D&D 5E Balance Query Re: Homebrew Weapons

[doctorbadwolf]

What does this weapon look like?

The concept of a versatile finesse weapon makes me twitch a little in terms of concept, but I can't see any balance issues.
I would avoid changing damage to 2d4 however I think. That would have a lot of synergy with the Two-handed style.

Finesse is a pretty powerful addition to a weapon. As I read it this would just be an obviously superior Scimitar or Shortsword.

How would this weapon differ from a handaxe or battleaxe?

I disagree that finesse is a powerful trait. However, a throwable shortsword is only workable if the shortsword has something else.

Why is finesse and versatile incongruent for you, though? It’s a natural fit for any number of weapons, a two-handed scimitar (Or katana, to a lesser extent) is no less a finesse weapon than it’s one handed counterpart.

Anyway, it’s something like a scimitar with a slight enough curve in the blade that thrusts are possible, if not ideal, and a counter-curved handle similar to some Specialised rapiers, or for the Star Wars nerds, Dooku’s saber handle.

Two-handed wielding provides additional leverage, but the weight and balance is such that one handed use is quick and graceful.

 

[Charlaquin]

Well, that sort of thing doesn’t happen in my group, but yeah. But if it’s a d4 it’s just a dagger.

The only real solution is to either ignore my irritation that a handaxe isn’t finesse but literally any sword is, or add properties to the weapons table and rebalance the whole thing.

That is accurate.

I find it a bit odd that this is a conundrum for you, given that you say you’re not worried about realism. Axes lacking finesse is entirely a game construct, to make them function differently from swords within the rules system.

Also, like... If you gotta have finesse axes, you could always drop Thrown. Axes aren’t even particularly effective throwing weapons, the default 20/60 you can throw an improvised weapon seems sufficient for an axe IMO.

 

[Charlaquin]

The concept of a versatile finesse weapon makes me twitch a little in terms of concept,

I mean... If a rapier is finesse, an estoc should definitely be, and they can be used one or two handed, so...

 

[doctorbadwolf]

That is accurate.

I find it a bit odd that this is a conundrum for you, given that you say you’re not worried about realism. Axes lacking finesse is entirely a game construct, to make them function differently from swords within the rules system.

It isn’t about realism, it’s about accomplishing character concepts.

Also, I don’t enjoy pretending I’m using an axe when im using a shortsword.

 

[Charlaquin]

It isn’t about realism, it’s about accomplishing character concepts.

Also, I don’t enjoy pretending I’m using an axe when im using a shortsword.

Right, but 5e doesn’t have the tools to distinguish weapons with that degree of granularity. Why does calling a 1d6 light finesse weapon an axe bother you more than calling a spear a trident, or a Greatsword a maul? Or a shortsword a scimitar?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I disagree that finesse is a powerful trait. However, a throwable shortsword is only workable if the shortsword has something else.

Finesse makes a weapon better by allowing its use by a character with a superior stat focus. If you have other measures in place to balance Str and Dex, then as you say, Finesse is less powerful.

The handaxe is already a very good weapon, and making a weapon martial doesn't necessarily make a weapon more powerful. What is it about this weapon that makes it different from a handaxe?

Why is finesse and versatile incongruent for you, though? It’s a natural fit for any number of weapons, a two-handed scimitar (Or katana, to a lesser extent) is no less a finesse weapon than it’s one handed counterpart.

When using the Finesse property of a weapon the damage it deals is based in the reflexes and grace with which it is wielded rather than the leverage and force that they can apply.
The point of putting two hands on a weapon is to improve the leverage and force you are exerting on it. - Which are irrelevant if you're using the Finesse property.

I wouldn't regard any of the swords covered under the D&D 5e weapon table as longswords as finessable. Of them, a short, blade-heavy weapon designed to emphasise the cut would be one of the least.

Anyway, it’s something like a scimitar with a slight enough curve in the blade that thrusts are possible, if not ideal, and a counter-curved handle similar to some Specialised rapiers, or for the Star Wars nerds, Dooku’s saber handle.

There are a number or swords with curved handles like you are describing - usually sabres like you suggest. Trying to use a handle with a curve like that two-handed would be tricky though I'd imagine: without a very curved blade it would try to twist in the hands on impact.

Two-handed wielding provides additional leverage, but the weight and balance is such that one handed use is quick and graceful.

That sounds like a standard longsword would fit the concept fairly well. Is there a need to optimise it for dex-based characters?

I mean... If a rapier is finesse, an estoc should definitely be, and they can be used one or two handed, so...

I get the impression that a D&D rapier is the more modern, whippy sword that you might see Errol Flynn fencing with. Not the longer, heavier weapon that required more strength than a longsword to use.
I'd say an estoc would just be a longsword that deals Piercing damage.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I always default to the same methodology-- I take the fluff off of every weapon on the chart and just look at the mechanics (damage die, special properties, simple/martial/melee/ranged) and let the player take whatever is the "best" version of what they want that is currently available mechanics-wise. Then, they can fluff on top of it whatever "type" of weapon they want.

