# Longsword finesse when used 2H



## Bill Zebub (Oct 4, 2022)

Is the idea crazy?

Implications:

A rogue could sneak attack with a d10 weapon, but would sacrifice two attacks with d6 weapons, which means only one chance at sneak attack
In general elven proficiency would no longer be totally worthless
Archers (fighters and rangers) would have a cool alternative to dual wielding
The “unarmored swordsman” archetype would have viable builds other than Kensei

For rule symmetry it would probably make sense to just say that all Versatile weapons are finesse when used with two hands. I can’t quite picture it with axes and hammers, with their balance points at the other end, but it would open up more options and not actually break anything. 

Thoughts?  Am I overlooking an exploit/loophole?


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 5, 2022)

Elves no longer have longsword proficiency by default, and since ASIs are floating now, elves could make as much use of longsword proficiency as anyone else.

Anywho, I’m not sure two-handing really fits the image of the Dex-based fighter.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 5, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Anywho, I’m not sure two-handing really fits the image of the Dex-based fighter.




Really?  Huh.


----------



## TwoSix (Oct 5, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Anywho, I’m not sure two-handing really fits the image of the Dex-based fighter.



Not sure I agree...fast, skinny guys using big swords has been a trope for a while now.


----------



## TwoSix (Oct 5, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Thoughts?  Am I overlooking an exploit/loophole?



Can't see one.  Sounds like a fun, easy change to me.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 5, 2022)

TwoSix said:


> Not sure I agree...fast, skinny guys using big swords has been a trope for a while now.



Oh, sure, but like… BIG swords, not regular longswords.


----------



## TwoSix (Oct 5, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Oh, sure, but like… BIG swords, not regular longswords.



I'm A-OK with changing the rule for heavy weapons also so we can have Cloud/Sephiroth types.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 5, 2022)

I am perfectly happy with adding finesse to longsword and removing rapier from the game (or giving it something other then being the finesse longsword)


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 5, 2022)

The way I figure it, if power isn’t your thing, two hands on the hilt gives you the leverage to move it quickly.


----------



## Laurefindel (Oct 5, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Thoughts?  Am I overlooking an exploit/loophole?



I've been racking my brain for ten minutes and can't find one other than sneak attack as you mention, if you can call that an exploit. I swear I had a pretty good case against it way back then when I was messing around with a versatile fighting style, but now I can't think of it.

I'd keep it to the longsword however. If symmetry is necessary, give the versatile battleaxe "heavy" property and let it -5/+10 with GWM, and give "thrown" to the warhammer because, hum, Thor?

[edit] just notice this is the 5.5e subforum so -5/+10 no longer exist. Does "heavy" bring any direct or hidden perks that we know of in 5.5?


----------



## tetrasodium (Oct 5, 2022)

GMforPowergamers said:


> I am perfectly happy with adding finesse to longsword and removing rapier from the game (or giving it something other then being the finesse longsword)



I largely agree on the rapier demotion but would rather it be a dedicated 2h only weapon like a meteor hammer nine section whip valenar double scimitar or whatever else fits.  A versatile weapon known for sword & board is probably a bit too good for dex given all of the benefits it carries over strength.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 5, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Elves no longer have longsword proficiency by default, and since ASIs are floating now, elves could make as much use of longsword proficiency as anyone else.
> 
> Anywho, I’m not sure two-handing really fits the image of the Dex-based fighter.



As someone who has some HEMA training(not a lot), I could say that this has some merit.

We trained with longswords, the historic 2Handed longswords, not Heavy as greatswords, but little too much to handle with one hand if you are not really strong.

and you can be a lot faster with two hands on a sword that has long handle and it relatively light. 1,2 - 1,5kg.

my practice sword(blunted) is 130cm long and has 1,3kg. that thing can move fast.


but only problem I have, it's one more boost to Dex...

I would rather see longsword be a d10(V d12) weapon based on STR and greatsword 2d8; 2Handed, heavy.


----------



## TheSword (Oct 5, 2022)

In the Adventures in Rokugan rules for 5e by Edge Studios the long sword has been given the finesse keyword to create the Katana. Of course in that setting the Katana is ubiquitous so it’s ok that almost everyone will have one. In a normal D&D setting I think we would just see everyone using Longswords.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 5, 2022)

Horwath said:


> As someone who has some HEMA training(not a lot), I could say that this has some merit.



Oh, it absolutely does. That’s why I said it doesn’t fit the image, not that it isn’t realistic.


