Collossal sized Bastard Sword??

[DefKab]

So, lets say I have an Orc cleric fighter. Lets say he has the exotic weapon proficiency for a Bastard sword, which lets him treat a bastard sword as a One handed weapon. The rules for larger than normal weapons state that you can treat it as a size larger at a-2, so a Large bastard sword would be a two handed weapon that has a -2 to hit and does 2d8.
Easy enough, right?
Now lets give the Orc Monkey Grip. That lets him use a size larger as normal, with a -2. That means his large bastard sword is now a one handed weapon that does 2d8 with a -2 to hit. Right?

Even more difficult, since he now can use a category bigger, he grabs a huge bastard sword. Monkey grip makes large a one handed, so a huge becomes a two handed weapon that does 3d8! The question is, would he have a -2 to hit, since the malus is from having an oversized weapon? Or does monkey grip give you an unnamed malus, and it will stack with the oversized malus for a total of -4 to hit?

Lets take it even further. He grabs himself a GARGANTUAN bastard sword! Well. Obviously he cant weild it, its one size category to big.
But wait! He's a cleric! With the Strength domain! He casts Enlarge Person, so now he's large. He can weild his gargantuan bastard sword now, right? Whether at a -2 or -4 he's still doing 4d8 damage.

But he's not done. His massive weapon will grow! He decides to dump his life savings into a permanancy spell of Enlarge Weapon! That means the gargantuan weapon grows to Collossal Size! And it can be used as a gargantuan weapon, per the rules! Thats a massive 6d8 weapon he's swinging around.
However. The spell Enlarge Weapon says that it REMOVES the penalties from oversized weapons. Removes... Does that mean the -2 or -4 he was taking is removed, too, since it is caused by an oversized weapon? Would there be no penalty for me to throw around this massive symbol of power?
Even more importantly, I'm a 14 foot tall Orc wielding a 58 foot long sword. What are the implications of that? Do I get reach?

This is an actual character idea I'm using. He's not really effective, but tell me, if you were my DM, how would you handle my collossal beat stick?

[Emperor Ing]

If I were your GM I'd have a good laugh and TOTALLY allow it. :smallbiggrin:
Your funeral. :smallamused:

[Flickerdart]

You get no reach (beyond what you got from Enlarge Person) and you just wasted a ton of resources on getting a couple of extra dice to-hit. Enlarge Weapon does remove the penalty altogether, but.

You've sunk 2 feats, 1 spell every time you want to use it (since you can't use the sword at all without being Enlarged), a ton of cash and a house rule (since Enlarge Weapon is not on the default Permanency list) to deal an extra 5d8 damage. A d8 averages 4.5, so you're only doing 22.5 extra damage. Compared to what Clerics can normally do that's not really a huge deal.

Meanwhile the Wizard takes thirty of your colossal swords and throws them all at the opponents in a big ol' heap, dealing full damage for each one.

[DefKab]

You get no reach (beyond what you got from Enlarge Person) and you just wasted a ton of resources on getting a couple of extra dice to-hit. Enlarge Weapon does remove the penalty altogether, but.

You've sunk 2 feats, 1 spell every time you want to use it (since you can't use the sword at all without being Enlarged), a ton of cash and a house rule (since Enlarge Weapon is not on the default Permanency list) to deal an extra 5d8 damage. A d8 averages 4.5, so you're only doing 22.5 extra damage. Compared to what Clerics can normally do that's not really a huge deal.

Meanwhile the Wizard takes thirty of your colossal swords and throws them all at the opponents in a big ol' heap, dealing full damage for each one.

Hey... If you wanted to rain on my parade, you could've just mentioned that a gargantuan sword weighs some 3072 pounds and I'd have to have a 30 strength to use it, but thats not the point. The point isnt whats best, the point is that I can, and it amuses me to no end.
And as far as permenant Enlarge Weapon goes, Enlarge Person is on the list, so, why not?

[Spuddles]

Wtf is a malus

[TuggyNE]

Hey... If you wanted to rain on my parade, you could've just mentioned that a gargantuan sword weighs some 3072 pounds and I'd have to have a 30 strength to use it, but thats not the point. The point isnt whats best, the point is that I can, and it amuses me to no end.
And as far as permenant Enlarge Weapon goes, Enlarge Person is on the list, so, why not?

A reasonable houserule, but Permanency sadly is not very extensible by default.

