Take the 2-minute tour ×
Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Using an inappropriately sized weapon confers a penalty to hit, as follows:

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.

I know that the Titan Mauler's Massive Grip ability reduces that penalty by 1 for every 3 levels.

Are there any other traits, feats, or class abilities that can reduce the penalty to hit from an inappropriately sized weapon?

share|improve this question
1  
Just as a comment: a weapon one size category is, on average, +1 damage. That’s not worth much at all: I cannot stress enough how much that is not worth a feat. If all a feat does for you is allow you to wield a weapon that does 1 damage more, you could do far, far better for that feat. –  KRyan Jan 16 at 16:57
1  
@KRyan I don't see the +1. A normal size 2H Sword does 2d6 damage, while a Large one does 3d6. That's +3.5 on average, which is better than Weapon Specialization (and stacks) –  Scrollmaster Jan 16 at 18:10
1  
Even with +3.5 it's only worth it on very low levels, if at all. –  Mala Jan 16 at 18:37
1  
@Scrollmaster The largest weapons do benefit somewhat more, and stacking multiple size increases can do more for you. But that’s still only +3.5 to damage, which is not all that impressive a use for a feat. But my point covers most weapons (everything that deals 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, or 1d6 damage), and the weapons scale quite slowly from there. –  KRyan Jan 16 at 18:38
1  
@KRyan, it seems like you're judging a (theoretical) feat based on how it helps the average character, and I think it makes more sense to evaluate them based on their impact on the character most likely to pick them. I wouldn't condemn Combat Reflexes because it doesn't do anything for characters that dump DEX or don't carry melee weapons; I judge its utility based on characters with mid-high DEX that like to get in front of groups of foes with a reach weapon in hand. –  Jeff Fry Jan 16 at 21:37
show 3 more comments

2 Answers

up vote 3 down vote accepted

Tieflings can get a variant heritage that allows you to use Large weapons:

16 - You have over-sized limbs, allowing you to use Large weapons without penalty.

There is a bit of debate on whether or not you need the Fiendish Heritage feat, but the answer seems to be "most likely no, but talk with your GM".

share|improve this answer
    
The rules look pretty clear to me, though I do think they’re pretty stupid: either your DM can let you have these things for free, or if he doesn’t let you, you can take the feat and then he’s “supposed” to let you (except of course that he’s the DM and he can still not let you so why does this rule even exist?) And it gives DMs absolutely no guidance as to whether these things should be worth a feat and thus have that cost, which is just headache-inducing. Anyway, for any DMs reading this: ability 16 is absolutely not in any way worth a feat. Replacing a racial feature, sure. –  KRyan Jan 16 at 18:43
add comment

Yes, I know of two feats that are found in the D&D 3.5 book Complete Warrior. I am going to assume they are also okay to use in Pathfinder.

Monkey Grip:

You can use melee weapons one size category larger than you are with a -2 penalty on the attack roll, but the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon does not change. For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat. For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-handed weapon. You can wield a larger light weapon as a light weapon, or a larger two-handed weapon in two hands. You cannot wield a larger weapon in your off hand, and you cannot use this feat with a double weapon.

Wield Oversized Weapon:

You can treat any weapon as if it were one size category smaller than normal and one category "lighter" for the purpose of determining the amount of effort it takes to wield. For instance, a halfl ing with this feat could wield a Medium short sword as a Small light weapon, or a human could wield an ogre's Large greatclub as a Medium twohanded weapon. The weapon still deals its normal amount of damage.

I can't find the link right now - but these two feats do not stack so you have to choose which you want to apply.


Other than these two feats, I found that there have been multiple queries similar to yours about using oversized weapons in Pathfinder, and all of those have turned up with negative replies or suggestions to just use the two feats I posted above. There was one person who designed two feats but they aren't official. Officially Pathfinder does not have any feats directly dealing with this, but you should consult your DM if you plan to use content from D&D 3.0/3.5 or homebrew.

share|improve this answer
2  
Actually, these two do stack. You treat a Huge Two-handed weapon as a Large One-handed weapon, and then you can wield a Large weapon at a -2 penalty, so all that checks out. The real problem is A. 3.5 material is not available by default in Pathfinder, so that’s quite an assumption, and B. Monkey Grip appears to be more-or-less the default in Pathfinder, as the inappropriately-sized weapon property is -2, the same as Monkey Grip gives. –  KRyan Jan 16 at 16:55
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.