----------



## John R Davis (Oct 5, 2022)

No ta. Dex is already too much win so let's not add more strings to its bow, erm, sword


----------



## Horwath (Oct 5, 2022)

John R Davis said:


> No ta. Dex is already too much win so let's not add more strings to its bow, erm, sword



Yeah, we need more damage on STR based weapons.

Dex with rapier, shortsword and longbow is doing fine.


----------



## aco175 (Oct 5, 2022)

I would rather it be a feat, maybe tied with something else.  Not sure what other than +1 Dex.  Maybe something that lets you move or gives +1 to AC.  

Maybe get rid of the rapier and have the LS just be the default rapier if we need a d8 finesse weapon, which I'm generally against.


----------



## gorice (Oct 5, 2022)

Makes sense to me. Adds flavour without changing balance much. Dex doesn't really get a big boost compared to shield and rapier.

Dex being too good in general is a distinct issue.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 5, 2022)

To all the people saying that Dex is already too good, let’s not make it better, how does letting longswords be finesse _when used two handed_ make Dex better?  With the new dual wield rules it’s worse than two short swords. 

It would really just be a flavor option.


----------



## Laurefindel (Oct 5, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> To all the people saying that Dex is already too good, let’s not make it better, how does letting longswords be finesse _when used two handed_ make Dex better?  With the new dual wield rules it’s worse than two short swords.
> 
> It would really just be a flavor option.



it give Dex-based martial access to a d10 weapon, which so far was only in the purview of Str-based characters (except heavy crossbow). I'm not really in the Dex-always-steals-the-show camp so I dont really care, but there's that...


----------



## gorice (Oct 5, 2022)

The damage increase is pretty small, and you have to give up a shield to get it. I think the bigger issue is that it doesn't work thematically with sneak attack. But, neither do rapiers.

Actually, some kind of iaijitsu thing would be much more apt than bumbling around trying to stab someone in the back with a rapier.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 5, 2022)

Laurefindel said:


> it give Dex-based martial access to a d10 weapon, which so far was only in the purview of Str-based characters (except heavy crossbow). I'm not really in the Dex-always-steals-the-show camp so I dont really care, but there's that...




Instead of 2d6. So it’s not an increase. It’s a downgrade.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 5, 2022)

gorice said:


> Actually, some kind of iaijitsu thing would be much more apt than bumbling around trying to stab someone in the back with a rapier.




Totally.


----------



## Laurefindel (Oct 5, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Instead of 2d6. So it’s not an increase. It’s a downgrade.



You mean instead of 2d6+stat bonus _twice_ instead of 1d10+stat bonus! Actually, you'd even be better with d8+stat+2 from dueling than straight d10 +stat but hey, I'm not here to tell you that it makes Dex OP, I'm just stating that this is the biggest departure from current rules.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 5, 2022)

Laurefindel said:


> You mean instead of 2d6+stat bonus _twice_ instead of 1d10+stat bonus! Actually, you'd even be better with d8+stat+2 from dueling than straight d10 +stat but hey, I'm not here to tell you that it makes Dex OP, I'm just stating that this is the biggest departure from current rules.




Can you explain what you are saying here? I think you are saying that when you include fighting style the 2H longsword gets even worse than I was saying, except that you took the position that it buffs Dex builds. So I’m confused.

(The reason I didn’t include fighting style is that I’m assuming this would mostly be a colorful but sub-optimal melee option for archers with Archery style.)

EDIT: If dueling style applied to this (“when you are wielding a single melee weapon that is one handed or versatile…”) I would consider playing a Dex fighter.


----------



## Laurefindel (Oct 5, 2022)

Sorry I'll try to be clearer.

My overall position is that I like the idea of finesse on versatile longsword, and that I don't think Dex is already too powerful as is.

At the same time, I also concedes that Dex builds would now have access to a d10 weapon, which didn't used to be the case. For me it doesn't cause any issues because rapier+dueling is already equivalent (if not superior) to versatile longsword+great-weapon fighting, and two-weapon fighting might even be better than both with the removal of bonus action requirement.

Without fighting styles, straight d10 is objectively better than straight d8. I'm not convinced that two attacks at d6 each, with stat bonus applying to the first attack only, is strictly superior to (1x) d10+stat, but its probably slightly better than 1d8+stat. Comparative average damage probably vary given what target number is required, but I'm not that good at probabilities. Throw a shield in there and one-handed d8 returns as king.

So all in all, I do believe that finesse on versatile longsword is a boost to Dex builds, but a rather modest and benign one.


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 5, 2022)

I think we need to differentiate weapons more, not make them more samey. 

