D&D 5E The D&D rapier: What is it?

Hriston · Sep 15, 2017

Thurmas said:
It's not always about maxing damage output, though. Sometimes it's about flavor and two swords doesn't make sense just to max damage if the character concept asks for something else.

Since it isn't about maximizing damage, as a DM, I would have no problem with you holding a dagger in your off-hand while attacking with your rapier to fulfill your character concept. Why would I? But it won't give you a bonus to your AC, and you won't get an off-hand attack with it. You're already doing 1d8 with your rapier after all!

Kalshane · Sep 15, 2017

iamntbatman said:
I just don't see what builds people would ever use with that. Giving up another 1 AC (sometimes 2) to be able to choose to do 1d4 only in melee sometimes seems like a really bad tradeoff.

By that logic dual-wielding scimitars (or shortswords) is pointless as well, since the average damage is the same. (2d6 vs 1d8+1d4)

The point is allowing a historical style (fighting with rapier and dagger at the same time) without forcing them to take a feat (at which point it becomes incredibly sub-optimal, as dual rapiers is clearly better). It's not a replacement for sword-and-board, it's giving another option beyond dual shortswords/scimitars for someone who wants to dual-wield.

Thurmas · Sep 15, 2017

Hriston said:
Since it isn't about maximizing damage, as a DM, I would have no problem with you holding a dagger in your off-hand while attacking with your rapier to fulfill your character concept. Why would I? But it won't give you a bonus to your AC, and you won't get an off-hand attack with it. You're already doing 1d8 with your rapier after all!

Requesting that the Main hand not be light isn't also requesting all the other benefits of the Feat. It seems like a traditional D&D fighting style that has been around for a long while. Mathematically speaking as well, a 1d8 weapon and a 1d4 weapon do the same damage when you use them as two 1d6 weapons. The two weapon fighting feat should be for something extraordinary, like two battleaxes at once.

Plus you automatically get to know how to use a non light weapon and a shield together, why not a non light weapon and a light weapon? How is a rapier or longsword and dagger different from the same with a shield?

Ancalagon · Sep 15, 2017

As far as I am aware, rapier dagger combos were not used to attack with both, but rather as a defensive measure or to be able to attack someone who got inside your rapier's reach.

So the two weapon fighting style works well to represent an aggressive dual scimitar "whirlwind of doom" style, but not at all the sword and parrying dagger style.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using EN World mobile app

schnee · Sep 15, 2017

Meanwhile, *Wizard Gates in a horde of Angels*

Then *Cleric banishes the Big Bad Evil Guy to a pocket dimension while party mops up minions*

But, OMG a FINESSE WEAPON that does UP TO 2HP MORE!?!!?!?!?

If the Single-Handed Quarterstaff is the Spiked Chain of 5e, then the Rapier is...the Mercurial sword?

Hriston · Sep 16, 2017

Thurmas said:
Requesting that the Main hand not be light isn't also requesting all the other benefits of the Feat.

I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't talking about the benefits of the feat. I was just talking about the suggestions being made in this thread. Some are suggesting a main-gauche grant a +1 to AC. I can see a rationale for that, but I wouldn't go that way myself. I think if you aren't using a shield and gaining the +2 to AC, then less effective forms of defensive protection are subsumed into your normal AC, or are represented by the damage reduction of the Battle Master's Parry maneuver.

Some are suggesting the main-gauche be allowed to make an off-hand attack as per the normal two-weapon fighting rules. I don't think this is consistent with historical styles at all, in which the main-gauche was primarily used to parry and for attack only when too close to an opponent to use the primary weapon effectively. So I think the normal rules are fine, allowing an attack from one weapon or the other, but not both.

Plus you automatically get to know how to use a non light weapon and a shield together, why not a non light weapon and a light weapon? How is a rapier or longsword and dagger different from the same with a shield?

It's different because the dagger isn't a shield, so it doesn't benefit your AC, and you can't attack with the shield on the same turn as the primary weapon, so why would you expect to be able to attack with the dagger?

doctorbadwolf · Sep 16, 2017

Hriston said:
I don't see why it needs to be any kind of historic "rapier" at all. Also, I think my solution's the best. Making rapier the generic sword explains why it's an optimal choice for sword and board combatants whether based on STR or DEX.

For my games, the rapier is often just a lighter and better balanced, sword that isn't best used with two hands. The basic "Viking sword" could be a rapier, short sword, or longsword, depending on the specifications.

Most of my players like it to be the classic Hollywood three mustekeers/princess bride inspired rapier, though.

Hriston · Sep 16, 2017

doctorbadwolf said:
For my games, the rapier is often just a lighter and better balanced, sword that isn't best used with two hands. The basic "Viking sword" could be a rapier, short sword, or longsword, depending on the specifications.

I don't know. My idea of a Viking sword doesn't include swords small enough to be dual-wielded (I could be wrong about this), and I don't think there were hilts long enough for two-handed use until the High Middle Ages, by which time the Viking sword had evolved into the knightly sword and longer hilts were occasionally employed. So that just leaves the "rapier" to describe this type of sword.

Most of my players like it to be the classic Hollywood three mustekeers/princess bride inspired rapier, though.

Yeah, I used to ban rapiers until I realized it was just the typical one-handed sword.

doctorbadwolf · Sep 17, 2017

Hriston said:
I don't know. My idea of a Viking sword doesn't include swords small enough to be dual-wielded (I could be wrong about this), and I don't think there were hilts long enough for two-handed use until the High Middle Ages, by which time the Viking sword had evolved into the knightly sword and longer hilts were occasionally employed. So that just leaves the "rapier" to describe this type of sword.

Yeah, I used to ban rapiers until I realized it was just the typical one-handed sword.

All fair. We have no real simulationist tendencies, so we don't really care if the specs match up exactly. The longsword is a bit of a stretch, but the rapier and short sword fit fine, imo.

As far as dual wielding them, I've seen it done with practice weapons of very similar weight, length, and balance, so I don't see much issue with it. Also, most PCs don't have a hard time getting mundane weaponry made for them, and in a world with humans and halflings living together, I assume that weapons range even more in length than they did IRL.

I'm curious, though. What did you used to associate the rapier with that had you banning it?

Ancalagon · Sep 17, 2017

doctorbadwolf said:
As far as dual wielding them, I've seen it done with practice weapons of very similar weight, length, and balance

By "them"... do you mean rapiers or something else?

D&D 5E The D&D rapier: What is it?

Hriston

Dungeon Master of Middle-earth

Kalshane

First Post

Thurmas

Explorer

Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon

schnee

First Post

Hriston

Dungeon Master of Middle-earth

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle

Hriston

Dungeon Master of Middle-earth

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle

Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon

Similar Threads