I remember a thread a while back on expanding the default list; it mentioned that no one really bothered to mark any splatbook spells as Permanency-compatible.


Wtf is a malus

I assume the opposite of a bonus.

[Jodah]

I heartily support with this, would allow you to do it myself, and have had a DM okay it in the past. Only difference was that I picked either half giant or goliath (don't remember which) to gain powerful build so as to prevent the need for enlarge person. I also used sizing on the blade as well so that I could draw the blade at medium size [small + enlarge] (move) size it (swift) and attack [standard] with iaijutsu focus.

(I think that we had to houserule against a clause stating that PB didn't stack with MG, but my memory is a bit hazy.)

[Ashtagon]

Monkey Grip allows you to use a weapon that is one size larger than you. No exceptions.

Why yes, I do believe fighters can't have nice things. Thanks for saying so :smallfrown:

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Did Monkey Grip get changed at some point? Originally, it only applied to one handed weapons; which makes sense when you consider the image the name brings to mind. Other than that it's a cool concept the only problem is that it isn't truly powerful compared to a lot of things, but the big numbers will make a lot of DMs get the nerf bat out.

For awhile I've had a mental image of a Barbarian with the mechanic of the Goliath ACF that drags around a Gargantuan Sword he claims he "won in an arm wrestling match" and wields it not just effortlessly, but acrobatically while enraged counting it as a masterwork item for jump and tumble.

[Urpriest]

Wtf is a malus

A sign of a non-English speaker, generally.

[Igneel]

A sign of a non-English speaker, generally.

That or he's talking about apples (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malus)?


I heartily support with this, would allow you to do it myself, and have had a DM okay it in the past. Only difference was that I picked either half giant or goliath (don't remember which) to gain powerful build so as to prevent the need for enlarge person. I also used sizing on the blade as well so that I could draw the blade at medium size [small + enlarge] (move) size it (swift) and attack [standard] with iaijutsu focus.

(I think that we had to houserule against a clause stating that PB didn't stack with MG, but my memory is a bit hazy.)

This is generally the route I go. Goliath or Half-Giant with a Sizing [MIC, +5k gp to weapon price] to get a weapon that can go anywhere from Fine sized to Colossal in a Swift action.

For more fun, get flight and enchant said weapon with Returning, Colossal size it up while flying and 'drop/throw' it. :smalltongue:

Morphing [MIC, +1 weapon ability] adds flexibility

[Morph Bark]

Enlarge Weapon does not stack with Enlarge Person: "This spell has no effect on a weapon that is already increased in size by some other effect (such as being held by a creature affected by enlarge person)."

The weight of a weapon increases by 2 for every size category larger it gets, but Enlarge Person increases its weight by 8. Thus, your Gargantuan bastard sword would weigh 192 lbs.

[Deophaun]

Don't forget strongarm bracers.

Enlarge Weapon does not stack with Enlarge Person: "This spell has no effect on a weapon that is already increased in size by some other effect (such as being held by a creature affected by enlarge person)."
But it might work if the character were enlarged, then he picked up the Gargantuan weapon, then enlarge weapon was used to bring it to Colossal, as enlarge person does not say that items later picked up by the target grow in size.

Of course, enlarge weapon obviates the need for all other tricks as long as you start with a Gargantuan weapon in the first place.

[Morph Bark]

Of course, enlarge weapon obviates the need for all other tricks as long as you start with a Gargantuan weapon in the first place.

This is a very good point. Now I kind of feel like playing a Pixie Factotum/Master of Masks with a Gargantuan goliath greathammer enlarged to Colossal, or a Halfling with an ubermount with a lance like that.

[Alienist]

A sign of a non-English speaker, generally.

Or someone who knows their Latin perhaps?

[Worira]

Latin is not, in point of fact, English.

[Yorrin]

I'd allow it. But every female NPC in the campaign would be making snide jokes about "compensating" and you'd probably run into all sorts of foes that a bigger beat-stick can't deal with. Also- the first time you had to walk through a small door and leave your blade behind I'd have someone try to steal it- mostly for RP purposes, as I'd provide plenty of opportunities to regain it and/or another massive weapon. But as a general rule of thumb visibly standing out like that is often more of a hindrance than a help in roleplaying. Especially when the mechanical benefits are just an extra few d6s of damage (a Warlock at equivalent level will be laughing as he does as much damage as you with a ranged touch attack).

[DefKab]

Enlarge Weapon does not stack with Enlarge Person: "This spell has no effect on a weapon that is already increased in size by some other effect (such as being held by a creature affected by enlarge person)."

