D&D General The rapier in D&D

pawsplay said:

Well, no, fighting a dragon is obviously nuts. But if I were going to do it, I wouldn't pick something that is as close to useless as I can imagine.

Click to expand...

Tell that to my old couch, and the wall that was behind it.

You see, I own a real rapier. It is modeled on a 17th century Spanish design, and is forged from high carbon steel.

When I first received my rapier I was so excited I decided to test it out. My friend who was with me that day I got it suggested I stab my couch cushion to try it out. In my excitement I put the full weight behind the thrust. The blade not on pierced the cushion, but passed all the way through the couch and far into the drywall behind it, with the tip slightly emerging from the second piece of drywall on the far side of the wall in my bedroom. My friend laughed so hard he had to sit down. Suffice to say rapiers are very effective weapons. Like someone else said, they became the primary melee weapon for a long time for a reason. Plus, being able to slip a slim blade between a Dragon's scales into the soft flesh underneath would probably work better than smashing a broadsword against said scales.

Besides, technically, all melee weapons in D&D should use DEX as their primary attribute when determining if you can hit a target or not, as DEX is supposed to include one's hand-eye coordination. STR could still be used to modify damage, but having it modify to-hit doesn't really make sense. Same as how STR should factor in to the use of bows as you need to be fairly strong to effectively use a (non-compound) bow.

humble minion said:

Presumably you're poking around trying to find an artery not too deep under the scales somewhere? A tiny little exacto knife in the wrong place can leave a human in serious trouble, presumably the same principle applies to dragons?

Click to expand...

Don't bring an exacto knife to a lucerne hammer fight.

zarionofarabel said:

Suffice to say rapiers are very effective weapons.

Click to expand...

Yes. In a duel. But historically they saw little action in mass combat.

zarionofarabel said:

Besides, technically, all melee weapons in D&D should use DEX as their primary attribute when determining if you can hit a target or not, as DEX is supposed to include one's hand-eye coordination.

Click to expand...

No, not at all. Finesse weapons were probably just a bad idea in the first place, but feat-gating them at least kept things less silly. Your real steel rapier is going to be a lot more deadly in the hands of a Marine than a world-class origami folder.

Whizbang Dustyboots said:

It was meant to let people play as swashbucklers, scientifically proven to be the sexiest of all melee combatants. It should probably not be present when the archetype is not otherwise supported (like by having the swashbuckler rogue subclass in the 2024 PHB).

Click to expand...

Bards likewise, have even more sexyfuntimes when a rapier is at their side!
(@Snarf Zagyg )

Reynard said:

This thread is a good reminder that serious simulation is a terrible idea for D&D fantasy. You'll die.

Click to expand...

Yes, I think people forget that d&d (at least its modern iteration) is a heroic fantasy game, and there's got to be a good amount of suspension of disbelief.

Desdichado said:

...Frankly, I think that in order to fight dragons, except for exceptionally small ones, you should have some kind of fantasy ordinance, like ballistas with magical or blessed bolts or something like that, and large weighted nets to hamper its ability to fly, and otherwise a whole host of special gear...

Click to expand...

Classic is classic.

pawsplay said:

Yes. In a duel. But historically they saw little action in mass combat.

Click to expand...

I don't think fighting a Dragon would be akin to a mass combat. I also think that most D&D combat is far closer to a duel than fighting in formation.

pawsplay said:

No, not at all. Finesse weapons were probably just a bad idea in the first place, but feat-gating them at least kept things less silly. Your real steel rapier is going to be a lot more deadly in the hands of a Marine than a world-class origami folder.

Click to expand...

I have mixed feelings about this. Rapiers are Far Too Good in 5e, definitely, and they make dex-only melee builds too viable and Strength redundant in too many places (and ensure that too many other weapons never get a look in). Dex gets you a good AC, good ranged attacks with the better ranged weapons in the game, and a bunch of bonuses to good skills and a frequently-used saving throw. Strength ... not so much utility. In 3e weapon finesse was basically a mandatory feat for anyone not going the high-str route. Mandatory feats are bad design (as are mandatory invocations, Agonizing Blast I'm looking at you). They're a sign that your base system needs work.

As for real life rapiers - I'm no expert other than a few years of fencing many decades ago, but paperfolder vs marine is a poor comparison. I'd prefer to say a rapier would be more deadly in the hands of a gymnast than a bodybuilder. Speed and flexibility counts, precision point control counts, and that requires your shoulders to have a wide range of motion , and demands fine coordination of your fourth and fifth fingers for disengages etc. I still wouldn't like to get stabbed by a bodybuilder with a rapier, mind you!

But that leads in to the whole debate about all or nothing ability score builds for melee combatants. One day I'd like to see a d&d system in which a Str 14 Dex 14 fighter (your hypothetical marine, for instance) is as effective as as a Str 18 Dex 10 (my bodybuilder) or Str 10 Dex 18 (my gymnast) fighter. Being well-rounded should be a viable strategy.

humble minion said:

But that leads in to the whole debate about all or nothing ability score builds for melee combatants. One day I'd like to see a d&d system in which a Str 14 Dex 14 fighter (your hypothetical marine, for instance) is as effective as as a Str 18 Dex 10 (my bodybuilder) or Str 10 Dex 18 (my gymnast) fighter. Being well-rounded should be a viable strategy.

Click to expand...

Maybe a subclass or two built around MAD?

Piperken said:

Classic is classic.

Click to expand...

I named the pseudodragon familiar of an old character Vermithrax.