PDA

View Full Version : (3.5) Ridiculously large sword



Ilmryn
2011-02-11, 07:54 PM
One of my players in my campaign has combined several magic items and feats, which technically give him the ability to wield a colossal-sized fullblade. ( a fullblade is a oversized sword you need EWP to use two handed, does 2d8 damage as medium and is the size of a large bastard sword)

I'm not entirely opposed to the idea, bu I do want to give him some of the difficulties that realistically come with using a sword that size. Any ideas?

Also, could someone help me figure out exactly how big this sword would be and how much it would weigh.

Spiryt
2011-02-11, 07:57 PM
Realistically? Seriously?

Realistically there's the fact that it wouldn't work. Period. :smallsmile:

So if it works, it's fantasy, magic and stuff. :smallwink:

As far as weight goes, I believe that there are suitable tables in Equipment sections of SRD - to determine how much more should generally colossal equipment weight.

Gavinfoxx
2011-02-11, 08:04 PM
"Realistically", once you go above, ohhh 8 lbs, it gets too unwieldy. And that is for the ABSOLUTE BIGGEST swords. Note that the default weight for a D&D greatsword is 8 lbs...

http://www.thearma.org/essays/2HGS.html

But, in general, the RAW methods for combining size increases for weapons generally, uh, don't stack... and mostly give penalties where they shouldn't, actually REDUCING the average damage done. This is a big fantasy trope, and if he invests in this, he shouldn't get a *single penalty to hit* for being able to do this -- instead, he should just get damage dice increases, so he can keep his damage up with no penalty, for spending so much investment into it. Really, being able to one shot enemies in melee isn't that big of a deal in D&D, at all.

Also, he should get Reach, at some point.

dsmiles
2011-02-11, 08:07 PM
Maybe he can't use it indoors, especially in narrow or low-ceilinged hallways.

EDIT: I think, size-wise, Guts used a fullblade.

Gavinfoxx
2011-02-11, 08:07 PM
Maybe he can't use it indoors, especially in narrow or low-ceilinged hallways.

It's called Half-Swording...

Lateral
2011-02-11, 08:09 PM
After all, it's bigger than he is. FAR bigger. It's about the size of a Huge creature, IIRC.

@V: I know. I think the size of weapons is 2 size categories for most 2-handers and 3 for one-handed weapons.

Gavinfoxx
2011-02-11, 08:11 PM
After all, it's bigger than he is. FAR bigger. It's about the size of a Huge creature, IIRC.

Welll.... remember. Weapon sizes are not actually, you know, the same thing as Creature or Object Sizes. I'd say that the biggest weapons folk wield are generally usually Tiny, or maybe Small sized objects... even if it is a weapon sized for a Large or Huge creature.

Really, how much average damage is he doing? 4d8? 4d6? 6d6? 6d8? It's only when you get to that point, really, that it becomes at all worth it to do this sort of thing, if you get a penalty to hit... don't give him a penalty to hit. Really, being able to do xd6 damage at will isn't a big deal.

Ilmryn
2011-02-11, 08:13 PM
Basically, what he is using is:
-"balanced" weapon enhancement, letting him wield a weapon as if it was a size smaller
-strongarm bracers, which let him use weapons one size larger
-monkey grip
-enlarge person

Are there rules for how the length and weight of weapons increase when they go up a size category beyond large? The only thing I could find in the srd was that weight doubles for large.

Edit-A colossal fullblade would do 8d8 damage, which is pretty hefty, considering he only takes -2 to hit and uses two feats.

AslanCross
2011-02-11, 08:15 PM
After all, it's bigger than he is. FAR bigger. It's about the size of a Huge creature, IIRC.

Nope, that's the old 3.0 convention of giving weapons a different size scale from creatures. I think using that convention, greatswords were large-sized. That doesn't mean Landsknechts were going around wielding 9-foot swords. :smalleek:

The Fullblade is described as 18 inches longer than a greatsword. Assuming that the greatsword is as long as and weighs as described in the above article:


"The two-handed sword was a specialized and effective infantry weapon, and was recognized as such in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Although large, measuring 60-70 in/150-175 cm overall, it was not as hefty as it looked, weighing something of the order of 5-8 lbs/2.3-3.6 kg.,

The D&D greatsword weighs 8 lbs and is approximately 5.8 feet long. That means the medium Fullblade would be 7.3 feet long. The book describes it as weighing 23 lbs. A colossal fullblade would weigh 23 x 16 or 368 lbs (real-world values such as weights use real math rules and not D&D's multiplier stacking rules). Since the size categories pretty much double the creature's height, we can assume the weapon also doubles in length as it goes up by size category.