The weight of a weapon increases by 2 for every size category larger it gets, but Enlarge Person increases its weight by 8. Thus, your Gargantuan bastard sword would weigh 192 lbs.

As previously stated, the weapon was enlarged before hand...

And for the weight, while it may be RAW, it doesn't make an sense. An object that is resized by a factor of two has its weight increased by a factor of 8. There go its x8 for large, x8 for huge, x8 for gargantuan... the 6LB weapon is already at 3072, and x8 for Collossal, which is some 22000 pound... At large size, my strength would have to be a 30 (1700 Heavy load x2 for large size) to wield a gargantuan sword, and a 45! to wield a collossal sword... It's not possible. :smalltongue:

[DefKab]

I'd allow it. But every female NPC in the campaign would be making snide jokes about "compensating" and you'd probably run into all sorts of foes that a bigger beat-stick can't deal with. Also- the first time you had to walk through a small door and leave your blade behind I'd have someone try to steal it- mostly for RP purposes, as I'd provide plenty of opportunities to regain it and/or another massive weapon. But as a general rule of thumb visibly standing out like that is often more of a hindrance than a help in roleplaying. Especially when the mechanical benefits are just an extra few d6s of damage (a Warlock at equivalent level will be laughing as he does as much damage as you with a ranged touch attack).

So what your saying is that if I build this character for roleplaying purposes (Because he's OBVIOUSLY not optimized, and therefore not for mechanical purposes), you'll instead punish me in both roleplay aspect (I cant bring it anywhere, and it gets stolen (lolHOW?)) and the mechanical (be providing me with nothing a beatstick can handle)? That's rough... :smalltongue:

[Yorrin]

So what your saying is that if I build this character for roleplaying purposes (Because he's OBVIOUSLY not optimized, and therefore not for mechanical purposes), you'll instead punish me in both roleplay aspect (I cant bring it anywhere, and it gets stolen (lolHOW?)) and the mechanical (be providing me with nothing a beatstick can handle)? That's rough... :smalltongue:

:smalltongue:

I assure you that it would be all good natured and clearly for the purpose of humor. Because honestly- what use is a character like this other than for the comic relief?

[Morph Bark]

As previously stated, the weapon was enlarged before hand...

And for the weight, while it may be RAW, it doesn't make an sense. An object that is resized by a factor of two has its weight increased by a factor of 8. There go its x8 for large, x8 for huge, x8 for gargantuan... the 6LB weapon is already at 3072, and x8 for Collossal, which is some 22000 pound... At large size, my strength would have to be a 30 (1700 Heavy load x2 for large size) to wield a gargantuan sword, and a 45! to wield a collossal sword... It's not possible. :smalltongue:

If all of its dimensions were increased by 2, then yes. However, a Small longsword is prettymuch the same as a Medium shortsword and a Medium shortsword is not half the size of a longsword in all three dimensions. It is maybe only a little less thick and a little less broad. The same goes for making things bigger. A Medium shortsword is prettymuch the same as a Large dagger, but a dagger isn't one-fourth the thickness and broadness of a longsword.

If you however want to insist on using a multiplication of 8 per size category and wield weapons nonsensically thick and broad and thus requiring a very high Strength score to even lift it, go ahead.

[DefKab]

If all of its dimensions were increased by 2, then yes. However, a Small longsword is prettymuch the same as a Medium shortsword and a Medium shortsword is not half the size of a longsword in all three dimensions. It is maybe only a little less thick and a little less broad. The same goes for making things bigger. A Medium shortsword is prettymuch the same as a Large dagger, but a dagger isn't one-fourth the thickness and broadness of a longsword.

If you however want to insist on using a multiplication of 8 per size category and wield weapons nonsensically thick and broad and thus requiring a very high Strength score to even lift it, go ahead.

It's not nonsensically think... If increasing a size category means doubling in size (Meaning, height and width), then a sword based on the size of your body (As most swords are) would double with you. As you get larger, you have more material to reinforce your weapon against the increased force with which you swing. Meaning that it will probably thicken to twice its original size to avoid snapping. Lets take a 6 foot tall human. He grows to large, putting him at twelve. Huge makes him 24, and gargantuan makes him 48 feet. His sword, originally 3.5 feet long, grows to 7, then 14, then 28 feet, but is still only an inch thick...? No, it'll get thicker so it doesnt snap. 1 Inch, to 2, to 4, to 8 inches thick. That means each time it grew, it doubled in size. Height, width, and depth, which means its mass increased by a factor of 8 each time. Any less, and it wouldn't be an exact resize.

