Large sized bow

[ohil]

Can a medium sized character wield a large sized bow with out using strong arm bracers, or monkey grip?

[Shining Wrath]

I had a character who did - medium sized character with a size large great bow. How does a 6'5" warforged get full draw on a great bow sized for an 9' ogre?

It's magic. Next?

[ohil]

But do you know where the rules are?

[Shining Wrath]

Right there in the description of the item or feat, it says you can use weapons of one size larger than yourself. It makes no limitations.

You can use pole arms, too, which is perhaps even more ridiculous to visualize - if a medium halberd is 10' long, a large one is perhaps 13' long. Imagine the grip strength for that.

[ohil]

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.

But does that effect ranged weapons? are they considered two handed? In particular I'm talking about a longbow

Also Halberds are Two handed so no you can't use a large sized one with out an item or feat.

[Grod_The_Giant]

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.
Emphasis mine. So no, I don't believe that you could wield a large bow as a medium character, as it's already a two-handed weapon-- one step up and it's off the chart.

[Yanisa]

Emphasis mine. So no, I don't believe that you could wield a large bow as a medium character, as it's already a two-handed weapon-- one step up and it's off the chart.

Isn't that exactly with Monkey Grip does? Keep the penalty, but allow you to use an item one size categorize larger as if it's weapon’s designation did not change?

So I guess the answer is yes.

Strong arm bracers keep the weapon’s designation, but remove the penalty, so don't work.

If they stack is another discussion it seems, with most people saying no.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Isn't that exactly with Monkey Grip does? Keep the penalty, but allow you to use an item one size categorize larger as if it's weapon’s designation did not change?
Yes, but...

Can a medium sized character wield a large sized bow with out using strong arm bracers, or monkey grip?
...not relevant here.

[TuggyNE]

Emphasis mine. So no, I don't believe that you could wield a large bow as a medium character, as it's already a two-handed weapon-- one step up and it's off the chart.

I agree with the conclusion, but not necessarily with the assumption that it's a two-handed weapon to start with. It's not, after all, a melee weapon. However, that doesn't improve things any, since if it didn't start out with any of the three valid handednesses, it certainly has none of them after a size increase.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I agree with the conclusion, but not necessarily with the assumption that it's a two-handed weapon to start with. It's not, after all, a melee weapon. However, that doesn't improve things any, since if it didn't start out with any of the three valid handednesses, it certainly has none of them after a size increase.
The description says "You need at least two hands to use a bow, regardless of its size." But fair point-- it'd be pretty nonsensical to wield a small-sized longbow in one hand.

If we're going to rules interpretation, I'd probably say that you could wield a bow of +- 1 size category with the usual -2 penalty, or no penalty with Strongarm Bracers-- specific does override general. (Monkey Grip specifies melee weapons. I'd probably still let it work, since it's such a crappy feat, but that'd be pure houseruling)

[Tohsaka Rin]

Acquiring Powerful Build (via race or wish) would solve the problem.

No comment on how feasible that may be, however.

[Namfuak]

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.

You know, it never says which way you have to alter it. So, you could argue that a fine character can use a Colossal greatsword as a light weapon by altering the designation steps in a particular order. If we were going to be this pedantic the point would still stand that a ranged weapon is not a light, one-handed or two-handed weapon and thus cannot be used by an inappropriately sized creature, though.

[torrasque666]

However, doesn't the fact that bows always "need at least two hands...regardless of size" keep it classified it as a two-handed weapon? Or maybe you could get grafts to get around it, as it does say at least.

[ohil]

Hence why I asked :). Also due to the fact that the rules says -2 for each size category increase. But since the rules say that if an item changes sizes it can't be done past a certain point. That seems to imply that I could wield a Colossal Long bow for 6d6 with a -8 as a medium sized character.

[torrasque666]

I think at that point it would take more than two hands to wield it though, simply due to sheer size. Most DM's I've played with have ruled that if a weapon is sized for more than two sizes in either direction its not allowed, just like any other weapon.

[Yanisa]

Yes, but...

...not relevant here.

Yeah... I kinda misread. :smallredface:




Owh owh DnD and rules. At the one side it really logical to assume that ranged weapons function like any weapon, and are in same weapon categories (light, one-handed and two-handed). But the tables seem to put them in their own little space and the book only defines melee weapon when talking bout the categories. (Heck the paragraph name is "Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons"). Luckily, for sanity sake, the Inappropriately Sized Weapons chapter is ambiguous, but refers a lot to those weapon categorizes (L, OH, TH) that seem to be implied to be melee only, but easily apply to all weapons.

