2
\$\begingroup\$

The Hammer of Thunderbolts is described as a +3 Large returning warhammer according to the PRD.

I am a human barbarian and after a horrendous quest line our party was rewarded with a few things. One of the things I was rewarded with was the Hammer of Thunderbolts. Being a medium creature, and the hammer is large, I see that I can take a -2 penalty, but... the Armor Class of the things we are fighting is so high, I can't really afford a -2.

A search on the PRD came up empty for me. I have spoken to the GM, since I have a Belt of Giant Strength already - and he said we can see about making a custom item. The custom item would be similar to the 3.5 Strongarm Bracers, but would instead be gauntlets - akin to the gloves that Thor needed to lift Mjolnir.

Custom item creation aside, what can I do within the existing rules to negate this penalty? My next level will give me a feat.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ If your GM was willing to bend the rules a bit, you could use Effortless Lace. It reduces the penalty for using a weapon that is too large by 2, which is the whole penalty in your case. RAW it only works on weapons that deal slashing or piercing damage, but it doesn't seem unreasonable for it to be applied to a bludgeoning weapon (in fact I'm not sure why it is limited in the first place). So with a little GM's discretion you could solve this problem with 2500 gp \$\endgroup\$
    – Kevin
    Nov 9 '16 at 22:19
4
\$\begingroup\$

Without taking any feat, you may get casted Enlarge Person on yourself so you are big enough to wield the hammer. RAW one could argue the hammer would be enlarged too, but you still can ask your DM if it is possible not to enlarge it. If you don't want to have it being casted at the beginning of every fight, you can have it permanent. It's a bit socially unpractical but pretty fun too.

If your GM accept some custom feats, you can ask him for the simple following custom feat:

Mjolnir's Grip (Combat) :

You can wield one-handed weapons designed for people one category larger than you as if they were two-handed weapons (or light weapons as if they were one-handed weapons) without taking the -2 penalty due to inappropriate size.

It seems pretty fair to me as a feat. Maybe your GM will want to add some prerequisite like a minimum BAB or to limit it to a single weapon category, but there is no reason to completely deny it.

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ If I set the Hammer on the ground and am not holding it when Enlarge Person is cast on me, and I then pick it up after enlarge, the Hammer wouldn't be also enlarged, would it? Also, Enlarge Person states: "Magical properties of enlarged items are not increased by this spell." Would the "Large" quality of the Hammer be considered magical? \$\endgroup\$
    – Zangief
    Nov 7 '16 at 10:01
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Even if it's not clearly told, the "Large" quality of your hammer seems natural: it probably have been forged with this size, not magically enlarged. If taking it from the ground would make it grow by one size is not clearly stated in the rules, but it seems not obvious to me that it keeps its size. Your DM may want to rule it that way, ask him ! \$\endgroup\$ Nov 7 '16 at 10:15
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @AnneAunyme It is clearly stated though, "All equipment worn or carried by a creature is similarly enlarged by the spell". That includes anything you pick up since that is then equipment being carried by the creature \$\endgroup\$
    – Kevin
    Nov 9 '16 at 22:25
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @KevinWells: One could argue about the difference between picking it while it is already active and having it when it is casted. I would tend to understand the rules the way you did, though, but I don't think it is necessary to apply the effect of every spell exactly the way it is written to have a fun game of Pathfinder so I preferred to leave the exact meaning of this rule for another question. \$\endgroup\$ Nov 10 '16 at 9:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ @AnneAunyme I agree that it is often better not to hold too tightly to RAW, as my comment on the question notes, I just think it is better to say, "Yes, by RAW this doesn't work, but feel free to overrule that if your GM approves" rather than "This wording is kind of ambiguous so you could argue that it works this way" \$\endgroup\$
    – Kevin
    Nov 10 '16 at 15:49

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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