D&D 5E I hate rapiers. Do you?

[Guest 6801328]

[MENTION=6801328]Elfcrusher[/MENTION] So you prefer unjustified opinions over fundamental knowledge?

Ha! That's funny. Nice leap.

No, I love fundamental knowledge...when it's useful.

Me not, i like it when People know what they talk about. You cannot convince me by telling me your preferences but you can by telling me hard proven Facts.

That's great. But D&D doesn't, and shouldn't, model "facts". I really don't give a flying $%#& about historical accuracy in my FRPGs. I don't care how much plate armor actually weighed. I don't care whether or not two-weapon fighting was practical. And I certainly don't care about the differences between arming swords and broadswords. Just gimme some stats and then let me decide what it looks like. (And god save me from prissy historical warhammers. I'll take Mjolnir any day. Physics and physiology be damned.)

Mostly what I care about is that there are some cool choices, balanced such that there is no optimal choice. Besides being anachronistic, the rapier is too obviously the 'best' choice for a variety of builds. That's poor design, in my book.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I don't know about Ninja-Radish, but I do! Ever since I saw these adapted weapons and armor tables for a dark ages setting at http://dnd-edit.tumblr.com/search/dark+ages

I like that table, too. Except that it still has a "rapier".

Adventures in Middle-Earth also has Weapons and Armor tables I prefer over the 5e PHB ones.

Shout-out for Cubicle 7.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Personally I've always hated rapiers, but it has nothing to do with rules or mechanics. I just prefer medieval weapons to the Renaissance. Also I hate the idea of swashbucklers in my games. However, I don't ban or nerf rapiers when I DM.

Man, I'd be bummed if I couldn't play Dresden Nuada Odhrain mac Mannannan Woodsheart of Frostburrow, Tyr Dannan, my Forest Gnomish Swashbuckler Tinkerer, with his rapier and repeating hand crossbow.

 

[Ancalagon]

That's great. But D&D doesn't, and shouldn't, model "facts". I really don't give a flying $%#& about historical accuracy in my FRPGs.

Very well. In your game, I shall wield a 2 handed potato that does 2d6 dmg.

What? That's stupid? Why not? You said you didn't care about facts or historical accuracy. Well that's the thing. Everyone has a tolerance level about what's cool and fun vs what is ridiculous. So for some people, certain game choices are as silly as fighting with a potato. I do agree with you that "historical" accuracy is something to be applied sparingly, because whatever D&D world you are using, it may not have developed in the same way. However, historical knowledge can inform us about what "works" and what doesn't. For example, in my thread I pointed out that very long and thin rapier blades worked poorly against armor, and that D&D adventurers would probably use rapiers with somewhat shorter and stouter blades.

Another example would be the bastard sword of 2nd edition. When used two handed, it did more damage but was slower, initiative wise. I can tell you from personal experience that this is rubbish - using such a weapon with two hands make it significantly *faster*, not slower. That being said...

Mostly what I care about is that there are some cool choices, balanced such that there is no optimal choice. Besides being anachronistic, the rapier is too obviously the 'best' choice for a variety of builds. That's poor design, in my book.

I fully agree with you that game design matters too. It *is* a game, and it has to be fun, and sometimes game balance has to trump slavish realism.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Very well. In your game, I shall wield a 2 handed potato that does 2d6 dmg.

Most potatoes don't have any hands, at all...

...plenty of eyes, sure, but no hands...

 

[Guest 6801328]

Most potatoes don't have any hands, at all...

...plenty of eyes, sure, but no hands...

Demonstrably false:

 

[BookBarbarian]

I like that table, too. Except that it still has a "rapier".

True, and "Plate" now that I think about it.

Shout-out for Cubicle 7.

One of the simple things I like about AiME is removing the top Medium and Heavy armor options and adding the greatshield. It does a really good job of replicating how in many ways the primary weapon of Dark Age combat was the shield.

 

[Ancalagon]

Demonstrably false:
View attachment 88669

Hands AND eyes. Everyone happy!

 

[Trevor Songary]

Here is my issue...

Why have a melee character with STR at all?

With the Rapier rules you can have a d8 melee weapon AND cover your AC with the same stat. You can "dump stat" your STR (or at least minimize it for heavy armour use) and still get your full melee bonus'. The long sword has become obsolete!

Thematically, it's even worse!! You have a bunch of plate armoured fighters running around with fencing weapons AND A SHIELD!??!

I don't understand why the change happened (other than someone's fetish for steampunk style thematics) instead of just leaving the Finesse Feat in the system for people who wanted to be DEX based. If this was all about the Rogue/Swashbuckler, then make the Finesse Feat a class feature at 2nd level. Personally I'll be house ruling that finess only gives DEX bonus to to-hit, damage bonus still comes from STR. Or, maybe I'll just say that you lose the finess feature if you use a shield. Or both.

Either way, the Rapier is a "broken" feature of the system and needs review.

 

[Mistwell]