Note that a fullblade is longer than average humans (assume 6 feet) are tall. Thus a colossal fullblade would be longer than the average colossal (tall) creature is, assuming a Mountain Giant. Note that the minimum height for colossal is 64 feet.

The fullblade would be over 112 feet long. It'd be very thin, though, to weigh only 368 lbs. :P I think someone adept at materials engineering would be able to answer this question more realistically.

Demidos
2011-02-11, 08:17 PM
Technically for the weight it would be would be *2 per size category
(http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#simpleMartialandExoticWeapons, the table shows that small weigh 1/2 and large weigh twice), so Med --> Colossal would be *16. Assuming it weighs the same as a greatsword, it would weigh 16*8=128 pounds. By RAW:smallsmile:

HunterOfJello
2011-02-11, 08:20 PM
Without changing the size of the character, the largest possible sword a medium sized character should be able to weild is a Large Fullblade which would do 3d8 damage. If it was made out of Kaorti Resin then the crit multiplier would be x4. That's about the best giant weapon I'm aware of that you can get since the sizing stuff doesn't stack.

Halae
2011-02-11, 08:22 PM
Assuming it weighs the same as a greatsword, it would weigh 16*8=128 pounds. By RAW:smallsmile:

actually, I believe the weight of a fullblade was 16 lbs., doubling your calculation.

See, this is why a sizing weapon property should be applied. ease of transport.

Lateral
2011-02-11, 08:23 PM
I can get a character who wields a Colossal warhammer quite easily. :smalltongue:

dsmiles
2011-02-11, 08:25 PM
I can get a character who wields a Colossal warhammer quite easily. :smalltongue:So can I, play a Titan. :smalltongue:

Lateral
2011-02-11, 08:27 PM
Titans have LA -. Close, though.

Fox Box Socks
2011-02-11, 08:29 PM
Ruroni Kenshin of all things touched on the subject briefly: when weapons get that ridiculously big, there are exactly two ways to swing them: horizontally and vertically. That's it. No thrusts, no slashes, just up to down and side to side. Both are fairly easy to see coming, too.

Short answer for solutions? Treat him as Colossal size for the purposes of penalties to attack rolls against smaller creatures. If that's not enough, impose even heftier penalties. If he complains, remind him that really big swords are really slow and really easy to dodge.

The Rabbler
2011-02-11, 08:29 PM
So can I, play a Titan. :smalltongue:

or use bloodlines and roll around in cheese.

Necro_EX
2011-02-11, 08:30 PM
Well, for starters where the hell is he keeping that thing?

No way he's taking it into any inns with him.
Of course, considering what all would be required for that perhaps the party has access to some extra-dimensional means of storage, but that in its own could be an issue.

Lateral
2011-02-11, 08:30 PM
or use bloodlines and roll around in cheese.

Bingo, sah!

Ilmryn
2011-02-11, 08:31 PM
Also, how long would a colossal fullbade be? 30 ft? 40 ft? 50? Even longer?

dsmiles
2011-02-11, 08:32 PM
Well, for starters where the hell is he keeping that thing?You don't want to know. :smalleek:

IronWilliam
2011-02-11, 08:35 PM
Wow, a whole thread just for my oversized weapon shenanigans!
I'm also considering just wielding a gargantuan full blade in EACH HAND and using two-weapon fighting. I play a paladin, so that would also mean I could wield two gargantuan lances if I took the TWF feats.

Ilmryn
2011-02-11, 08:35 PM
Well, for starters where the hell is he keeping that thing?

No way he's taking it into any inns with him.
Of course, considering what all would be required for that perhaps the party has access to some extra-dimensional means of storage, but that in its own could be an issue.

I think he said something about a "scabbard of holding."

AslanCross
2011-02-11, 08:36 PM
actually, I believe the weight of a fullblade was 16 lbs., doubling your calculation.

See, this is why a sizing weapon property should be applied. ease of transport.

