# The rapier problem



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 14, 2022)

I love swashbuckling characters, I do. But there should not be one best weapon in the game for a huge swath of characters. But right now, there is: the rapier.

If I want to make a genasi Thief of Bagdad style swashbuckler, I will be costing myself damage output (the main contribution swashbucklers bring to a party) by going with a scimitar instead of a rapier. Likewise a halfling thief with a short sword, or any other aesthetic choices that are, by the math, "wrong."

(See also no one using slings or a host of other weapons, because it's never the right decision to make.)

I'm not sure what the fix is.

Make weapon stats more similar, with only flavor between them? I believe there's an OSR game (maybe either the White or Black Hack) where every class does a set amount of damage, no matter what weapon they're using.

Make weapon stats far more complex, with every weapon being situationally good? The odds are that there will still be a "best" weapon and it'll just take the hardcore math types throwing everything into a spreadsheet to determine what it is.

What do you think? Is this a problem in your game? Have you attempted to fix it in some fashion?


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

the rapier in itself is not the problem.

having finesse and versatile the same value as weapon traits is more of a problem.

also 2Handed melee attacks lost 1+1/2 str mod to damage so 2d6 greatsword is not that better than 1d8 1Handed rapier.

Make longsword/battleax/warhammer 1d10 Versatile(1d12) and greatsword/greatax/maul 2d8 as obviously we will not get 1+1/2 str mod back and rapier falls into place.

and maybe classes having weapons damage difference could cut down on weapons as we would not need the simple/martial table. only one.

then rapier could have damage:
basic damage: 1d6
martial damage: 1d8

basic damage would be of all classes and martial damage for well, martial classes(all that will gain extra attack feature)


----------



## SakanaSensei (Sep 14, 2022)

There're only two actual "fixes" I can think of, and one of them is basically what you brought up.

1) Normalize weapon damage dice by type. Light 1-handed = 1d6, medium 1-handed = 1d8, 1d10 versatile, 2-handed = 2d6. 

This is simple and people would complain about weapons feeling too similar.

2) Give weapons special abilities tied to them, Kobold Press Beyond Damage Dice style. 

This adds a lot of crunch to weapons and adds another layer to balance around and people would complain about both the balance and the added crunch.

I don't forsee them doing much of anything.


----------



## Leatherhead (Sep 14, 2022)

The main thing that prevents Swashbucklers from using scimitars is a lack of proficiency. Most Rogues don't even get to use them for no good reason. 

Otherwise, Slashing damage is a superior damage type to Piercing: Marginally less resisted by monsters, better VS most objects, and has better supporting feats. The average damage difference of 1 is largely inconsequential in the face of the bonus D6s from Sneak attack. 


The Sling is messed up because of an errata that came out in early on in 5e, the one that requires a free hand to load a ranged weapon with the ammunition property.  A rule which was changed only to stem the gnashing of teeth from people who were upset that other people were daring to have fun by using two-hand crossbows at the same time. Otherwise, you would be able to use a shield and a sling at the same time giving it a proper niche.

The Trident is just a worse Spear.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

Leatherhead said:


> The Trident is just a worse Spear.



this is a prime example of what a mess 5E weapon table is.


----------



## CubicsRube (Sep 14, 2022)

If I were to change it I'd just make a rapier 1d6 and be done with it.

But i'd also make a club and hand axe finesse.


----------



## humble minion (Sep 14, 2022)

And while we're at it, how about a 1d8 one-handed spear?  Don't care about Versatile, or reach, or the ability to throw the thing.  Just make it so i can play a spear and shield fighter or barbarian without taking a hit to damage output for the sake of a niche special rule i'll basically never use..


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

CubicsRube said:


> If I were to change it I'd just make a rapier 1d6 and be done with it.
> 
> But i'd also make a club and hand axe finesse.



then you have a problem with shortsword/scimitar.

why should they stay at 1d6 as they have both finesse and light properties?

also dagger is too strong with d4 with it being simple weapon and having light, finesse and thrown properties.

better is to boost str based weapons.


----------



## Malmuria (Sep 14, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Make weapon stats more similar, with only flavor between them? I believe there's an OSR game (maybe either the White or Black Hack) where every class does a set amount of damage, no matter what weapon they're using.



black hack has variable damage but by class like odnd, with the warrior class being able to target multiple foes. In  Whitehack every weapon is 1d6 plus or minus 1 or 2, but have other tradeoffs that matter more in osr games, eg weight. bx has things like certain weapons being slow to add tradeoffs.


----------



## GMMichael (Sep 14, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> If I want to make a genasi Thief of Bagdad style swashbuckler, I will be costing myself damage output (the main contribution swashbucklers bring to a party) by going with a scimitar instead of a rapier. . .
> 
> I'm not sure what the fix is.



The fix is obvious.  Stop trying to maximize your damage output.

If you were really after damage anyway, you'd be using something much heavier than a glorified foil.


----------



## Bupp (Sep 14, 2022)

I've always admired 13th Age's damage by class, but have never implemented it. 

It would allow you to do the same damage no matter what weapon type you are using...light melee, two handed, ect. Everything else is just flavor. Your swashbucker could be using a rapier, scimitar, cutlass, kopesh...it doesn't matter. They are equally good with any number of similar weapons.


----------



## TerraDave (Sep 14, 2022)

1d6 damage, with the swashbuckler fighter doing 1d8. 

(there will of course be a swashbuckler fighter, right?).


----------



## John R Davis (Sep 14, 2022)

My fix: if you use a Str based weapon in two hands you add your Prof in damage.
Simple, elegant and stops Dex being the uber-duber stat.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

John R Davis said:


> My fix: if you use a Str based weapon in two hands you add your Prof in damage.
> Simple, elegant and stops Dex being the uber-duber stat.



double STR would be better. it would give STR more meaning.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

Sample of a table that we are trying for melee weapons.
Not perfect, but it gives weight to every weapon trait.
Every trait reduces weapon base damage.
Boost to STR based weapons.


*Weapon traits**Simple weapon damage**example**Martial weapon damage**example*1Handed, Versatiled8(d10)maced10(d12)longsword1Handed, Thrownd6javelind8trident1Handed, finessed6long knifed8rapier1Handed, lightd6clubd8arming sword1Handed, reach, Versatiled6 (d8)speard8(d10)partisan1Handed, finesse, lightd4daggerd6shorsword1Handed, finesse, reachd4whipd6dagger whip1Handed, finesse, thrownd4dartd6throwing hammer1Handed, light, thrownd4pillumd6throwing axe1Handed, finesse, light, thrownd3throwing knifed4chakram2Handed, heavy2d6warmace2d8greatsword2Handedd12greatclub2d6claymore2Handed, heavy, reachd12pike2d6pole-ax2Handed, reachd10longspeard12glaive2Handed, finessed10bo staffd12elven courtblade2Handed, finesse, reachd8elven speard10spiked chain


----------



## John R Davis (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> double STR would be better. it would give STR more meaning.



Nah, that's an ugly.
"Prof" for many things, is the way OneD&D is going 
But each to their own.


----------



## Mephista (Sep 14, 2022)

Is the rapier really a problem? Or is it just getting flak for being the go-to Dex melee weapon?  1d4 is the lowest damage, and that's daggers (finesse/thrown/conceal/dual weilding). Short swords are finesse/dual wielding 1d6. Rapier is just the finesse weapon with no bells or whistles - should it be on par with short swords or dagger damage without the extra functionality?

If 2 weapon fighting wasn't such a mess, that would probably be the go to option for Dex.