In addition, this is the old Ninja-Katanas argument we've heard for decades. But think of it this way: Katanas, Broadswords, and Bastard swords (the historic inspirations of the D&D Longsword) are HEAVY. To perform a rapid iaijutsu strike the likes of Rurouni Kenshin or Sephiroth, you still need enough arm muscular strength to make the momentum. It's NOT like a Rapier where the weight is less important and thus damage is almost entirely based on your manual dexterity. 

I think an Iaijutsu feat, martial maneuver, and/or class feature; probably best as a maneuver or feat that can be activated via class or subclass features and can be thus accessed by certain Fighters, Monks, Rogues, etc a la Fighting Styles. I could see Way of Shadow and Way of the Kensei Monks, Phantom Rogues and Assassin Rogues, as well as various Fighters like Samurais or Battle Masters having access to this feat or maneuver. In this case, I'd allow you to add your STR and DEX mods to the attack roll when making the Iaijutsu attack, thus representing the quick strike's higher likelihood of accuracy, and I'd allow the attack to be made when the weapon hasn't been drawn (drawing the weapon as part of the same action). But I'd limit its usage via proficiency bonus and/or superiority dice, depending on the path taken (and I'm not going to hone in right now whether this should be a short rest or long rest ability; just that it should NOT be a basic attack you can make all day with Longswords).


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 5, 2022)

Laurefindel said:


> Sorry I'll try to be clearer.
> 
> My overall position is that I like the idea of finesse on versatile longsword, and that I don't think Dex is already too powerful as is.
> 
> ...




2d6 averages 7, while 1d10 averages 5.5, so if we are adding stat once then dual wielding is superior (especially for rogues who want to improve chances of getting sneak attack). 

Getting d10 damage this way is only superior to:

Rapier with no shield and no fighting style (which is now strictly inferior to two short swords)
Sword and board with no fighting style, _if_ you value +1 damage over +2 AC.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 5, 2022)

This doesn’t pass the 5e sniff test, but one “realism” touch could be either that you need Str 10 to do this, or that negative Str modifiers would apply.


----------



## Laurefindel (Oct 5, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> 2d6 averages 7, while 1d10 averages 5.5, so if we are adding stat once then dual wielding is superior (especially for rogues who want to improve chances of getting sneak attack).
> 
> Getting d10 damage this way is only superior to:
> 
> ...



2d6 averages 7 when both attacks hit. The probabilities that one attack out of two hits is higher than a that of a single attack landing, but the probabilities that both attacks hit are lower than that of a single attack landing a hit.

If we assume that the first attack hits in both cases, d6 averages 3.5+stat, d10 averages 5.5+stat. Then, the second attack might or might not hit, so let's say your target number is 11 on the d20 to hit the AC, that's 1 chances out of 2, averaging to 1.75 damage. The lower the TN, the more this second attack contributes to average damage.

Then again it's possible that only the second attack hits, in which case TWF nets a 3.5 damage over one attack at d10 (because there's no bonus to damage from stat). So my maths are not the greatest but eyeballing it overall, two attacks at 1d6, with only the first adding stat bonus to damage, probably washes out with one attack at 1d10+stat bonus.

[edit] with discriminary bonus damage or bonus damage dice such as sneak attack, I agree that (2x) 1d6 is better that (1x) 1d10


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 5, 2022)

Laurefindel said:


> 2d6 averages 7 when both attacks hit. The probabilities that one attacks out of two hits is higher than a that of a single attack landing, but the probabilities that both attacks hit are lower than that of a single attack landing a hit.
> 
> If we assume that the first attack hits in both cases, d6 averages 3.5+stat, d10 averages 5.5+stat. Then, the second attack might or might not hit, so let's say your target number is 11 on the d20 to hit the AC, that's 1 chances out of 2, averaging to 1.75 damage. The lower the TN, the more this second attack contributes to average damage.
> 
> Then again it's possible that only the second attack hits, in which case TWF nets a 3.5 damage over one attack at d10 (because there's no bonus to damage from stat). So my maths are not the greatest but eyeballing it overall, two attacks at 1d6, with only the first adding stat bonus to damage, probably washes out with one attack at 1d10+stat bonus.




Oh, I see. 

The only difference is that the standard deviation is higher for the two attacks, which is what you are trying to describe. But expected DPR is still average damage * chance to hit. 

Really the only time it matters is when there is a reason you need to hit beyond that average damage, such as rogue sneak attack or preventing regeneration, in which case dual is superior.


----------



## Cap'n Kobold (Oct 8, 2022)

I don't see a balance issue: I removed the Finesse requirement for Sneak Attack for 5e and I've not seen any thematic or balance issues.
We will probably have to wait for the Warrior playtest to see weapon rules: so far only the change to the Light property and the interaction of Heavy with GWM feat have been revealed IIRC.
Until then, this sort of thing is pretty much speculation.