It's 23 lbs in the Arms and Equipment Guide.

IronWilliam
2011-02-11, 08:38 PM
There is a scabbard that negates the weight of any weapons held in it.

Necro_EX
2011-02-11, 08:39 PM
Wow, a whole thread just for my oversized weapon shenanigans!
I'm also considering just wielding a gargantuan full blade in EACH HAND and using two-weapon fighting. I play a paladin, so that would also mean I could wield two gargantuan lances if I took the TWF feats.

Two giant lances?

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes!

AslanCross
2011-02-11, 08:40 PM
There is a scabbard that negates the weight of any weapons held in it.

Of course, this doesn't really apply when one draws the weapon...

Claudius Maximus
2011-02-11, 08:40 PM
Pretty sure a colossal fullblade would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 75+ feet long. That is just preposterous.

Also, what means are you using to wield a colossal weapon, just out of curiosity?

NichG
2011-02-11, 08:41 PM
If a normal full-blade is 5ft long, a Colossal full blade should be 30ft long.

By the book, it does what it does, which is that it gains a lot of damage on the base damage dice and takes only whatever penalties the wielder has to deal with via their feats and so on.

On the house rule side of things, I'd be tempted to say that all the guy's attacks against medium-sized targets are 90-degree cone AoEs (Reflex DC = 10+to-hit modifier to keep it simple) with a weapon that big, and that he should be considered Squeezing in a hallway less than 10ft wide (being generous here) unless the weapon is brilliant energy and passes through walls or something like that.

Combo it with Sizing and I'd have no problems with him taking it anywhere - it'd just matter when he wanted to fight with it.

Claudius Maximus
2011-02-11, 08:44 PM
If a normal full-blade is 5ft long, a Colossal full blade should be 30ft long.

How do you get that? A fullblade is supposed to be longer than the wielder is tall, and I'm pretty sure a colossal human has been listed at an average of 72 feet.

How they can fit in a 30x30x30 cube is anyone's guess.

IronWilliam
2011-02-11, 08:46 PM
Yes, it's impractial to transport, but it's just so awesome! Plus it would make it practically impossible to impersonate me. And it would also give me some sort of bonus to intimidate...

Ilmryn
2011-02-11, 08:47 PM
Sizing would probably solve many of his problems, he could shrink it in a dungeon and enlarge it on open fields. A medium sized fullblade is "18 inches longer than a greatsword", so probably somewhere in the vicinity of 7-8 feet. 8x16= 128 feet. By raw, he has 5-foot reach :smallconfused:

Edit-His sword would be 128 feet long, weigh 360 pounds, and be incapable of striking foes that are further than 5 feet away. DnD can be absurd at times :smallbiggrin:

Halae
2011-02-11, 08:48 PM
How they can fit in a 30x30x30 cube is anyone's guess.

the same way those crazy half-giants fit in a 5x5x5 square?

HunterOfJello
2011-02-11, 08:49 PM
First of all, a medium Fullblade weighs 23lbs which means that a Gargantuan Fullbade would weigh around 184 lbs. Because of the weight of the weapon, the character would need around 23 strength to hold it without being encumbered.

If we're nice, we can say that this Gargantuan Fullblade is made from the Blue Ice material from Frostburn and therefore weighs half as much as usual, 92lbs. This increases the cost by 500gp (for medium size) and gives +1 enchancement to damage since it's a slashing weapon.

Now we have to consider the fact that a Large weapon costs twice the normal price and therefore, a Gargantuan weapon would cost at least 8 times the normal price to be created. Since a medium sized Blue Ice Fullblade would cost 600gp, this sword will cost at least 4800gp before putting magical enchantments on it. (If we make it out of steel instead of Blue Ice, then it would cost 800gp instead, but would be impossibly heaving to wield.)

Note: Items made from Mithril also weighs half as much as steel, but would be significantly more expensive.

~

SO. If you insist on letting your friend play a medium sized character who uses a Gargantuan Fullbade, then I strongly suggest that the Fullblade be required to be made of Blue Ice to be wielded and cost a minimum of 4800gp before enchantments. This gargantuan weapon would already weight 92 lbs, which is 6 times heavier than the heaviest weapon listed in the PHB, the orc double axe which weights 15lbs.