If thrown weapons weren't such a mess for Str ranged options, people wouldn't complain about Dex being overpowered as often.

If we had better feats than SS/xbow and PAM/GWM combos for massive damage....


----------



## Olrox17 (Sep 14, 2022)

Make the rapier a 1d6 damage weapon. Add the versatile (1d8) feature.

This way, the rapier becomes the “best” option for two handed finesse combat, a “normal” option for one handing, and a no-go for two weapon fighting.


----------



## Shiroiken (Sep 14, 2022)

The rapier is fine, it's finesse that's the problem. Have finesse only work for the attack roll, not damage, and most non-rogue dex builds disappear.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

Shiroiken said:


> The rapier is fine, it's finesse that's the problem. Have finesse only work for the attack roll, not damage, and most non-rogue dex builds disappear.



This is here to stay, and I have 0 problem with dex to damage.

the base damage die needs to be bigger for STR only weapons as they are not as versatile that they can be used by both stats.


----------



## Imaculata (Sep 14, 2022)

Sling should just have infinite ammo, since you can pick up a pebble nearly anywhere.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

Imaculata said:


> Sling should just have infinite ammo, since you can pick up a pebble nearly anywhere.



Agree, but there should be option for real lead bullets made for sling for d6 damage.

Also, sling should be a martial weapon, if heavy crossbow is...


----------



## CubicsRube (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> then you have a problem with shortsword/scimitar.
> 
> why should they stay at 1d6 as they have both finesse and light properties?
> 
> ...



Why is that a shortswod and scimitar problem? It's precisely why they would all be 1d6, so someone can choose what they want for flavour.


----------



## humble minion (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> the base damage die needs to be bigger for STR only weapons as they are not as versatile that they can be used by both stats.



Maybe, but personally I'd like to see more done with Str in general.  A big part of the reason Dex is so powerful is because it also helps out with initiative, AC, one of the most useful saving throws, and Stealth, which is one of the most useful skills.  If you're not a Str-focused melee warrior, Str is near useless - but every PC can benefit a lot from a high Dex.  If Str had more utility and out of combat uses, the balance would even up a lot.


----------



## CreamCloud0 (Sep 14, 2022)

I think a couple of weapon properties ‘defensive’ and ‘weak guard’ or something similar which respectively endow +1 and -1 AC to certain weapons while wielding them would help balance out the whole weapons table a fair bit, you want that higher d8 rapier damage? sure but you’re taking a -1 to your defences at the same time, or go with the d6 shortsword/scimitar that’s weaker but safer, just add a few more pros/cons decisions to the weapons (and armour) selections.


----------



## Sorcerers Apprentice (Sep 14, 2022)

A "saber" that's d8 slashing and finesse would add some weapon choice for today's rapier users. 

It's fine that the rapier does more damage than a short sword, since the short sword is meant for dual wielders.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

humble minion said:


> Maybe, but personally I'd like to see more done with Str in general.  A big part of the reason Dex is so powerful is because it also helps out with initiative, AC, one of the most useful saving throws, and Stealth, which is one of the most useful skills.  If you're not a Str-focused melee warrior, Str is near useless - but every PC can benefit a lot from a high Dex.  If Str had more utility and out of combat uses, the balance would even up a lot.



delete CON, merge CON mechanics into STR


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

CubicsRube said:


> Why is that a shortswod and scimitar problem? It's precisely why they would all be 1d6, so someone can choose what they want for flavour.



because you now have d6 finesse weapons with and without light trait, and that light trait has to cost something(usually a smaller damage die)


----------



## Olrox17 (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> because you now have d6 finesse weapons with and without light trait, and that light trait has to cost something(usually a smaller damage die)



Just give rapiers the versatile feature in return for the lower damage die.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 14, 2022)

GMMichael said:


> The fix is obvious.  Stop trying to maximize your damage output.



What about 5E weapons is so compelling that you'd want it preserved? 

They're not a terribly good simulation of how weapons work in the real world. They're not particularly balanced against each other. And the melee capabilities of each class aren't always evenly distributed.


----------



## Micah Sweet (Sep 14, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I love swashbuckling characters, I do. But there should not be one best weapon in the game for a huge swath of characters. But right now, there is: the rapier.
> 
> If I want to make a genasi Thief of Bagdad style swashbuckler, I will be costing myself damage output (the main contribution swashbucklers bring to a party) by going with a scimitar instead of a rapier. Likewise a halfling thief with a short sword, or any other aesthetic choices that are, by the math, "wrong."
> 
> ...



I went with option 2, and have created a massive equipment chapter for my games with many, many weapons from a variety of eras.  Some are certainly better situationally, but variety is encouraged.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Sep 14, 2022)

Str has no problems.

With the new grab and shove options better integrated, str already is miles ahead for a fighter that wants to be sticky.
Also versatile weapons are improved:

Opportunity attack: grapple.

Next turn: attack with one handed longsword.

Rapier problem has never been one. 

Probably, if two weapon fighting gets a little overhaul, short swords might become viable again too.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

Olrox17 said:


> Just give rapiers the versatile feature in return for the lower damage die.



rapier is exclusive 1Handed weapon, I don't see how you could 2Hand it with effectiveness.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

Sorcerers Apprentice said:


> A "saber" that's d8 slashing and finesse would add some weapon choice for today's rapier users.
> 
> It's fine that the rapier does more damage than a short sword, since the short sword is meant for dual wielders.



this is all true, but what damage then for a 1Handed weapon without light and finesse property like a longsword?


----------



## GMMichael (Sep 14, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> What about 5E weapons is so compelling that you'd want it preserved?



Nothing, really.  I was going off the premise that you had already written off houseruling (which is pretty easy - a rapier is clearly a d4 weapon).  The next best thing is to play RAW, and smooth out the rules imperfections (_in D&D?  Never!_) with role-play.  After that, you can make 3rd-party products or start a petition for WotC...


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> They're not a terribly good simulation of how weapons work in the real world. They're not particularly balanced against each other. And the melee capabilities of each class aren't always evenly distributed.



Weapons don't need to be balanced against each other.
Melee capabilities shouldn't be evenly distributed.  (Fighter FTW)
And D&D weapons can't be terribly good simulations if D&D isn't a simulationist game.  

An easier fix than my first one/post is create a _new_ scimitar for your character with a d8.  Change the name a bit, say your far-flung relative has been making this type of sword for decades, and no one can complain because the rapier still does d8, and the normal scimitar still does d6.  Who can tell you that your family sword-making secret is wrong?


----------



## SkidAce (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> this is all true, but what damage then for a 1Handed weapon without light and finesse property like a longsword?



I understand the game balance point of view, but I dont think it needs to be adhered to for every weapon to loose a damage dice because it has a trait.

Some weapons are just better.


----------



## SkidAce (Sep 14, 2022)

GMMichael said:


> Nothing, really.  I was going off the premise that you had already written off houseruling (which is pretty easy - a rapier is clearly a d4 weapon).  The next best thing is to play RAW, and smooth out the rules imperfections (_in D&D?  Never!_) with role-play.  After that, you can make 3rd-party products or start a petition for WotC...
> 
> Weapons don't need to be balanced against each other.
> Melee capabilities shouldn't be evenly distributed.  (Fighter FTW)
> ...



Quoted for truth.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

SkidAce said:


> I understand the game balance point of view, but I dont think it needs to be adhered to for every weapon to loose a damage dice because it has a trait.
> 
> Some weapons are just better.



then everyone will carry one out of five weapons from entire game.