[danzibr]

Wtf is a malus

I assume the opposite of a bonus.

A sign of a non-English speaker, generally.
I'm a native English speaker and I sometimes use the word malus, but rarely. I also sometimes use contra. Only when I'm being silly though.

[gallagher]

dip a level of barb and be a goliath so you can go large for raging. that takes one less turn, so now you can do it with one spell and one feat

instea of monkey grip, use strongarm bracers. they do the same thing and i believe without the penalty. regardless, you now have an extra feat to play with.

instead of one feat and two spells (thus, two turns) you now do it in one turn, no feat requirement, for +1 LA.

I do not recall if going large through raging is any more advantageous than the enlarge person spell. it may only go +2str -2dex instead of a natural bonus, but its still a full turn left to go large.

and while hte average die on a d8 isnt much, make it keen and you can crit more, and you are obviously playing this for the fun of it and not to optimize, so i say go with it

[Venusaur]

Also- the first time you had to walk through a small door and leave your blade behind I'd have someone try to steal it.
Steal it? Someone said that the sword weighs 3,000 pounds. You would need 30
strength to wield it, and anyone who can lift it probably has something better to do than steal swords.

[Yorrin]

Steal it? Someone said that the sword weighs 3,000 pounds. You would need 30
strength to wield it, and anyone who can lift it probably has something better to do than steal swords.

Imagine a whole tribe of Orcs trying to lift the thing. Seems like something Orcs would do. With enough of them working together they'd at least be able to drag it, and the sounds of them trying to drag it away would likely alert the PCs, which would make for a humorous encounter.

[Curmudgeon]

The weight of a weapon increases by 2 for every size category larger it gets, but ...
Where did you get that idea?
Weight figures are for Medium weapons. A Small weapon weighs half as much, and a Large weapon weighs twice as much. There's no specific D&D rule specifying weapon weight changes outside the Small - Large range. Instead, we've got these rules:
This section on world-building assumes that your campaign is set in a fairly realistic world. That is to say that while wizards cast spells, deities channel power to clerics, and dragons raze villages, the world is round, the laws of physics are applicable, and most people act like real people.
When applying multipliers to real-world values (such as weight or distance), normal rules of math apply instead. A creature whose size doubles (thus multiplying its weight by 8) and then is turned to stone (which would multiply its weight by a factor of roughly 3) now weighs about 24 times normal, not 10 times normal. Outside of the Small - Large range, each size step doubles length and increases weight by a factor of 8.

This gives us bastard sword weights as follows:

Medium: 6 lbs.
Large: 12 lbs.
Huge: 96 lbs.
Gargantuan: 768 lbs.
Colossal: 6144 lbs.

[Answerer]

Curmudgeon: non sequitur. (let's get more Latin in this thread!)

First, it states that the rules of physics apply unless otherwise noted. Second, it states that with real world values, you use normal multiplication. Third, it says that when you double the size of a creature, its weight is multiplied by 8.

None of these says anything about changing the size of an object, and it is not reasonable to assume (as others have pointed out) that a weapon is twice as large in every dimension as a weapon that is a size category smaller.

The actual RAW here is that you'd have to go out, and figure out the dimensions of a bastard sword designed for a 64+ ft. tall humanoid, and then use the weight of that (relative to the weight of an actual bastard sword made for a real human being, I suppose).

[Morph Bark]

Where did you get that idea? There's no specific D&D rule specifying weapon weight changes outside the Small - Large range. Instead, we've got these rules: Outside of the Small - Large range, each size step doubles length and increases weight by a factor of 8.

This gives us bastard sword weights as follows:

Medium: 6 lbs.
Large: 12 lbs.
Huge: 96 lbs.
Gargantuan: 768 lbs.
Colossal: 6144 lbs.

Ahuh. I guess due to it not saying anything about the Large-to-Huge increase or above specifically I just assumed the same hold true there as it did for the Medium-to-Large and Small-to-Medium increases.

This means you'll need a Str score of 45 to lift a Colossal bastard sword, and then it would still be a heavy load for you.


Imagine a whole tribe of Orcs trying to lift the thing. Seems like something Orcs would do. With enough of them working together they'd at least be able to drag it, and the sounds of them trying to drag it away would likely alert the PCs, which would make for a humorous encounter.