Also, I in no way condone ignoring the sizing rules which obviously make all of this impossible by the rules and by reality.

Lateral
2011-02-11, 08:50 PM
Sizing would probably solve many of his problems, he could shrink it in a dungeon and enlarge it on open fields. A medium sized fullblade is "18 inches longer than a greatsword", so probably somewhere in the vicinity of 7-8 feet. 8x16= 128 feet. By raw, he has 5-foot reach :smallconfused:

By RAW, you can wield a Gargantuan weapon as long as you have twelve hit dice and a major Titan bloodline. What's your point?

IronWilliam
2011-02-11, 08:52 PM
My character already wears heavy armor, so as long as it's not over my max encumbrance, I don't care. While my normal STR is 16, enlarge person increases my strength, so I already know I could carry a colossal full blade.

Drynwyn
2011-02-11, 08:55 PM
Well, my ruling on reach would be to give him half the reach of a colossal creature.
Also, this is physically unrealistic, but not particularly unbalancing. Why not give in to the madness?

Innis Cabal
2011-02-11, 08:56 PM
It's called Half-Swording...

The sword is colossal. Care to explain where half swording would be a viable tactic in any corridor your going to be going into?

AslanCross
2011-02-11, 08:56 PM
If a normal full-blade is 5ft long, a Colossal full blade should be 30ft long.


A normal greatsword would be almost 6 feet long. The fullblade is a foot and a half longer than a normal greatsword, and as such would be almost 7.5 feet long and weighs 23 lbs. Each size category increase doubles height, so the final multiplier would be x16. For weapons, weight also doubles per size category (strangely enough, it's x8 per size category increase for creatures...).

As such, my calculations put a colossal fullblade at 112 feet long and 368 lbs. Using the x8 multiplier for weight I get about 94,000 lbs or about 47 tons.


How do you get that? A fullblade is supposed to be longer than the wielder is tall, and I'm pretty sure a colossal human has been listed at an average of 72 feet.

How they can fit in a 30x30x30 cube is anyone's guess.

Odd, using 6 feet as a base gives me around 96 feet for a colossal human's height. And yeah, I can see how a colossal (120+ ft) dragon can fit in a 30x30 space (the space only includes its body; the rest of the length is shown by the creature's reach), but not a Colossal (tall) creature.

Claudius Maximus
2011-02-11, 09:01 PM
About the weight. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_cube_law)

Realistically, weight for weapons should multiply by 8 for every doubling of size. Apparently not in D&D though. If you think about it, 3 pounds per foot is pretty low considering how thick the sword is at that point.

(Of course this could all be wrong, since as a classicist I haven't done real math in a dreadfully long time.)


Odd, using 6 feet as a base gives me around 96 feet for a colossal human's height. And yeah, I can see how a colossal (120+ ft) dragon can fit in a 30x30 space (the space only includes its body; the rest of the length is shown by the creature's reach), but not a Colossal (tall) creature.

My math agrees with you. ~96 for the person and 112 for the sword should be right. I guess WotC got something wrong with the 72 ft. figure.

AslanCross
2011-02-11, 09:12 PM
About the weight. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_cube_law)

Realistically, weight for weapons should multiply by 8 for every doubling of size. Apparently not in D&D though. If you think about it, 3 pounds per foot is pretty low considering how thick the sword is at that point.

It's strange, since Enlarge Person does use the Square Cube Law, but weapons only double. :smallsigh: Oh well. With the Square Cube Law, it realistically hits about 47 tons.



I guess WotC got something wrong with the 72 ft. figure.

...I guess one could make a tongue in cheek comment about how that's the least of the things WOTC got wrong.

Anyway, relevant link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds46-Q3LUo4&feature=related (1:10 onwards is most relevant, since that's where the ridiculous swords come in, but the headbanging is hilarious to watc)

Thrudgelmir, the robot in the video, is in the neighborhood of 65 meters tall or about 215 feet. The giant nanomachine crystal sword it uses is about 100 meters long (using the full-scale FMV at the end of the video as basis), or 330 feet. About 1/4 to 1/3 of that length is the weapon's hilt.

The full-power energy version in the last in-game animation stretches all the way up to the atmosphere, making it at least 10 kilometers long. :smallbiggrin:

Magdela
2011-02-11, 09:14 PM
The damage should be considered blunt for the sake of resistances due to it being scale.