----------



## SkidAce (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> then everyone will carry one out of five weapons from entire game.



Everyone that is concerned about a point of damage perhaps.  

Tell this to my whip, dagger, staff, etc players.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

SkidAce said:


> Everyone that is concerned about a point of damage perhaps.
> 
> Tell this to my whip, dagger, staff, etc players.



you can have cool weapons and thematic weapons and still have them balanced.

Mind blown, I know.


----------



## Olrox17 (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> rapier is exclusive 1Handed weapon, I don't see how you could 2Hand it with effectiveness.



Yes, but the off-hand is used for balance and support in rapier combat, there clearly is a benefit in keeping an hand free. The versatile feature would be a simple way to represent this.
Of course, you could make a unique feature for the rapier that increases your damage die if you keep a hand free while attacking with a rapier, but that is functionally identical to what versatile already does.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

Olrox17 said:


> Yes, but the off-hand is used for balance and support in rapier combat, there clearly is a benefit in keeping an hand free. The versatile feature would be a simple way to represent this.
> Of course, you could make a unique feature for the rapier that increases your damage die if you keep a hand free while attacking with a rapier, but that is functionally identical to what versatile already does.



only benefit of a free hand is that you have a free hand.

if case you need to hold something or someone(grapple) or you need to climb or manipulate something.

if you are fighting with rapier, you are better with a broken beer bottle in your off hand than a free hand, if only combat is concerned.


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Sep 14, 2022)

Armor type

A few categories yield a +2, no modifier, or a + 2.

People go mad over not maxing attack stars so a mere -2 will move people toward hammers vs. plates or plate like hide.  Same with maces.  

I know I know “too complicated.”  But really not a big hassle if you want to mix up weapon types


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

Warpiglet-7 said:


> Armor type



as much as I would like to have those things and have various armors have different damage reduction vs different damage types, it would slow down the game to a crawl.

those things work best in videogames as the game runs those calculations in the background instantly.


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> as much as I would like to have those things and have various armors have different damage reduction vs different damage types, it would slow down the game to a crawl.
> 
> those things work best in videogames as the game runs those calculations in the background instantly.



I would prefer damage reduction but a simple +|- 2 is not onerous and would I think encourage a broader array of medieval weapons.

Another issue is that attack stat (singular) is another issue.

An average of str and dex would be better for most melee attacks…


----------



## Olrox17 (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> only benefit of a free hand is that you have a free hand.
> 
> if case you need to hold something or someone(grapple) or you need to climb or manipulate something.
> 
> if you are fighting with rapier, you are better with a broken beer bottle in your off hand than a free hand, if only combat is concerned.



That doesn't sounds right to me. I'm no fencing expert, but from what little I've seen the combat style usually employs a buckler, a parrying dagger or a free off-hand, and again, from the few pictures and videos I've seen, the techniques used might be impaired by an otherwise fairly useless broken bottle in the off-hand. 
I won't go into further detail on a topic I'm no expert about...but I'd also point out that, in pop culture, the rapier user usually fights with an empty off-hand. Instead, the D&D rules reward the usage of bulky medieval shields with rapiers, which just looks wrong, IMO.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 14, 2022)

Olrox17 said:


> That doesn't sounds right to me. I'm no fencing expert, but from what little I've seen the combat style usually employs a buckler, a parrying dagger or a free off-hand, and again, from the few pictures and videos I've seen, the techniques used might be impaired by an otherwise fairly useless broken bottle in the off-hand.
> I won't go into further detail on a topic I'm no expert about...but I'd also point out that, in pop culture, the rapier user usually fights with an empty off-hand. Instead, the D&D rules reward the usage of bulky medieval shields with rapiers, which just looks wrong, IMO.



there are moments in fencing when blades "bind" and you are close to your opponent, then a broken bottle across the neck or face is better than a punch, and dagger would be even better as you can block with dagger, you cannot with a hand: I guess you can block once with a hand, but it is not recommended.


----------



## Olrox17 (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> there are moments in fencing when blades "bind" and you are close to your opponent, then a broken bottle across the neck or face is better than a punch, and dagger would be even better as you can block with dagger, you cannot with a hand: I guess you can block once with a hand, but it is not recommended.



Perhaps having the rapier in the game at all is a mistake, without also having the rest of the gear it's usually employed with (buckler, parrying dagger).


----------



## Vael (Sep 14, 2022)

I do wish Scimitars were more accessible to Rogues and Bards. I end up going Shortsword, though, to dual-wield without feats.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Sep 14, 2022)

Rapiers have blades that are longer than 3 feet, they are not the modern fencing foil, which is based off of the Smallsword. 

Empty off hands can be used for unarmed attacks like grapples or shoves or disarms.


----------



## CleverNickName (Sep 14, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I love swashbuckling characters, I do. But there should not be one best weapon in the game for a huge swath of characters. But right now, there is: the rapier.
> (snip)
> What do you think? Is this a problem in your game? Have you attempted to fix it in some fashion?



I changed the damage from 1d8 to 1d6.  It's only a difference of 1 point, on average, but you would think they are all suddenly radioactive judging by how fiercely the players avoid it.  "_Only one dee six damage?!  HISSSSSS!!!_"

Then, just for the swashbucklers in my game, I added in a new weapon called the Cutlass.  It's mechanically identical to a shortsword, but I don't think anyone has noticed yet.  They're still too busy grumbling about the rapier, and trying to decide how many pistols they can afford.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> there are moments in fencing when blades "bind" and you are close to your opponent, then a broken bottle across the neck or face is better than a punch, and dagger would be even better as you can block with dagger, you cannot with a hand: I guess you can block once with a hand, but it is not recommended.



You can block with a hand. It's just difficult because you have to avoid all the sharp/pointy bits. It's a timing/angle thing. Should be used as a last resort, though, you're right about that.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Sep 14, 2022)

FitzTheRuke said:


> You can block with a hand. It's just difficult because you have to avoid all the sharp/pointy bits. It's a timing/angle thing. Should be used as a last resort, though, you're right about that.



The assumption when blocking with hands is that you're wearing gloves, which many nobles at the time did in fact wear. And that the hands are sort of cupped so less surface area touches the sharp part.


----------



## TaranTheWanderer (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> Sample of a table that we are trying for melee weapons.
> Not perfect, but it gives weight to every weapon trait.
> Every trait reduces weapon base damage.
> Boost to STR based weapons.
> ...



I like this.

and to add to it, if you don't even make actual weapons, people can just customize the ones they want and then skin them as whatever they want.

Grim Tales, a d20 modern had a neat way to customize weapons.  These are d20 modern rules.  You'd have to change them up - since X3 crits don't exist in 5e.

*


Spoiler: Example



Simple Melee Weapons:


*


Spoiler: Example



Base Damage: d6
Base Threat Range: 20
Multiplier: X3
Size: Medium

Decrease the multiplier to X2 to improve threat to 19-20
Decrease multiplier to X2 to improve damage die 1 step
Decrease multiplier to X2 to allow weapon to be thrown. (slashing/bludgeoning are 10 foot range, piercing 20 feet)
Increase size to Large (2handed) to improve dmage die by 1 max d8
Decrease Damage Die to d4 to make it small



Martial weapons start at d8. making them large increases damage dice by two, Max d12


----------



## TaranTheWanderer (Sep 14, 2022)

PS, boosting crit range for certain weapons to 19-20 would give low dice weapons a bit more love.


