D&D 5E Changing Sneak Attack to Light Weapons

[Cap'n Kobold]

Sure, that’s a great argument for opening up the SA weapon options to include all light weapons, or even just any non-heavy weapon.

But there is no reason on any world you can’t backstab someone or fight in an underhanded manner to lethal effect or whatever with a rapier (or a longsword, for that matter).

Note that they weren't actually saying the rapier shouldn't be able to sneak attack. They were saying that if the rapier can sneak attack, then so should clubs and other weapons.

What I’ve been trying to sell to my group is just making bows finesse, so you can use STR with it.

That's a houserule that I put in as well. Fits conceptually, and no balance issues that we've run into yet.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

I like the restriction. The sneak attack feature is modeling a combatatant swiftly moving to take advantage of a sudden vulnerability. This implies a weapon that is quick to move and able to be moved precisely. Thus finesse. Not blunt instruments.

On the other hand, a club or a cosh is an archetypal weapon for thieves and assassins.

Personally... I think the weapon system needs an overhaul. I have an idea where there are no light or versatile tags, just a weapon size (tiny to huge). The size of a weapon compared to the size of the wielder informs mechanics like sneak attack and two-weapon fighting.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Note that they weren't actually saying the rapier shouldn't be able to sneak attack. They were saying that if the rapier can sneak attack, then so should clubs and other weapons.

That's a houserule that I put in as well. Fits conceptually, and no balance issues that we've run into yet.

Just to chime in, in case I and the OP are part of your "they" (bold added), I was most definitely saying you should not be able to sneak attack with a rapier... but that's because I, personally, don't feel rapiers belong in a D&D setting. Otherwise, yet, I am definitely saying other weapons , which are smaller, lighter, etc. should be able to sneak attack.

I know the 5E term is not the same as it used to be. Back in AD&D when it was "back stab" it really did more mean an attack by surprise. Now it is just a "find a weakness, etc." as @Greenstone.Walker says. I know they did it so rogues could keep pace with other battlers, but IMO not everyone needs to be able to keep pace with everyone else in their strengths.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Just to chime in, in case I and the OP are part of your "they" (bold added), I was most definitely saying you should not be able to sneak attack with a rapier... but that's because I, personally, don't feel rapiers belong in a D&D setting. Otherwise, yet, I am definitely saying other weapons , which are smaller, lighter, etc. should be able to sneak attack.

I know the 5E term is not the same as it used to be. Back in AD&D when it was "back stab" it really did more mean an attack by surprise. Now it is just a "find a weakness, etc." as @Greenstone.Walker says. I know they did it so rogues could keep pace with other battlers, but IMO not everyone needs to be able to keep pace with everyone else in their strengths.

That comment was addressed to the conversation between Fenris 77 and DoctorBadWolf. It looked like there was a misunderstanding about what was actually being said there.

 

[Fenris-77]

Yeah. My problems with the rapier are more general. I don't care that it can be used for sneak attack, I care that it can and the club or shortsword can't. My actual issue with the Rapier is the extent to which it props up the annoying supremacy of DEX as the default combat stat outside of a few specific feat builds. If it were just an matter of keeping Rogues up to snuff that would be one thing, but it has a massive impact on the martial classes as well. STR is supposed to be the metier of the fighter, or at least a big part of it, but what we get is STR as a stat dump for martials because you simply don't need it. Anyway, off topic, I'll put my soapbox away now.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That comment was addressed to the conversation between Fenris 77 and DoctorBadWolf. It looked like there was a misunderstanding about what was actually being said there.

Ah, no problem. Just clarifying in case.

 

[Ludovino]

Yeah. My problems with the rapier are more general. I don't care that it can be used for sneak attack, I care that it can and the club or shortsword can't. My actual issue with the Rapier is the extent to which it props up the annoying supremacy of DEX as the default combat stat outside of a few specific feat builds. If it were just an matter of keeping Rogues up to snuff that would be one thing, but it has a massive impact on the martial classes as well. STR is supposed to be the metier of the fighter, or at least a big part of it, but what we get is STR as a stat dump for martials because you simply don't need it. Anyway, off topic, I'll put my soapbox away now.

This criticism sums up 5E imo. There are good and noble ideas and a commendable approach to making the rules accessible, and as simple and robust as possible, but unfortunately I think WOTC dropped the ball on the robust part. A seemingly tiny thing like finesse rapier has lead to a game where DEX is the better stat compared to STR. CHA multiclass shenanigans. Feats being pretty lame aside from the 4-5 good ones. The awkward use of Bonus Action. Unintended consequences.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yeah. My problems with the rapier are more general. I don't care that it can be used for sneak attack, I care that it can and the club or shortsword can't. My actual issue with the Rapier is the extent to which it props up the annoying supremacy of DEX as the default combat stat outside of a few specific feat builds. If it were just an matter of keeping Rogues up to snuff that would be one thing, but it has a massive impact on the martial classes as well. STR is supposed to be the metier of the fighter, or at least a big part of it, but what we get is STR as a stat dump for martials because you simply don't need it. Anyway, off topic, I'll put my soapbox away now.

IME 9/10 Melee fighters are strength based, in heavy armor.

edit: but even if that weren’t the case, I can’t imagine focusing on the rapier as if it were the problem. There are any number of ways to boost Strength use.

 

[Blue]

This is a flavour issue not a balance issue. There's no 1H weapon, at all, in 4E, which Sneak Attack is unbalanced on.

Even with 2H weapons, it's not actually a problem, because GWF only applies to the weapon's own damage dice (according to Sage Advice - Rules Answers: April 2016 | Dungeons & Dragons).

I guess if you some sort of weird min-maxer, you could get GWM as well, somehow, but I'd be interested to see if that actually worked out when you only had 1 attack/round and relied on it connecting to do your SA damage (you wouldn't have the usual off-hand weapon for a "second bite at the cherry").

None of which to say that you need to change this, but it's not a balance problem.

Since SA is once per turn, having an attack on other people's turn means it can be applied again. Polearm Mastery would be good for a rogue.

But that's a corner case that can be addressed, not a reason to disallow a full range of weapons.

 

[Blue]

I see most rogues with dual short swords, followed by hand crossbows, with rapiers coming in third.

Two short swords is -1 average damage on a hit with the primary hand, but if you miss you have another option to spend your bonus action on, which could allow you to apply your entire Sneak Attack (even if you don't get DEX to damage). It's a great fall-back for a first attack miss, and greatly brings up a rogue's expected damage by making the weapon die and the SA dice as effectively advantage.

Moving from finesse to light means that we move from two valid melee options to a variety of d6 ones, but never any reason ever to go single, since there is no penalty for two weapons and a big upside.