TwoSix said:


> Not sure I agree...fast, skinny guys using big swords has been a trope for a while now.



 Those skinny guys are generally depicted as massively (often superhumanly) strong.



Bill Zebub said:


> The way I figure it, if power isn’t your thing, two hands on the hilt gives you the leverage to move it quickly.



 If the weapon is dependent on leverage, then the strength (literally the ability to apply leverage) of the wielder is relevant.
If the weapon is not dependent on leverage, then you do not need the additional hand on the hilt limiting your reach.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 8, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> I think we need to differentiate weapons more, not make them more samey.
> 
> In addition, this is the old Ninja-Katanas argument we've heard for decades. But think of it this way: Katanas, Broadswords, and Bastard swords (the historic inspirations of the D&D Longsword) are HEAVY.



Not really. The weight of most swords pretty much caps out at about 3 lbs, or around 1.3 to 1.4 kg. Only dedicated two-handed swords like Zwihanders really get much heavier than that, and even those are a lot lighter than you’d think because the blades are really thin (which makes edge alignment that much more important for such big swords). Turns out, 3 lbs is the sweet spot for optimizing strike force, giving you the most mass without sacrificing the ability to accelerate it by muscle power. The difference tends to be in how that weight is distributed (hence the very long blades also being very thin).


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 8, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> (which makes edge alignment that much more important for such big swords).




Edge alignment?


----------



## tetrasodium (Oct 8, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Edge alignment?



if "-" & " /" were sword strikes & "|" a target
| - *← *Would be aligned well
but
|/*←* would not be



Spoiler: this gives more detail


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 8, 2022)

tetrasodium said:


> if "-" & " /" were sword strikes & "|" a target
> | - *← *Would be aligned well
> but
> |/*←* would not be
> ...



Ohhhh…I thought they were referring to something about how the blade was forged/ground. Symmetrical bevels or something.

And bonus points for the ascii art.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 8, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Edge alignment?



You cut through a target more easily and cleanly if you hit it at the right angle. This is especially important with a long, thin blade because it’s liable to wobble otherwise, which wastes a lot of kinetic energy that could otherwise be directed into your target. Ever used a metal ruler? Think about how, if you hit it on the broad side it wobbles, but if you hit it on the narrow side it _might_ not.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 8, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Ohhhh…I thought they were referring to something about how the blade was forged/ground. Symmetrical bevels or something.



That’s also a thing. Well, not symmetrical bevels, but the angle of the cutting edge (a 90 degree angle, for example, _can_ cut with enough force, but mostly isn’t going to do it very well. 45 degrees is pretty much the optimal blade angle).


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 8, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> You cut through a target more easily and cleanly if you hit it at the right angle. This is especially important with a long, thin blade because it’s liable to wobble otherwise, which wastes a lot of kinetic energy that could otherwise be directed into your target. Ever used a metal ruler? Think about how, if you hit it on the broad side it wobbles, but if you hit it on the narrow side it _might_ not.




No, but an aeronautical engineer once designed a wobbly javelin for my limp wrist that helped my fraternity win the campus Greek Olympics. Maybe you saw the documentary.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 8, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> That’s also a thing. Well, not symmetrical bevels, but the angle of the cutting edge (a 90 degree angle, for example, _can_ cut with enough force, but mostly isn’t going to do it very well. 45 degrees is pretty much the optimal blade angle).




Depends what you are cutting. I learned to grind a progressive bevel so that it’s nearly 90 degrees at the very edge, but you’d need a microscope to see it.  The majority of it is about 17-24 degrees per side, so 34-40 degrees total.

(Then again my blades are for cutting meat without armor over it.)


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 8, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Depends what you are cutting. I learned to grind a progressive bevel so that it’s nearly 90 degrees at the very edge, but you’d need a microscope to see it.  The majority of it is about 17-24 degrees per side, so 34-40 degrees total.
> 
> (Then again my blades are for cutting meat without armor over it.)



Yeah, it does depend what you’re cutting. You can polish a 90 degree edge until it’ll shear flesh easily, but even at that degree of sharpness it’s going to take an awful lot of force to cleave bone with.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 8, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Yeah, it does depend what you’re cutting. You can polish a 90 degree edge until it’ll shear flesh easily, but even at that degree of sharpness it’s going to take far more force than any human’s muscles can produce to cleave bone with.




i just deleted a paragraph of pedantry. It’s really not important.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 8, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> i just deleted a paragraph of pedantry. It’s really not important.



I also edited my post. “More force than a human’s muscles can produce” was unhelpful hyperbole.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 9, 2022)

This could be sorted with a feat.