Of course! They need more dakka!

[Curmudgeon]

First, it states that the rules of physics apply unless otherwise noted. ... Third, it says that when you double the size of a creature, its weight is multiplied by 8.

None of these says anything about changing the size of an object, and it is not reasonable to assume (as others have pointed out) that a weapon is twice as large in every dimension as a weapon that is a size category smaller.
As a counterpoint, it is not reasonable to assume that when you double the size of a creature its weight is multiplied by only 8. The problem is the square/cube rule, i.e., the weight goes up as the cube of the dimension (x8) but the cross-sectional area (bone strength, muscle thickness, & c.) goes up only as the square of the dimension (x4). A Humanoid doubled in height would need to be much heavier than 8x in order to support its own weight. Imagine a mouse increased in scale to be the size of an elephant: that mouse would immediately shatter its spindly legs, then quickly suffocate as its fragile ribs collapsed and its lungs deflated. Elephants have massively thick legs specifically to be able to hold up their heavy torsos. A 2-legged 12' tall Humanoid would need much thicker legs, and other parts of this Humanoid's structure would need to be comparatively massive.

[Answerer]

As a counterpoint, it is not reasonable to assume that when you double the size of a creature its weight is multiplied by only 8. The problem is the square/cube rule, i.e., the weight goes up as the cube of the dimension (x8) but the cross-sectional area (bone strength, muscle thickness, & c.) goes up only as the square of the dimension (x4). A Humanoid doubled in height would need to be much heavier than 8x in order to support its own weight. Imagine a mouse increased in scale to be the size of an elephant: that mouse would immediately shatter its spindly legs, then quickly suffocate as its fragile ribs collapsed and its lungs deflated. Elephants have massively thick legs specifically to be able to hold up their heavy torsos. A 2-legged 12' tall Humanoid would need much thicker legs, and other parts of this Humanoid's structure would need to be comparatively massive.
I agree, it's not reasonable.

However, by RAW, creatures have a specific exception from the "as in the real world" clause. Objects don't.

[Crasical]

I remember a build I submitted for a game that used the ghost template with the TK special quality, letting them 'swing' their Colossal Platinum Greatsword every 1d4 rounds, even though they couldn't wield it normally.

Also, I'm not sure that 'But a wizard would do it better!' is really ever a valid commentary on a build, given how many people are convinced that it's true in absolutely every circumstance. Even when the build is for a wizard, a SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT wizard does it even better than that.

[Occasional Sage]

RP question: what orcish god would be ok with their cleric using not-their-favored-weapon?

[Answerer]

I'm pretty sure as long as it maims, crushes, eviscerates, or otherwise brutally murders the opposition, an Orcish god should be fine with it.

[ericgrau]

You don't need to buy a sword 1 step higher for enlarge person because enlarge person already enlarges the weapon. That also means you can still wield the weapon before casting enlarge person.

Having a weapon too heavy to wield is a real possibility, but a high strength score can also hold an obscene amount of weight. Even assuming 6144 lbs. a strength of 35 could manage it (33 before enlarge person). Make it mithril for 3072 lbs and you only need 30 strength (28 before enlarge person).

Enlarge person does certainly increase your equipment weight by a factor of 8 since it enlarges them equally in all dimensions. And the rules do half/double weapon weights for small and large creatures. For a hand forged huge weapon, however, it is not reasonable to assume that the weight increases by a factor of 8 any more than it is reasonable to assume that the weight increases by a factor of 2. Heck, the second might be a more reasonable guess. It is not a matter of physics to assume the weapon is scaled up equally in all dimensions when a larger weapon is constructed. Let's say I have a fluted weapon constructed similar to an I-beam (the flute makes the middle thin) and I double its length. If I double the width by pushing the bulk of the material towards the edges rather than adding more material, I can reduce the stress back to what it was in the smaller weapon. So overall the weight doubles from the increase in length. This might become impractical at some point, with the middle too thin and long to hold the two edges together without crumpling, so the actual weight increase is probably a little more than double. But it is with absolute certainty nowhere near 8 times as heavy. That would be a horribly inefficient and dumb way for a blacksmith to make a blade.

If I were to toss out a guess I might say that weapon weight triples every size category, but without an official answer we can only guess. If we go with the pattern from the 3.0 arms and equipment guide, which said +50% for every size category, we might assume in 3.5 that it is likewise double for every size category, but who knows.