What's the Point of two-handed weapons

[CosmicCowboy]

Still waiting on my True20 books to come in, but reading through the Blue Rose rules, I'm wondering what the point of two-handed weapons is. Unless I'm missing something, you don't increase your strength modifier, and most don't seem to do any more damage than one handed weapons. Did I miss something?

[ValhallaGH]

The point is STYLE.

Mechanically, they're no better than single-handed weapons. One-handers have the edge of being able to use your off-hand for tasks. So, much like original D&D, 2-handers are inferior to other weapons. But they have a ton of style.

[CosmicCowboy]

Ha! That's what I thought the answer was going to be. Might have to house rule something in. Then again, after all this time playing Castles & Crusades, they're used to not having a benefit from two-handed weapons.

[timemrick]

Due to their size, two-handed weapons usually do +1 or +2 more base damage than their closest one-handed equivalent. For example, longswords do +3 but greatswords do +4, battleaxes do +3 but greataxes do +5.

[Rimlar]

I give +50% strength bonus, bonus to resist disarm. When you have two hands on something, I give you best of two rolls. I also have buckler rules that are interesting.

Mike