It would be a boost to dex fighters, but it would come at a cost.

Feat:
Agile versatility( or something)
+1 dex or +1 con
you treat Versatile weapons that you wield in 2 hands as finesse weapons.

Not a great feat, but it expands the base of finesse weapons for your character to pick from.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 9, 2022)

Horwath said:


> This could be sorted with a feat.
> 
> It would be a boost to dex fighters, but it would come at a cost.
> 
> ...




How is it a boost to Dex fighters?


----------



## Marandahir (Oct 10, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Not really. The weight of most swords pretty much caps out at about 3 lbs, or around 1.3 to 1.4 kg. Only dedicated two-handed swords like Zwihanders really get much heavier than that, and even those are a lot lighter than you’d think because the blades are really thin (which makes edge alignment that much more important for such big swords). Turns out, 3 lbs is the sweet spot for optimizing strike force, giving you the most mass without sacrificing the ability to accelerate it by muscle power. The difference tends to be in how that weight is distributed (hence the very long blades also being very thin).



I guess that's a matter of perspective - that's a lot heavier than one-handed arming swords or rapiers or the like…


----------



## Cap'n Kobold (Oct 10, 2022)

Marandahir said:


> I guess that's a matter of perspective - that's a lot heavier than one-handed arming swords or rapiers or the like…



Both one-handed arming swords and rapiers weigh over 2lbs. That isn't that much lighter.


----------



## Minigiant (Oct 10, 2022)

I could see Finesse Longsword as an Advanced Fighting style like Monkey Grip Greataxe and Zen Archery.


----------



## CleverNickName (Oct 10, 2022)

In my last campaign a "katana" was just a Longsword with the Finesse property.  It was also a Monk weapon.
It didn't break the game.


----------



## Clint_L (Oct 11, 2022)

Seems like a solution in search of a problem, and it chips away at what little remains of strength as a viable stat. If it's just a flavour option, then just say that your rapier is a long sword and keep using the rapier rules.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 11, 2022)

I have this suspicion that at least some of the posters in this thread totally missed the part about two-handed.


----------



## Clint_L (Oct 13, 2022)

No, I caught it. But you also wrote, "It would really just be a flavor option." If it's just about flavour, then why do we need a new rule that chips away at what little remains of strength as a viable stat?


----------



## the Jester (Oct 13, 2022)

This seems to me like a solution in search of a problem. I see no reason to allow it. If you want to do so in your game, feel free, but I'm not into it.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 13, 2022)

Clint_L said:


> No, I caught it. But you also wrote, "It would really just be a flavor option." If it's just about flavour, then why do we need a new rule




Well, the battle axe is a flavor option.   It’s mechanically identical to a long sword, except for weight/cost. Should we get rid of it?



Clint_L said:


> that chips away at what little remains of strength as a viable stat?




I still haven't an explanation for why this has any effect on Str. And if it did then it wouldn’t be a flavor option.  Those two things are contradictory.

Or is it just because people who want to swing a weapon with two hands have to go Str, and this would give them another option?  If so, I guess I don’t really equate “aesthetic preference” with “viability”.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 13, 2022)

the Jester said:


> This seems to me like a solution in search of a problem. I see no reason to allow it. If you want to do so in your game, feel free, but I'm not into it.




I get not liking it for aesthetic reasons; that’s valid. But “solution in search of a problem” seems like an inapplicable cliche. Problem: as a Ranger, I want to swing a melee weapon with two hands AND be a good archer. Solution: versatile weapons are finesse when used with two hands. 

I guess since nobody has pointed out an actual mechanical exploit I have my answer.


----------



## DragonBelow (Oct 13, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> I get not liking it for aesthetic reasons; that’s valid. But “solution in search of a problem” seems like an inapplicable cliche. Problem: as a Ranger, I want to swing a melee weapon with two hands AND be a good archer. Solution: versatile weapons are finesse when used with two hands.
> 
> I guess since nobody has pointed out an actual mechanical exploit I have my answer.




Solution: invest in STR and DEX.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 13, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> I get not liking it for aesthetic reasons; that’s valid. But “solution in search of a problem” seems like an inapplicable cliche. Problem: as a Ranger, I want to swing a melee weapon with two hands AND be a good archer. Solution: versatile weapons are finesse when used with two hands.
> 
> I guess since nobody has pointed out an actual mechanical exploit I have my answer.



Guess we need a dedicated 2Handed finesse weapon.

greatsword 2d6->remove Heavy, becomes d12->add finesse, becomes 1d10.

Then again, greatsword should be 2d8 from the start so that imagined 2Handed finesse weapon should be d12.
But that is another topic/problem for 5E.


