However a great optimizer asks other optimizers for help.
The limitations are
Str 18
Dex 7
Con 16
Int 15
Wis 11
Cha 7
Lvl 13
Alignment CG
Race Dragonblooded of Bahamut (Human. dragonblooded)
Class Duskblade
You have 8 points to spend on stats through normal point-buy
110000 gp for buying equipment no comsumibles
We are allow to use any books however once the game starts we can't bring in any new book. The world will be built according to with books we use. I have already read Dictum Mortuum's handbook it is good, but I want a second opionion.
The limitations are
Str 18
Dex 7
Con 16
Int 15
Wis 11
Cha 7
Lvl 13
Alignment CG
Race Dragonblooded of Bahamut (Human. dragonblooded)
Class Duskblade
You have 8 points to spend on stats through normal point-buy
110000 gp for buying equipment no comsumibles
What kind of "limitations" are those? I see AMAZING stats already and it seems you're saying you can boost them even higher. Your equipment value is right in line with what 13th-level character SHOULD have although I think he's being a little hard when it comes to consumables although I know why they are sometimes limited.
Now it has been a while since I've looked at the Duskblade and while I enjoy using it to meet spellcasting prereqs for martial PrC when needed I believe that if you're actually going to "play" a Duskblade you don't need to do any multiclassing; at least not very early.
I would strongly recommend something that looks like this: Duskblade 7/Abjurant Champion 5/Exotic Weapon Master 1. For EWM, take the stunt that lets you get double strength mod to damage when you wield a one-handed exotic weapon two-handed. Get a laminated Kaorti Weighted Greatsword (Kaorti turns the weapon into an exotic weapon, and gives it a x4 crit mod. Laminated is a simple 1 point increase in threat range that stacks with all other threat range increases.
It's from a Wizard's article but also in a book somewhere, forget which, Google can tell you.) Weighted Greatsword is in Arms and Armor v3.5. 18-20 crit change, 2d8 base damage. Making it out of kaorti turns it into an exotic weapon, take the proficiency feat and then take monkey grip, proceed to wield two-handed. Make it keen or take improved critical. Pick up deathstrike bracers from the magic item compendium. Combine with earlier listed magic tricks. Proceed to destroy ****.
Weapon will be 2d8, double strength mod, 13-20 critical threat range, x4 crit damage, and the deathstrike bracers let you crit stuff you can't normally crit, three times a day. Combining this with power attack is beastly, especially when mixed with certain spells, given the situation. This build is kind of cheesy, and some DMs will pretty much just auto-veto this. The weighted greatsword alone is pretty awesome.
You should also double check what Monkey Grip does. It DOES NOT let you wield a Greatsword with one hand. You still need two hands to wield a greatsword although MonkeyGrip would let you wield a LARGE Greatsword with two hands. I'd also caution you on spending too many feat trying to become "the guy with a massive super sword," because as far as game mechanics go it usually is NOT benefical.
As for a gish being underpowered it all depends on your reference points. I also depends on how you want to define a gish because there are MANY way to build a character who can use arcane magic and still fight with weapons. I mean you have some "gish" characters that are mostly spellcasters (admittedly a level or two behind a focused caster and probably without all the focus) that are a bit tougher physically then most casters but still have more then enough magic to "handle" most non-casters. At the other end you can have some gish characters that are mostly warrior types but who may have a small amount of spellcasting that they can use for various things. I mentioned using Duskblade as a common way to meet PrC arcane casting requirements and an example of that is just taking a level or two of DB to pick up True Strike and then going into DragonDisciple.
You can use melee weapons one size category
larger than you are with a –2 penalty on the attack roll, but
the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon does
not change. For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed
weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed
weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat.
For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered
a one-handed weapon.
If you have the feat, a large longsword, ordinarily a two-handed weapon, counts as a one-handed weapon.
I forgot about the full attack channel for the duskblade, but the laminated kaorti weapon is the way to go, if the DM will allow it. x4 crit and 13-20 is awesome. I said weighted greatsword because it's a two-handed weapon with 18-20. I suppose you could just as easily go falchion.
Only reason I'm advocating for a two-handed weapon at all is because of the high strength and power attack. This is why I asked about what he wanted for the duskblade in the first place. I just assumed damage.
What StevenO said. Sorry; I've never played a Duskblade, but "guy using a Cloud sword" tends to suck hard.
Depends on how you do it. Fighter 8, barbarian 1, frenzied berserker 10, Exotic Weapon Master 1, Laminated Kaorti Weighted Greatsword. With all the other gear and the rest of the feats, you will be hitting for 200ish damage, without making any kind of use of power attack whatsoever, per attack. Get the impaling quality on the sword, and deathstrike bracers, and you can do full power attacks for truly asinine amounts of damage. Combine it with the combat brute and momentum swing, and you can deal over 1k damage on a single attack.
When it comes to gish characters you have your mostly marshal types like the Duskblade but if you want "true" spellcasting potential then you probably want to go with a BattleSorcerer (UA/SRD) or a multiclass build using Wizard or Sorcerer.
One comment about any gish character is that most of them still don't use a lot of armor. If you have DEX 7 you're probably going to be wearing heavier armors and that is going to hinder your spellcasting. I know there are ways a character can cast in full plate armor but I'd set my sights a lot lower and usually go with some kind of light armor; several classes let you cast in light armor without ASF and that can be improved to medium with a feat while other classes/thing will lower the ASF outright.
You bolder the wrong sentence, dood. Read the first sentence again, especially the part about "weapons one size category LARGER THAN YOU ARE". This isn't 3e, it's 3.5; 2H weapons are called 2H weapons, not Large weapons anymore. It doesn't work the way you think it does.
It totally does work the way I think it does. That's the 3.5 version of the feat. It says weapons one size category larger. Medium character, large weapon. Look at the sentence I underlined again. You can use large weapons with one hand if you're a medium sized character, so long as you have the feat. It says so right in there. A greatsword is only a large bastard sword, and a small greatsword is just a bastard sword. The only thing that determines whether or not a weapon is two-handed, is the size relative to the creature wielding it. That's why ogres can wield greatswords one-handed. The only reason greatswords are listed as 2h in the PHB is because there are no large races in the PHB. Hell, there are even different damage entries for weapons of different sizes. If you have both EWPs, you could do it.
Edit: Wait, my bad, large longsword skips bastard sword. What was I thinking. Large Longsword is a greatsword. So you only need one EWP.
The Duskblade works by dealing damage/debuffs, usually by combining melee attacks with spellcasting. As StevenO said, focus on that and you should be golden. Is there any particular reason why you selected Dragonborn as your race? A suggestion I might give you is to consider playing an illumian, as then you could pull the aeshkrau sigil and then base your bonus spells off of your strength score - a definite plus for a strength-based Gish.
Also I should mention they are what hexblades should have been
This. The only really solid hexblade build is a heavy debuffer/life-drainer.
feats:
Knowledge Devotion
Obtain familiar
Improved familiar (IMP)
Power Attack
Versatile Spellcaster
spells
oth
touch of fatigue
1st 5
Chill Touch (touch attack, lasts r-p-lv, 1d6 extra cold damage and 1 Strength damage undead saving throw or run)
Shocking Grasp (touch attack, 5d6 extra damage +3 attack if target is metal or wearing)
True Strike (standard action, +20 insight bonus to next attack)
Resist Energy(130 min 30 points resistance choices acid, cold, electricity, fire or sonic)
Obscuring Mist(20 ft radius mist)
2nd 4
Dimension hop(touch attack teleport 30 ft will save 16)
Swift Fly (swift action, fly one round)
Touch of Idiocy (touch attack 1d6 damage to Int, Wis and Cha)
Swift Invisibility (swift action, Invisibility for 1 round)
*Dragonshard 2nd lv Wraithstrike (swift action, one round my attacks are touch attacks)
3rd 3
Greater Magic Weapon (make weapon +4 for 13 hours)
Vampiric Touch (touch attack, 6d6 extra damage gain as much temp hp as damage delt)
*Dragonshard 3rd lv Shivering Touch (touch attack, 3d6 Dex damage)
4th
Dimension door
items:
Hand of Glory (DMG 258) 8,000 gp neck slot
Shadow Clock (DotU) 5,500 shoulder slot
Talisman of Undying Fortitude (MIC). 8,000GP Held
Third Eye Clarity (MIC). 3,000GP, face slot
Horn of Plenty (MIC). 12,000GP held
Handy Haversack 2,000
Belt of Battle (MIC) 12,000 waist
Ring of wizardry 1 20,000 ring
Drake Helm 1 slot (XPH) 8000
*Dragonshard 3rd lv Shivering Touch 5,000 gp
*Wraithstrike 3rd lv 5,000 gp
Imp carries to buff me
Eternal wand enlarge Person 820 gp
Eternal wand haste 10,900 gp
Eternal wand Heroism 5,000 gp (caster lv 5)
You bolder the wrong sentence, dood. Read the first sentence again, especially the part about "weapons one size category LARGER THAN YOU ARE". This isn't 3e, it's 3.5; 2H weapons are called 2H weapons, not Large weapons anymore. It doesn't work the way you think it does.