----------



## Gorck (Sep 14, 2022)

GMMichael said:


> An easier fix than my first one/post is create a _new_ scimitar for your character with a d8.  Change the name a bit, say your far-flung relative has been making this type of sword for decades, and no one can complain because the rapier still does d8, and the normal scimitar still does d6.  Who can tell you that your family sword-making secret is wrong?



Falchion?


Horwath said:


> there are moments in fencing when blades "bind" and you are close to your opponent, then a broken bottle across the neck or face is better than a punch, and dagger would be even better as you can block with dagger, you cannot with a hand: I guess you can block once with a hand, but it is not recommended.



This is one part of 2-weapon fighting in 5e that I dislike.  You can't do the traditional Spanish style of Rapier/Longsword & Dagger because both weapons need to have the Light property.


----------



## Sorcerers Apprentice (Sep 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> this is all true, but what damage then for a 1Handed weapon without light and finesse property like a longsword?



Maybe bump it up to 1d10(versatile 1d12), and then 2d8 for the greatweapons? If the Great Weapon master feat is nerfed in 1D&D (as it should be) then two handed weapons deserve a significant damage boost to make up for not being able to use a shield.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 14, 2022)

Gorck said:


> This is one part of 2-weapon fighting in 5e that I dislike.  You can't do the traditional Spanish style of Rapier/Longsword & Dagger because both weapons need to have the Light property.



My son, who clearly has seen a lot of Assassin's Creed videos, insists on having his swashbuckler fight with two rapiers. Hardly optimal, but he did almost everything else he could to optimize, so he's still a damage beast.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 14, 2022)

GMMichael said:


> Nothing, really.  I was going off the premise that you had already written off houseruling (which is pretty easy - a rapier is clearly a d4 weapon).



I haven't written off house ruling -- I use quite a bit of them in my home games -- but this is the 1D&D forum. WotC has a chance to do modest tweaks to weapons systems in 1D&D. (Smaller than 3.5, which had disruptive changes on that front.)


----------



## Azzy (Sep 14, 2022)

It's a shame that 5e didn't include crit ranges like 3e did. That would have been another way way to make weapons meaningfully different from each other. But then I have a few complaints about what 5e did to the weapon and and armor tables.


----------



## Yaarel (Sep 14, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I love swashbuckling characters, I do. But there should not be one best weapon in the game for a huge swath of characters. But right now, there is: the rapier.
> 
> If I want to make a genasi Thief of Bagdad style swashbuckler, I will be costing myself damage output (the main contribution swashbucklers bring to a party) by going with a scimitar instead of a rapier. Likewise a halfling thief with a short sword, or any other aesthetic choices that are, by the math, "wrong."
> 
> ...



The rapier is probably ok, but it has such a strong renaissance and modern flavor. It would be better if the mechanically better weapon has medieval flavor.

D&D has the longsword (such as a historical claymore) and the shortsword (such as the gladiator gladius). But there is no "normal" sword in between.

The knightly arming sword, viking sword, spatha, etcetera is this sword in between. It is an agile weapon, for both cutting and thrusting (slash or pierce). The stats are comparable to a rapier.

Where the greatsword is more like a historical zweihänder, it is more like a polearm with reach. I would do the stats as follows.



_Martial Melee Weapons_
Greatsword (2d6 slash) 6 lb. Heavy, reach, two-handed
Katana (1d6 slash) 2.5 lb. Finesse, versatile (1d10)
Longsword (1d8 slash) 3 lb. Versatile (1d12)
Rapier (1d8 pierce) 2 lb. Finesse
Shortsword (1d6 pierce) 2 lb. Finesse, light
Sword (1d8 slash/pierce) 2.5 lb. Finesse



Here the point is, the knightly "Sword" is as mechanically good as the Rapier. So if the player wants medieval flavor go for the Sword, and if wants the renaissance flavor go for the Rapier.



(Obviously, these swords could be more complex mechanically. For example the rapier would be less useful against armored opponents. The Greatsword wielder would be forced to "half-sword" against an adjacent opponent (1d6 pierce), as opposed to an opponent at reach that gets full damage. The Katana is worthless against chain armor. And so on. But D&D simplicity doesnt go there.)


----------



## Horwath (Sep 15, 2022)

Olrox17 said:


> Perhaps having the rapier in the game at all is a mistake, without also having the rest of the gear it's usually employed with (buckler, parrying dagger).



that is just setting bias, as rapier were a thing in 16th century and walking around town with a shield was not practical.
if rapiers were present in 13th century on a battlefield, you would always be better with a shield than a buckler or a parrying dagger.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 15, 2022)

Horwath said:


> that is just setting bias, as rapier were a thing in 16th century and walking around town with a shield was not practical.
> if rapiers were present in 13th century on a battlefield, you would always be better with a shield than a buckler or a parrying dagger.



You look a lot sexier with a buckler or parrying dagger, though. 

Would Mercutio or Tybalt carry around a big nerd shield? No, they would not.


----------



## Eubani (Sep 15, 2022)

I think the issue is both Dex the god stat and the weapon table as a whole. Finesse enables you to get good melee, ranged, initiative a good save and raft of good skills all because of Dex. The weapon table shows the lack of care in general put into martial characters. I loved 4e weapons, being defined by to hit bonus, damage and a large selection of properties (I do miss Brutal X).


----------



## reelo (Sep 15, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> The rapier is probably ok, but it has such a strong renaissance and modern flavor. It would be better if the mechanically better weapon has medieval flavor.
> 
> D&D has the longsword (such as a historical claymore) and the shortsword (such as the gladiator gladius). But there is no "normal" sword in between.
> 
> ...




If D&D was serious about medieval verisimilitude, it'd be all about spears, polearms, maces, and warhammers (the real ones, not the ones that look like a giant sledgehammer) The "arming sword" was a backup weapon.

It's a shame that a "modern" weapon like the rapier is arguably the best weapon in the game.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 15, 2022)

reelo said:


> If D&D was serious about medieval verisimilitude, it'd be all about spears, polearms, maces, and warhammers (the real ones, not the ones that look like a giant sledgehammer) The "arming sword" was a backup weapon.
> 
> It's a shame that a "modern" weapon like the rapier is arguably the best weapon in the game.



rapier and shield is a good shield wall tactic.
it would be more common in history if rapier did not come together with early firearms and complete evolution of plate armor.

one handed spear does not have much longer reach than a rapier, and rapier is more nimble to use than a one handed spear.
you also do not have a part of spear behind you for counter balance and your hand is better protected. there is zero hand protection on the spear.


shield is always the best addition to one handed weapon, if you do not mind carrying it around.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 15, 2022)

Warpiglet-7 said:


> I would prefer damage reduction but a simple +|- 2 is not onerous and would I think encourage a broader array of medieval weapons.
> 
> Another issue is that attack stat (singular) is another issue.
> 
> An average of str and dex would be better for most melee attacks…



there can always be an option to have min str for all weapons.

then you can use str or dex for all melee weapons IF you have sufficient strength.

I.E. a shortsword for 1d6 damage might have min STR of 8 while 2Handed greataxe with 2d8 damage might have min STR of 18.
then if you have 18 STR and 20 DEX, use the DEX for attack and damage. with 18 STR and 20 DEX you deserved it.


----------



## South by Southwest (Sep 15, 2022)

There are some posters on here who know a lot about fencing and swordplay, for all of which I'm grateful.

In the end, I'm inclined to agree with Horwath and others that the rapier isn't the real problem: the way weapons in general work in 5e is the problem. When I say,_ "problem,"_ I expressly don't mean, _"thing I dislike."_ I mean, _"thing that prevents the game from working as intended."_ We had a lot of these same weapons back in AD&D, but they worked very differently, IIRC (long time ago, though, so maybe I don't RC).