----------



## Minigiant (Oct 13, 2022)

Horwath said:


> Guess we need a dedicated 2Handed finesse weapon.
> 
> greatsword 2d6->remove Heavy, becomes d12->add finesse, becomes 1d10.
> 
> ...



The core problem is STR and DEX are so unbalanced in base 5e and likely base 1D&D that a 2 dice shift is not enough.

So 2H Finesse Longsword 1d10 would only be okay if 2H Greatsword is allowed to be 1d16 (or 2d8).


----------



## Horwath (Oct 13, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> The core problem is STR and DEX are so unbalanced in base 5e and likely base 1D&D that a 2 dice shift is not enough.
> 
> So 2H Finesse Longsword 1d10 would only be okay if 2H Greatsword is allowed to be 1d16 (or 2d8).



d12 vs. 2d8 is 2,5 damage per swing.

That will add up fast.

with the (horrible) 2Handed fighting style, it's +3,17 damage per swing.


2Handed style should be changed to +1d6 damage per swing. +1d4 if it's finesse 2Handed weapon.


----------



## Minigiant (Oct 13, 2022)

Horwath said:


> d12 vs. 2d8 is 2,5 damage per swing.
> 
> That will add up fast.



It should be more. At least 3. Preferably 4

I'm not against features, feats, or options that swap attack or DC ability scores. But to me, it should come at heavy cost, be a specific build, or have rebalancing of scores.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 13, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> It should be more. At least 3. Preferably 4
> 
> I'm not against features, feats, or options that swap attack or DC ability scores. But to me, it should come at heavy cost, be a specific build, or have rebalancing of scores.



As I mentioned, with style it's 3,17.
And if you use houseruled 2Handed fighting style, it's 3,5 per swing.
that is really enough.


----------



## Clint_L (Oct 13, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Well, the battle axe is a flavor option.   It’s mechanically identical to a long sword, except for weight/cost. Should we get rid of it?



Yes! We should simplify weapon rules to just the basic types (i.e. 1-hand slashing), give players a list of typical weapons that fall into the category, and let them decide what to call their preferred weapon.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 13, 2022)

Clint_L said:


> Yes! We should simplify weapon rules to just the basic types (i.e. 1-hand slashing), give players a list of typical weapons that fall into the category, and let them decide what to call their preferred weapon.



so true.


here is my suggestion;








						Rebalancing melee weapons for 5.5E
					

Right now the weapon table looks little bit chaotic with some weapons having little sense in their traits and their damage.  For this I will take for base from 3.5e simple 1Handed weapon that has d8 damage and critical of 20/×2(the default and only weapon crit range in 5E) as 5E does not have...




					www.enworld.org
				





pick traits you need for your character concept and flavor the look/name of the weapon.
within reason OFC.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 13, 2022)

Clint_L said:


> Yes! We should simplify weapon rules to just the basic types (i.e. 1-hand slashing), give players a list of typical weapons that fall into the category, and let them decide what to call their preferred weapon.




Oh, well that I agree with, but it’s not very realistic to expect it to happen officially. 

I bet if it did, though, that 1d10 2H finesse martial weapons would be a thing.


----------



## Laurefindel (Oct 13, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> I still haven't an explanation for why this has any effect on Str. And if it did then it wouldn’t be a flavor option.  Those two things are contradictory.



You took something that only Str builds could do and allowed Dex builds to do it _as well_ also. You’re not taking anything away from Str (and from one of its least used options at that), but it still results in a net gain for Dex which causes knee-jerk reactions when you want to rein-in Dex.

But if it makes 2-handed versatile a valid (if still niche) option, I say it’s a net gain for the whole game because very few players take advantage of the versatile property in the first place, by lack of support. And as you demonstrated, finesse 2-handed versatile is at best on par with rapiers, and potentially inferior to TWF depending on bonus action status.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 13, 2022)

Laurefindel said:


> You took something that only Str builds could do and allowed Dex builds to do it _as well_.




Not quite. Str builds can do 1d12 (or 2d6). So if you want to go 2H, Str is still better.  

Unless you meant “as well” not in the sense of “to equal effect” but merely “also.”


----------



## Laurefindel (Oct 13, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Not quite. Str builds can do 1d12 (or 2d6). So if you want to go 2H, Str is still better.
> 
> Unless you meant “as well” not in the sense of “to equal effect” but merely “also.”



The latter.

Now Dex characters can also do something previously restricted to Str builds.

Indeed, poor choices of word on my part. I’ll edit.