It totally does work the way I think it does. That's the 3.5 version of the feat. It says weapons one size category larger. Medium character, large weapon. Look at the sentence I underlined again. You can use large weapons with one hand if you're a medium sized character, so long as you have the feat. It says so right in there. A greatsword is only a large bastard sword, and a small greatsword is just a bastard sword. The only thing that determines whether or not a weapon is two-handed, is the size relative to the creature wielding it. That's why ogres can wield greatswords one-handed. The only reason greatswords are listed as 2h in the PHB is because there are no large races in the PHB. Hell, there are even different damage entries for weapons of different sizes. If you have both EWPs, you could do it.
.
NO. The feat does NOT work the way you think it does. Monkey Grip allow you (a medium sized creature) to wield a large longsword with one hand. A large longsword is NOT the same as a medium sized greatsword even if they have stats that look almost identical. The lines you have bolded and underlined are just explaining the rule. NORMALLY, if you wanted to wield a large longsword you're going to need to use two hands to do it but with the Monkey Grip feat you know can do it with one hand; you can still use two hands on the weapon just like you can use two hands on a normal longsword. No where does it say it makes it easier to wield weapons that normally take two hands to use.
An Ogre can wield a greatsword one handed because it is a two-handed weapon for a smaller creature. When it does it takes a penalty to his attack rolls using that weapon. Of course that Ogre may be able to pick up a large longsword with characteristic similar to the greatsword but it wouldn's suffer the penalties for wielding a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. If you look in the PHB you will see that weapon damage is listed for different sized creatures who may wield that weapon; the table may just cover the small and medium sized versions of the weapons but the table could be expanded to cover the larger and smaller versions of a listed weapons. The actual "handedness" doesn't change with weapon size except when you try to wield a weapon that is inappropriately sized for you.
I also have some pretty serious doubts about getting a weapon that deals "normal" damage and has a threat range of 13-20/x4. Perhaps you would be so kind as to show how an 19-20/x2 weapon goes to that? Please note the source of anything that isn't in the PHB to make verification easier.
NO. The feat does NOT work the way you think it does. Monkey Grip allow you (a medium sized creature) to wield a large longsword with one hand. A large longsword is NOT the same as a medium sized greatsword even if they have stats that look almost identical.
2d6, 19-20, x2, 8 lbs, required two-handed for medium creatures, martial weapon. Here, read it again.
For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed
weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed
weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat.
For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered
a one-handed weapon.
See? Large longsword, one handed for a large creature, just like a greatsword, but it's two-handed for a medium sized creature. For something that doesn't have the feat. However, if you do have the feat, a large longsword, something ordinarily a two-handed weapon for a medium sized creature, becomes a one-handed weapon for a medium sized creature, if that medium sized creature has the feat. Straight-up RAW. You cannot argue this. It flat out says it, two-handed weapon becomes a one-handed weapon for a medium sized creature with this feat. Deal.
The lines you have bolded and underlined are just explaining the rule. NORMALLY, if you wanted to wield a large longsword you're going to need to use two hands to do it but with the Monkey Grip feat you know can do it with one hand; you can still use two hands on the weapon just like you can use two hands on a normal longsword. No where does it say it makes it easier to wield weapons that normally take two hands to use.
A greatsword is a large longsword. Ever heard of a halfing longsword? It's a shortsword.
I also have some pretty serious doubts about getting a weapon that deals "normal" damage and has a threat range of 13-20/x4. Perhaps you would be so kind as to show how an 19-20/x2 weapon goes to that? Please note the source of anything that isn't in the PHB to make verification easier.
No problem.
Greatsword, weighted 80 gp 1d12 2d8 18-20/x2. This is under martial weapons, under the category of swords. This comes from Arms and Armor v3.5. The specific entry is on page 21.
Laminated Steel
Weapons
Laminated steel weapons are forged by a special
process that involves multiple layers of steel being
bonded by softer and more pliable metals, such as
nickel. These layers are then welded and folded
several times over. This produces a fine cutting
edge unmatched by any other mundane forging
process. However, it take a great deal of time to
construct weapons in this way. Only slashing
weapons may be made from laminated steel. A
laminated steel weapon gains a +1 circumstance
bonus to damage rolls and has its threat range
increased by one.
Laminated Steel Weapon: +900 gp
That's from page 41 of More Ultimate Equipment. So now our weighted greatsword has 17-20.
Kaorti items are all constructed from the resin their palms secrete. In most campaigns involving the kaorti, the creation of resin weapons doesn't become an issue because the kaorti normally serve as enemies of the player characters. However, a few kaorti turn rogue and seek to find a home within the world, and others would like to wield the powerful ribbon weapons that they find.
Weapons made from kaorti resin require the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat to wield, and each must be specific to each ribbon weapon. For example, if the character acquires one of the ribbon longswords of wounding wielded by the Guardians of Gloom and Despair, she must take the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (longsword) feat. If she has acquired a ribbon dagger also, she must take the dagger version of the feat as well.
Making magical versions of kaorti items is possible. The item maker must use resin it has excreted itself, and also must have the appropriate craft skill and item creations feats. Kaorti resin is particularly suitable for bladed weapons such as daggers and swords. Any resin item must be made as a masterwork item. A resin piercing or slashing weapon has a critical multiple of x4.
The article is here: www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/200...
You can find more on Kaorti on page 110 of The Fiend Folio.
*grabs popcorn*
I'm going to enjoy watching this Gangnam-style Internet smackdown.
*whispers an aside to adjacent spectator*
Think he's willing to admit when he's wrong, or is he going to be like a certain someone we all know and, ahem, love?
NO. The feat does NOT work the way you think it does. Monkey Grip allow you (a medium sized creature) to wield a large longsword with one hand. A large longsword is NOT the same as a medium sized greatsword even if they have stats that look almost identical.
2d6, 19-20, x2, 8 lbs, required two-handed for medium creatures, martial weapon. Here, read it again.
For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat. For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-handed weapon.
See? Large longsword, one handed for a large creature, just like a greatsword, but it's two-handed for a medium sized creature. For something that doesn't have the feat. However, if you do have the feat, a large longsword, something ordinarily a two-handed weapon for a medium sized creature, becomes a one-handed weapon for a medium sized creature, if that medium sized creature has the feat. Straight-up RAW. You cannot argue this. It flat out says it, two-handed weapon becomes a one-handed weapon for a medium sized creature with this feat. Deal.
You're wrong but I can already sense a
who isn't going to listen to a thing he's told. I think you should read up on what weapon size means and how it works. Pay close attention to this section: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. 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.
All Monkey Grip does is allow you to ignore that second paragraph when wielding a weapon a size larger.
A greatsword is a large longsword. Ever heard of a halfing longsword? It's a shortsword.
Wrong and wrong. A greatsword and large longsword share many of the same stats but the large longsword only costs 30 gp while a greatsword costs 50 gp. A halfling (small) longsword? It is a SLASHING weapon that deals 1d6 damage, cost 15gp, and weighs 2 lbs. A shortsword? Well it's a PIERCING weapon that deals 1d6 damage, cost 10gp, and weighs 2 lbs. Oh yeh, those two items MUST BE THE SAME WEAPON despite doing different damage types and having different costs.
I also have some pretty serious doubts about getting a weapon that deals "normal" damage and has a threat range of 13-20/x4. Perhaps you would be so kind as to show how an 19-20/x2 weapon goes to that? Please note the source of anything that isn't in the PHB to make verification easier.
No problem.
Greatsword, weighted 80 gp 1d12 2d8 18-20/x2. This is under martial weapons, under the category of swords. This comes from Arms and Armor v3.5. The specific entry is on page 21.
Laminated Steel...
That's from page 41 of More Ultimate Equipment. So now our weighted greatsword has 17-20.Kaorti items are all constructed from the resin their palms secrete. ...
Weapons made from kaorti resin ....
You're "no problem" has a few big ones. For starters Arms & Equipment is a 3.0 book so that may void your weighted greatsword.
Next, your "More Ultimate Equipment" is NOT an "official" sourcebook so that kicks out your Laminated Steel. Now even if I didn't dismiss it for that I'm not going to let you build an item out of two different materials (your Kaorti and laminated steel) and gain the benefit from both. I also like how you are using something from a "bonus EPIC Encounter" to enhance something for a 13th-level character.
When two out of three of your sources don't count and the third one comes from an epic source I'll say your weapon also gets an epic fail. Perhaps you want you use the Katana which a fanboy put up on the DnD wiki instead because treating it as a masterwork bastard sword as mentioned in the DMG just isn't good enough for the greatest swrod ever made by man.
Now, don't purchase anything on that gear list other than Belt of Battle. Most of it is awful. And I mean really awful.
Seriously? o.O The Shadow Cloak is one of the few places you can get teleportation as an immediate action outside of a level of Conjurer. (Come to think of it, I can't think up with any others off of the top of my head.) That's automatic attack dodging three times a day. Heward's Handy Haversack is like a bag of holding that actively helps you find what you're looking for. Heck, even Hand of Glory isn't bad if you want to wear more than two rings pre-epic and you don't have the feats available for Extra Rings. (Not that that's really a benefit until his character actually has some rings.) These aren't the greatest items in the game, but it's certainly a far cry from awful (particularly those first two).
If you have better ideas of a item list please post them that is why I asked for help. Sorry about the bold.