Bows are even more exceptional. All bows have the following clause: "You need at least two hands to use a bow, regardless of its size.".This clause seems to exist to prevent abuse from I am using a small bow one-handed. Besides that the line implies two things. Firstly, it is a two-handed weapon. Secondly you need more arms the larger the bow. But those are only interpretations. RAW there is nothing placing any bow in the Two-Handed category, or Light, or One-Handed. They are ranged weapons in the eyes of RAW and nothing more.

Simply said, nothing in the RAW seems to support the idea that ranged weapons can be Light, One-Handed or Two-Handed, because those categories are reserved for melee weapons. So by RAW, nothing seems to limit Oversized Ranged Weapons other the the -2 penalty per increase.

Ignore bows, try colossal shurikens (Still a free action to draw) or dual-wield colossal hand crossbows. Nothing in RAW is stopping you (except that colossal -8 penalty). Go nuts!
Good luck convincing a DM though. :smallwink:

[Vertharrad]

Actually look up Arrow Demons...they need a special ability to fire their oversized bows with only 2 hand...

[Yanisa]

Actually look up Arrow Demons...they need a special ability to fire their oversized bows with only 2 hand...


Arrow Demons (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20040815b&page=4)?


Oversized Weapons (Ex): Arrow demons can use bows of any kind that are up to one size larger than their size would allow without penalty.

Seems that only is for removing the penalty, not to wield bows larger then normal.

[TuggyNE]

Arrow Demons (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20040815b&page=4)?



Seems that only is for removing the penalty, not to wield bows larger then normal.

Not quite. It says that they can use them, and furthermore that they take no penalty.

[Yanisa]

It's one sentence, it's not. "Arrow Demons can use bows larger then themselves and doing so means they get no penalty". It specially says they can use oversized bows without penalty.



Oversized Weapons (Ex): Arrow demons can use [bows of any kind that are up to one size larger than their size would allow without penalty].

There is not even a comma...
With that argument you can use argue that Arrows Demons need a special ability to use bows, period.


Besides then it doesn't even matter, there is logic in assuming oversized bows cannot be worn but it is not mentioned in the rules anywhere. I wouldn't quote one obscure monster to explain something that should have been in the core rules. The RAW is written crap and nothing within the PHB is keeping you from oversized ranged weapons. There is a bit of implying, but no hard written rules.

Unless someone proves me wrong with PHB quote, or even a DMG one.

[TuggyNE]

It's one sentence, it's not. "Arrow Demons can use bows larger then themselves and doing so means they get no penalty". It specially says they can use oversized bows without penalty.


There is not even a comma...

There is no need for a comma, either, since it is possible to include two positive assertions in the same sentence without commas and without the word "and". This is easily demonstrated with this very statement which contains not two but three such assertions.


With that argument you can use argue that Arrows Demons need a special ability to use bows, period.

Nah, there's a general rule that lets them, since they have arms. That's all that's needed.


Besides then it doesn't even matter, there is logic in assuming oversized bows cannot be worn but it is not mentioned in the rules anywhere. I wouldn't quote one obscure monster to explain something that should have been in the core rules. The RAW is written crap and nothing within the PHB is keeping you from oversized ranged weapons. There is a bit of implying, but no hard written rules.

Besides the provision forbidding characters from using weapons that, after adjustment, are not light, one-, or two-handed melee weapons? That should be enough. :smallconfused:

[Yanisa]

Besides the provision forbidding characters from using weapons that, after adjustment, are not light, one-, or two-handed melee weapons? That should be enough. :smallconfused:

Which is only appliable to MELEE weapons, not to RANGED weapons. Ranged weapons don't have light, one- or two-handed catogories.

Have a SRD qoute.


Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons

This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon’s size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.



And seriously, do prove me wrong. I am arguing for a very stupid side. :smalltongue:
I don't see anything within RAW PHB text that mentioned you cannot use large or larger bows as a medium creature.

[TuggyNE]

Which is only appliable to MELEE weapons, not to RANGED weapons. Ranged weapons don't have light, one- or two-handed catogories.

Exactly. Since a bow designed for a different size of wielder can never be light, one-, or two-handed, and since a weapon designed for a different size of wielder must be one of those three categories to be wielded at all, only same-size bows can ever be wielded.