----------



## tetrasodium (Oct 13, 2022)

Laurefindel said:


> You took something that only Str builds could do and allowed Dex builds to do it _as well_ also. You’re not taking anything away from Str (and from one of its least used options at that), but it still results in a net gain for Dex which causes knee-jerk reactions when you want to rein-in Dex.
> 
> But if it makes 2-handed versatile a valid (if still niche) option, I say it’s a net gain for the whole game because very few players take advantage of the versatile property in the first place, by lack of support. And as you demonstrated, finesse 2-handed versatile is at best on par with rapiers, and potentially inferior to TWF depending on bonus action status.



Actually it does have a loss for strength builds.  5e may not make good use of such things but it makes feats & abilities designed to bring sword & board up more difficult to balance because that would include both the build its trying to lift as well as builds already at or near the target.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 13, 2022)

Laurefindel said:


> The latter.
> 
> Now Dex characters can also do something previously restricted to Str builds.
> 
> Indeed, poor choices of word on my part. I’ll edit.



Well that’s not really a qualitative change. Dex builds can already use 2H weapons if they really want to…they have proficiency…they just won’t be as good at it. My suggestion would narrow the gap, but not allow something that previously wasn’t.


----------



## Minigiant (Oct 13, 2022)

Longsword 2H Finesse is something I would be okay bring a super ultra specific feat. Like Complete warrior Styles 


Anger of the Wurm: Warhammer and Warpick TWF
Dragon Horn: Greatsword and Dagger TWF
???? Longsword 2H Finesse 
Griffin Roar: Greataxe 1H and Shield
Manticore Tail: Flail Reach


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 13, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> Longsword 2H Finesse is something I would be okay bring a super ultra specific feat. Like Complete warrior Styles
> 
> 
> Anger of the Wurm: Warhammer and Warpick TWF
> ...



Why would anybody ever spend a feat to do less damage?


----------



## Minigiant (Oct 13, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Why would anybody ever spend a feat to do less damage?



Which one does less damage?

AofW lets you dual wield 1d8 weapons.
Dragonhorn lets you dual wield 2d6 and 1d4.
Griffin Roar lets you deal 1d12 one hand with a shield
Manticore Tail gives you a 1d8 one handed reach weapon.

*Anger of the Wurm*
8th-LevelFeat
Prerequisite:Strength 13+, Warrior Group
Repeatable: No

*AbilityScoreIncrease*.Increaseyour
Constitutionor Strengthscoreby1,toa
maximumof20.
*Grounded*. YouhaveAdvantageon Strength
SavingThrows
*Deep Wurm Strike*. You treat Warhammers and War Picks as light weapons


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 14, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> Longsword 2H Finesse is something I would be okay bring a super ultra specific feat.




This one.


----------



## jasper (Oct 14, 2022)

No. Adds another column to the weapon table. One handed  str,  Two handed finese.  5E is suppose to be easy.  But get rid of rapier and make longswords Fine mess and I will be happy with it.


----------



## Laurefindel (Oct 14, 2022)

1d8 slashing, versatile (1d10, finesse)?


----------



## Minigiant (Oct 14, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> This one.



There aren't any 2 Handed finesse weapons.
So there is no where to lower your damage from.


----------



## Clint_L (Oct 14, 2022)

Just make it a house rule.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 14, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> There aren't any 2 Handed finesse weapons.
> So there is no where to lower your damage from.




I’ll start over.

Why would anybody who can dual wield short swords for 2d6 ever spend a feat to be able to do 1d10? Is there an example of another feat that is pure flavor?


----------



## Clint_L (Oct 14, 2022)

Frankly, I think the rules should get rid of most weapon properties, including versatile. Make all that stuff flavour. The current weapon rules still add way too much complexity given the actual impact on the game, and are occasionally abusable (reach property, for example).


----------



## Horwath (Oct 14, 2022)

Clint_L said:


> Frankly, I think the rules should get rid of most weapon properties, including versatile. Make all that stuff flavour. The current weapon rules still add way too much complexity given the actual impact on the game, and are occasionally abusable (reach property, for example).



what complexity?

there are 6 properties to weapons.
Light, Heavy, Finesse, Thrown, Reach, Versatile(this is basically non property, so count it out) and Range

2 more if you want to add 1Handed and 2Handed as property. I wouldn't.

and some few odd weapons that have some Special property.


----------



## Minigiant (Oct 14, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> I’ll start over.
> 
> Why would anybody who can dual wield short swords for 2d6 ever spend a feat to be able to do 1d10? Is there an example of another feat that is pure flavor?



Because it qualities for great weapon fighting fighting style and a special versatile weapon feats.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 14, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> Because it qualities for great weapon fighting fighting style and a special versatile weapon feats.



the worst style in the game and what versatile feat exactly?


