Their function isnt actually different. "You can use weapons designed for a creature one size larger than you" and "you can use melee weapons one size larger than your self" are fundemanetally identical within the 3.5 sizing rules, other than the penalty MG leaves, since they both allow you to treat weapons one size larger than yourself in a similar manner. If having the EWP makes the thing count as Large for PB then it must count as large for MG as well. If you dont think the EWP makes it count as large neither should work. The RAW supports the FAQ author's view. I just don't like the concept of P.B. Medium players running around with 3d8 weapons, so apply the P.B. without allowing the EWP to stack with P.B. I guess it ruffles me less since, other than at lower levels, 3d8 is not that impressive for something that requires a feat. If you find it unbalancing i think that you have a pretty strong argument that if you hold onto the wacky sizing properties of the 3.0 fullblade, it doesnt work with PB as the author of the FAQ rules.
Frugal 05-24-07, 01:40 PM	Ok, i thought you were saying it was illegal with MG but valid with PB. I can see why you might not rule the the EWP makes it count as "large" if your keeping it a "huge" weapon and if that is what you find then neither combination will work. No, the FAQ does in fact say that in 3.5 a fullblade is a large weapon, that huge version would do 3d8 and could be wielded by a large creature or a medium creature with powerful build. There's no mention of monkey grip, which could be an omission or be that they are drawing a distinction between, "can use weapons designed for a creature one size larger," and "weapons 1 size category larger than you are." Now normally these are one and the same as the size category in 3.5 is supposed to indicate what size creature the weapon is designed for. But apparently you can reason that if the fullblade is a large weapon that can be wielded by a medium creature then it is "designed" for a medium creature, and thus a huge fullblade would be "designed" for a large creature, and thus work with powerful build but not monkey grip.
GhostStepper 05-24-07, 04:20 PM	No, the FAQ does in fact say that in 3.5 a fullblade is a large weapon, that huge version would do 3d8 and could be wielded by a large creature or a medium creature with powerful build. There's no mention of monkey grip, which could be an omission or be that they are drawing a distinction between, "can use weapons designed for a creature one size larger," and "weapons 1 size category larger than you are." Just because it doesnt specifically cite monkey grip means nothing. They didnt specifically say that a Huge giant can use the 3d8 version without penalty but that doesnt mean the FAQ implies that they cant. Now normally these are one and the same as the size category in 3.5 is supposed to indicate what size creature the weapon is designed for. But apparently you can reason that if the fullblade is a large weapon that can be wielded by a medium creature then it is "designed" for a medium creature, and thus a huge fullblade would be "designed" for a large creature, and thus work with powerful build but not monkey grip. If it was "designed" for a large creature then it is a Large weapon and thus works with Monkey Grip. The PHB says this: "Every weapon has a size catergory, such as Small, Medium or Large. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. A Small greatsword is a greatsword designed for a Small creature, such as a halfling." Clearly, "a weapon designed for a Large creature" is synonymous with "a Large weapon". There is no logical way that you can wield it with powerful build with the EWP but not monkey grip with the EWP, since a weapon "designed for a large creature" and a "large weapon" are the same thing in 3.5. If you follow the FAQ and allow half-giants 3d8 fullblades with the EWP, you must allow humans with MG and the EWP by the same logic.
Frugal 05-24-07, 05:12 PM	Just because it doesnt specifically cite monkey grip means nothing. They didnt specifically say that a Huge giant can use the 3d8 version without penalty but that doesnt mean the FAQ implies that they cant. Um, did you notice where I said it might be an omission? If it was "designed" for a large creature then it is a Large weapon and thus works with Monkey Grip. The PHB says this: "Every weapon has a size catergory, such as Small, Medium or Large. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. A Small greatsword is a greatsword designed for a Small creature, such as a halfling." Clearly, "a weapon designed for a Large creature" is synonymous with "a Large weapon". There is no logical way that you can wield it with powerful build with the EWP but not monkey grip with the EWP, since a weapon "designed for a large creature" and a "large weapon" are the same thing in 3.5. If you follow the FAQ and allow half-giants 3d8 fullblades with the EWP, you must allow humans with MG and the EWP by the same logic. Well as I mentioned, I disagree with the FAQ's ruling. I also pointed out that elsewhere in the FAQ they incorrectly state that powerful build treats a medium creature as large for the purposes of wielding weapons, if they're following that logic then that would explain how powerful build can wield a huge fullblade and monkey grip can't with no logical issues. Now yes, I completely agree with what you say about weapon sizes, in 3.5 the size is typically what size creature the weapon is designed for. However, the sizing rules in 3.5 also don't allow for a smaller creature to wield the weapon with no penalty, so if we accept that the fullblade is a large weapon that can be wielded by medium creatures we have to accept that it's an exception to the normal sizing rules in 3.5. Or we ignore all the typical rules for converting 3.0 sizes to 3.5 sizes and say that it's medium but that raises other implications. So, if we accept that it's a large weapon with a special exception that it can be wielded by a medium creature with no penalty then the next size increase makes it a huge weapon that can be wielded by a large creature at no penalty. This would put it out of the reach of monkey grip (only works on weapons 1 size larger) but if you allow that special property to mean that it's "designed" for large creatures then it would work with powerful build. I'm just saying that's how the logic might work, I think it's more likely to be built off the incorrect assertion that powerful build treats the creature as large. I disagree with that ruling and the fullblade ruling and with fullblades even existing in 3.5.
GhostStepper 05-24-07, 09:57 PM	Um, did you notice where I said it might be an omission? I thought you were implying that it could be in intentional omission. Well as I mentioned, I disagree with the FAQ's ruling. I also pointed out that elsewhere in the FAQ they incorrectly state that powerful build treats a medium creature as large for the purposes of wielding weapons, if they're following that logic then that would explain how powerful build can wield a huge fullblade and monkey grip can't with no logical issues. Now yes, I completely agree with what you say about weapon sizes, in 3.5 the size is typically what size creature the weapon is designed for. However, the sizing rules in 3.5 also don't allow for a smaller creature to wield the weapon with no penalty, so if we accept that the fullblade is a large weapon that can be wielded by medium creatures we have to accept that it's an exception to the normal sizing rules in 3.5. Or we ignore all the typical rules for converting 3.0 sizes to 3.5 sizes and say that it's medium but that raises other implications. So, if we accept that it's a large weapon with a special exception that it can be wielded by a medium creature with no penalty then the next size increase makes it a huge weapon that can be wielded by a large creature at no penalty. This would put it out of the reach of monkey grip (only works on weapons 1 size larger) but if you allow that special property to mean that it's "designed" for large creatures then it would work with powerful build. I'm just saying that's how the logic might work, I think it's more likely to be built off the incorrect assertion that powerful build treats the creature as large. I disagree with that ruling and the fullblade ruling and with fullblades even existing in 3.5. This whole discussion/argument we've been having is the main reason i think that the dumb "large for some, medium for others" mechanic should be dropped if the 3.5 version is to be used. I was mainly arguing the logic of the one FAQ entry in the context of the RAW of PB and MG but i can see how it could cause confusion if your trying to incorporate other, perhpas faulty, FAQ entries. If you go by RAW, ignoring everything in the FAQ, you either must allow both PB and MG folks to use the 3d8 version. If your assuming the FAQ entry assumes a goliath can wield the 3d8 version because "he counts as large" for wielding weapon then i agree with what your saying.