double bladed bastard sword

[kingsolomon]

double bladed bastard sword the question i could have swore i have seen one in one of my books but now i can't seem to find it so question is there one out there and what book is it in.

[Octopusapult]

Googling it brings us to this post. XD

I don't think I've ever seen one, but I've seen double scimitars in Eberron. Could that have been what you were thinking?

[NotScaryBats]

By double bladed do you mean both sides of the blade have a cutting surface (unlike, say, a katana) or do you mean a hilt with a blade coming out of each side?

[Greenish]

I don't recall one either, but if regular double bladed sword is too small for you, you could get Powerful Build/Monkey Grip/Strongarm Bracers and wield a large one for 2d6/2d6.

Then again, there are double spears, double scimitars, double axes, double khopeshes…

[kingsolomon]

Playing a dwarf and Dm calls it one of my racial weapons. Thought a double bladed bastardsword would be sweet.

[Greenish]

Playing a dwarf and Dm calls it one of my racial weapons. Thought a double bladed bastardsword would be sweet.Then ask your DM. Sounds like homebrew, and we can't know what your DM's homebrew is like.

[pbdr]

Don't cut yourself.....

[Octopusapult]

Don't cut yourself.....

Here's hoping they remembered to put a handle on there somewhere.

[Snowbluff]

I don't recall one either, but if regular double bladed sword is too small for you, you could get Powerful Build/Monkey Grip/Strongarm Bracers and wield a large one for 2d6/2d6.

Then again, there are double spears, double scimitars, double axes, double khopeshes…

Do we have double lances? Halfling mounted Paladins are fun, and a want more ways to play with them. :smallsmile:

[White_Drake]

I'm just popping in to say this: good lord, grammar is your friend. Please carry on.

[Octopusapult]

Do we have double lances? Halfling mounted Paladins are fun, and a want more ways to play with them. :smallsmile:

To what end do you use a double lance? I really can't think of a practical application for making a lance like that.

I mean if you're going to have a lance that heavy and long, then why not just add to the existing side for further reach?

[Snowbluff]

To what end do you use a double lance? I really can't think of a practical application for making a lance like that.

I mean if you're going to have a lance that heavy and long, then why not just add to the existing side for further reach?

It's for when I make a full attack on a charge! There is nothing like trying to push all of your momentum into one hit... and then magically do it again! :smallbiggrin:

[Muktidata]

I'm just popping in to say this: good lord, grammar is your friend. Please carry on.

I'm just popping in to say: good lord, some people have English as a second language, some live in a socio-economic culture that has devalued education, and some posters are very, very young. Please carry on.

[Octopusapult]

It's for when I make a full attack on a charge! There is nothing like trying to push all of your momentum into one hit... and then magically do it again! :smallbiggrin:

This thread just used plane shift to the elemental plane of cheese.

[TuggyNE]

To what end do you use a double lance?

Both of them, of course. :smallbiggrin:

[Gavinfoxx]

...It sounds like a weapon that you can sink a bunch of feats into, and end up worse than if you just two handed a completely normal 0 gp club and power attacked with it.

Double Weapons, bastard swords, oversized weapons, all that 'cool!' stuff, etc. etc. are really never worth it. D&D Weapon system does NOT work for what you seem to be interested in.

D&D weapons work best with two handed weapons wielded in two hands, like a Greatsword.

Orc Double Axes, Dire Flail, Gyrspike, Gythka, Gnome Hooked Hammer, Double Hammer, Latajang, Double Scimitars, Dwarven Double Spears, Two-Bladed Swords, etc. etc. are not worth it. The entire 'two weapon fighting' line of feats profoundly sucks.

Here are some weapons that are good in general for their proficiencies:

-Morningstar
-Fauchard
-Longspear
-Duom
-Falchion
-Greatsword
-Guisarme
-Spiked Chain

[Octopusapult]

...It sounds like a weapon that you can sink a bunch of feats into, and end up worse than if you just two handed a completely normal 0 gp club and power attacked with it.

Double Weapons, bastard swords, oversized weapons, all that 'cool!' stuff, etc. etc. are really never worth it. D&D Weapon system does NOT work for what you seem to be interested in.

D&D weapons work best with two handed weapons wielded in two hands, like a Greatsword.