[Yanisa]

Exactly. Since a bow designed for a different size of wielder can never be light, one-, or two-handed, and since a weapon designed for a different size of wielder must be one of those three categories to be wielded at all, only same-size bows can ever be wielded.

Again, the whole light, one, two-handed applies to melee weapons. Bows don't suddenly become melees weapons when they are inappropriately sized . Except throw weapons... Are you saying you can wield a large dagger in melee, but not throw a large dagger? :smallconfused:

[TuggyNE]

Again, the whole light, one, two-handed applies to melee weapons. Bows don't suddenly become melees weapons when they are inappropriately sized .

They don't have to. Inappropriate sizing is not listed under melee weapon handedness; it's in a whole different section. So there is absolutely no reason to assume weapon size limitations apply only to melee weapons. However, melee weapons are the only ones that can mitigate them.


Are you saying you can wield a large dagger in melee, but not throw a large dagger? :smallconfused:

It wouldn't be the strangest thing in RAW, but no. Thrown weapons appear to always use melee weapon handedness even when being used at range. For that matter, so do crossbows, which is why you can TWF with them.

[Yanisa]

They don't have to. Inappropriate sizing is not listed under melee weapon handedness; it's in a whole different section. So there is absolutely no reason to assume weapon size limitations apply only to melee weapons. However, melee weapons are the only ones that can mitigate them.
Ah I see. Playing the inconsistent use of "Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons" and "Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Weapons" card. Meh, that's almost as stupid as my argument. I can logic my way out, but RAW is a harsh piece of text not leaning to either side.

Seriously though, both "Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Weapons" and "measure of how much effort it takes to wield" are terms used when refering to melee weapons within the chapter "Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons". Why would outside that chapter the rules suddenly change? (Because it's horribly and inconsitantly written...)

Likewise the "Inappropriately Sized Weapons"-chapter has 2 paragraphs. One dealing with a general rule for all weapons, and one dealing with specific rule for melee weapons, indicated by using various terms that were early discribed as melee only. Or so seems the intent, which is lost due not using the word melee! :smallsigh:

You win, I guess. But only on a technicality. A consistentsy error! Which is worse then winning due lack of rules. :smalltongue:


It wouldn't be the strangest thing in RAW, but no. Thrown weapons appear to always use melee weapon handedness even when being used at range. For that matter, so do crossbows, which is why you can TWF with them.


Thrown Weapons

Daggers, clubs, shortspears, spears, [B]darts, javelins, throwing axes, light hammers, tridents, shuriken, and nets are thrown weapons.


Boldes weapons are incidated as Ranged weapons and not sorted in the Light, One, Two or Three-handed weapon catogories. That makes the whole thing more confusing.
I can wield a oversized dagger, I cant wield a oversized dart. What about throwing them?

As for crossbows, they are only counted as light or one-handed when dual-wielding them.

You can shoot a hand crossbow with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two light weapons.
Crossbows are not light weapons.

[TuggyNE]

You win, I guess. But only on a technicality. A consistentsy error! Which is worse then winning due lack of rules. :smalltongue:

Heh. Not like I think RAW here is entirely sensible. :smalltongue:


Boldes weapons are incidated as Ranged weapons and not sorted in the Light, One, Two or Three-handed weapon catogories. That makes the whole thing more confusing.
I can wield a oversized dagger, I cant wield a oversized dart. What about throwing them?

*enormous shrug* I didn't write these rules! The lack of handedness for some weapons that rely on them is deeply unfortunate and shows up in several situations.


As for crossbows, they are only counted as light or one-handed when dual-wielding them.

Fair enough. Crossbows were tangential to my argument, so I went off (apparently slightly flawed) memory rather than looking them up.

[Yanisa]

Heh. Not like I think RAW here is entirely sensible. :smalltongue:
*enormous shrug* I didn't write these rules! The lack of handedness for some weapons that rely on them is deeply unfortunate and shows up in several situations.
Fair enough. Crossbows were tangential to my argument, so I went off (apparently slightly flawed) memory rather than looking them up.

Looking again at crossbows, it seems there was some intend to have ranged weapons in the same catogires and they should have done that too. It's the best way to handle as a DM, nothing wrong with someone using a small longbow or a large shuriken. Just have the penalty and go nuts.

