The wizard shouldn't get the +1 longsword because the fighter's too small [Feat]

[TheEscapist]

I was inspired to create the following feat because one of my favorite characters is a halfling fighter/barbarian, but it's impossible to find magical weapons that he can use. The campaign world we play in also has a heavy theme of racism, so most cities won't even cater to the smaller races when it comes to forging mundane weapons. Initially I also wanted to make adjustments based on the effort it would take for the smaller character to wield a larger weapon (ie - weapon focus: bastard sword would apply the +1 bonus to medium longswords wielded by small creatures, since the fighting style would be the same, weapon focus: longsword would apply the +1 bonus to medium shortswords in small hands, etc), but I couldn't think of a way to do it without having to create a huge chart listing every single weapon in the PHB and their small equivalents. Here's what I came up with instead:

Weapons of the Big Folk (General)

It is easy to come by weapons made for the taller races, but outside your people’s settlements it’s fairly difficult to find weapons made for those of your stature. You’ve learned to make the best of this and use the weapons designed for larger folk with a minimum of difficulty.
Prerequisite: STR 13, small size
Benefit: You are able to use most medium-sized weapons with which you are proficient with no penalty to attack rolls for the size difference. You may use medium-sized light weapons in one hand, but must use two hands to wield a medium-sized one-handed weapon. With the exception of the shortbow you cannot use two-handed medium-sized weapons at all, nor can you use a medium-sized heavy crossbow.
Normal: A small character takes a -2 penalty to attack rolls when wielding a weapon designed for medium characters.

Please let me know of any ways I might be able to simplify the wording of this feat, if a similar feat already exists, or just any general suggestions or feedback.

[mabriss lethe]

Monkey Grip from Complete Warrior. it'll at least get you started.

[TheEscapist]

Originally Posted by mabriss lethe

Monkey Grip from Complete Warrior. it'll at least get you started.

Monkey Grip still imparts a -2 penalty to attack rolls. It's usually used by medium munchkins so they can wield weapons that do more damage. Mine has no penalty, is only usable by small creatures, and it does change the amount of effort it takes to swing the weapon.

The idea originally came from the line in The Hobbit when Bilbo first finds Sting. It says Sting was a dagger, but could pass as a shortsword in the hands of a hobbit.

[Raging_Pacifist]

Good feat overall, good pre-reqs, benefits, although maybe you should change it to a medium sized proficiancy. I think thats how you spell that. Anyway thats my opinion.

[Ascension]

It's kind of funny, in the first session of our current campaign we had the opposite problem. We fought a large contingent of goblins and slew them all quite handily, but when the fight was over the lion's share of the loot was small... and everyone in the party is medium sized. We tried to talk the DM into letting us use the small shortswords as daggers and the small longbows as shortbows, but to no avail. At least he let us use the goblins' binoculars.

I'm all for helping out the wee folk. This sounds like a good feat to me.

[ronnyfire]

not to nitpick

and this may not apply in the setting your in, but

Originally Posted by SRD

When an article of magic clothing or jewelry is discovered, most of the time size shouldn’t be an issue. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they adjust themselves magically to the wearer. Size should not keep characters of various kinds from using magic items.

There may be rare exceptions, especially with racial specific items.

[Nebo_]

Originally Posted by ronnyfire

not to nitpick

and this may not apply in the setting your in, but

What has that got to do with it? The feat is for weapons, not jewelery and clothing.

[Magnor Criol]

I think he may be attempting to draw emphasis on the last sentence -

Size should not keep characters of various kinds from using magic items.

Which could imply that any magic item will resize. That's sort of fuzzy, though, based on its context; mentioning only clothing and jewelry right before means it may only apply to clothing and jewelry, not to all magic items.

[Dryad]

I just use the 3.0 hint: If you're small, then you're small, and a longsword is medium. So to you, a longsword is a large weapon. It's much easier.

[Peregrine]

Originally Posted by TheEscapist

Initially I also wanted to make adjustments based on the effort it would take for the smaller character to wield a larger weapon (ie - weapon focus: bastard sword would apply the +1 bonus to medium longswords wielded by small creatures, since the fighting style would be the same, weapon focus: longsword would apply the +1 bonus to medium shortswords in small hands, etc), but I couldn't think of a way to do it without having to create a huge chart listing every single weapon in the PHB and their small equivalents.