My memory of AD&D is that weapon use was much more restrictive, with the Fighter the only class that could use pretty much all weapons. They also had much sharper, more limiting trade-offs between weight, damage-dealing, number of attacks _per_ round, _etc._ This made one's weapon choices much trickier, where I had to spend some real time figuring out which weapon(s) to use. Almost none of our options were ever genuinely interchangeable or replaceable by some other option that just flat out surpassed the others.

Today, it seems, weapon choice is almost reducing down to a matter of flavor, not a matter of affecting what happens in combat. Almost as soon as I got back into the game in 2018, I noticed a lot of options were mechanically redundant, yielding weapon choices that were more flavor than mechanics. Weapons tables that become ~50% flavor are not tables I will like, and I really don't think the designers intended this. Forget verisimilitude: I'm not worried about that. I just want to return to a set of tables in which each option compels a balancing act between various in-combat _desiderata_.


----------



## Yaarel (Sep 15, 2022)

reelo said:


> If D&D was serious about medieval verisimilitude, it'd be all about spears, polearms, maces, and warhammers (the real ones, not the ones that look like a giant sledgehammer)






reelo said:


> It's a shame that a "modern" weapon like the rapier is arguably the best weapon in the game.



It gets tricky if the medievalesque is too Eurocentric. But I agree the Players Handbook needs to focus on the premodern flavor, themes, and tropes. Maybe focus on what exists around the real world in year 1000. The katana might not exist yet − as far as I know it emerges in late 1300s.

Then, the Forgotten Realms Guide can add early modern weaponry, like rapiers and certain guns, and other renaissance flavor.

But if the core timespan covers 400s to 1400s, then it is everything from King Arthur to Leonardo di Vinci.



reelo said:


> The "arming sword" was a backup weapon.



It depends what era. Around year 1000, the "Sword", representing knightly, viking, spatha, etcetera is the main weapon, often sword-and-shield.

The Sword is only a backup when the Longsword becomes prevalent, from 1300s to 1500s (contemporary with katana). But there are earlier examples of Longsword existing experimentally and idiosyncratically.


----------



## glass (Sep 15, 2022)

Horwath said:


> there are moments in fencing when blades "bind" and you are close to your opponent, then a broken bottle across the neck or face is better than a punch, and dagger would be even better as you can block with dagger, you cannot with a hand: I guess you can block once with a hand, but it is not recommended.



I am by no means an expert, but AIUI there were gloves with mail on the inside specifially for the purposes of grabbing blades. I think it was mostly your own blade, for half-swording techniques, but presumably they would also allow you to grab someone else's without cutting your hand.


----------



## fluffybunbunkittens (Sep 15, 2022)

Eubani said:


> The weapon table shows the lack of care in general put into martial characters. I loved 4e weapons, being defined by to hit bonus, damage and a large selection of properties (I do miss Brutal X).



Brutal and High Crit would've been so easy to fit in, too.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 15, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> Brutal and High Crit would've been so easy to fit in, too.



never liked brutal, no need for more rerolls.

high crit just screams, this must be used by assassin!


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Sep 15, 2022)

I think the system should generally cover from the Stone Age to the mid 1800s. And a "default D&D" is half-way in the Renaissance already.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 15, 2022)

Kobold Avenger said:


> I think the system should generally cover from the Stone Age to the mid 1800s. And a "default D&D" is half-way in the Renaissance already.



we could always make weapons with "primitive" trait.

reduce damage die by one step and make it on average 1/10th the price and low craft DC


----------



## Micah Sweet (Sep 15, 2022)

Horwath said:


> we could always make weapons with "primitive" trait.
> 
> reduce damage die by one step and make it on average 1/10th the price and low craft DC



I'd rather use materials to represent that.  Level Up handles that issue (and weapons/armor in general) pretty well.


----------



## Cruentus (Sep 15, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> It depends what era. Around year 1000, the "Sword", representing knightly, viking, spatha, etcetera is the main weapon, often sword-and-shield.
> 
> The Sword is only a backup when the Longsword becomes prevalent, from 1300s to 1500s (contemporary with katana). But there are earlier examples of Longsword existing experimentally and idiosyncratically.



I could be wrong here, and someone else probably has better knowledge at hand, but I think around this time most warriors are still using spear, axe and shield.  In Roman times, the Spatha developed over time as a cavalry sword, long enough to be used from horseback.  The Gladius remained the infantry sword until after the fall of Rome.  Swords, particularly Viking, were symbols of prestige and wealth, and were not readily available/were too expensive for most to own.  But just about everyone could own a spear or an axe (which also has other uses).  The archaeology is still not very clear on this, but I think that swords are more of a Hollywoodism, and "look cool", which is why they're so ubiquitous in games.  They also appear in ancient sites because there is enough metal remaining to be found, while spears don't.   Axes, Maces, Polearms (Spears), and Hammers were all much more effective in combat, particularly when the opponent was armored.

*edit, and I do realize that Rome fell long before 1000AD.  I'm just using the Spatha, since it was mentioned, as an example of a specific weapon that developed for a specific purpose.  The spatha as a slashing (not thrusting weapon) had no utility in a block of infantry behind shields. 

The other element of DnD that often doesn't make sense, is that a lot of weapons and tactics were used en masse, ie. in formations.  DnD is usually concerned with "skirmish" style fighting.  And in skirmish style fighting, a lot of the weapons would be impractical (pikes, lances, bows, etc.), but highly effective in blocks.

**2nd edit:  I've taken to reskinning the Rapier as a "Sword" that does S/P damage at d8 while still being "finesse".  I still don't like it, as I'd like to remove all melee connections to Dex (aside from AC benefits) to differentiate ability scores better, but it works in a pinch.


----------



## Yaarel (Sep 15, 2022)

Cruentus said:


> I could be wrong here, and someone else probably has better knowledge at hand, but I think around this time most warriors are still using spear, axe and shield.  In Roman times, the Spatha developed over time as a cavalry sword, long enough to be used from horseback.  The Gladius remained the infantry sword until after the fall of Rome.  Swords, particularly Viking, were symbols of prestige and wealth, and were not readily available/were too expensive for most to own.  But just about everyone could own a spear or an axe (which also has other uses).  The archaeology is still not very clear on this, but I think that swords are more of a Hollywoodism, and "look cool", which is why they're so ubiquitous in games.  They also appear in ancient sites because there is enough metal remaining to be found, while spears don't.   Axes, Maces, Polearms (Spears), and Hammers were all much more effective in combat, particularly when the opponent was armored.
> 
> *edit, and I do realize that Rome fell long before 1000AD.  I'm just using the Spatha, since it was mentioned, as an example of a specific weapon that developed for a specific purpose.  The spatha as a slashing (not thrusting weapon) had no utility in a block of infantry behind shields.
> 
> The other element of DnD that often doesn't make sense, is that a lot of weapons and tactics were used en masse, ie. in formations.  DnD is usually concerned with "skirmish" style fighting.  And in skirmish style fighting, a lot of the weapons would be impractical (pikes, lances, bows, etc.), but highly effective in blocks.



Because a viking sword was so prestigious, families went to extreme lengths to obtain it for their warriors. In this sense, swords are surprisingly common during the Viking Period.

In the viking sword and shield style, the viking shield is more like dexterous buckler, where the metal boss (hub) actively knocks away an incoming weapon. The shield itself is light and somewhat flimsy, unlike other kinds of shields. The viking shield is more like a martial weapon that requires extensive training and can be used for punching.