Orc Double Axes, Dire Flail, Gyrspike, Gythka, Gnome Hooked Hammer, Double Hammer, Latajang, Double Scimitars, Dwarven Double Spears, Two-Bladed Swords, etc. etc. are not worth it. The entire 'two weapon fighting' line of feats profoundly sucks.

Here are some weapons that are good in general for their proficiencies:

-Morningstar
-Fauchard
-Longspear
-Duom
-Falchion
-Greatsword
-Guisarme
-Spiked Chain

The Duom is from the Arms and Equipment guide which is technically 3.0.

But aside from nitpicking, it also breaks the hell out of the game by essentially giving wielders two attacks per turn.

[CIDE]

http://stf.campaigncreations.org/Images/Other/SwordChucks.jpg

[Gavinfoxx]

The Duom is from the Arms and Equipment guide which is technically 3.0.

But aside from nitpicking, it also breaks the hell out of the game by essentially giving wielders two attacks per turn.

No, I believe the more recent version is in Dragon magazine 331, which as best as I can figure, doesn't do anything like you said.

[Octopusapult]

No, I believe the more recent version is in Dragon magazine 331, which as best as I can figure, doesn't do anything like you said.

Ah, I'm unfamiliar with the Dragon Magazines, but I'll take your word for it.

[Gavinfoxx]

The A&EG version doesn't do what you say either. You can only use reversed thrust to attack adjacent in the same round if you have two attacks anyway... whirling frenzy, haste, bab of +6, etc.

[Octopusapult]

The A&EG version doesn't do what you say either. You can only use reversed thrust to attack adjacent in the same round if you have two attacks anyway... whirling frenzy, haste, bab of +6, etc.

...apparently I thought the duom was something else entirely.

My mistake. I'm going to go look for what I thought it was though, so I don't look like so much of an ass...

[Gavinfoxx]

Yea, it is a martial weapon with reach that gives you the ability to attack adjacent. If you attack adjacent in the same round that you attack at reach, you get a minus two penalty. It's a weaker spiked chain.

[Fates]

...It sounds like a weapon that you can sink a bunch of feats into, and end up worse than if you just two handed a completely normal 0 gp club and power attacked with it.

Double Weapons, bastard swords, oversized weapons, all that 'cool!' stuff, etc. etc. are really never worth it. D&D Weapon system does NOT work for what you seem to be interested in.

D&D weapons work best with two handed weapons wielded in two hands, like a Greatsword.

Orc Double Axes, Dire Flail, Gyrspike, Gythka, Gnome Hooked Hammer, Double Hammer, Latajang, Double Scimitars, Dwarven Double Spears, Two-Bladed Swords, etc. etc. are not worth it. The entire 'two weapon fighting' line of feats profoundly sucks.

Here are some weapons that are good in general for their proficiencies:

-Morningstar
-Fauchard
-Longspear
-Duom
-Falchion
-Greatsword
-Guisarme
-Spiked Chain


...But some people like using sub-par weapons, because they go with the theme the player wants, or just look cool.

And on the contrary, a well-optimized TWF rogue can be pretty friggin' deadly. Not every non-spellcaster needs to power attack with a greatsword or Minotaur hammer to be competent, you know.

[Gavinfoxx]

And on the contrary, a well-optimized TWF rogue can be pretty friggin' deadly.

I strongly disagree with this. Two weapon fighting is one of the most inherently weak fighting methods in the game, with some of the least return on effort expended, and which can't get to be as competent as the other methods. By any metric, it is not 'pretty freakin deadly'. At the highest levels of optimization, it can work passably well to be somewhat viable.

[Greenish]

Well, you could the standard charger tricks with EWM or RB. True, you'll have to put in more effort to be as good as a two-hander guy, but in many games that's quite possible.

[ArcturusV]

Wouldn't TWF be better for the rogue? I mean the rogue, unlike the Fighter/Barbarian/Warblade and the like is getting most of their damage not out of Power Attacking and Iterative attacks, but off Sneak Attack damage. Which means they want more attacks, no matter what, rather than Power Attacking. +8 extra damage from Power Attacking with a Two Hander doesn't compare to getting plus 3d6, or more, (Average out towards 11) from an additional Sneak Attack.

Least that's how I understand it. If I am wrong, enlighten please.