Automatic dodging, assuming the opponent doesn't have reach. Or decides to use a five-foot step during a full-attack. Situational at best/
It's a 10' teleportation effect. If you're fighting toe-to-toe with someone (in an adjacent square), that's already 5' of distance (standard melee reach). An additional 10' makes for a total 15' between you and the other guy; a 5' step won't be enough to get the other guy back into melee if he's only got standard melee reach. Opponents with reach don't get a free pass either unless they've elected to go toe-to-toe with you (vice standing back and waiting for you to give them an attack of opportunity). If this cloak forces enemies with reach to go toe-to-toe with you when you're playing a melee specialist, then that still works to your benefit.
Yes (the Hand of Glory) is really that bad. It became totally useless once the good ol' MIC gave us combining rules.
Hardly - if you're talking strictly about rings less than 24,000 in value and/or situations with infinite gold, then yes, Hand of Glory is absolutely useless to you. However, if that isn't the case, and any of the rings you want to combine cost more than 24,000 gold, then suddenly it becomes more economic to combine Hands of Glory (12,000 per additional hand) than it is to pay .5x the cost of the ring. (A moot point for the current build, I suppose, but still not without merit...)
And, on an unrelated note, the relevant page is 233. ;)
Automatic dodging, assuming the opponent doesn't have reach. Or decides to use a five-foot step during a full-attack. Situational at best/
It's a 10' teleportation effect. If you're fighting toe-to-toe with someone (in an adjacent square), that's already 5' of distance (standard melee reach). An additional 10' makes for a total 15' between you and the other guy; a 5' step won't be enough to get the other guy back into melee if he's only got standard melee reach. Opponents with reach don't get a free pass either unless they've elected to go toe-to-toe with you (vice standing back and waiting for you to give them an attack of opportunity). If this cloak forces enemies with reach to go toe-to-toe with you when you're playing a melee specialist, then that still works to your benefit.
Unless he's built as a charger.
As for what CJ said about TWF, he's (mostly) right. There are other acceptable circumstances for TWF, like Tiger Claw focus (usually with kukris anyway), Sun Sword shenanigans, various precision damage effects, etc. In this particular case, you're going to want a 2H weapon (reach is optional, but recommended) and Power Attack.
Unless he's built as a charger.
Please elaborate, as I'm a bit lost on how this applies. The advantage of the cloak is having the ability to get out of melee reach when it's to your advantage to do so. If you're fighting a charger, then teleporting 10' away is about as wise as leaving melee with a wizard who isn't set up for it (but you're under no obligation to teleport, so the cloak doesn't really hurt you there). If you're a charger yourself, 10' of teleportation could be useful for setting up a charge on the next round (so the cloak doesn't hurt you there either).
Or, of course, you're fighting a caster. Caster goes LOLCELERITYSOLIDFOG. And then you pretty much die.
The cloak's not there for casters - that's like saying wizards should never bother to cast mind blank because it doesn't help them any when a CoDzilla goes into melee with them. I fail to see how the cloak leaves him worse off in that scenario.
This would be true, except for the slight problem that I am seriously having trouble thinking of a ring that's more than 24000 GP that's actually worth that cost.
Spellbattle rings, rings of protection +4 and higher, rings of freedom of movement, rings of evasion. (I play with persistent spell a lot, deal with disjunctions a lot, and even the once-per-day spellbattle ring I find to be useful, esp. on surprise rounds.) I suppose you could make the claim that these things are overpriced and/or unnecessary - but, even if you were to make the case they aren't "worth the cost", that still wouldn't be the same thing as "totally useless", would it?
@OP: I'm partial to winged masks on the face slot, myself (either that or phantom steeds), but your flying needs might not be as big as the need for immunities.
Wow. Look, Zaramon, you need to understant something. A greatsword is a two-handed weapon. Period. Those are the rules. Now, circumstances can occur that allow you to wield a two-handed weapon one-handed. That does not change that a two-handed weapon is two-handed. Now, if this doesn't convince you, I'm going to let someone else have the honors. Too tired and lazy. But, really, you're missing something much more simple and much, much more important:
Fighting with oversized weapons sucks. Hard. Like, so far beyond awful, I lack the vocabulary to effectively describe it without comparing it negatively to Truenamer or Weapon Specialization.
Oh, and third party stuff ain't cool. And pumping out four digit damage at level 11+ is so easy, making 100-ish isn't something to be impressed about.
If you size a greatsword down one category, it can be wielded one-handed, because a greatsword shrunk down one size category is a medium weapon. I already quoted the rules once and I'm reading the size rules right now in the PHB. What's wrong with third party stuff?
You're wrong but I can already sense a
You're disagreeing with a quoted section of the feat. That wasn't my own words, I was quoting straight from Complete Warrior. Also, I don't believe anything anyone tells me unless it can be backed up with evidence. I've proven my point. I don't really care what you think I am, but your raging isn't going to do a damn thing other than make you look like a child who can't handle disagreement, especially when proof is presented to him about how he is wrong. Monkey Grip states flat-out, "a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat. For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-handed weapon."
Inappropriately Sized WeaponsA creature can’t make optimum use of a weapon that isn’t properly sized for it.
This is known to me.
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.
Yep.
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.
Thanks for proving my own point for me. Look at that. Right at that bolded part. Now compare: "a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat. For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-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.
Yes, the large longsword would still be two-handed, and therefore wieldable. If the size category moves it up beyond two-handed, it can't be wielded by medium size creatures, the same is true for light weapons. It's not saying that if the designation changes at all, it can't be wielded, which is what you seem to be implying.
All Monkey Grip does is allow you to ignore that second paragraph when wielding a weapon a size larger.
Monkey Grip doesn't change the effort required, so,
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. 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.
It does not allow for the avoidance of penalties that occur when wielding an improperly sized weapon.
Wrong and wrong. A greatsword and large longsword share many of the same stats but the large longsword only costs 30 gp while a greatsword costs 50 gp.
The different size table increases the price accordingly as well.
A halfling (small) longsword? It is a SLASHING weapon that deals 1d6 damage, cost 15gp, and weighs 2 lbs. A shortsword? Well it's a PIERCING weapon that deals 1d6 damage, cost 10gp, and weighs 2 lbs. Oh yeh, those two items MUST BE THE SAME WEAPON despite doing different damage types and having different costs.
It's just a printing error. Daggers always do both slashing and piercing. The cost isn't so much a printing error as it is an actual math mistake. It's supposed to equal out based on size. Even so, it could still be done with a large longsword, which counts as a one-handed weapon for someone who has the monkey grip feat.
You're "no problem" has a few big ones. For starters Arms & Equipment is a 3.0 book so that may void your weighted greatsword.
It has "v3.5" right on one of the first pages, in big bold letters.
Next, your "More Ultimate Equipment" is NOT an "official" sourcebook so that kicks out your Laminated Steel. Now even if I didn't dismiss it for that I'm not going to let you build an item out of two different materials (your Kaorti and laminated steel) and gain the benefit from both.
It's not the material in and of itself, but the lamination process. Just laminate the solidified resin. Hell you could do that with any special material. Throw it out and it's still 15-20 though. You can also find it in Mercenaries, by Alderac Entertainment. Was there some rule against not using certain sourcebooks in the OP?
I also like how you are using something from a "bonus EPIC Encounter" to enhance something for a 13th-level character.
When two out of three of your sources don't count and the third one comes from an epic source I'll say your weapon also gets an epic fail.
What? Epic Encounter? Kaorti are CR 1, with a +2 level adjustment. I'm guessing you mean the kaorti since you already mentioned the other two elements of the set-up.
Perhaps you want you use the Katana which a fanboy put up on the DnD wiki instead because treating it as a masterwork bastard sword as mentioned in the DMG just isn't good enough for the greatest swrod ever made by man.
The greatest sword ever made by man? Eh, that's arguable. There's this myth perpetrated by anime, game nerds, and general rule of cool that the katana is the best blade in the world. For one, there are varying degrees of quality when it comes to any weapon, including Japanese blades. On a slash, the best katanas in the world, still forged by the Masamune family, (One of their blades will run you about $40,000 last I checked btw.) can barely slash through chain mail. The curved blade naturally glides along and deflects off armor.
A straight blade, much more suited to chopping and thrusting, will go right through chain mail. For the record, the real difference between a quality arming sword and a quality katana is virtually non-existent. At least concerning sturdiness and sharpness. If I had to say right off hand what the greatest sword ever forged by the hands of man were, I would have to say either the singing swords of Tubal-Cain, or The Sword of Mars. Go google them sometime. They're pretty impressive.
Wow. Look, Zaramon, you need to understant something. A greatsword is a two-handed weapon. Period. Those are the rules. Now, circumstances can occur that allow you to wield a two-handed weapon one-handed. That does not change that a two-handed weapon is two-handed. ...
Oh, and third party stuff ain't cool. And pumping out four digit damage at level 11+ is so easy, making 100-ish isn't something to be impressed about.
If you size a greatsword down one category, it can be wielded one-handed, because a greatsword shrunk down one size category is a medium weapon. I already quoted the rules once and I'm reading the size rules right now in the PHB. What's wrong with third party stuff?
If you "down size" a greatsword it can be wielded by a creature of the previous size with one hand. It is still "two-handed" weapon but you just happen to be able to wield it with one hand although you take some sizable penalties for doing so. The "small greatsword" is a 50gp weapon that deals 1d10 (19-20/x2) slashing damage that weighs 4lbs. If you are a medium sized character you take a -2 penalty when wielding it although you can wield it using only one hand.