Celtics were using the spatha before the Romans adopted it from them. The spatha "Sword" is in use from about the 000s to the 500s. The viking "Sword" in use from the 600s to 1000s is a variant of the spatha. The knightly "Sword" in use from the 1000s to 1400s, is a variant of the viking sword.



Cruentus said:


> **2nd edit:  I've taken to reskinning the Rapier as a "Sword" that does S/P damage at d8 while still being "finesse".  I still don't like it, as I'd like to remove all melee connections to Dex (aside from AC benefits) to differentiate ability scores better, but it works in a pinch.



Just now I am systematizing weapon traits in an other thread.

The "Sword" is an "agile" weapon − in D&D terms, a finesse weapon that can benefit from Dexterity. However, the Sword has heft, and it seems to me only a Medium size creature could wield it agilely. I would restat the weapons. Note, versatile is equivalent to twohanded but optionally onehand-able.

Greatsword *2d6*: heavy, twohanded
Longsword *1d8* slash: versatile (*1d12*)
Rapier *1d6* pierce: finesse
Sword *1d8* slash/pierce: finesse, heavy

Notice, a Small creature can use a Longsword twohandedly, but cannot wield a Sword dexterously.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Sep 15, 2022)

Kobold Avenger said:


> The assumption when blocking with hands is that you're wearing gloves, which many nobles at the time did in fact wear. And that the hands are sort of cupped so less surface area touches the sharp part.



Exactly.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 15, 2022)

reelo said:


> If D&D was serious about medieval verisimilitude, it'd be all about spears, polearms, maces, and warhammers (the real ones, not the ones that look like a giant sledgehammer) The "arming sword" was a backup weapon.



I think the audience has long ago spoken and doesn't want D&D to be a Middle Ages simulator. That said, I think the weapons table can be cleaned up without taking that step.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Sep 15, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Make weapon stats more similar, with only flavor between them? I believe there's an OSR game (maybe either the White or Black Hack) where every class does a set amount of damage, no matter what weapon they're using.
> 
> Make weapon stats far more complex, with every weapon being situationally good? The odds are that there will still be a "best" weapon and it'll just take the hardcore math types throwing everything into a spreadsheet to determine what it is.



Either is the solution, and it almost doesn't matter which. But yeah, 5E needs to "pick a lane" with weapons. Right now it's splitting the difference and weapons are just complicated enough to be annoying/tedious, but also too simple to be engaging or interesting.



Olrox17 said:


> Make the rapier a 1d6 damage weapon. Add the versatile (1d8) feature.



Are you trying, like actively trying, to give every fencer and HEMA person on these boards an actual aneurysm lol? Rapiers are not a weapon designed to be wielded with two hands on the hilt.



Mephista said:


> Is the rapier really a problem?



Literally the OP's point is that the Rapier isn't the problem, the way the system works is. People focusing on the Rapier are profoundly missing the point. And yeah you're right re: Feats (and Fighting Styles), if they sucked less this would be a non-issue.


----------



## Bupp (Sep 16, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I think the audience has long ago spoken and doesn't want D&D to be a Middle Ages simulator. That said, I think the weapons table can be cleaned up without taking that step.



I have moved away from a Middle Ages type setting long ago. The availability of magic, in nearly every edition, makes those technology levels untenable in my mind.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 16, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I love swashbuckling characters, I do. But there should not be one best weapon in the game for a huge swath of characters. But right now, there is: the rapier.
> 
> If I want to make a genasi Thief of Bagdad style swashbuckler, I will be costing myself damage output (the main contribution swashbucklers bring to a party) by going with a scimitar instead of a rapier. Likewise a halfling thief with a short sword, or any other aesthetic choices that are, by the math, "wrong."
> 
> ...



In my 5e game the “rapier” is a host of weapons. Any one handed cut-and-thrust sword whose balance is close to the hilt, basically. The scimitar also has identical stats to it, and the short sword can be piercing or slashing. 

In my own system, weapons aren’t differentiated by damage. Damage type matters, and things like range and reach matter, but it’s mostly flavor in the end, unless you specialize via traits in particular moves that rely on a particular weapon.


----------



## Olrox17 (Sep 16, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> Are you trying, like actively trying, to give every fencer and HEMA person on these boards an actual aneurysm lol? Rapiers are not a weapon designed to be wielded with two hands on the hilt.



Maybe I am?  
Seriously though, I went into more detail on my other posts. I didn’t mean to suggest that rapier were actually used with two hands, despite what dark souls had been trying to teach us.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Sep 16, 2022)

Olrox17 said:


> despite what dark souls had been trying to teach us



< eye twitch >

Fair enough. Versatile is a bit of a weird one anyway. I just wish there was a bit more going on with weapons in 5E.


----------



## Crimson Longinus (Sep 16, 2022)

EDIT: never mind, makes more sense in another thread.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Sep 17, 2022)

my answer is refluff...

"Oh I have an elven arming sword, and it's 1d8 finesse martial"
"Cool, I have a dragonbone scimitar and it's 1d8 finesse martial"


----------



## Micah Sweet (Sep 17, 2022)

GMforPowergamers said:


> my answer is refluff...
> 
> "Oh I have an elven arming sword, and it's 1d8 finesse martial"
> "Cool, I have a dragonbone scimitar and it's 1d8 finesse martial"



I don't care for this.  If you don't want the mechanics to differ, I would just say it's a sword (of whatever variety and stats) that was manufactured by elves, dragonborn, or whoever.


----------



## TaranTheWanderer (Sep 17, 2022)

GMforPowergamers said:


> my answer is refluff...
> 
> "Oh I have an elven arming sword, and it's 1d8 finesse martial"
> "Cool, I have a dragonbone scimitar and it's 1d8 finesse martial"



It’s already like this


----------



## fluffybunbunkittens (Sep 17, 2022)

TaranTheWanderer said:


> It’s already like this



Depends. When the weapons table lists trident separately, some people are going to be like 'you cannot reskin a spear to be a trident, use the trident stats, which are so bad that no-one will ever use it'.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Sep 17, 2022)

Micah Sweet said:


> I don't care for this.  If you don't want the mechanics to differ, I would just say it's a sword (of whatever variety and stats) that was manufactured by elves, dragonborn, or whoever.



Yeah we find the stats we want to use and the flavor look and try to make them work (obviously we aren't letting anyone take a d10 heavy two handed reach dagger)


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Sep 17, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> Depends. When the weapons table lists trident separately, some people are going to be like 'you cannot reskin a spear to be a trident, use the trident stats, which are so bad that no-one will ever use it'.



yup trident fluff on a spear is a common request at my tables too


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 17, 2022)

I keep wanting to redo the weapon table. 

I like Brutal (reroll low damage tolls) more than I like higher die step. 

High Crit is also good. Add a die of damage on a crit. 

Vicious could add your proficiency mod to damage. 

Some properties could give secondary effects to successful attacks, or do stuff like the Tasha’s feats do for a given damage type. Hooked swords help you climb, and let you trip without a free hand, as long as you’re proficient. 

“Defensive” weapons add +1 AC or maybe let you do a defensive reaction. 

Etc. tighten up the damage values, and use properties to differentiate most weapons. As long as the properties are _fun, _you’d see more variety of use.


----------



## MGibster (Sep 17, 2022)

This isn't just a D&D problem of course.  I find that in most games, having a large selection of weapons is rather pointless because you quickly find just a handful of them being used on a regular basis.


----------



## Minigiant (Sep 17, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> Brutal and High Crit would've been so easy to fit in, too.



