No Sense Proficiencies

Remove all ads!

well my beef i think has to do with halflings and long swords correct me if i'm wrong.

halflings 2-31/2 feet tall

long swords 4ft in leanth about 8-10pnds


i see a problem with a halfling holding a long sword with one hand and a shield in the other
so wouldent a long sord be consederd a 2HD weapon for a halfling

 

In PnP, yes, although I don't know if 3rd edition still uses that rule.

 

There are some rules regarding this, but I'm not sure the exact size limits. Besides in BG the proficiencies are more general and cover several weapons of the same type, where-as PnP you'd have to have a proficiency for each.

You could argue about a Human being able to wield a Bastard Sword 1-handed, yet this is okay. I would imagine a Halfling wielding a Longsword would be the same. Maybe it's inferred to mean a halfling long sword?

 

For a halfling, a human longsword is a a two-handed sword according to the rules.

A halfling longsword would be a shortsword for a human. And so on.

A human can wield a bastard sword one-handed, but it's not so easy as with a longsword - and, well, it's reflected by the need for Exotic Weapon Proficiency to do that without penalties.

It should have some STR requirement. Your average Joe can't really swing a longsword at ease (my own sword is too heavy for most guys), let alone a bastart sword.

 

Is that 2nd or 3rd edition?

 

My two cents on this deep and profound issue

I like the fact that they split swords and blunt weapons up from the categories they used in the original Baldur's Gate game. I mean, using a longsowrd is VERY different from using a two handed sword, and they were on the right track when they split hammers and maces away from each other. I guess they figured it would be too complicated to split flails and morning stars up, though I agree with the people who say it would make more sense.

What I wish they would do or had done is made the limitations on using one and two handed weapons a little more realistic. Honestly, a fellow carrying a big honking longbow is not going to have a big honking two handed sword as his backup weapon, and a fighter equipped with a longbow, a crossbow, a halberd and a 2H Sword may work in the game, but gimme a break! I don't care how strong or tough you are, you're just gonna look ridiculous. And if you don't mind a little ridiculousnous, then why not allow a shield to be equipped with a 2 handed weapon? With such a weapon in your quickslot, I can't see it as being fabulously difficult for the computer to remove the shield bonus from your character when you select said 2 handed weapon. It's no less unrealistic than saying an archer switches to a 2h sword at will when enemies close in.

Speaking of Archers (the class kit as opposed to the generic term I used above) Why in God's name do they have the ranger bonus in two-weapon style? Can they easily equip a weapon in the off hand? Not according to the game rules or a reality check. And since they cannot even specialize in melee weapons (which makes sense, actually) using the two weapon proficiency would not give great results.
I have said my say -- feel free to flame.