A kukri question and a two-weapon fighting question.

[Enforcer]

Is the kukri now a martial weapon? 'Cause that's what the table in my PHB seems to say. Just wanted to make sure this was a rules change for 3.5.

When you're wielding a double-weapon (quarterstaff, gnomish hook hammer, two-bladed sword, etc.) the off-hand end counts as a light weapon in terms of two-weapon fighting penalties. So does that mean the off-hand can be used with Weapon Finesse since it's considered a light weapon?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Kukris are now martial weapons.

The off-hand end of a double-weapon counts as a light weapon in terms of two-weapon fighting penalties. No more, no less. Therefore, no, you cannot finesse it. It might be a pretty common house-rule, however.

EDIT: Specifically:

Double Weapons: Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaffs, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he or she incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.

 

[werk]

I would say no.

You treat the off-hand attack as if it were made with a light weapon.
The weapon retains it's original category (not light) and is therefore ineligible for the feat.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Kukris are now martial weapons.

Yup. They were exotic in 3E because they were a size category smaller than a shortsword (Tiny instead of Small), but had a better crit modifier than a Tiny shortsword - they were thus 'better than Martial'.

In 3.5, they're the same size category as a shortsword - they're both Light weapons. The shortsword is 1d6 19-20x2, and the kukri is 1d4 18-20x2, which are effectively equivalent. So they're both Martial.

The off-hand end of a double-weapon counts as a light weapon in terms of two-weapon fighting penalties. No more, no less.

And for Power Attack, per the Feat description.

Note that that means that by strictly adhering to that, the primary end of the double weapon gets 1.5x Str bonus to damage (since it's a two-handed weapon, and nothing about the penalties associated with two-weapon fighting changes that), and both ends get +4 to Disarm checks (like any other two-handed weapon).

My personal inclination is to treat it as a combination of one-handed and light weapon for all purposes... so 1x/.5x Str bonus to damage, and +0/-4 for Disarm checks... and off-end finessable.

After all, the Power Attack feat text states "Normally, you treat a double weapon as a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. If you choose to use a double weapon like a two-handed weapon, attacking with only one end of it in a round, you treat it as a two-handed weapon." It doesn't limit it to only TWF penalties - just says "normally it's one-handed and light".

-Hyp.

 

[RigaMortus]

I'd say that the 'light' part of the double weapon COULD benefit from Weapon Finesse and not benefit from Power Attack (since it is considered light). JMHO of course.

 

[TheEvil]

Definately not WF, though I would be inclined to treat it as a two-handed weapon for being disarmed purposes. Otherwise, you have the odd circumstance of being disarmed of one half of your double weapon. When you are disarming, it would depend on if you want to two-weapon fight or not.

 

[amethal]

In 3.5, they're the same size category as a shortsword - they're both Light weapons. The shortsword is 1d6 19-20x2, and the kukri is 1d4 18-20x2, which are effectively equivalent.

I have seen this stated by other people, and I am wondering where it came from.

In my opinion, in a lot of cases it is simply not true to say that a +1 on the threat range is the same as using the next higher dice. I actually did the number crunching and in most cases the shortsword seems better to me - even if you assume a natural 18 hits (pretty fair assumption) and the creature is subject to critical hits (not such a fair assumption).

For example,
if you hit on a 15, +0 to damage and don't have improved critical feat, the shortsword averages 1.155 [(14 x 0) + (4 x 3.5) + 2 x (3.5 + (3.5 x 6/20))]/20 and the kukri averages 0.8625 [(14 x 0) + (3 x 2.5) + 3 x (2.5 + (2.5 x 6/20))]/20

if you hit on a 15, and have +4 to damage and the improved critical feat, the shortsword averages 2.7 damage and the kukri does 2.535 (getting closer)

It may be that there is a problem with my maths, but to take the example to extremes, apparently a weapon which does 1d2 damage but has a 15-20 threat range is the same as a longsword doing 1d8 damage with a 19-20 threat range. Without using any maths at all I would say that simply isn't true.

 

[Sithobi1]

It all depends on the bonuses you recieve to damage. At high levels, most of the damage comes not from the die, but from bonuses like PA and STR.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I have seen this stated by other people, and I am wondering where it came from.

I don't mean "deal the same average damage", I mean "result in the same weapon category".

A longsword (1d8 19-20x2) and a scimitar (1d6 18-20x2) are both martial one-handed weapons. A battleaxe (1d8 x3) and a heavy pick (1d6 x4) are both martial one-handed weapons.

A shortsword (1d6 19-20x2) and a kukri (1d4 18-20x2) are both martial light weapons. A handaxe (1d6 x3) and a light pick (1d4 x4) are both martial light weapons.

If I want to up the threat range on a longsword while leaving it one-handed, I must either lower the damage die (scimitar) or make it exotic (thinblade). If I want to increase the damage of a scimitar without changing the threat range, I must either increase it to two-handed (falchion) or make it exotic (thinblade).

The kukri fits the pattern as a martial light weapon in 3.5, but in 3E, it was too good as a Tiny weapon to be martial... it needed to be exotic to fit the pattern.

-Hyp.