If Crits only rereroll weapon dice, Brutal and High Crit can be uses to add more dice to cirts:

*Brutal:* When you roll a 1 on a damage die for an attack you make with this weapon, you can reroll the die and must use the new roll, even if the new roll is a 1. In addition, If the attack is a critical hit, you can reroll a 1, 2, or 3 instead.

For Scimitar and khopesh

*High Crit:* When an attack is a Critical Hit with this Weapon or Unarmed Strike, you roll the damage dice of the Weapon or Unarmed Strike a third time time and add the third roll as extra damage to the target. 

For War pick and War Scythe

*Sharp: *When an attack is a Critical Hit with this Weapon or Unarmed Strike, you roll all the damage dice of the attack a second time time and add the additional rolls as extra damage to the target. 

For Fachion, War Axe, and Special daggers (katar, kukri, punching dagger aka super rogue daggers).


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 17, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> If Crits only rereroll weapon dice, Brutal and High Crit can be uses to add more dice to cirts:
> 
> *Brutal:* When you roll a 1 on a damage die for an attack you make with this weapon, you can reroll the die and must use the new roll, even if the new roll is a 1. In addition, If the attack is a critical hit, you can reroll a 1, 2, or 3 instead.



I really strongly prefer “reroll until the die shows a number higher than 1”, but adding a crit effect is probably sound.


----------



## Minigiant (Sep 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I really strongly prefer “reroll until the die shows a number higher than 1”, but adding a crit effect is probably sound.



4e's Brutal is too weak for 5e. Brutal 1 is just ~ +.5 damage per W for a 1d6. 
However in 5e all attacks are 1W except for crits which are 2W. So I figured that make Crits Brutal 3 for +3 damage twice for +6 damage.
But that's alot and could lead to a lot of rerolls.. It works for 4e because 99.9% of the time, you only attack once.
So I figured, nerf the base buff the crit.

You lose a little on the base damage and gain a lot on te crit without bogging down play.


----------



## Maxperson (Sep 17, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I'm not sure what the fix is.



Other attributes.  Maybe bring back crit ranges for weapons.  Make short swords and/or scimitars crit on 19-20.  Make certain weapons faster.  Or longer(longsword gets reach).  Bring back proficiencies.  The rapier might be better, but the longsword is much more common, so many more magic swords will be longswords.


----------



## Eubani (Sep 17, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> 4e's Brutal is too weak for 5e. Brutal 1 is just ~ +.5 damage per W for a 1d6.
> However in 5e all attacks are 1W except for crits which are 2W. So I figured that make Crits Brutal 3 for +3 damage twice for +6 damage.
> But that's alot and could lead to a lot of rerolls.. It works for 4e because 99.9% of the time, you only attack once.
> So I figured, nerf the base buff the crit.
> ...



Brutal in 4e was not just on a 1 it was on the number after Brutal some weapons for example were Brutal 2 so would roll till higher then 2.


----------



## fluffybunbunkittens (Sep 17, 2022)

Brutal: the rerereroll does slow things down, so maybe it should just be the minimum your die can do (with Brutal 4, you roll a 2, you do 4 dmg).

If crits no longer double every additional die (from smite/sneakattack/etc), I hope we can get expanded crit range back for some weapons...


----------



## TaranTheWanderer (Sep 17, 2022)

Personally, I like this table and might consider it for my next game.  Including the suggestions for ranged.  I would make versatile a boost to a weapon and make the heavy property a penalty which boosts damage by two.   I’ll stat out the weapons in the phb using this method as a quick way to pick weapons or let players create their own. 

I agree that simple weapons should start at a d6 and martial at a d10.


----------



## bedir than (Sep 17, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I will be costing myself damage output (the main contribution swashbucklers bring to a party) by going with a scimitar instead of a rapier.



I'm going to circle back to this.

The damage output being reduced is a single hit point on average with a maximum shift of 4 HP (on a crit rolling max number on both dice). This is *insignificant*. No combat is going to shift because you do 1 less HP of damage in two-thirds of rounds (because you hit about 2/3rd of times).

Also, the scimitar shouldn't be listed as a separate weapon. It should just be on a list somewhere that says the short sword represents one-handed blades such as the blah and blah


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Sep 17, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> If Crits only rereroll weapon dice, Brutal and High Crit can be uses to add more dice to cirts:
> 
> *Brutal:* When you roll a 1 on a damage die for an attack you make with this weapon, you can reroll the die and must use the new roll, even if the new roll is a 1. In addition, If the attack is a critical hit, you can reroll a 1, 2, or 3 instead.
> 
> ...



love this


----------



## fluffybunbunkittens (Sep 17, 2022)

bedir than said:


> Also, the scimitar shouldn't be listed as a separate weapon. It should just be on a list somewhere that says the short sword represents one-handed blades such as the blah and blah



But surely there is value in paying 2.5x as much for a scimitar over shortsword and 1.5x the weight, because you get to do SLASHING instead of PIERCING!


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Sep 17, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> But surely there is value in paying 2.5x as much for a scimitar over shortsword and 1.5x the weight, because you get to do SLASHING instead of PIERCING!



I still don't understand why we went away from swords being BOTH slash and Pierce?


----------



## Crimson Longinus (Sep 17, 2022)

GMforPowergamers said:


> I still don't understand why we went away from swords being BOTH slash and Pierce?



This is what I did on my revised weapon lists. Not that it practically ever matters.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Sep 17, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> But surely there is value in paying 2.5x as much for a scimitar over shortsword and 1.5x the weight, because you get to do SLASHING instead of PIERCING!




... and then people complain that there is nothing to spend your gold on...


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Sep 17, 2022)

UngeheuerLich said:


> ... and then people complain that there is nothing to spend your gold on...



that's the thing at character creation and a session or 2 you need to spend gold and count silvers... after an adventure or two it doesn't matter.

so the price difference is "Gee that is expensive" or "Who cares I tip the guy a platinum for selling me it"


----------



## fluffybunbunkittens (Sep 17, 2022)

'Ugh, I really need 400gp for a breastplate, I will do _anything_ for it... okay, got it, now I want for nothing ever again.'

Not that I like magic shops, but...


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Sep 17, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> 'Ugh, I really need 400gp for a breastplate, I will do _anything_ for it... okay, got it, now I want for nothing ever again.'
> 
> Not that I like magic shops, but...



I played in a campaign were we had to scrounge for every copper... we started level 2 with basic equipment and played through level 9.  By level 4 we saved enough to get the melee character the armor his class wanted, and by level 5 we had no care what we did with money... The DM got so pissed when we 'tipped' people with gold or when he had bandits jump us and we told them "Look, it's not worth us killing you, if we give you 15gp will you go away?"


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 17, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> 4e's Brutal is too weak for 5e. Brutal 1 is just ~ +.5 damage per W for a 1d6.
> However in 5e all attacks are 1W except for crits which are 2W. So I figured that make Crits Brutal 3 for +3 damage twice for +6 damage.
> But that's alot and could lead to a lot of rerolls.. It works for 4e because 99.9% of the time, you only attack once.
> So I figured, nerf the base buff the crit.
> ...



Oh I understand the logic, I just disagree with the first sentence and tbh the game already has enough “reroll take second” mechanics.


----------



## Hriston (Sep 17, 2022)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I love swashbuckling characters, I do. But there should not be one best weapon in the game for a huge swath of characters. But right now, there is: the rapier.
> 
> If I want to make a genasi Thief of Bagdad style swashbuckler, I will be costing myself damage output (the main contribution swashbucklers bring to a party) by going with a scimitar instead of a rapier. Likewise a halfling thief with a short sword, or any other aesthetic choices that are, by the math, "wrong."
> 
> ...



