D&D 5E The best solution for longswords

[Oofta]

Except that they only did half the job, elves and rogues were never proficient in bastard swords before.

I'm right there with you on the rogues getting proficiency with longswords, it doesn't make much sense. Then again, straight rogues were never weapon monkeys so if it bothers you that much get rid of the proficiency since it's going to be rarely used anyway.

Elves? They're the munchkin race of 5E (I kid, mostly) so why wouldn't they get proficiency? I could see removing that one too and putting in a note about how they call their rapiers "elven thin blades" because they're snooty that way. But that's probably me just mostly being bitter because any time I run an elf PC it dies before it hits 3rd level.

End of the day I just don't see a big issue having to do with names of weapons that never had any hard historical definition anyway. I've also seen plenty of longswords being used by PCs, your experience may vary.

Want to discuss how to have more realistic bonuses from dexterity? I'm full of opinions. Well, everyone says I'm full of it anyway. But it affects more than just swords, it affects bows, AC, a few other things.

 

[snickersnax]

The longsword is fine, or at least as fine as every other versatile weapon is. It's still better than the martial 1d8 weapons that lack the versatile property, like the flail. If you have a problem with versatile weapons, then you need to find a way to make the property more useful. A fighting style would be best IMO, but a feat would work too.

Through this thread I am discovering that I do have a problem with versatile that I didn't even know I had.

Versatile once combined with a fighting style seems the same as a non-versatile 1-H weapon of the same damage and worse than a non-versatile 2-H weapon. So I'd disagree and say that a longsword is not better than a flail.

Now there maybe some interesting edge cases around spell casting and grappling, as others are beginning to point out, and if those are somehow emphasized, versatile may have more value than a non-versatile weapon, but otherwise versatile is the same or worse.

 

[jaelis]

I would have thought the broken thing about longswords is that they suck when used two-handed compared to one-handed when using the appropriate fighting style.

So don't use them two-handed, doesn't bother me. (Although I do like my strongarm feat )

And there is no use for a rogue to be proficient in them (rogues don't have proficiency in rapiers, so a rapier/longsword comparison doesn't really apply).

Rogues are also proficient with greatclubs, doesn't mean they have to use them. That doesn't bother me either.

Rogues are proficient with rapiers though, for the record.

 

[snickersnax]

Don't try to recreate your favorite Third Edition elf rogue in 5E? Count me in with those who thought the longsword has always been 'too good' of a weapon choice.

Seriously, though, based on the thread, it doesn't sound like your real issue is with the stats for the longsword, but with the definition of Sneak Attack --

--
Pauper

Well you might be right, when I think that the weapon of choice for executions according to game math is the rapier I start to cringe. Where are all the executioner axes and 2-H swords? I'd just as soon see all weapons available for sneak attack...

 

[jaelis]

Well you might be right, when I think that the weapon of choice for executions according to game math is the rapier I start to cringe. Where are all the executioner axes and 2-H swords? I'd just as soon see all weapons available for sneak attack...

Another of my favorite houserules:
Rogue: Assassin
- Add to bonus proficiencies: choose two martial weapons. You gain proficiency with these weapons and can use them for sneak attack, even if they are not finesse weapons.

 

[snickersnax]

Rogues are proficient with rapiers though, for the record.

You are quite right. Thanks for the correction

 

[Krachek]

Add Longsword to the list of weapon authorized for polearm master feat!

 

[snickersnax]

Add Longsword to the list of weapon authorized for polearm master feat!

That's interesting... Polearm mastery applied to all 2-handed weapons would be such a cool replacement for great weapon fighting style. It actually feels like a fighting style

 

[Krachek]

Don’t take my answer too seriously, but Longsword simply need a feat.
There is feat for heavy weapon, polearm, shield, ranged weapon, crossbow but nothing for longsword.
Give me a feat and a horse and I will conquer this land!

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Ok. Can the player decide to use piercing or slashing damage? The reason I asked is because the longsword is slashing only and the rapier is piercing only, so if you removed one from the game then damage type availability would change.

Not in my world. A broadsword is slashing, a rapier is piercing, a longsword is both. But then, I may be too old school sometimes for 5E.

I would have thought the broken thing about longswords is that they suck when used two-handed compared to one-handed when using the appropriate fighting style. And there is no use for a rogue to be proficient in them (rogues don't have proficiency in rapiers, so a rapier/longsword comparison doesn't really apply).

I do not allow two-handed fighting with a longsword unless it is specifically made with enough room on the grip to fit two hands. And at that point, to me, it is now a bastard sword, even if the blade length does not meet the traditional minimum.