D&D 5E Is the rapier "necessary"?

[Blue]

Not a big issue, but as you mention it does impact one concept of character. Perhaps there's a thematic bludgeoning or slashing weapon that would be d8 finessable.

I apologize for my lack of familiarity with the source material, but what about a tabak-toyok or two-section staff? Heck, many Asian sources could just have the quarterstaff as finessable and be done with it. (It is Versatile, it can be used single-handed.)

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Now my first instinct here is "this isn't a problem, high dex characters have it too good with dex being so useful all around anyway". But... well I haven't played the game yet, and most (I hope haha) of you have. Would "forcing" dex-based characters to use smaller weapons be a big issue? Or is it a small nerf that might well be needed (seeing how good dex is).

The main game balance effect is that you're "forcing" Dex-based players to become ranged attackers. Expect to see Crossbow Expert and Sharpshooter be even more popular than normal. The extent to which this effect occurs will depend on how savvy your players are.

Since ranged weapons are already better, this isn't a nerf--you're just encouraging them harder to take an already-optimal strategy by worsening a suboptimal one (melee Dex).

 

[Darkwing Duck]

This is definitely off-book, but I think it is neat. I would replace the d8 rapier with an escrima stick. However, the escrima stick would do d4 and double damage on a natural 19 and quadruple damage on a natural 20. It is also bludgeoning rather than piercing. As the 19, or 20 represents getting struck multiple times, anything which adds to damage die gets added multiple times (so, the Rogue's sneak attack dice are added multiple times).

 

[Ancalagon]

Frankly the rapier never should have been made a D8 weapon. The D6 scimitar (or talwar in south asia) is a more lethal and effective weapon and should probably be bumped up to D8 and dump the rapier all-together.

What I was considering to do was to have the talwar a strength based (ie non finesse-able) weapon and be the "default" sword ("standard" D&D equivalent to longsword), since it has a thicker blade (but it wouldn't be versatile due to the handle). For the "rapier" I was going to use the shamshir, but then I saw that in D&D the finesse-able scimitar was a d6 weapon so...

IRL the rapier required many hours of practice to use effectively. It was impressive to watch in a duel, but hopeless in a skirmish which is why it was the weapon of the civilian aristocracy. To land a deadly blow you either needed to get the blade between your opponent's rib cage or into his armpit. No easy feat!

Well, IMO *any* weapons requires a lot of practice to master, but you are right that if you are untrained and you have to pick something up and fight, you'd be much better off with a baseball bat or a machette...

And yes, for an adventurer a "cut and trust" sword would make much, much more sense than a "real" rapier. Mind you back then any penetrative wound was potentially lethal due to infection... but with curing spells that is less so, *and* so what if that orc is going to die of an infection 2 days later if he's still trying to bash your skull in *now*?

The Urami whilst a very different kind of weapon, is probably the closest south asian analog: a graceful martial weapon requiring great deal of skill, its artful and effective in duels but mostly useless in warfare. Neither weapon is very effective against an armored opponent. (The urami is quite good for driving away predators though and I suspect that was its original intent).

Well the Urami does allow to keep many foes at bay unlike a rapier, but that aside, does it sound like a d8 weapon?

Since you are going off book and inventing your own weapon list anyway, I'd advocate making the scimitar D8 and rapier D6, but give the rapier x3 or x4 critical. Or roll again every time you roll a 6 for damage.

There is a stylistic consequence to having the scimitar a d8 weapon, because it won't be light anymore, making 2 scimitar fighting not really work anymore.

 

[Ancalagon]

I totally agree that the jian would work well as the rapier equivalent *but* that isn't south asia

 

[Salamandyr]

I don't think a tulwar is appreciably different from a saber from any other reason, other than hilt configuration. Not all sabers or scimitars are light, not all tulwars are heavy. It's just a different word for the same weapon in different regions. So for that, perhaps let the player decide whether they want a light tulwar (scimitar stats) or a "heavy" tulwar (longsword stats) or "giant" tulwar (greatsword stats).

Definitely agree on leaving the rapier out. I'm doing so in my next campaign, which I want to feel more medieval. The rapier is not only post-medieval, it's a highly specialized weapon that doesn't really have an analogue outside of Europe.

The jian is much shorter than a rapier, much lighter, and its fighting style is much more oriented toward cuts. It makes more sense as a 1d6 finesse, slashing weapon than the scimitar does.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

So for that, perhaps let the player decide whether they want a light tulwar (scimitar stats) or a "heavy" tulwar (longsword stats) or "giant" tulwar (greatsword stats).

This is what I did for the Chinese dao, anyway.

Definitely agree on leaving the rapier out. I'm doing so in my next campaign, which I want to feel more medieval. The rapier is not only post-medieval, it's a highly specialized weapon that doesn't really have an analogue outside of Europe.

The jian is much shorter than a rapier, much lighter, and its fighting style is much more oriented toward cuts. It makes more sense as a 1d6 finesse, slashing weapon than the scimitar does.

Step back and look at the bigger picture. All a rapier is in D&D is a 1d8 finesse weapon that is not light -- i.e., something which functions as well as any "standard" main-hand weapon, but quick enough to use dexterity rather than strength, and should not be wielded off-hand or dual-wielded without special training. I think a lot of weapons fit those parameters, even if they're shaped very differently than the rapier of the European Renaissance. Arguably, since the longsword is versatile, this description is the best fit for any strictly-one-handed Medieval arming sword. Hell, one of my characters uses rapier stats for a light spear.

 

[jaelis]

The main game balance effect is that you're "forcing" Dex-based players to become ranged attackers. Expect to see Crossbow Expert and Sharpshooter be even more popular than normal. The extent to which this effect occurs will depend on how savvy your players are.

Since ranged weapons are already better, this isn't a nerf--you're just encouraging them harder to take an already-optimal strategy by worsening a suboptimal one (melee Dex).

IMX most dex characters use TWF, which precludes rapiers anyway, until you get the feat. So you could adjust the feat instead.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

IMX most dex characters use TWF, which precludes rapiers anyway, until you get the feat. So you could adjust the feat instead.

Rogues like to have their bonus action free for Cunning Action. A rapier is a good choice for them.

 

[jaelis]

Eh +1 damage vs the opportunity to try again to score sneak attack? I'd say two short swords is better mechanically. You don't have to use your bonus action to attack, but it's nice to have the option.

Not that rapier is a bad choice if that's the flavor you want, but the OP is going for a different flavor anyway.