Weapon Sizes

[Ethernil]

I have read the rules about weapon sizes and have the following questions:

Greatsword is considered large. So in my character sheet at the weapon tab i write large size correct?

Is it actually large, as in small race characters take a penalty trying to use it because of 2 sizes difference? Or would they use a medium size Greatsword(had halfling paladin in mind when forming these questions) for no penalty?

[Uckleverry]

You could be mixing the weapon size rules of 3.0 and 3.5.

In 3.5, a greatsword is 'two-handed'. Whether it's Small, Medium, Large, or even Colossal is separate from being a two-handed melee weapon.

If you're playing a Medium character, you'd be using a Medium greatsword. If you found a Large greatsword, you couldn't use it at all (unless you had a special class feature or feat for using oversized weapons).

Likewise, a Small character cannot use your Medium greatsword. A Small character uses a Small greatsword. You as a Medium creature could pick up and use the Small greatsword as a one-handed weapon, but you'd take a -2 penalty on attack rolls because it's not really made for larger hands.

[DEMON]

Weapon sizes explained in SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponSize)

[Jay R]

Bear in mind that a human-sized greatsword is six feet long, more or less. The three-foot halfling really can't wield it effectively, for the same reason a human can't wield a twelve-foot sword.

[Fouredged Sword]

Technically you can wield a incorrectly sized weapon for your character. It does not add to your reach in any way and imposes a large penalty to your attack roll.

[Uckleverry]

Technically you can wield a incorrectly sized weapon for your character. It does not add to your reach in any way and imposes a large penalty to your attack roll.

You can't if the weapon is too big. A human treats a Large dagger as a one-handed weapon, a Large longsword a two-handed weapon, and since a Large greatsword goes beyond two-handed, he can't use it at all.

[Ethernil]

You could be mixing the weapon size rules of 3.0 and 3.5.

I think you hit the problem spot on. Thank you all for the clarification.

[KillianHawkeye]

The weapon size rules from 3.0 aren't too difficult to understand, although they aren't as simplified as the 3.5 version.

Basically, a one-handed weapon was considered to be the same size as the creature who was meant to be wielding it. A two-handed weapon was one size larger (hence a greatsword being Large), and light weapons were any number of sizes (but typically one or two sizes) smaller.

So you had a dagger being Tiny, a short sword being Small, a longsword being Medium, and a greatsword being Large, because they were all designed for Medium-size humanoids. Small humanoids like Halflings and Gnomes could wield the same weapons subject to the limitations of their size, so a Human's longsword would be a two-handed weapon because it was Medium and a Halfling is Small. I can't remember if there was any penalty for that, but I don't think there was.

D&D 3.5 changed it so that every race just makes their own kind of gear rather than using whatever is made by the dominant Medium-size humanoids.

[Vizzerdrix]

Technically you can wield a incorrectly sized weapon for your character. It does not add to your reach in any way and imposes a large penalty to your attack roll.

I do this with morningstars on my low level clerics. So long as you use a masterwork weapon and have a 12 or more in str it isnt too hard to hit and the extra damage helps.