I don't know what PHB you are reading but I'm under the impression that this thread was looking for answers under the 3.5 rules. In 3.5 weapons are "sized" by their normal wielder and how hard it is for them to wield. A greatsword is ALWAYS a "two-handed weapon" when wielded by the appropriate sized user but a larger user can use it differently with a penalty applied. You should know that everything I've posted about weapon size has come straight from the 3.5 SRD and you should have noticed that the full stats do NOT match up despite your claims.
What's wrong with third party stuff? Plenty. Oh there is also plenty that is fine but you need to remember that ANYONE can put out third party stuff. Just because you can publish it and some people think "it's fine" that does NOT mean it actually works well within the official pureview of the game. Did you look at that Katana entry I linked to? There's a prime example of what a "third party" source can provide which says "
you" to anything that WotC may have done to try and maintain game balance. Those third party sources you used are really saying "
off" to a generally unwritten rule in 3.5 that says weapons with a big critical mutliplier only threaten on a 20 and weapons with a big threat range only deal x2 when they do crit; now threat range can improve but in 3.5 they no longer stack but I believe there is only one official, but relatively obscure and difficult to obtain, to increase a weapon's mutltiplier. If you look at 19-20/x2 and a x3 crit range you'll see that both deal the same damage assuming that critials are all confirmed and the same is true for an 18-20/x2 and x4 crit range although these weapons start with a lower base damage to make up for more crit potential; if you double the critical range on any of these you do not change the relationship between them. Normally the 19-20 and x3 get two extra damage results (a normal 20/x2 critical is just one extra damage result) while the 18-20 and x4 get three and if you double the threat range you just double those numbers; a 19-20/x3 weapon gets FOUR extra damage results which means such a weapon should have a MUCH lower base damage but when you can crit that often for that much people will often use them just for any multipliable damage bonuses they may have.
It will not have the same porportions. A Greatsword is usually a foot of hilt and four to five feet of blade. A longsword is usually 8 inches of hilt and under thirty inches of blade.
A large longsword will be thicker and wider then a Greatsword, probably the same length or up to a foot longer, with a longer hilt that is also TWICE AS THICK as a Greatsword's, made to accomodate the larger hands of a size L creature. Wielding it would be like waving around a blade using the thick end of a baseball bat for a hilt, it would be much wider and heavier then you're used to, and the weight balanced further toward the point then a Greatsword, which often had a very large pommel to bring the weight down closer to the hilt. Longswords are designed to shift the weight towards the end more. Wielding this thing, you're going to feel like you're sweeping a broom with a hilt as wide as a doorknob, or something.
A small longsword has the opposite problem. It's going to be more slender and thinner then a Medium shortsword. It's going to be weighted to slash, not to stab. The hilt is going to be sized for size S hands, meaning about the thickness of a golf club shaft (not the handle). You're going to feel like you're wielding a hilt the size of a pencil or something, and probably afraid you're going to bend or break the thing you're using.
==Aelryinth
There's a reason 3pp stuff is often disallowed at tables. You're showcasing it.
He'd be better off just using an alchemically Heavy weapon for a virtual size increase (FR magic book) and sticking with that if he's going to spend an EWP.
==Aelryinth
You're wrong but I can already sense a
You're disagreeing with a quoted section of the feat. That wasn't my own words, I was quoting straight from Complete Warrior. Also, I don't believe anything anyone tells me unless it can be backed up with evidence. I've proven my point. I don't really care what you think I am, but your raging isn't going to do a damn thing other than make you look like a child who can't handle disagreement, especially when proof is presented to him about how he is wrong. Monkey Grip states flat-out, "a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat. For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-handed weapon."
I guess the "censored" part left too much to the imagination but I'm sensing someone who can't see where they are wrong and will refuse to admit it. For a newbie to the board you're reminding me of another person who recently became active on the board and is a lightning rod for controversy.
What I'm having trouble with is when you say that a large longsword equals a greatsword and that because you can wield a large longsword with one hand due to the Monkey Grip feat that you can do the same with a greatsword. The MG feat does NOT allow that.
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.
Thanks for proving my own point for me. Look at that. Right at that bolded part. Now compare: "a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat. For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-handed weapon."
I should point out the very first line of the Monkey Grip feat to you:
"You can use melee weaons one size category larger then you are..., but the amount of effort tit take you ...does not change."
This would mean that to a medium character with the Monkey Grip feat a large longsword is ONLY a one-handed weapon and can NOT be a considered a two-handed weapon like a greatsword any more then a normal longsword can be considered a two-handed weapon.
Wrong and wrong. A greatsword and large longsword share many of the same stats but the large longsword only costs 30 gp while a greatsword costs 50 gp.
The different size table increases the price accordingly as well.
You should look at those numbers again. A longsword cost 15 gp so a large longsword costs twice that or the 30 gp I state; the medium greatsword still cost 50 gp. I don't see what your point here was but mine is still clear: a large longsword is NOT a greatsword.
A halfling (small) longsword? It is a SLASHING weapon that deals 1d6 damage, cost 15gp, and weighs 2 lbs. A shortsword? Well it's a PIERCING weapon that deals 1d6 damage, cost 10gp, and weighs 2 lbs. Oh yeh, those two items MUST BE THE SAME WEAPON despite doing different damage types and having different costs.
It's just a printing error. Daggers always do both slashing and piercing. The cost isn't so much a printing error as it is an actual math mistake. It's supposed to equal out based on size. Even so, it could still be done with a large longsword, which counts as a one-handed weapon for someone who has the monkey grip feat.
A printing error you say.... Then are those the things I pulled out of the SRD? Now Daggers may do slashing or piercing as needed by the user but that option does NOT exist for shortswords or longswords; some DMs may houserule that possibility but if they do it greatly increases the power of those weapons while also sticking it to some of the history behing the weapons. You brough up the halfling and a halfling with monkey grip should be using human sized weapons just like a MG human would use large weapons.
You're "no problem" has a few big ones. For starters Arms & Equipment is a 3.0 book so that may void your weighted greatsword.
It has "v3.5" right on one of the first pages, in big bold letters.
Then I guess my google-foo is horrible because everything I found about WotC's Arms & Equipment book says its a 3.0 product. Of course they may be a 3rd-party version that says its v3.5 but that runs into the issues with third party material.
Next, your "More Ultimate Equipment" is NOT an "official" sourcebook so that kicks out your Laminated Steel. Now even if I didn't dismiss it for that I'm not going to let you build an item out of two different materials (your Kaorti and laminated steel) and gain the benefit from both.
It's not the material in and of itself, but the lamination process. Just laminate the solidified resin. Hell you could do that with any special material. Throw it out and it's still 15-20 though. You can also find it in Mercenaries, by Alderac Entertainment. Was there some rule against not using certain sourcebooks in the OP?
Your Laminated Steel does say it is "steel" which means you can't/shouldn't use with with other materials. Maybe you want to tell me I could use that process to combine a weapon to use your Kaorti resin, adamantine, silver, and cold iron all in one weapon.
I also like how you are using something from a "bonus EPIC Encounter" to enhance something for a 13th-level character.
What? Epic Encounter? Kaorti are CR 1, with a +2 level adjustment. I'm guessing you mean the kaorti since you already mentioned the other two elements of the set-up.
I'm just reading the page you linked to which mentions "Epic Encounters" and slapping x4 critical damage on a high threat range weapon that normally does x2 damage certainly pushes things up a lot.
Perhaps you want you use the Katana which a fanboy put up on the DnD wiki instead because treating it as a masterwork bastard sword as mentioned in the DMG just isn't good enough for the greatest sword ever made by man.
The greatest sword ever made by man? Eh, that's arguable. ...
I guess you missed the sarcasm behind that suggestion. If you want to go and say that using third party material is find and dandy then maybe you should just you that third party sword as your base.
I'll take that as a concession.
What are you taking as a concession and as a concession to what?
I guess the "censored" part left too much to the imagination but I'm sensing someone who can't see where they are wrong and will refuse to admit it.
Aw, I bet you say that to everyone that calls you out on disagreeing with RAW.
For a newbie to the board you're reminding me of another person who recently became active on the board and is a lightning rod for controversy.
Oh really. Who is it?
What I'm having trouble with is when you say that a large longsword equals a greatsword and that because you can wield a large longsword with one hand due to the Monkey Grip feat that you can do the same with a greatsword.
It's all about size category. A halfling longsword still counts as a light weapon for a medium sized character. Just like a shortsword. Granted, you'd still suffer the penalty to the attack roles, but you could totally do it. And combo it with that fun little exotic weapon stunt.
"You can use melee weaons one size category larger then you are..., but the amount of effort tit take you ...does notchange."
Like I said, you'd still take the penalties to the attack role.
This would mean that to a medium character with the Monkey Grip feat a large longsword is ONLY a one-handed weapon and can NOT be a considered a two-handed weapon like a greatsword any more then a normal longsword can be considered a two-handed weapon
.
Yeah. That's the idea. The whole reason that's done is to benefit from the exotic weapon stunt for double strength instead of strength and a half from wielding a one-handed weapon two-handed while using a weighted greatsword. The synergy with frenzied berserker and momentum swing is sweet. Granted, this is a duskblade, but I'm assuming this duskblade is all about damage, so, that's what I'm going with. Unless you want to dual-wield, this is the best way to get damage from the physical aspect of the character.