Also, strength should play a smaller part in the damage, since it is more gravity pulling the blade down than you swinging it at that point.

Also, you could crush an inn with a sword of that size. Or begin breaking through castles and dungeons if it was a blunt weapon.

Furthermore, there should be tired penalties for wielding such a large blade after so many swings.

AslanCross
2011-02-11, 09:20 PM
The damage should be considered blunt for the sake of resistances due to it being scale.

Also, strength should play a smaller part in the damage, since it is more gravity pulling the blade down than you swinging it at that point.

Also, you could crush an inn with a sword of that size. Or begin breaking through castles and dungeons if it was a blunt weapon.

Furthermore, there should be tired penalties for wielding such a large blade after so many swings.

Crush inns? It's a freaking siege weapon! :smallbiggrin: Smash a wall, and have allied soldiers climb up through the hollow in the blade!

Vknight
2011-02-11, 09:25 PM
Now all you need is to make it a 'Dancing Weapon' and activate it within a castle.

Fox Box Socks
2011-02-11, 09:29 PM
Now all you need is to make it a 'Dancing Weapon' and activate it within a castle.
Sweet zombie Jesus this is a terrifying idea

Vknight
2011-02-11, 09:32 PM
Exactlly!
Think about it this guy walks into the city puts a sword bigger then the walls down then starts running as the sword begins to float.
With 1 of those you could win any war.

Tibbaerrohwen
2011-02-11, 09:43 PM
Exactlly!
Think about it this guy walks into the city puts a sword bigger then the walls down then starts running as the sword begins to float.
With 1 of those you could win any war.

Now I'm very scared. Very very scared.

Could you imagine Whirlwind Attack with a weapon that size? Everything would be obliterated!

I just can't seem to get the crocodile Dundie thing out of my head "You call that a knife? That ain't a knife. This is a knife."


Basically, what he is using is:
-"balanced" weapon enhancement, letting him wield a weapon as if it was a size smaller
-strongarm bracers, which let him use weapons one size larger
-monkey grip
-enlarge person

Are there rules for how the length and weight of weapons increase when they go up a size category beyond large? The only thing I could find in the srd was that weight doubles for large.

Edit-A colossal fullblade would do 8d8 damage, which is pretty hefty, considering he only takes -2 to hit and uses two feats.

I love the idea, but I'd been lead to believe that Monkey Grip and Strongarm Bracers didn't stack. I believe the argument was that they both acted with respect to the base size of the creature.

Out of curiosity, where is the balanced weapon property from?

Did you think of stacking it with the Heavy Weapon property form Forgotten Realms?

Claudius Maximus
2011-02-11, 09:47 PM
Monkey Grip, Strongarm Bracers, and Powerful Build all won't stack with one another.

Ilmryn
2011-02-11, 09:48 PM
I'm not 100% clear on the heavy weapon rules, but I think they make the weapon require a ewp feat for heaviness, but since the fullblade already requires ewp, I don't think it works.

DnD rules aside, could anyone figure out the real world math for a 100 foot sword, assuming a steel weapon, and that it is as light as it could possibly be while still being able to take some serious fighting without bending or breaking?

Vknight
2011-02-11, 09:49 PM
Balanced weapon just treats the weapon for weight and carrying as 1size less (may also effect enchanting it or being made of special material)
Monkey Grip is a feat which treats the weilder 1size larger for weapon wielding purposes.
Strongarm Bracers let the wielder wield the weapon and does not treat them as the larger size. (I believe, I'm not exactlly sure)

"You call that a city wide destructive capability? Thats not a city wide destructive capability. This is a city wide destructive capability."

Crossblade
2011-02-11, 09:54 PM
Everyone also seems to be missing the ENLARGE PERSON spell. So the weapon will only be HUGE SIZE when the PC is carrying it around, unless the Enlarge Person spell is permanent. So size and weight calculations are twice (?) as high as they should be.

Tibbaerrohwen
2011-02-11, 09:56 PM
I'm not 100% clear on the heavy weapon rules, but I think they make the weapon require a ewp feat for heaviness, but since the fullblade already requires ewp, I don't think it works.

