D&D 5E Katana in 5th edition - finesse?

[Charlaquin]

That's strange, because Samurai planning on a fight wore LOTS of armor.

In real life, yeah. But the trope of the robe-wearing, katana-wielding martial artist from the exotic east has very little to do with real life.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

In real life, yeah. But the trope of the robe-wearing, katana-wielding martial artist from the exotic east has very little to do with real life.

True, Ogami Ito only ever wore that one robe. He just killed things faster than they could hit him (so lots of attacks) and had a ton of hit points.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

I'm starting to wonder if elaborate discussions of history and gratuitous overuse of the word "arming sword" should be considered thread crapping, because it really isnt contributing anything.

Katanas are not the same as, longswords, they are at least as different as scimitars. They make a fine reflavor for strength based characters but many romanticized samurai (rurouni kenshin, champloo, for instance) are dex based, their slashes relying more heavily on iado and the like. I recommend 1d6 finesse, versatile (2d4) it has the added benefit of adding a two hand build for small characters and dex characters but still is lower in damage than strength great weapons, because it lacks the heavy property for GWM builds.

Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

So does a Katana require less Strength to use than a longsword? Does it require more Dexterity? They were both made in comparable ranges of weight and length. They both need to deal with armor. They can both be wielded with 1 or 2 hands.

Other than a perspective that 'Eastern' combat arts might be Dex-based, why would there be a differentiation between them?

Longsword requires less strength than a rapier, but that doesn't mean they're finesse weapons.
Longsword techniques emphasise the thrust, and the motion of the sword is often within the length of the sword itself. Katana techniques make more use of the insane flesh-cutting capability of its slash, and the centre of motion of the techniques is often outside the sword. *
*Now that is a bunch of generalisations, and both weapons have many different schools that vary as to their use and attitude. There are also a fair number of techniques that users of both weapons would recognise.

In general though, I'd have to say that if you really had to grant a type of longsword the finesse property, the more blade-heavy and slashing-oriented katana would be one of the less-likely examples.

Yes. Obviously you can use a longsword while wearing no armor, just like you can use a greataxe on your rogue. That doesn’t mean it’s a viable build. What I’m getting at is that the mysterious robe-clad, katana-wielding wanderer from distant Kara-Tur, for better or worse, is a popular trope. People like popular tropes to be viable builds. That’s why we got the Kensai in XGTE.

In real life, yeah. But the trope of the robe-wearing, katana-wielding martial artist from the exotic east has very little to do with real life.

True. And as you say, that concept can be catered for with the use of magic: - in the Monk class, which is pretty much ideal for the trope.

True, Ogami Ito only ever wore that one robe. He just killed things faster than they could hit him (so lots of attacks) and had a ton of hit points.

I think that that is it for a lot of those concepts: A very high level character that fights lots of mooks in a setting where HP aren't necessarily meat.

I'm starting to wonder if elaborate discussions of history and gratuitous overuse of the word "arming sword" should be considered thread crapping, because it really isnt contributing anything.

The OP didn't specify a particular reasoning for their suggestion. - a discussion of the realism of it is as germane as the discussion of it in terms of game balance, or realisation of character concepts. "Arming sword" is generally used because the D&D use of "longsword" is pretty imprecise, and so we need different words to distinguish different swords like arming swords, katana, falchions etc that all fall under the umbrella of the 5e longsword category.
I've found the discussion has in general been mostly interesting and informative.

Perhaps if you were a little less vague about how it has been "threadcrapping", then that violation of the site policy could be rectified.

Katanas are not the same as, longswords, they are at least as different as scimitars. They make a fine reflavor for strength based characters but many romanticized samurai (rurouni kenshin, champloo, for instance) are dex based, their slashes relying more heavily on iado and the like. I recommend 1d6 finesse, versatile (2d4) it has the added benefit of adding a two hand build for small characters and dex characters but still is lower in damage than strength great weapons, because it lacks the heavy property for GWM builds.

I've allowed a dual-wielding samurai-type character to simply count both katana and wakizashi as scimitars: - instant finesse-capable reflavour.
And, as you point out, many of the more romanticised later-period "duelling courtier samurai" or wandering swordsmen fit much better with a more monk-like concept - now catered for in the kensei. You can now have that unarmoured, swordsman, able to strike hard with both sword and body despite not being very athletic or powerful.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

-snip-

Meh, it just seems like these historical discussions just go around in meaningless circles that have little to nothing to do with the original question. Full rewritings of weapon tables, the same tired circlejerks about rapiers, the same discussions about how the word longsword is effectively meaningless, about why katanas are actually exactly the same longswords even though that's hysterically inaccurate but f*ck weebs amirite, just getting caught up in so much minutae that it feels... meandering? and not entirely sincere, I think I may have just read these threads one too many times so at this point it just feels tired. 5e Dungeons and Dragons is hardly an accurate simulation of medieval warfare, nor is it particularly trying to be- and yet there's this sense that whenever it deviates, it's a shortcoming, and that it needs to be purified to some base european historical root, I'm catching this weird subtext of one true wayism where "oooh, i'll use a katana" is met with derision.