If a dwarf rogue wants to dual-wield finesse weapons... the best it could normally have would be the shortsword/scimitar 1d6 finesse, light. If the rogue player then decides for characterization and looks that he wants them to be handaxes... then yes, he can fluff those mechanics so that he dual-wields finessed, light handaxes that do 1d6 damage.

Same way the bugbear PC in my last Eberron campaign wanted to stick with the Eberron theming of goblinoids usually using chain weapons, while also wanting to use a two-handed weapon. So we took the mechanics of the maul and replaced the fluff with "two-handed great flail". And we were done-- perfectly balanced, no issues.

I mean let's be honest here... as someone said above the minute differences in the mechanics of the actual base weapons themselves become obsolete after Tier 1 anyway. At that point its going to be all the other class mechanics everyone gets that will be adding to damage which will more than cover over any differences between the different weapons themselves. A "martial finesse" handaxe that does 1d6 would be "slightly better" than a shortsword? Heh, well neither of those weapon's base stats will matter a lick when that rogue is adding in 3d6 extra damage for Sneak Attack. The slight difference between the shortsword and the new handaxe no longer matter in the slightest.

 

[Blue]

I don't see a balance issue. There may be some corner case interaction with some feature or feat or monster power with using a weapon two handed that they didn't have access to with a finesse weapon before, but even if I could identify one I wouldn't see that as an issue.

For the people saying finesse is a ribbon, my comment is to look at the relative power of STR vs. DEX. For many more builds, either (a) focusing on and advancing DEX is better that doing the same for STR, or (b) the occasional weapon wielder is more likely to have/benefit from a decent DEX than STR.

 

[Charlaquin]

I get the impression that a D&D rapier is the more modern, whippy sword that you might see Errol Flynn fencing with.

That’s not a sword at all, that’s a foil. It’s sports equipment.

Not the longer, heavier weapon that required more strength than a longsword to use.

A rapier weighs about the same as an arming sword, the weight is just more concentrated near the back end, putting its point of balance closer to the hilt. It doesn’t exactly require more strength to use, it requires different strength - more in the forearm, wrist, and legs, as opposed to the upper arm(s) and core. That’s true of foils as well, fencing takes an incredible amount of lower body strength and balance.

Of course, none of that really matters, because finesse in D&D isn’t about how much actual strength a weapon requires to use. It’s about how the weapon is perceived in pop culture and depicted in fiction. A rapier is seen as a weapon used by a dashing swashbuckler who fights with agility and grace over power and force, so it’s a finesse weapon. This is also the main reason there aren’t any axes with finesse. Accurate or not, they’re seen as more brutal, direct weapons than their more elegant counterparts in swords, so they lack finesse and have a bigger damage die.

I'd say an estoc would just be a longsword that deals Piercing damage.

But an estoc’s function is to penetrate small gaps in heavy armor - it is fundamentally designed for precision.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Right, but 5e doesn’t have the tools to distinguish weapons with that degree of granularity. Why does calling a 1d6 light finesse weapon an axe bother you more than calling a spear a trident, or a Greatsword a maul? Or a shortsword a scimitar?

I wouldn't do those either. I'd make a new weapon, or use the existing weapon as it is.

Finesse makes a weapon better by allowing its use by a character with a superior stat focus. If you have other measures in place to balance Str and Dex, then as you say, Finesse is less powerful.

Yeah, sorry, I'm never going to take this stance seriously. I will never design anything for powergamers or to foil them, and that is the only lense through which I'd care about this argument. Most players just use the stats that make sense for the concept, and pick the weapons that fill out that concept best, as allowed by the system.

When using the Finesse property of a weapon the damage it deals is based in the reflexes and grace with which it is wielded rather than the leverage and force that they can apply.
The point of putting two hands on a weapon is to improve the leverage and force you are exerting on it. - Which are irrelevant if you're using the Finesse property.

This is just a thing you're coming up with, not a feature of the system.

I wouldn't regard any of the swords covered under the D&D 5e weapon table as longswords as finessable. Of them, a short, blade-heavy weapon designed to emphasise the cut would be one of the least.

There are a number or swords with curved handles like you are describing - usually sabres like you suggest. Trying to use a handle with a curve like that two-handed would be tricky though I'd imagine: without a very curved blade it would try to twist in the hands on impact.

That sounds like a standard longsword would fit the concept fairly well. Is there a need to optimise it for dex-based characters?

I get the impression that a D&D rapier is the more modern, whippy sword that you might see Errol Flynn fencing with. Not the longer, heavier weapon that required more strength than a longsword to use.
I'd say an estoc would just be a longsword that deals Piercing damage.

None of that makes any sense, IMO. And you're simply incorrect about rapiers and the estoc, as charlequin points out.