Besides you are the first person to get a counter argument from RAW. I googled and saw some similar topics, everyone seems to agree that you can use oversized bows. Heck, Paizo even made a FAQ ruling you cannot with guns, but that PF, and guns. But similar rules.

[TmasterT]

just an FYI Rules compendium page 148 has the rules your sort of looking for. it tells you how to convert ranged weapons into light, one hand, and 2 handed. its poorly placed and the rules are basically for throwing weapons with 2 weapon fighting but it does give you the way to convert ranged into the melee categories. bows are 2 handed weapons

[TuggyNE]

just an FYI Rules compendium page 148 has the rules your sort of looking for. it tells you how to convert ranged weapons into light, one hand, and 2 handed. its poorly placed and the rules are basically for throwing weapons with 2 weapon fighting but it does give you the way to convert ranged into the melee categories. bows are 2 handed weapons

Huh. Do you have a quote handy?

[Cloud]

I'm assuming this is what he meant? It's what I could find on page 148.

Ranged Weapons
The same rules apply when you throw or fire a weapon from each hand, as long as the weapon you’re using doesn’t require two hands to fire. Treat Medium weapons that weigh 1 pound or less as light when used in this manner. Treat Medium weapons that are heavier as one-handed for this purpose. The same light or one-handed designation applies to such weapons when they’re appropriately sized for creatures larger or smaller than Medium.

[Yanisa]

I'm assuming this is what he meant? It's what I could find on page 148.

Ranged Weapons
The same rules apply when you throw or fire a weapon from each hand, as long as the weapon you’re using doesn’t require two hands to fire. Treat Medium weapons that weigh 1 pound or less as light when used in this manner. Treat Medium weapons that are heavier as one-handed for this purpose. The same light or one-handed designation applies to such weapons when they’re appropriately sized for creatures larger or smaller than Medium.

Using weight is a bit arbitrary and doesn't even match with existing weapons. Light Hammers are light weapons and can be duel wielding with -2/-2 but this "rule" suggest that the light hammer is an one-handed weapon when throwing, just because they weigh 2 lb. Crossbows are even heavier.

While it doesn't work for excising weapons, it does work for the four items that lack such a designation. Darts, Nets, Shurikens and Javelins. Which I would slot as light, light, light and one-handed respectively. Still I feel using weight isn't the right way to deal with it.

[Cloud]

*Shrugs,* just copying and pasting, though as far I can tell it wouldn't apply to weapons that aren't ranged but can happen to be thrown, that is a light hammer is a light weapon when thrown because it's a light weapon, not a ranged weapon. As you point out it's mostly for ranged weapons that don't have any category and it works out, even if the weight seems arbitrary.

That being said I don't think this actually helps the OP, this was under the two-weapon fighting rules and was solely meant to be to determine the penalty when dual wielding ranged weapons. All the RC says is that bows need two hands to fire, it doesn't give them a designation.

This is completely pulling stuff out of thin air, but given we have a short bow, long bow, and great bow, and they deal 1d6/1d8/1d10 damage as medium weapons, I'd just go light/one-handed/two-handed for each bow for how being able to wield different sized bows go (while of course always making them need two hands to use). Though again that's got no rule basis.

[Findaleus]

Back to the OP, does powerful build specify melee weapons only? I'm AFB for 3.5, but the PF/DSP version given to the Half-Giant race and Aegis class states they "can use weapons designed for a creature one size larger without penalty." (Given the OP is referencing Strongarm Bracers, I have a feeling they want a 3.5 answer.)

EDIT: Completely missed Tohsaka Rin's post. My bad.

[torrasque666]

I can see no reason why they wouldn't. What powerful build essentially does is treat the creature as a size larger in certain cases, one of those being weapons. However, it does specify that it only has to do so when it is beneficial to do so and therefore if so desired can still be classed as its original size. So if we do go with the ruling that bows must be wielded as sized, then a Goliath(RoS) would be able to wield both Medium and Large bows.

At least, that was my DM's understanding of it, thus allowing for my Goliath to wield a large Greatspear and a large Greatbow.

[Loxagn]

If you're looking for plus-sized ranged weapon damage in a character, I'd personally go for either a sorcerer or wizard with Eschew Materials (or a wand) and judicious use of Launch Bolt. A Gargantuan crossbow bolt costs less than 1 gp I believe, so you can deal some pretty righteous damage with that alone. No need for lugging a heavy weapon around, either! Pity there's no full-attacking with it though.