To my mind there's no problem with the katana being reflavored as the longsword in and of itself, it is A longsword, just not a European one. That being said, I think that the longsword does come up short in that it isn't finesse- the kensai monk is my favorite subclass in the game, but I can certainly understand someone wanting a katana for use with any other class which the kensai obviously doesn't help much with. I also think that given the presence of the scimitar, and a few other weapons, and the mechanical room for a versatile finesse option that it would be a waste of an opportunity. 1d6 finesse versatile (2d4) does slightly lower average damage than the longsword (and less one handed damage than the rapier, preserving it's niche), can be used with dex, allows novel dex GWF builds without GWM therefore preserving the alpha-damage niche for strength, feels more inclusive toward other portions of the geeky community (because obviously, people have a lot of affections for katanas), and just overall seems to have a more positive impact than reflavoring the dnd longsword which might not actually meet the person's expectations for what a Katana should be like.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Meh, it just seems like these historical discussions just go around in meaningless circles that have little to nothing to do with the original question. Full rewritings of weapon tables, the same tired circlejerks about rapiers, the same discussions about how the word longsword is effectively meaningless, about why katanas are actually exactly the same longswords even though that's hysterically inaccurate but f*ck weebs amirite,

This is why the word longsword is thought of as meaningless in this sort of discussion: you need to preface it with something in order to know what is being discussed.
As illustrated by the point you make: a historical longsword is different from an arming sword (which is what some people think of as a 'longsword') is different from a katana, is different from a spatha etc. However they all fall under the D&D 5e longsword category of the weapons table. Unless you specify whether you're talking about 5e longswords, or historical longswords, or arming swords or whatever, people aren't going to know quite what you mean and misunderstandings abound.

just getting caught up in so much minutae that it feels... meandering? and not entirely sincere, I think I may have just read these threads one too many times so at this point it just feels tired.

Well, this is hardly the first thread on this sort of subject: they tend to crop up now and again, and the same things are generally said by the same people on the same subject.

5e Dungeons and Dragons is hardly an accurate simulation of medieval warfare, nor is it particularly trying to be- and yet there's this sense that whenever it deviates, it's a shortcoming, and that it needs to be purified to some base european historical root, I'm catching this weird subtext of one true wayism where "oooh, i'll use a katana" is met with derision.

I've not noticed that.
Although the "Oooh, I'll use a katana. But it should have bigger damage dice/be finesse/have crit range of 15-20!" does get met with a certain amount of derision.

There is nothing wrong with rewriting the weapons table to include a separate entry for katana if you really believe that its stats should be different from the longsword entry. Generally you'll be met with a response of "Seems unnecessary, but if its what your table wants, more power to you." Its when people try to justify that with what others believe is erroneous information that others may step in to try to correct them.

To my mind there's no problem with the katana being reflavored as the longsword in and of itself, it is A longsword, just not a European one. That being said, I think that the longsword does come up short in that it isn't finesse- the kensai monk is my favorite subclass in the game, but I can certainly understand someone wanting a katana for use with any other class which the kensai obviously doesn't help much with. I also think that given the presence of the scimitar, and a few other weapons, and the mechanical room for a versatile finesse option that it would be a waste of an opportunity. 1d6 finesse versatile (2d4) does slightly lower average damage than the longsword (and less one handed damage than the rapier, preserving it's niche), can be used with dex, allows novel dex GWF builds without GWM therefore preserving the alpha-damage niche for strength, feels more inclusive toward other portions of the geeky community (because obviously, people have a lot of affections for katanas), and just overall seems to have a more positive impact than reflavoring the dnd longsword which might not actually meet the person's expectations for what a Katana should be like.

I don't see any issue with that in a game-balance sense. (As long as you use the RAI rather than RAW for the Great Weapon fighting style to prevent interactions with Sneak Attack.)
From a realism sense, it makes me twitchy, since a finesse weapon is supposed to not require leverage by definition. Extra leverage for more force and control is generally why you would sacrifice reach by putting two hands on a weapon.

But I, and several others in my group get twitchy even around official 5e stuff like Studded Leather armour. We're not going to come around to your table and tell you you're doing it wrong.

 

[Charlaquin]

Re: D6 Finesse versatile (2d4): I think it’s a good weapon for the game to have, even though katana is not the name I would personally give to it, because it does fill a mechanical niche that the default weapons list leaves open.

Re: Studded Leather Armor: I’ve just come to accept that it’s the D&D name for brigandine. Honestly, Gary had probably just seen brigandine without understanding its construction and assumed the rivets themselves were what made it effective armor, rather than that they were there to secure the plates to the leather.

 

[BookBarbarian]

Katanas are not the same as, longswords, they are at least as different as scimitars. They make a fine reflavor for strength based characters but many romanticized samurai (rurouni kenshin, champloo, for instance) are dex based, their slashes relying more heavily on iado and the like

I am quite looking forward to making a Rurouni Kenshin style kensei using a Longsword with Dex. He'll use a quarterstaff until level 3 refluffed as fighting with a sheathed sword. At level 3 he will draw it.

 

[Yaarel]

Specific kinds of D&D ‘longswords’:

Longsword 1d8 slashing/piercing finesse/versatile
• Bastard Sword 1d8 slashing versatile
• Knightly Sword 1d8 slashing, 1d8 piercing, finesse (includes spatha, viking sword, etcetera)

• Rapier 1d8 piercing finesse
• Katana 1d8 slashing finesse versatile