The DMG has the chart you're looking for. "Variant: Weapon Equivalencies", p.27.

But for those who don't want to use that variant rule, the feat seems like a perfectly good way to do it. I wrote one like it once, called "Big Hands" (it wasn't entirely a serious feat), that basically just reduced penalties by -2 when wielding oversized weapons. Had to be taken at 1st level, being a physical trait. And I didn't account for things like wielding shortbows (which, RAW, can't be wielded by smaller creatures as they're two-handed), so well done there!

[MorkaisChosen]

This works. I'd actually remove the size thing- it's just as relevant for a Medium character wanting to use a Large weapon, as long as it doesn't change the number of hands the weapon takes up.

[Arioch]

Originally Posted by SRD

When an article of magic clothing or jewelry is discovered, most of the time size shouldn’t be an issue. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they adjust themselves magically to the wearer. Size should not keep characters of various kinds from using magic items.

There may be rare exceptions, especially with racial specific items.

This applies to all magic items except weapons, armour and shields. They don't resize.

[Doberler]

I personally would make Monkey-Grip a prerequisite if I were to allow one of my players to use this.

[Darth Mario]

Originally Posted by Doberler

I personally would make Monkey-Grip a prerequisite if I were to allow one of my players to use this.

Because making your players waste a feat slot on a feat that actually HURTS is a good thing?

[Magnor Criol]

Originally Posted by darthmario

Because making your players waste a feat slot on a feat that actually HURTS is a good thing?

I apologize, maybe it's been too long since I've read Monkey Grip, but how exactly does it HURT the player? If I recall aright, it lets you use two-handed weapons a size larger than you can ordinarily wield. I can see why it doesn't really tie in to this feat, and it's a bit of a waste of a feat (anyone who wants to take MG and use larger weapons like that will be using them regardless of this feat), but I hardly can call that truly detrimental on its own.

[Roderick_BR]

@Magnor Criol: Monkey Grip is said to be bad because it gives you a -2 penalty to attack rolls to use it (after the Thou shall not lose caster levels rule, comes the Thou shall not take attack rolls penalties rule), when you could get a better weapon to use.
For example, instead of spending a feat to use a human-sized greatsword in two hands, with a -2 to attack rolls, you could use a halfling-sized greatsword in two hands, both saving a feat, and ignoring the penalty, with just a slightly smaller damage.

To the OP: Sounds good, a variation of Monkey Grip, although it sounds just like a non-epic version of Wield Oversized Weapon [epic]. You could just say that any character can use the oversized feat instead of monkey grip, without being epic, or having monkey grip as requisite. Myself, I use the 3.0 rules for weapon size.
Here's an interesting hoursule if you want:

Weapon size: Medium-sized one-handed weapons are called "medium-size weapons". One medium sized character can use it in one or two hands, at his choice. A small character can use it in two hands without penalties, or in one hand taking a -2 penalty to attack rolls (monkey grip doesn't exist anymore, it is considered a basic rule) and no penalty at all when using the Wield Oversized Weapon feat (req: bab +1, Str 13)
Light weapons are light for medium sized characters, and one-handed/two-handed for small characters. Exception is the dagger, kukri, and similar weapons , that in 3.0 were "tiny" weapons, meaning that they were light weapon for both medium and small characters, with the base damage of 1d4.
Two-handed weapons are large sized for medium characters, and impossible to use for small characters in 3.0. Using the variant rule, you could let a small character use it in two hands with a -2 penalty, or without penalty with the feat.
Yeah, it'll be funny as heck to see a halfling carrying a human-sized greataxe, but so what? It's not exactly game braking to allow a meeler to deal a tiny bit more damage.

[TheEscapist]

Originally Posted by MorkaisChosen

This works. I'd actually remove the size thing- it's just as relevant for a Medium character wanting to use a Large weapon, as long as it doesn't change the number of hands the weapon takes up.

That doesn't really fit my idea for the feat. Small creatures take this feat out of necessity, since medium-sized weapons are so easy to come by. Weapons made for large creatures are also comparitively hard to find, so humans don't really have any pressing need to adapt to using them. Similarly, tiny creatures can't take this feat for the same reason small creatures would want to take this feat: small weapons are rare outside halfling and gnome settlements.
If a medium creature decides he wants to use a large-sized weapon, he can take the Monkey Grip feat.