----------



## Minigiant (Oct 14, 2022)

Horwath said:


> the worst style in the game and what versatile feat exactly?



A speculative one.

It's all speculation.


----------



## ECMO3 (Oct 25, 2022)

To be honest I have not seen a lot of the handwringing about longswords in play.

The only characters I know who have proficiency and don't use them are generally Rogues.  We have plenty of dex martials and ranged characters that use longswords for two reasons.  

First and most commonly Gauntlets of Ogre power are pretty common (actually uncommon but you know what I am saying) and girdles of giant strength are not unheard of.  At medium to high levels it is usually a dex-based martial that is sporting these things.  Combine this with the fact that longswords are the most common magic item, especially powerful magic items, this makes them often a good choice.

Second if you roll stats straight up (i.e. roll strength, not roll something and assign it to strength) you can end up with a high enough strength score that using a longsword is more than viable, especially like noted above if it comes magic.  for example if your Elven Ranger rolled a 14 strength, using that +1 longsword you found as your melee weapon is not a bad idea.

I find that many of the mechanics issues surrounding certain armor and weapons choices come from people using point buy and the idea of "dump stats".  Rolling largely eliminates these problems (and causes others)


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 25, 2022)

I’m not sure that an old school stat generation method that isn’t even offered as an option in 5e (or is it buried somewhere that I’ve forgotten?) is the best basis for an argument that everything is fine as it is.


----------



## Clint_L (Oct 26, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> I’m not sure that an old school stat generation method that isn’t even offered as an option in 5e (or is it buried somewhere that I’ve forgotten?) is the best basis for an argument that everything is fine as it is.



I'm not sure what they are getting at by "roll stats straight up." 

Rolling for stats rather than using point buy is still the first recommended option in the PHB: "You generate your character’s six ability scores randomly. Roll four 6-sided dice and record the total of the highest three dice on a piece of scratch paper. Do this five more times, so that you have six numbers. If you want to save time or don’t like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8."

But that still allows you to assign them. Just rolling once for each stat in order is super old school and if that is what they are getting at, that does seem like a Quixotic argument.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 26, 2022)

Clint_L said:


> But that still allows you to assign them. Just rolling once for each stat in order is super old school and if that is what they are getting at, that does seem like a Quixotic argument.




Yeah unless I read it wrong that’s what they are saying.  “…roll strength, not roll something and assign it to strength.”


----------



## Clint_L (Oct 26, 2022)

When I started playing, in 1979 (!) we just rolled the six stats, in order, using just 3 dice for each. Needless to say, it was pretty hit or miss, and you wound up throwing away a lot of characters because they just weren't viable for anything. We made a house rule that you had to have two rolls of 13 or higher or you got to re-roll. It still made classes like paladin basically impossible (min 17 in charisma!). Then the new DM's Guide came out and we started using the option where you got to roll six times for each stat and keep the best one. That was when I got my first character with an 18 - a ranger with 18/94 strength, which we were all in awe of (back then, rangers were a strength build, and the extra percentile was a thing you only did for strength, which meant that at level 1 he was +2/hit, +5/damage).


----------



## ECMO3 (Oct 27, 2022)

Clint_L said:


> I'm not sure what they are getting at by "roll stats straight up."
> 
> Rolling for stats rather than using point buy is still the first recommended option in the PHB: "You generate your character’s six ability scores randomly. Roll four 6-sided dice and record the total of the highest three dice on a piece of scratch paper. Do this five more times, so that you have six numbers. If you want to save time or don’t like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8."
> 
> But that still allows you to assign them. Just rolling once for each stat in order is super old school and if that is what they are getting at, that does seem like a Quixotic argument.



I did not say use the PHB method.

When I said "straight up" I meant you roll dice (using whatever method, there are a lot) and what you roll is your strength score.  That is your strength score before bonuses.  Pick up the dice and roll again.  That is your dexterity score .....

Usually we use an alternate method with varying number of dice for every stat for this, so you usually get a good roll in the stat you want a good roll in, but it still prevents "assigning" a dump stat, your low stat(s) are random.


----------



## Branduil (Oct 27, 2022)

If you give Longswords Finesse, why even have a Strength stat at that point? Just combine STR and DEX into one super-ability "Prowess" that is used for defense and all attacks.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 27, 2022)

Branduil said:


> If you give Longswords Finesse, why even have a Strength stat at that point? Just combine STR and DEX into one super-ability "Prowess" that is used for defense and all attacks.




Oh for f&@k’s sake. 

Finesse _only_ when used _two-handed_.


----------