You should look at those numbers again. A longsword cost 15 gp so a large longsword costs twice that or the 30 gp I state; the medium greatsword still cost 50 gp. I don't see what your point here was but mine is still clear: a large longsword is NOT a greatsword.
Where's Crazy_Monkey when we need him? It's a math error. It's supposed to all come out the same.
Then I guess my google-foo is horrible because everything I found about WotC's Arms & Equipment book says its a 3.0 product. Of course they may be a 3rd-party version that says its v3.5 but that runs into the issues with third party material.
"Arms and Armor v 3.5." Not "Arms and Equipment Guide". They are two separate books, and I own both of them.
Your Laminated Steel does say it is "steel" which means you can't/shouldn't use with with other materials. Maybe you want to tell me I could use that process to combine a weapon to use your Kaorti resin, adamantine, silver, and cold iron all in one weapon.
Aegis-Fang is a mithral/adamantine weapon. It isn't like material combination has never been done before in the history of D&D.
I'm just reading the page you linked to which mentions "Epic Encounters" and slapping x4 critical damage on a high threat range weapon that normally does x2 damage certainly pushes things up a lot.
When they said "epic" encounters, I don't think they meant in the technical mechanical sense of 20+, I think they meant, "awesome." I'm trusting they realize kaorti are functionally common as dirt in a lot of ways.
I guess you missed the sarcasm behind that suggestion.
I guess I did.
If you want to go and say that using third party material is find and dandy then maybe you should just you that third party sword as your base.
I've been DMing and playing for 12 years, (Much more DMing than playing.) and I've never really had a problem with using third-party material. The only thing I've had problems with have been DIMs, and those appear in both WotC material and in third party content. Wildlander, Rhino's Rush, Weighted Greatswords, Oathbow, DIMs are what create the crazy gib potential at higher levels.
What are you taking as a concession and as a concession to what?
I'm taking your zany rant about design intent in regards to weapons as a concession of your disagreement to my set-up. I mean, if I really wanted to, I could do the same exact thing with a basic medium-sized scimitar straight from the phb, eliminating the need for monkey grip. Even losing the laminated steel, a kaorti resin scimitar after keen/imp. crit. is 15-20 x4, and a one-handed exotic weapon capable of being wielded two-handed, therefore benefitting from the ews for double strength, and that's all WotC material, no third party stuff, at all.
Again, throw in FB with supreme power attack, rage/frenzy, and combat brute/momentum swing, and the build is still totally functional, and the best damage any pure physical melee character will ever see in 3.5, short of paying for miracle cheese. If his duskblade is going for big damage, even if Duskblade 13 works out to be more than duskblade 12/EWM 1, a kaorti resin high threat range weapon is still an optimal and official D&D set-up. Oh no, damage dice becomes 1d6 instead of 2d8. Such a gigantic balance impact. Now all you need is the impaling quality on the weapon and deathstrike bracers (Both offical D&D/WotC material.) and everything will be afraid.
HEY! Not cool, man. When I bring up RAW, I make sure I'm always right. Not like this totally-unsupported absurdity from Z.
I'm going to take this for the in-fun jape that I sincerely believe it is.
Especially since "Arms and Armor 3.5" is a third party book, and a particularly bad one at that. Seriously, bro. Learn the difference.
Scary when you realize the only real difference between a third party book and an offical WotC product is a mere 8 points of damage.
I guess the "censored" part left too much to the imagination but I'm sensing someone who can't see where they are wrong and will refuse to admit it. For a newbie to the board you're reminding me of another person who recently became active on the board and is a lightning rod for controversy.
HEY! Not cool, man. When I bring up RAW, I make sure I'm always right. Not like this totally-unsupported absurdity from Z.
You should get around more, CJ. If StevenO means who I think he means, it's the same guy I was referring to in my "popcorn" post a couple days ago... that ff thought was you.
Then you'd be incorrect. I have a proper understanding of the rules. You obviously do not. I make sure I am correct before I post. You obviously do not.
I'm right about the monkey grip feat, and I'm right about the build. I've got RAW on my side.
No, the real difference is one is official WotC 3.0, and one isn't.
So, the name then, and not the technical details, matter?
Also, the fact that the authors do not appear to understand the difference between 3.0 and 3.5, and the fact that they're hacks on a level to put Monte Cook to shame.
So, you're okay with kaorti resin scimitars with an EWM/FB build? Because that's pure WotC. Want to know what that turns into with all the third party content in the world? 2d8 vs. 1d6 base damage, and 13-20 vs. 15-20.
So, seriously, give it a rest. You've gone from mildly amusing to quite depressing.
Give what a rest? I'm sorry you're depressed, but that's your problem, and not mine.
Then you'd be incorrect. I have a proper understanding of the rules. You obviously do not. I make sure I am correct before I post. You obviously do not.
I'm right about the monkey grip feat, and I'm right about the build. I've got RAW on my side.
You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. /Inigo
Seriously, dood. RAI is against you, and RAW is NOT on your side. Y'know how I know? Because NOWHERE in any of the books do you see "Large longsword = Medium greatsword". Until you can find that quote, you really shouldn't claim that "RAW is on my side".
I guess the "censored" part left too much to the imagination but I'm sensing someone who can't see where they are wrong and will refuse to admit it. For a newbie to the board you're reminding me of another person who recently became active on the board and is a lightning rod for controversy.
HEY! Not cool, man. When I bring up RAW, I make sure I'm always right. Not like this totally-unsupported absurdity from Z.
Especially since "Arms and Armor 3.5" is a third party book, and a particularly bad one at that. Seriously, bro. Learn the difference.
I'm definitely not refering to you CJ. You haven't noticed me having endless arguements about the rules with you. I guess you may be the cause of some controversy but I'd say that has more to do with play style then any real disagrements about how the rules work. I'm 99.9% sure Draco knows who I'm talking about and I don't want to mention his name less he somehow winds up in these arguements as well but I'll say his board name starts with the last letter of my user name.
I also hope that second paragraph is NOT directed at me. I know that when I highlighted Z's Arms and Armor v3.5 and run a google search I get LOTS of directions and they ALL point to a book from Bastion Press. That makes it third party material!! I may have mixed some names up when I was typing but I looked for the 3.5 DnD book that supposed has this Laminated Steel in it but constantly came up empty.
Now it would be nice if Zaramon could do a little better job formating posts so they didn't have all that white space to scroll through but a few points:
You should look at those numbers again. A longsword cost 15 gp so a large longsword costs twice that or the 30 gp I state; the medium greatsword still cost 50 gp. I don't see what your point here was but mine is still clear: a large longsword is NOT a greatsword.Where's Crazy_Monkey when we need him? It's a math error. It's supposed to all come out the same.
Math error? On who's part? I didn't make any math error so clearly a large longsword is not the same thing as a greatsword.I'm taking your zany rant about design intent in regards to weapons as a concession of your disagreement to my set-up. I mean, if I really wanted to, I could do the same exact thing with a basic medium-sized scimitar straight from the phb, eliminating the need for monkey grip. Even losing the laminated steel, a kaorti resin scimitar after keen/imp. crit. is 15-20 x4, and a one-handed exotic weapon capable of being wielded two-handed, therefore benefitting from the ews for double strength, and that's all WotC material, no third party stuff, at all.
Again, throw in FB with supreme power attack, rage/frenzy, and combat brute/momentum swing, and the build is still totally functional, and the best damage any pure physical melee character will ever see in 3.5, short of paying for miracle cheese. If his duskblade is going for big damage, even if Duskblade 13 works out to be more than duskblade 12/EWM 1, a kaorti resin high threat range weapon is still an optimal and official D&D set-up. Oh no, damage dice becomes 1d6 instead of 2d8. Such a gigantic balance impact. Now all you need is the impaling quality on the weapon and deathstrike bracers (Both offical D&D/WotC material.) and everything will be afraid.
You know something, I find things a LOT more appealing when you break them down into the simplest terms. Do your builds using basic equipment and they are easier to follow and adapt then they are when you spout about using specific stuff that I'll venture many people don't have access to much less any familiarity with. I appreciate Tempest's "character" posts because they are done without a lot of equipment assumptions.
Anyone who has been around long enough should know that I am not a hyper-optimizer. I believe in building characters well but do not believe that they should need to squeeze every single thing they can from every book related to DnD ever published. I don't own every 3.5 book printed although I believe I have the most common ones so if you start pulling stuff from less popular DnD books you are going to be asked about it. If you throw in all of the potential 3rd party material it would take some kind of crazy to own and be familiar with all of that as well. Another thing, especially with 3rd party stuff, is that some people will only buy what they can use to make their character's stronger. WotC certainly had some power creep with 3.5 but if you look at 3rd party stuff I'll venture a lot of the "new" stuff in them can be seen as power creep as well in an attempt to coax people into buying their books.
I'm also sure it means nothing to Z' but I can't help but notice where people are coming down on our little dispute. You say you've been a DM for a dozen years but why are you just now joining the "official" DnD boards? Some of us have been around here as long as 3.0 has been around if not longer and haves seen many things so perhaps you can learn from the wisdom of those who have come before you.
Seriously, dood. RAI is against you, and RAW is NOT on your side. Y'know how I know? Because NOWHERE in any of the books do you see "Large longsword = Medium greatsword". Until you can find that quote, you really shouldn't claim that "RAW is on my side".
If a=b, and b=c, then a=c. Here, let me post it again.