[Greenish]

Wouldn't TWF be better for the rogue? I mean the rogue, unlike the Fighter/Barbarian/Warblade and the like is getting most of their damage not out of Power Attacking and Iterative attacks, but off Sneak Attack damage.Also somewhat unlike the fighter/barbarian/warblade, rogue isn't really suited for standing toe-to-toe with big nasties and trading full attacks.

I mean, yes, if you get your hit bonus high enough to reliably hit even with your iteratives, then yes, a full attack with SA is going to do decent damage. But THW who puts in the same effort is going to do more damage.

[Snowbluff]

Sneak Attack is condition, easily avoided, and does not multiply. The classes that use it have lower BaB, so they as though they are power attacking anyway.


Both of them, of course. :smallbiggrin:

This guy gets me. Thanks tuggyne.

[Zubrowka74]

Why stop with double weapons ? Why not triple ou quad ? PF already has a 3-bladed katar and the starknife (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons/weapon-descriptions/starknife), putting longer blade should'nt be a problem.

Who needs blade-barrier, ha!

[Greenish]

The dreaded orc quadruple axe.

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/1893/axeofretardkk1.png

[Octopusapult]

The dreaded orc quadruple axe.

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/1893/axeofretardkk1.png

I think Lu-Bu used this in Dynasty Warriors 6...

And his broke apart at the middle so he could go two-weapon fighting with two double axes.

or no...it was halberds... Sorry. Close though.

[Fates]

I strongly disagree with this. Two weapon fighting is one of the most inherently weak fighting methods in the game, with some of the least return on effort expended, and which can't get to be as competent as the other methods. By any metric, it is not 'pretty freakin deadly'. At the highest levels of optimization, it can work passably well to be somewhat viable.

My issue with you, as it has seemed to be repeatedly in the past, is that you're totally dismissing entire character themes, or even whole classes, because they are sub-par. Not everything is about perfect optimization, after all, and in my mind, the point of optimizing a character is not to make it the best character possible, but to make a capable character that fits with your desired theme.

And despite the fact that a TWF rogue may not have the reliability or even potential damage output of a Power Attack (etc etc) barbarian, it is still a perfectly capable and viable character concept. 25d6+25 extra damage on a full attack at level nine, while obviously not nearly reaching the power of any self-respecting t3+, is still respectable, and can take down most enemies very quickly in the games I've been in- and that's assuming relatively low op for the rogue.

EDIT: I suppose my point is, rather than telling people who are asking for help with their own character concept to try a different, more powerful concept, you should try to help them make that concept work, given the level of optimization in their own game. Objectivity does not serve one well in D&D.

[Gavinfoxx]

Yes, Objectivity serves one well in D&D as in other places. The system makes it absurdly difficult to be viable with two weapon fighting. It's possible, but knowing that it is fraught with peril and something that it is best to do at high levels of (relative) optimization is something that is really worth knowing. Also consider the lack of basic understandings of the strengths and weaknesses of the system, and what things roughly do or don't work well, that many of these posters express. Providing basic familiarity with the concept that two weapon fighting is, by and large, a trap option, is actually courteous.

[Fates]

Yes, Objectivity serves one well in D&D as in other places. The system makes it absurdly difficult to be viable with two weapon fighting. It's possible, but knowing that it is fraught with peril and something that it is best to do at high levels of (relative) optimization is something that is really worth knowing. Also consider the lack of basic understandings of the strengths and weaknesses of the system, and what things roughly do or don't work well, that many of these posters express. Providing basic familiarity with the concept that two weapon fighting is, by and large, a trap option, is actually courteous.


While I agree for the most part, I believe that one should be subjective when it comes to the level of play in which the person is playing. "Viable" is not such an easy thing to define- ultimately, as in most cases when it comes to D&D discussions, it boils down to the level of optimization in the rest of the OP's party. In the game I'm running right now, for example, the players are for the most part inexperienced and poor at optimization, and the most powerful member of the party is the TWF rogue. This does not mean that the PCs are doomed to fail, it just means that, as DM, I need to adjust the challenge of the game to the capabilities of the party, and we can only hope that other DMs do the same. While your benevolent advice may be a godsend to a new player in a high-op game, it could also cause that player to break the game that they're in, because the other players can't keep up.