D&D 5E Scimitar

[Ahrimon]

Story wise and mechanically he was a fighter/ranger and the dual wielding came from his fighter background. Most people just see that he's a ranger now so rangers should dual wield.

 

[Umbran]

SO. MUCH. HATE. Plenty for everyone!

Someone call the Jedi Council. We have a Sith here....

 

[fjw70]

Story wise and mechanically he was a fighter/ranger and the dual wielding came from his fighter background. Most people just see that he's a ranger now so rangers should dual wield.

Back in 1e Drow had the ability to fight with two one-handed weapons with penalty. So the dual wielding comes from his race.

 

[JeffB]

For a couple years now I have been using weapon damage by class for every version of D&D except for 4e. I hate someone having to change a character concept because they need a couple points extra out of a sword vs. a scimitar or spear.

 

[variant]

The scimitar and rapier groups are broad that cover different sizes and weights. Also, the actual weight of something shouldn't necessarily determine if it is Dexterity or Strength based, balance plays a major role.

 

[Jeff Albertson]

Yeah, a few weapons are missing:

1d8, slashing, two-handed.

1d8, piercing, versatile.

1d8, slashing, finesse.

2d6, piercing, heavy, two-handed.

1d12, bludgeoning, heavy, two-handed.

1d12, piercing, heavy, two-handed.

 

[AverageCitizen]

Yup, I'd agree with this. Whereas most standard dual-wielding would be with two 1d6 weapons (shortswords / scimitars etc)... allowing instead a 1d8 / 1d4 combo is not going to cause that much difficulty or any tremendous unbalancing in my personal opinion. Damage is going to end up being close to the same in the end, so I don't see any reason to disallow it if the player wants to go rapier/main gauche for flavor reasons.

The 1d8/1d4 combo is a little better than 1d6/1d6 because on turns where you use your bonus action for something other than off-hand attacks you still get most of your damage.

 

[GMMichael]

So, I talked with my team of experts on this. We couldn't come to a consensus, much less understand the concept of a curved sword. Here's the recap: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMHle170Kxw

Seriously though, the Player's Handbook can only be wrong if it's self-contradictory (like some other popular books...). If Mike and the gang say a rapier does d8 damage, then it does d8 damage.

But since you're probably not playing in the WotC offices, use your judgment. I'll tell you that a short sword, gladius, rapier, epee, foil, scimitar, and butter knife all do d6+1 damage. Scratch the butter knife.

 

[Shiroiken]

The 1d8/1d4 combo is a little better than 1d6/1d6 because on turns where you use your bonus action for something other than off-hand attacks you still get most of your damage.

Yes the damage will be slightly better, because you can use just the 1d8 when you don't use your bonus action. That's how much the average 1H weapon deals, so no big change (you save some interactions of dropping/drawing weapons). The major change is when you add Additional Attacks, but as I mentioned earlier, that's when TWF tends to fall off the damage chart. This helps keep them in the mix.

 

[Morty]

The weapons table in 5e is kind of hilariously bad. I doubt there was any thought behind it other than slapping together the weapons that have been around since 3e and calling it a day. So the mix of misguided, ignorant realism and haphazard balance applies. Nothing stops you from using a rapier, changing the damage type - which I don't think is relevant anyway - and calling it a scimitar. Or vice versa.