Yes. I call it an arming sword. Problem solved.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 17, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> 'Ugh, I really need 400gp for a breastplate, I will do _anything_ for it... okay, got it, now I want for nothing ever again.'
> 
> Not that I like magic shops, but...



I will never grok this. Why aren’t your PCs spending gold on things like hiring NPCs, buying land or ships or wagons, and doing things other than just going back into the next dungeon?


----------



## fluffybunbunkittens (Sep 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I will never grok this. Why aren’t your PCs spending gold on things like hiring NPCs, buying land or ships or wagons, and doing things other than just going back into the next dungeon?



Because not everyone's idea of a DnD adventure is managing the NPC army you send in to adventure instead of yourself? And what is the purpose of investing in land/ship/wagons/businesses, but to make more money to do nothing with?

DnD has no rules for estate management. It has no rules for running a proper business. It has no rules for improving your status in society through wealth. Rules are how players interact with the game world, and it sure would be nice to have something like those as an intended gold sink / roleplay opportunity / world showcase. But instead, we get hundreds of pages of combat spells, because the game itself is telling us that it is not about those things.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 17, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> Because not everyone's idea of a DnD adventure is managing the NPC army you send in to adventure instead of yourself?



That’s really the only thing you can imagine using hired NPCs for? Seriously!?

And what management? You hire some guys to do a thing. If it’s on a long term basis, you simplify the gameplay by making it a bigger payment. Why on earth would you “manage” them? 


fluffybunbunkittens said:


> And what is the purpose of investing in land/ship/wagons/businesses, but to make more money to do nothing with?



Obtain rare material while doing more interesting things on your adventures, get a source of information that you just set up and it feeds you intel over time, have a ship and crew that know the surrounding coastlines and sea around the area where you tend to adventure, gain passive “turnkey” access to the circles of wealth without your DM having to preposterously pretend that dirty hobos who’ve killed a few dragons would be anything other than a curiosity anywhere respectable, not to mention all the many things particular to a campaign and setting. 


fluffybunbunkittens said:


> DnD has no rules for estate management. It has no rules for running a trade empire. It has no rules for improving your status in society through wealth. Rules are how players interact with the game world, and the game says you do that via fireballs.



That is a horrendously reductive view of playing the game. 

You and I would not enjoy each other’s games, I expect.


----------



## Ancalagon (Sep 17, 2022)

I see mention  of rapiers now doing 1d6 - I apologize for barging in a bit, but is this part of the playtest or just an "idea"?


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Sep 17, 2022)

Ancalagon said:


> I see mention  of rapiers now doing 1d6 - I apologize for barging in a bit, but is this part of the playtest or just an "idea"?




Pure ideas. We've seen nothing on weapons (which probably won't change) for the playtest.


----------



## Clint_L (Sep 19, 2022)

SakanaSensei said:


> There're only two actual "fixes" I can think of, and one of them is basically what you brought up.
> 
> 1) Normalize weapon damage dice by type. Light 1-handed = 1d6, medium 1-handed = 1d8, 1d10 versatile, 2-handed = 2d6.
> 
> This is simple and people would complain about weapons feeling too similar.



I think this is the best option. People can then use whatever flavour they want, and we will see far more weapon types actually being used in the story of the game.

The problem with tying advantages/disadvantages to specific weapon types is it actually decreases the variety of weapons that get used, per the OP. I remember in AD&D when the PHB listed every melee weapon under the sun with pretty granular detail but only about 5 got regularly used. For the sake of both gameplay and the story it makes far more sense to standardize them and then add text to help players come up with the specific details of their particular light martial weapon, or whatever.


----------



## Gorck (Sep 20, 2022)

Clint_L said:


> I think this is the best option. People can then use whatever flavour they want, and we will see far more weapon types actually being used in the story of the game.
> 
> The problem with tying advantages/disadvantages to specific weapon types is it actually decreases the variety of weapons that get used, per the OP. I remember in AD&D when the PHB listed every melee weapon under the sun with pretty granular detail but only about 5 got regularly used. For the sake of both gameplay and the story it makes far more sense to standardize them and then add text to help players come up with the specific details of their particular light martial weapon, or whatever.



That's great for people who are experts in weaponry.  But I highly doubt my 10 year old daughter knows the difference between a shortsword, longsword, rapier, and scimitar.  And I bet she'd never even heard of a glaive or a halberd.

EDIT: I just asked her and I was right on both points.  She DID know that a rapier does piercing damage.


----------



## SakanaSensei (Sep 20, 2022)

Gorck said:


> That's great for people who are experts in weaponry.  But I highly doubt my 10 year old daughter knows the difference between a shortsword, longsword, rapier, and scimitar.  And I bet she'd never even heard of a glaive or a halberd.
> 
> EDIT: I just asked her and I was right on both points.  She DID know that a rapier does piercing damage.



Wouldn't standardized weapon damage die sizes be even easier for people like your daughter? Like, no need to go over all these fiddly options in detail, take a look at the image of weapons on page X and pick what looks coolest.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Sep 20, 2022)

I only knew what a halberd was as a kid because my little brother owned a smurf who inexplicably wielded one. (The war against Gargamel got pretty intense, I assume, if the smurfs were preparing to cut off the cat's head.)


----------



## Knight_Marshal (Sep 20, 2022)

Part of the problem is that scimitar is set up wrong. The saber, also known as a backsword, should be the d6 damage slashing and piercing finesse weapon. The scimitar should be a d8 weapon.


----------



## Horwath (Sep 20, 2022)

Knight_Marshal said:


> Part of the problem is that scimitar is set up wrong. The saber, also known as a backsword, should be the d6 damage slashing and piercing finesse weapon. The scimitar should be a d8 weapon.



that is not the problem.

only problem can show up in balancing weapon damage die size and weapon properties.

name, design, damage type is just flavor.
you can have scimitar with d6 Slashing, finesse and light and
scimitar d8 Slashing, finesse. and call it "big scimitar"
or d12 Slashing, 2handed, finesse and call it "really big scimitar" or falchion


----------



## Yaarel (Sep 23, 2022)

Knight_Marshal said:


> Part of the problem is that scimitar is set up wrong. The saber, also known as a backsword, should be the d6 damage slashing and piercing finesse weapon. The scimitar should be a d8 weapon.



Because the word "scimitar" means the same thing as a "sword", there are many different kinds of scimitars.

I am not at all clear about what kind of "scimitar" 5e is talking about. Its d6, finesse and light properties, suggests a small weapon, like a shortsword, about the bladelength of ones forearm. Is this the kind of scimitar that the 5e Weapons Table has in mind?

Probably, in a medievalesque context, from the 1200s onward, the "scimitar" especially refers to the long sabers that the Turkic cavalry used. But this is a kind of longsword, and not at all what the 5e Weapons Table is describing.

I find the Japanese classification of bladelengths most useful and most convenient.
• 1 foot or less = knife
• 1-2 feet (12-24 inches) = shortsword
• 2-3 feet (24-36 inches) = sword
• 3-4 feet (36-48 inches) = longsword
• 4 feet or more = crazy long

The scimitars that the Turkic cavalry wields are between 30 inches and 40 inches. In other words, the "scimitar" is comparable to a "normal" knightly sword or else a longsword.

But this sword-maybe-longsword isnt at all what the 5e Weapons Table is statting.

What is the Weapons Table statting?


----------