You can use melee weapons one size category
larger than you are with a –2 penalty on the attack roll, but
the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon does
not change. For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed
weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed
weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat.
For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered
a one-handed weapon.
You can use a melee weapon one size category
larger than you are with a –2 penalty on the attack roll, and the
amount of effort it takes to use the weapon increases. A larger
light weapon is considered a one-handed weapon, a larger onehanded
weapon is considered a two-handed weapon, and you
cannot use a larger two-handed weapon at all.
You can use melee weapons one size category larger than you are. The size of the weapon changes the number of hands required to wield it, or, if you will, the "handedness." This means that if you drop a greatsword by one size category, it is wieldable in one hand by a medium-sized creature.
A larger light weapon becomes a one-handed weapon. A larger one-handed weapon is a two-handed weapon. Know what that means? That means that a smaller two-handed weapon becomes a one-handed weapon. A smaller one-handed weapon becomes a light weapon. Size still determines how hard a weapon is to wield. Monkey grip increases the size category of weapons that you can wield, by one. That is why you can wield a large longsword, ordinarily a two-handed exclusive weapon, in one hand.
I also hope that second paragraph is NOT directed at me. I know that when I highlighted Z's Arms and Armor v3.5 and run a google search I get LOTS of directions and they ALL point to a book from Bastion Press. That makes it third party material!! I may have mixed some names up when I was typing but I looked for the 3.5 DnD book that supposed has this Laminated Steel in it but constantly came up empty.
Well I've got it.
Now it would be nice if Zaramon could do a little better job formating posts so they didn't have all that white space to scroll through
The way I post makes it easier to separate points and properly respond to them individually. It might take you a second or two longer to scroll through, but it's easier to quote. I actually wasn't a fan of how blocky your posts come out to be when I quote them, but I wasn't going to say anything as it's only a minor inconvenience. But since you brought it up, there it is.
Math error? On who's part? I didn't make any math error so clearly a large longsword is not the same thing as a greatsword.
In the actual PHB. I should really have saved the list of errors and errata for the 3,5 PHB. Sadly I didn't.
You know something, I find things a LOT more appealing when you break them down into the simplest terms. Do your builds using basic equipment and they are easier to follow and adapt then they are when you spout about using specific stuff that I'll venture many people don't have access to much less any familiarity with. I appreciate Tempest's "character" posts because they are done without a lot of equipment assumptions.
I have no idea who Tempest is, nor do I much care.
Anyone who has been around long enough should know that I am not a hyper-optimizer. I believe in building characters well but do not believe that they should need to squeeze every single thing they can from every book related to DnD ever published.
These are the "optimizer" boards right? I mean, if something's worth doing, it's worth doing right. Or as the Mythbusters say, if something's worth doing, it's worth over-doing.
I don't own every 3.5 book printed although I believe I have the most common ones so if you start pulling stuff from less popular DnD books you are going to be asked about it.
I've never had to answer those kinds of questions on other boards. Generally most everyone knew what I was talking about, and where to find it, without needing a source. I don't personally own every 3.5 book either, but between my friends and I, I'm confident in saying that we do in fact own every 3.5 piece printed under the OGL. That said, I have no problem answering source questions.
If you throw in all of the potential 3rd party material it would take some kind of crazy to own and be familiar with all of that as well. Another thing, especially with 3rd party stuff, is that some people will only buy what they can use to make their character's stronger. WotC certainly had some power creep with 3.5 but if you look at 3rd party stuff I'll venture a lot of the "new" stuff in them can be seen as power creep as well in an attempt to coax people into buying their books.
I don't doubt that. Hence the Wildlander, Midnight's Ranger class that I mentioned earlier. Most of the third party stuff though, is either setting-specific, compilations, or entirely new sub-systems meant to replace or interact with previous material. There are even new skills, like knowledge: necrology and demonology. Demonology lets you pull some similar effects to the conjuration school, but at less power and more risk. Fun stuff. A lot of it is just plain flavor. Hehe, plain flavor.
I'm also sure it means nothing to Z' but I can't help but notice where people are coming down on our little dispute. You say you've been a DM for a dozen years but why are you just now joining the "official" DnD boards?
Truthfully, I heard about the Next playtest from one of the hobbyshop owners in my area (No joke, in the last 2-3 months, five new gaming shops opened up in my comparatively small town.) and figured I'd check it out. When I went to go check it out, I discovered these forums. I mean, I guess I assumed there were always forums here, but I never really bothered to check them until I actually had a reason to come to this site. Don't be surprised if I don't stay around too long after the Next playtest is over. With the way it's looking now, I might not even stay that long.
Some of us have been around here as long as 3.0 has been around if not longer and haves seen many things so perhaps you can learn from the wisdom of those who have come before you.
I keep hearing, "Respect my authority!" In Eric Cartman's voice now that I've read this.
But seriously, I don't doubt that there are people all across these boards that can tell me things I didn't already know, but I don't believe it's due to length of experience, at least not as a primary factor.Cat = 3 letters
Therefore, a pig is a cat. I like your logic, bro. I think I'll start yelling "meow" at the cops.
I notice you didn't find me that quote. If the people who designed, tested, and wrote the feat wanted it to apply to same-sized 2H weapons, don't you think they would have said that's what it did? Or was that a typo, too?
No, you aren't. You've got outdated incompatible rules and third-party garbage on your side.
Outdated and incompatible rules? Everything I'm using is 3.5. I can change the weapon from weighted greatsword to scimitar, cut out the laminated steel, and it's all pure wizards of the coast, with only the slightest dip in effectiveness.
No, the fact that one is, yanno, actual rules is what matters.
It's published under the OGL, so it's actual rules. You may place more personal value on products that are official WotC, but why? If you have no other reason than it's WotC, then we're back to what I said about the thing mattering being the name.
Yes, I am fine with that. Partially, because such a build is garbage, but mostly because, yanno, it's rules-compliant. No third-party ****.
Why don't you establish some objective criteria for evaluating the quality of those third party books, and see how they stack up to WotC products. Now, why do you say the build is garbage? It certainly does what it's supposed to do, it brings the damage. Unless you're talking about a dual-wielder or a specifically built rogue, that's the best physical melee damage you're going to get. Then again you're probably one of those people that believes all fighters should be built to dual-wield spiked chains with combat reflexes.
I'm guessing you're just trolling at this point.
I don't troll. I find it a collossal waste of time. There are many other things I would rather do than troll. With all your vitriol, I'm inclined to say the same thing. I'd have reported you a while ago, but much like a trainwreck, I'm having a little trouble looking away.
Pig = 3 letters Cat = 3 letters Therefore, a pig is a cat. I like your logic, bro. I think I'll start yelling "meow" at the cops.
Know what that is? That's called ad argumentum ridiculum. It's a logical fallacy. Here's how the basic logic that I demonstrated is supposed to apply. F-18s are fighter jets. Fighter jets are aircraft. Therefore, all F-18s are aircraft.
I notice you didn't find me that quote. If the people who designed, tested, and wrote the feat wanted it to apply to same-sized 2H weapons, don't you think they would have said that's what it did? Or was that a typo, too?
Sorry, you asked for a quote? Explain in detail please, what it is that you want to know. If you want to know how monkey grip let's someone use a two-handed weapon one-handed, it's in the feat, like I've posted several times before.
No. Nowhere does it specifically say that. You're pulling this out of unrelated text. See, you can't just make up text that you want to be there.
It doesn't have to explicitly say a small greatsword is a one-handed weapon, because the rules are quite clear that the handedness of the weapon is dependent on the size of the weapon relative to the wielding creature. Large longsword is quite clearly a two-handed weapon, because the size of the weapon matters. Therefore, a small greatsword must be a one-handed weapon for a medium sized creature. Like I said earlier, if a=b, and b=c, than a=c.
Furthermore, just for the record, "being considered X for medium-sized creatures" does no actually make it X.
Of course not. A medium longsword would be like a dagger for a huge creature. It's relative to the creature size.
Now that is something that can't be argued with, and if you'd like to, I don't have much else to say aside from congratulating you on actually making me and CJ agree on something.
I think I can put a quick end to this. Page 27 of the 3.5 Dungeons Masters Guide has a section with a variant rule entitled Weapon Equivilencies that give the DM the option to treat similarly designed weapons of different sizes as the same, I.E a large long sword can be used as a great sword since they are smiler in design and a large short sword can be used as a long sword (all this assuming medium size). The shear fact that this is a variant proves that under normal circumstances monkey grip does not function the way you claim it does Zaramon. If it did, that rule would be a rule, not a variant rule. If a DM uses this rule (which I do for fun and flavor) than monkey grip would work the way you say, but unless that variant rule is in effect, you are in fact wrong.
Now that is something that can't be argued with, and if you'd like to, I don't have much else to say aside from congratulating you on actually making me and CJ agree on something.
But it says right in monkey grip that a large longsword is a two-handed weapon for a medium-sized creature that doesn't have the feat, but functions as a one-handed weapon for someone that does have the feat. So, apparently monkey grip auto-assumes that variant is in play.
Thanks for showing that to me though. I'll definitely be making use of it.
You can use melee weapons one size category larger than you are with a -2 penalty on the attack roll, but the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon does not change. For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat. For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-handed weapon. You can wield a larger light weapon as a light weapon, or a larger two-handed weapon in two hands. You cannot wield a larger weapon in your off hand, and you cannot use this feat with a double weapon.