DnD rules aside, could anyone figure out the real world math for a 100 foot sword, assuming a steel weapon, and that it is as light as it could possibly be while still being able to take some serious fighting without bending or breaking?

It does take EWP, but you don't need it for a regular Fullblade then. If you take EWP Heavy Fullblade then you're good to go and it's a size larger, which I think would bump you back to where you wanted to be seeing as the Monkey Grip and Strongarms won't stack.

Does your player have Enlarge Person at will? It's suck to have a weapon fitted for you at that size and get stuck in a fight with Dispel Magic; stuck with a sword you can't use.

I'm still curious about Balanced Weapon. Where is it from?

true_shinken
2011-02-11, 10:05 PM
It does take EWP, but you don't need it for a regular Fullblade then. If you take EWP Heavy Fullblade then you're good to go and it's a size larger, which I think would bump you back to where you wanted to be seeing as the Monkey Grip and Strongarms won't stack.
It would also weight twice as much...

NichG
2011-02-11, 10:10 PM
As such, my calculations put a colossal fullblade at 112 feet long and 368 lbs. Using the x8 multiplier for weight I get about 94,000 lbs or about 47 tons.


I stand corrected! So yeah, don't try wielding this without a Strength score in the 50s.

herrhauptmann
2011-02-11, 10:12 PM
It does take EWP, but you don't need it for a regular Fullblade then. If you take EWP Heavy Fullblade then you're good to go and it's a size larger, which I think would bump you back to where you wanted to be seeing as the Monkey Grip and Strongarms won't stack.

Does your player have Enlarge Person at will? It's suck to have a weapon fitted for you at that size and get stuck in a fight with Dispel Magic; stuck with a sword you can't use.

I'm still curious about Balanced Weapon. Where is it from?

I once would've sworn it was in Magic of Faerun with the 'Heavy' weapons, but few months ago suddenly couldn't find it. I even made a thread asking about it... Anyway, a gold or platinum weapon is the same physical size as it's normal counterparts, just twice as heavy, and deals damage as if it were one size larger. The heavy property required an extra feat to use, or the balanced enchantment.

And you're totally right about suddenly being too small to wield a weapon because your permanent Enlarge got dispelled or you got disarmed. Think about it: You get enlarged, all your equipment changes size. It becomes permanent, all your equipment stays your size. Unless you remove it, drop it, or throw it, then your equipment goes back to normal. Nothing in the spell says that things you pick back up get increased again, so you adventure and buy new equipment sized to your new body. (It's entirely new as well, if you take your armor off to get upgraded, you can't wear it again) A few levels go by, then you get hit with a dispel and there goes your enlarge person. Voila: Normal human, trying to wear clothes/armor and use weapons sized for an ogre. :)

Regarding everything else, having a blade 70feet long doesn't actually have an effect on you reach. Thus the hilarity of titan-blooded pixies.
And DM: I really think you should've done a sanity check on the players full-blade before he started throwing all these extra things onto it. If only because the weapon size categories changed between rulesets. (Yes, this is a violation of the rule: Anything 3.0 that wasn't updated is still valid in 3.5.)

sorry if my post rambles a bit. I went back to add stuff, and the flow has gotten lost.

The Rabbler
2011-02-11, 10:13 PM
By RAW, you can wield a Gargantuan weapon as long as you have twelve hit dice and a major Titan bloodline. What's your point?

Just because I feel like being pedantic, by RAW, the major titan bloodline ability allows you to specifically wield gargantuan warhammers. That's it. Not all gargantuan weapons, just gargantuan warhammers.

and now let's just forget that bloodlines were ever brought up. or written at all.

Vknight
2011-02-11, 10:16 PM
Shouldn't we be trying to figure out how to actually accomplish this so we can cause this beautiful destruction.

Pechvarry
2011-02-11, 10:24 PM
-definitely make the weapon(s) adamantine. Dungeon walls giving you problems? Not anymore!
cave-in prevention sold separately

This becomes particularly amazing with the Dancing enhancement idea.

-There are rules somewhere for making weapons considered 1 size category higher (that requires you to find your own method of wielding said large weapon). I think it was Gold from one of the 3.0 faerun books. Anyway, something like this can get you a smaller weapon that is mechanically heavier.

-Trade in those Paladin levels for Crusader (ToB) levels and you can go for Aura of Chaos (reroll all dice that come up max, indefinitely). Fantastic for anyone rolling lots of dice!