Nowhere in there does it say that you wield normal sized weapons as a size category smaller, it simply says that you wield weqapons a size catigory larger as you normally would with a -2 penalty. A large sized long sword is a one handed weapon, a large sized great sword is a two handed weapon. The key to understanding this feat is that if a weapon increases in size, the effort to change it goes up. All the feat does is let you wield the weapon as if it was sized for you in the dynamic of handling. If you wanted to two-handedly wield a large sized long sword, you could since you can wield most one-handed weapons two-handedly, however you do not gain the ability to wield a regular sized gread sword one-handed since it is still a two handed weapon for your size.
First off, have you even seen the rules you're referring to? It seems whoever wrote that just has a serious boner for some of the more dysfunctional melee 3.0 rules.
I have entire builds that use nothing but third party content. So yes.
And a scimitar is fine. Y'know why? It's a one-handed weapon.
So is a large longsword with the monkeygrip feat, or a greatsword with the monkey grip feat, because they're both large-sized weapons, and therefore two-handed for a medium-sized creature, and we know, that size determines handedness, as pointed out in one of Steveno's posts. Thanks again for that Steve.
No. The WotC rules aren't rules because of the OGL, they're the rules because, yanno, WIZARDS WROTE THE GAME. It's their game. Only stuff they specifically wrote(Or officially approved, in the case of DLCS) is valid.
In your eyes maybe. In the eyes of the people that matter, anything under OGL is legit. Now, of course DMs will choose which content to use and which not to use depending on setting and their mood.
Well, I'm ignoring your incorrect use of the greatsword with monkey grip for a moment.
My correc use, you mean. I'm going to keep pushing this until you can prove it's wrong, because I've already demonstrated how it's right. As Steveno's post pointed out, size determines handedness. So it's a correct use.
Now, in a damage build, number of attacks matter more than a bit of extra power attack, which, by the wording I remember, I'm pretty sure doesn't actually stack with FB. There are options that get you more attacks to be octupled in damage, which is better than the crap that is EWM.
You need power attack to get FB, which has improved and supreme power attack. With my build, you get basic rage and the +10 frenzy. The exotic weapon stunt gives double damage to strength on one-handed exotic weapons wielded two-handed, rather than 1 and a half strength. You have any idea how much that stacks up when you have rage and frenzy running at the same time and you land a x4 crit? Assume 15 str, a +5 tomb, a +6 item, 5 points from level up, rage, max version of frenzy, that's 45 str.
The modifier for that is +17. Double that it becomes +34 damage. Just from strength. Multiply that by x4 and you get 136 damage, solely from str. That's not adding in anything from power attack, enhancement bonus, or momentum swing. Throw rhino's rush in there and on a charge you're doubling your damage. I'm guessing you're talking about dual-wielding using slashing flurry and Dervish? What is the maximum number of attacks you've ever had on a build, and how did you get that number of attacks?
No. You know why I'm not trolling and you appear to be? I'm right. You're wrong. That's the end of it.
Say it all you want. It won't make it true. So far it's been proven that handedness is determined by weapon size, so a small greatsword is a one-handed weapon for medium-sized creatures. You barely even tried to prove that wrong, and now that you can't, you just keep telling me I'm wrong over and over again.
Vitriol? No. Just impatience with someone who obviously doesn't understand the basics of RAW, and is clinging to his misquided belief for some reason I cannot grasp.
Go ahead, keep saying it if it makes you feel better.
Which is exactly your argument. So, I'm not seeing any problems here.
I'm not taking anyone's argument to a ridiculous extreme and calling that extreme ridiculous. I don't know where you came up with that one.
You are referring to text which you are extrapolating incorrectly from a feat. You see, if it doesn't say something, it isn't there. You're referring to rules that don't exist.
It was StevenO who provided the quote from the SRD that says handedness is determined by size. If that is indeed the case, then monkey grip acsolutely let's someone use a greatsword one-handed, as I have demonstrated.
Except that's not the case, because it doesn't say that. First of all, there are only rules for scaling up in there. You are going down, which changes things. You cannot simply go backwards, because the rules don't say you can.
Handedness is determined by weapon size, according to the SRD quote that StevenO so courteously provided.
Except that it isn't. Becuase the rules don't say it is. You seem to have a problem with this whole "rules" concept.
It was either you or StevenO that actually made the case for that for me a couple pages back. I just repeated it.
Monkey Grip
You can use melee weapons one size category larger than you are with a -2 penalty on the attack roll, but the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon does not change. For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat. For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-handed weapon. You can wield a larger light weapon as a light weapon, or a larger two-handed weapon in two hands. You cannot wield a larger weapon in your off hand, and you cannot use this feat with a double weapon.
Nowhere in there does it say that you wield normal sized weapons as a size category smaller, it simply says that you wield weqapons a size catigory larger as you normally would with a -2 penalty. A large sized long sword is a one handed weapon, a large sized great sword is a two handed weapon. The key to understanding this feat is that if a weapon increases in size, the effort to change it goes up. All the feat does is let you wield the weapon as if it was sized for you in the dynamic of handling.
If you wanted to two-handedly wield a large sized long sword, you could since you can wield most one-handed weapons two-handedly, however you do not gain the ability to wield a regular sized gread sword one-handed since it is still a two handed weapon for your size.
Sure about that? Because you said...
large sized long sword is a one handed weapon,
But the feat says...
For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat.
Look at that. Two-handed weapon. For a creature that doesn't have this feat. But guess what? If you do have the feat...
For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-handed weapon.
So you can indeed wield two-handed weapons as though they were one-handed, if you have the feat. Considered two-handed without the feat, considered one-handed with. I don't know how to put it any plainer.
The key to understanding this feat is that if a weapon increases in size, the effort to change it goes up.
Yes, you still take the penalties for the off-size.
Edit: This has all given me an idea. I use like, 8 levels of fighter for filler in this build. I bet that dervish could totally be implemented for more attacks. Now I want to see that build even more so I can integrate elements of it into my own build.
Other Edit: I take that back about the Dervish. I forgot that Thousand Cuts was only once a day. I hope you have a better multi-attack build, one that doesn't involve dervish. I could see certain feats, but my build can just take those feats too.
1. For a medium creature a longsword is a one-handed weapon that can be wielded two handed.
2. For a medium creature a greatsword is a two-handed weapon.
3. A medium sized creature can wield a large longsword at a -2 penalty but doing so requires the use of two hands.
4. A medium sized creature with the monkey grip feat wields a large longsword as a one-handed weapon but can still use two hands on the weapon just like a normal longsword.l
5. A medium sized creature with the monkey grip feat wields a greatsword as a two-handed weapon; it can NOT wield a greatsword as a one-handed weapon.
6. A medium sized creature normally may NOT wield a large greatsword.
7. A meidium sized creature with the monkey grip feat can wield a large greatsword as a two-handed weapon but suffers a -2 penalty on attacks with it.
I'm under the impression that because of #4 you believe that #5 is wrong here when it most certainly is correct. Perhaps you miss the distinction but Monkey Grip makes it easier to wield weapons designed for larger creatures but it does NOT make it any easier to wield weapons designed for your own size.
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.
That's what the SRD and the PHB says. If the above statement is true, the the only reason the greatsword is a two-handed weapon for medium characters, is because of its size. If all that matters is the weapon's size, then monkey grip's effect applies to greatswords and medium-sized characters wielding them. The monkey grip feat even has an example of wielding a weapon that would ordinarily be two-handed due to it's size, in one hand. It was either you or the other guy who's significantly more rude, who said something to the effect of, "An ogre can wield a greatsword in one hand." Again, weapon handedness is determined by the weapon size. It may sound slightly convoluted, but it 100% works under RAW. How is this wrong?
I have a problem with 5 because of this;
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.
That's what the SRD and the PHB says. If the above statement is true, the the only reason the greatsword is a two-handed weapon for medium characters, is because of its size. If all that matters is the weapon's size, then monkey grip's effect applies to greatswords and medium-sized characters wielding them. The monkey grip feat even has an example of wielding a weapon that would ordinarily be two-handed due to it's size, in one hand. It was either you or the other guy who's significantly more rude, who said something to the effect of, "An ogre can wield a greatsword in one hand." Again, weapon handedness is determined by the weapon size. It may sound slightly convoluted, but it 100% works under RAW. How is this wrong?
Under RAW it dosn work because a medium sized great sword is still a two handed weapon. the feat just allows you to wield larger weapons with the ease it would take to wield it as a size below. the inverse does not work with the feat, allow me to highlight a few key parts of the feat.
"You can use melee weapons one size category larger than you are with a -2 penalty on the attack roll, but the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon does not change..."
The first line of the feat explicitly states via the highlighted portions that it's effect apply to weapons a size category larger and that the effort to wield them does not change. You can wield a regular sized long sword in two hands or one hand. You can wield a large sized long sword with a -2 penalty but only as a two handed weapon. You can wield a small sized great sword as a one handed weapon at a -2 penalty. Now here is the tricky part, a great sword sized for a medium creature is a two handed weapon, a great sword made for a large creature is generally unusable by a medium character, however the feat lets you treat a weapon one size larger than your size category as it's base size designation for how you wield it in your hands.
basically the feat allows you the ability to reduce the amount of hands the weapon needs down to it's normal "placement" if you will, regardless of the size difference. Nothing more, nothing less. Like I said earlier there is a variant that if used would allow you to do what your saying you can, but that is a variant, meaning by it's shear existence your argument proves wrong baring the case of the variant.