The Rabbler
2011-02-11, 10:28 PM
-Trade in those Paladin levels for Crusader (ToB) levels and you can go for Aura of Chaos (reroll all dice that come up max, indefinitely). Fantastic for anyone rolling lots of dice!

or someone rolling one very low dice. :smallamused:

herrhauptmann
2011-02-11, 10:30 PM
Oh yes, your player would be better served, and more legal if he did the following.
--Half minotaur (best template for getting a size boost ever) =large weapon and char. Weapon weight doubles compared to medium sized weapon in PHB
--7 or 9 levels of Psy Warrior + Psi Expansion for 2 size boosts. = gargantuan weapon and char. Weapon weight doubles
--Strong arm bracers = gargantuan char, colossal weapon. Weapon weight doubles
--Gold or Platinum weapon + balanced enchantment = gargantuan char, colossal+ weapon. Weapon weight doubles.

Now he's not dependent on others giving him buff spells or casting permanency. If he gets dispelled, he can just remanifest Psi Expansion, or wait for the dispel to end on his 'balanced' weapon. He's not totally screwed like when his permanent Enlarge Person gets dispelled.

And his chosen weapon should be the greathammer. Either the awesome minotaur greathammer, or the better defined goliath greathammer. 3d6 damage has a higher average than 2d8 too. Either hammer weighs 30 pounds for medium characters. (60-large, 120 huge, 240 garg, 480 colossal...)
A better way to stack all those weight doublings is with D&D math, where two doublings equals a triple. A double and a triple equals a quadruple. And so on.

Vknight
2011-02-11, 10:36 PM
This this is all so beautiful.

IronWilliam
2011-02-12, 10:48 AM
I think we can agree a permanent enlarge person is not the way to go. There is a magic item, I think it's called a belt of growth or enlarging, that let's me use enlarge person x/day. I don't want to use templates, since I'm already using my character. The strongarm Bracers are good, and monkey grip was suggested by Ilmryn, so I don't know exactly how it works. The balanced weapon enchatment is poorly worded, just saying it lets a wielder one size catagory smaller wield the weapon in one hand. By RAW, this means I could wield a balanced fullblade in one hand with no other requirements. (balanced enchantment is from the arms and eqipment guide.) Ilmyrn, my DM, and I decided it would just let me wield a weapon one size catagory larger. We decided it would stack with the strongarm bracers as well, since ballanced affects the weapon, and the bracers affect me. Thanks to everyone for helping me figure this out!

Vknight
2011-02-12, 11:19 AM
You my friend must get Dancing Weapon at one point. Or at the very begining. Let the Dm forget about it.

Then when you got to raid that castle.
"I activate the Dancing Weapon Property of my Sword."

term1nally s1ck
2011-02-12, 11:20 AM
Nope, that's the old 3.0 convention of giving weapons a different size scale from creatures. I think using that convention, greatswords were large-sized. That doesn't mean Landsknechts were going around wielding 9-foot swords. :smalleek:

The Fullblade is described as 18 inches longer than a greatsword. Assuming that the greatsword is as long as and weighs as described in the above article:

,

The D&D greatsword weighs 8 lbs and is approximately 5.8 feet long. That means the medium Fullblade would be 7.3 feet long. The book describes it as weighing 23 lbs. A colossal fullblade would weigh 23 x 16 or 368 lbs (real-world values such as weights use real math rules and not D&D's multiplier stacking rules). Since the size categories pretty much double the creature's height, we can assume the weapon also doubles in length as it goes up by size category.

Note that a fullblade is longer than average humans (assume 6 feet) are tall. Thus a colossal fullblade would be longer than the average colossal (tall) creature is, assuming a Mountain Giant. Note that the minimum height for colossal is 64 feet.

The fullblade would be over 112 feet long. It'd be very thin, though, to weigh only 368 lbs. :P I think someone adept at materials engineering would be able to answer this question more realistically.

Not this. Colossal is 6x normal height, not 16x. They go from 5'x5'x5' to 30'x30'x30' for people. It would be 45' long, but the weight calculation is right (doubles for every size increase, as written in core.)

For every size increase, the length increases by 7.3' and the weight doubles.