Pig = 3 letters Cat = 3 letters Therefore, a pig is a cat. I like your logic, bro. I think I'll start yelling "meow" at the cops.
Know what that is? That's called ad argumentum ridiculum. It's a logical fallacy. Here's how the basic logic that I demonstrated is supposed to apply. F-18s are fighter jets. Fighter jets are aircraft. Therefore, all F-18s are aircraft.
Actually, you're the one using the logical phallusy. A better way of saying what you're trying to pull is "An F-18 is an aircraft. A DC-3 is an aircraft. Therefore, an F-18 is a DC-3." Seriously, pay attention. In the first post I made to correct you, I pointed out that your interpretation of Monkey Grip would have been correct in 3.0, when a greatsword was considered a Large weapon. That is no longer true. Therefore, a feat that allows you to use a weapon "one size category larger than you" won't work on a greatsword.
I notice you didn't find me that quote. If the people who designed, tested, and wrote the feat wanted it to apply to same-sized 2H weapons, don't you think they would have said that's what it did? Or was that a typo, too?
Sorry, you asked for a quote? Explain in detail please, what it is that you want to know. If you want to know how monkey grip let's someone use a two-handed weapon one-handed, it's in the feat, like I've posted several times before.
Reading comprehension, dood. It's what you're lacking.
Be honest, bro: are you willfully ignorant, or just trolling? Cuz if you're trolling, I know some people who would LOVE to have some fun with you.
5. A medium sized creature with the monkey grip feat wields a greatsword as a two-handed weapon; it can NOT wield a greatsword as a one-handed weapon.
I have a problem with 5 because of this;
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.
That's what the SRD and the PHB says. If the above statement is true, the the only reason the greatsword is a two-handed weapon for medium characters, is because of its size. If all that matters is the weapon's size, then monkey grip's effect applies to greatswords and medium-sized characters wielding them. The monkey grip feat even has an example of wielding a weapon that would ordinarily be two-handed due to it's size, in one hand. It was either you or the other guy who's significantly more rude, who said something to the effect of, "An ogre can wield a greatsword in one hand." Again, weapon handedness is determined by the weapon size. It may sound slightly convoluted, but it 100% works under RAW. How is this wrong?
You are ignoring the very first sentence of the Monkey Grip feat. I've said this before but maybe you weren't listening at the time. It is the second half the sentence but MG says, "the amoun of effort it takes you to use the weapon does not change."
The first sentence may say you can wield a weapon one size category larger then you but you need to notice that a greatsword for a medium sized character is a medium two-handed weapon. The difference between the longsword and greatsword is NOT a "size" category but rather a "usage" category. A weapon's size category refer to the size of the intended wielder. Within each size category weapons also fall into one of three usage categories: light, one-handed, two-handed. You seem to want to say weapons of a size category then fall into a -1/0/+1 size adjustment based on the usage; in 3.0 that is how things worked and you didn't have light or two-handed weapons but 3.5 changed those rules.
There is so much wron here, I don't knoew where to start.
Nothing wrong there.
Incorrect. Monkey Grip does not say this.
Sure it does. One size category larger. Greatsword counts as it's a two-handed weapon for a medium creature, because size determines handedness.
No. A greatsword is a two-handed weapon because it's a two-handed weapon.
Says you. RAW disagrees. I already posted the text from the SRD that says weapon-handedness is determined by weapon size. It's a two-handed weapon because of its size. Seriously, go back and read it.
Seriously, what makes you the arbiter of all things "in the people that matter?" Third party is third party. Unofficial content. You seem to have a problem with definitions.
The OGL is official. If it wasn't, WotC would be able to sue the hell out of Mongoose, Green Ronin, and Alderac and make a killing. If that is something they could do, they would. Don't need to cite sources for common knowledge.
No. This is absurd. It's been established as wrong for several different reasons.
No it hasn't. SRD says weapon-handedness is determined by size. So far the only thing you have is that first line in the feat, which applies to the penalties for different sizes, and not weapon-handedness. If "You can use melee weapons one size category larger than you are with a –2 penalty on the attack roll, but the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon does not change," applied to the handedness of the weapon, which is determined by weapon size, then this "For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat. For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-handed weapon," would be contradictory, because it would be changing the effort required to wield the weapon, which we know monkey grip does not do. You keep saying that it only applies to specific weapon, and doesn't allow up-scaling, but no where in the feat description does it say that.
Pro tip, bro? 136 damage is easy. One should be doing at least five figures in a Frenzied Berserker build. Minimum.
The best I've ever reached with a typical FB build is 4300-ish damage in a single turn. Five figures? The only way I could see that is with multi-armed race cheese. There's a build out there that uses 40-something hands with nothing but kukris to get 20d6 damage per attack, with somewhere around 1.2 million attacks, but I figured something like that would be considered cheesy on these forums.
No, it may be that handedness is determined by size in your crappy third party book,
Again with your irrational bias. You've also apparently picked up a new trick, unprovoked inference. I've repeatedly posted the stuff from the SRD and the PHB that says what determines handedness.
but according to the rules, handedness is a simple quality of a weapon type.
"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."
The above is from the d20 3.5 SRD. As I said, weapon-handedness is determined by size relative to the wielder of the weapon.
As I said. Trolling.
How out of control your ego must be that just because someone disagrees with you, they're a troll. Either that or since you know you can't prove your point you're falling back on ad hom.
pqupte]
No, that is your argument. Noone is taking it "to a ridiculous extreme" because it's already pretty ridiculous.
Ad arg rid is where you take someone else's argument to an extreme and insult the extreme. I'm guessing you're just trying to call my own argument ridiculous?
No. You know why? Because a greatsword is a two-handed weapon. A longsword, a shortsword, and a greatsword do not all have the same stats when changed size, because they're different weapons.
I'm just going to keep re-posting this rebuttal until you can find a way to actually shut it down instead of just plugging your ears and going "nananana."
"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."
The above is from the d20 3.5 SRD. As I said, weapon-handedness is determined by size relative to the wielder of the weapon.
Incorrect. Care to actually cite a source?
Okay but this is going to be like the fifth time it's appeared in this thread.
"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."
The above is from the d20 3.5 SRD. As I said, weapon-handedness is determined by size relative to the wielder of the weapon.
No. It does not say that. It says you can wield a large one-handed weapon in one hand. Nothing at all about general two-handed weapons.
For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat.
Hrm.... nope, nothing about general two-handed weapons there. No way that large longsword is being used as an example, that "for instance" at the start certainly doesn't modify the text in such a way...oh wait...it does. The large longsword is being used as an example of two-handed weapons being used one-handed.
Or, in other words, what Lashius said. Makes me wonder why I'm bothering. I mean, if I wanted to deal with absurdity and idiocy on this level, I'd be watching FOX.
MLA should really create a new logical fallacy, comparing me to fox news, while it may soothe your aching ego and calm your nerves, doesn't do anything to change the fact that you're straight-up wrong. See, this is that vitriol I was talking about. Absurd, idiot, fox news, "your build's garbage" (Still waiting on that build that you mentioned. Now you've said you can do 5-digit damage with a standard FB build. Put up or shut up.) "your garbage third-party books," those are inflammatory statements, vitriol. Whether you're angry or not doesn't change the fact that those are insults. At first I really thought you might have something that could prove me wrong, but since you don't, I feel good about reporting you now and moving on.
Be honest, bro: are you willfully ignorant, or just trolling? Cuz if you're trolling, I know some people who would LOVE to have some fun with you.
Like I said earlier, I don't troll. I've already dealt with this idea that the greatsword's handedness isn't determined by it's size, rather handily I might add, so I'm not going to re-address it here. Just read my post.
You are ignoring the very first sentence of the Monkey Grip feat. I've said this before but maybe you weren't listening at the time. It is the second half the sentence but MG says, "the amoun of effort it takes you to use the weapon does not change."
And yet the SRD says,
"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."
But we know the monkey grip feat has an example of a two-handed weapon being used one-handed. Compare bolded text. The SRD here is talking about handedness, saying it does change based on size. If that's the case, then monkey grip wouldn't allow for a large longsword to be used one-handed, because the amount of effort does not change. So it must be talking about something else. What's the only thing left? The extra penalties for wielding an inappropriately sized weapon. I was listening when you brought this up, and I dealt with it in the same fashion.
The first sentence may say you can wield a weapon one size category larger then you but you need to notice that a greatsword for a medium sized character is a medium two-handed weapon. The difference between the longsword and greatsword is NOT a "size" category but rather a "usage" category. A weapon's size category refer to the size of the intended wielder. Within each size category weapons also fall into one of three usage categories: light, one-handed, two-handed. You seem to want to say weapons of a size category then fall into a -1/0/+1 size adjustment based on the usage; in 3.0 that is how things worked and you didn't have light or two-handed weapons but 3.5 changed those rules.
I'm just going off SRD, handedness is determined by weapon size relative to the wielder of the weapon.
I'm still trying to figure out how text directly contradicting what you claim to be the default rules supports your claim that they are, in fact, the default rules.
Oh, btw: I looked up the PHB errata; no mention of weapons at all, so that's yet another 2 claims of yours shot down.
You can review the Code of Conduct here: company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.