Optimisation-wise, grab Sizing on it, making it easier to carry around in smaller spaces, get Aura of Chaos stance somehow, ways to get crits are always good with high weapon damage, and the more extra size increases you can find the more effective it is.

Claudius Maximus
2011-02-12, 01:31 PM
Not this. Colossal is 6x normal height, not 16x. They go from 5'x5'x5' to 30'x30'x30' for people. It would be 45' long, but the weight calculation is right (doubles for every size increase, as written in core.)

For every size increase, the length increases by 7.3' and the weight doubles.

The lowest end of medium size is 4 feet. The lowest end of colossal size is 64 feet. Looks like x16 to me.

term1nally s1ck
2011-02-12, 04:23 PM
I see colossal creatures taking up 30' cubes...where do you get the 64' from?

Claudius Maximus
2011-02-12, 04:54 PM
The size chart (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm#bigandLittleCreatu resInCombat) has colossal height starting at 64 feet. As we can see, the doublings are cumulative as size categories go up.

Also of note, the Giant Size spell makes the caster 72 feet tall when colossal, which roughly agrees with the chart up there.

Obviously the space/reach doesn't agree with that very well, but that's WotC for you.

Vknight
2011-02-12, 04:59 PM
Do we really care? Were trying to actively make a sword that descimates cities on command.

ericgrau
2011-02-12, 05:22 PM
For the realistic weight it's roughly proportional to length squared rather than length cubed. That's all you need to maintain rigidity. The smiths would need to consult an engineer to keep the weight that low rather than length cubed though. But even without engineers any weapon-smith knows a couple basic weight reduction techniques like fluting. So basically x4 per size category or 256 (4^4) times the normal weight.

EDIT: Heck while we're at it make it mithril. That will cut the weight in 1/4th. Not 1/2 because it only needs half as much material to support its own weight now. Tapering the blade might bring it down another 5-10%. Now it's only around x60 a medium fullblade's weight.

term1nally s1ck
2011-02-12, 05:32 PM
...What. That...makes no sense at all. Guh.

Yeah, I was wrong, it is 16x. How exactly a 128' tall person fits inside a 30' cube I have no idea. Cortortionism is a bonus of size categories, apparently.

AslanCross
2011-02-12, 06:00 PM
...What. That...makes no sense at all. Guh.

Yeah, I was wrong, it is 16x. How exactly a 128' tall person fits inside a 30' cube I have no idea. Cortortionism is a bonus of size categories, apparently.

We did mention how weird it was. It seems that in terms of a long creature (say, a dragon), the space is only occupied by a creature's center of mass (my gargantuan dragon miniatures definitely have some dimensions that exceed 20x20, but their four legs fit snugly in the space), while the neck, tail and wings can definitely exceed the space. I think the estimate was that a Gargantuan blue dragon would be approximately 70 feet long and have a comparable wingspan.

As for Tall creatures---no idea. Many colossal creatures are described as being much larger than a 30x30 foot square.

What I'm sure of is that a creature's space is not actually a cube. An 8-foot bugbear (or for that matter, a 6' human) is still Medium. A 14' giant is still Large, despite having a 10x10 base. (Note that the abstraction of space is a combat rule, so we assume that the creatures are occupying their space in their "fighting stance." As such, a 40-foot behir is actually rearing up, a 24' storm giant might be crouched slightly, etc.)

term1nally s1ck
2011-02-12, 06:21 PM
and a 128' long tarrasque can fight inside a much much smaller room at no penalty.

mint
2011-02-12, 06:53 PM
In one campaign I played in, one of the players did this, though not quite as extreme.
As he gained levels his sword kept growing until eventually we had to start asking questions about how he could fight using it. I think he was about to go from huge to gargantuan. The DM judged that his sword no longer gained actual size but gained "air pressure". Which was kinda silly. But less so than carrying around a really sharp tower.

Vknight
2011-02-12, 07:45 PM
So we want that really sharp tower.

"Oh look its the 'Tomb of Horrors', hey Tom put your sword in there!"
*Tom does as told then activates sword*
"So we completed the tomb are reward is?"

IronWilliam
2011-02-12, 10:44 PM
Don't give up! We will create a colossal sword that decimates cities on command!

Vknight
2011-02-13, 10:32 AM
I won't I believe, I believe!