Expanding the Weapon List

[AmerginLiath]

Where’s the polearm appendix?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Where’s the polearm appendix?

It's connected to the polearm cecum.

 

[Coroc]

Well if you like 30 years war period as a quasi tech Background, there is a lot (that i use):

Typical "peasant" weapons I like to equip my orcs with these
2 handed flail reach heavy 2d4 blunt/pierce (works with GWM)
Langes Messer (Long Knive) 1d6 slash
Kriegsmesser (The two handed Version of it) 2d4 slash (Works with GWM)

With swords, since i like it historically acurate:

Katzbalger (A Landsknecht short sword) 1d6 s/p
Arming sword (Sidesword) 1 handed only 1d8 s/p
Bastard sword 1d8/1d10 versatile s/p
Great sword (The real Longsword) 2d6 s/p

Partisan 1d8 p/s reach heavy
Lucern hammer 1d10 pierce / blunt

If applicable i associate a 2nd or even third damage type to weapons, so

Poleaxe 1d8/1d10 versatile s/p/b The specialised weapon for heavy armor combat

 

[JonnyP71]

I tweak, add, remove depending on various factors - but there are a few things I always change.... My pedantic brain is unhappy with the Quarterstaff being Versatile, so in my game it isn't, and I add the Jo Stick (1d4 Bludgeoning Light Finesse). I also tweak the Trident (Versatile 1d6/1d10) and give spears and tridents the reach property - because it's something I think they *should* realistically have.

I don't really care if it throws anything slightly out of balance, as thankfully I don't have a group of players who scour the options looking for mathematical advantages.. they pick weapons by flavour alone.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I've long been a little disappointed with how restricted the 5E weapon list is. It's fine for most scenarios, but what about when you just want to swing a good ol' wood axe into an orc's face? For that matter, why isn't there an actual hatchet or tomahawk equivalent/ The 1d6 Handaxe feels more like a short-handled wood axe than a hatchet. Whether this is what the devs intended, I have no idea.
So toying around with the basic premise of equipment a commoner would most likely have access to, I've come up with a couple of developments of the basic list -- specifically Hatchet and Wood Axe because the given Handaxe is sort of a sloppy design in my mind.

A Hatchet would be functionally identical to the Handaxe, though it would be a 1d4 die coupled with the Light trait so you can offhand it if you wanted to.
A Wood Axe would simply be a long-handled Handaxe, trading in the Thrown trait for Versatile allowing it to be used as a two-handed 1d8 weapon.
Another idea I thought interesting was the historical Cane Knife or Machete, similar to the Sickle but also possessing the Finesse trait in addition to Light.

These might seem a little obvious, and that's the point. While the Player's Handbook gives a great indication of what type of weapon has what traits, the list itself isn't anywhere close to being exhaustive. After all, we also lack a 1d8 Slashing Finesse weapon while we have two 1d8 Slashing Versatile weapons in the Longsword and Battleaxe. Such a weapon might be a Cutlass or Saber, which would logically follow on from the Scimitar which itself is more a representation of the genre of lightweight swords made for cutting rather than thrusts.

Are there any other weapon types which would be reasonable to expand the PHB list with? I'm somewhat partial to also including a Sledgehammer because I can imagine a number of situations where that would be hilarious with an appropriate character.

Off the top of my head, I can't think of a weapon that isn't already covered in the list. The idea is that it is inclusive rather than exclusive.
So "Longsword" isn't just the European knightly sword, it is any long blade that can be used in either one hand or two. Katana, Macahuitl, Viking swords, bastard swords and so on.
"Handaxe" covers any small, throwable axe or chopping implement. Hatchets, Tomahawks, small wood axes, - you could even make an argument that the machete fits there. Wood axe, despite not being a real weapon, is functionally similar to battleaxe to use its stats, just maybe rule that is has to be used two-handed.
Sledgehammer is pretty much exactly what a Maul represents, although you could also include bludgeoning polearms and tesubo as well as the traditional "Brick onna stick".
Nunchaku are officially a variant of the club. They're wooden bludgeons that a commoner might use as a tool, and eligible for Monk Weapons. That seems to fit.

Cutlasses and sabres are close to scimitar to use those stats. I don't see the need to create a new weapon category just for the sake of ticking the 'd8 finesse slashing option' box. Be careful when creating new finesse weapons just for the sake of having finesse.
I find the Bruce/Bilbo test a useful tool: If you can imagine a weapon dealing the same damage in the hands of a high-dex character like Bilbo Baggins as in the hands of a character with similar dex but also high strength like Bruce Lee, then it may be eligible for finesse trait. If you think Bruce would be dealing more damage with it, then its probably not finesse.

 

[Coroc]

[MENTION=6788862]JonnyP71[/MENTION] as Long as you also give the Quarterstaff / Bo a 1d6 damage twohanded instead of 1d8 i have to totally agree with you and yes spear should be versatile 1d8/1d10 and have reach . With Trident i would say give it 2d3/2d4 for better Balance, of Course it depends wether you talk about a fishing implement or a fork aka Polearm.
[MENTION=6802951]Cap'n Kobold[/MENTION] well a rapier is not a weapon for Bilbo, it is far to Long it and is quite heavy. But please no discussion, i am fine with rapier representing smallsword for most fanbois minds.

 

[Dylan Wight]

Off the top of my head, I can't think of a weapon that isn't already covered in the list. The idea is that it is inclusive rather than exclusive.
So "Longsword" isn't just the European knightly sword, it is any long blade that can be used in either one hand or two. Katana, Macahuitl, Viking swords, bastard swords and so on.
"Handaxe" covers any small, throwable axe or chopping implement. Hatchets, Tomahawks, small wood axes, - you could even make an argument that the machete fits there. Wood axe, despite not being a real weapon, is functionally similar to battleaxe to use its stats, just maybe rule that is has to be used two-handed.
Sledgehammer is pretty much exactly what a Maul represents, although you could also include bludgeoning polearms and tesubo as well as the traditional "Brick onna stick".
Nunchaku are officially a variant of the club. They're wooden bludgeons that a commoner might use as a tool, and eligible for Monk Weapons. That seems to fit.

Cutlasses and sabres are close to scimitar to use those stats. I don't see the need to create a new weapon category just for the sake of ticking the 'd8 finesse slashing option' box. Be careful when creating new finesse weapons just for the sake of having finesse.
I find the Bruce/Bilbo test a useful tool: If you can imagine a weapon dealing the same damage in the hands of a high-dex character like Bilbo Baggins as in the hands of a character with similar dex but also high strength like Bruce Lee, then it may be eligible for finesse trait. If you think Bruce would be dealing more damage with it, then its probably not finesse.

I agree that the scimitar covers the cutlass, but don't forget that a cutlass is a short saber in form. Historically, the utilitarian cutlass is what you get when you shorten and slightly widen the blade of a saber, making it ideal for ship-to-ship boarding actions. The historical saber is quite a long weapon, easily as long as a typical English long sword. It deserves its own template.
Likewise, a rapier's intended fighting style necessitates quick, precise jabs and thrusts which is definitely an associable trait of a finesse weapon. While you can technically perform cuts with a rapier, this is not how they are intended to be used.

In the same manner, I wouldn't say that the gladius-inspired shortsword template is much of a piercing weapon at all. Their short length was a matter of sidearm convenience, meant to be used when a polearm or spear was impractical or unavailable. They were intended to both cut and stab, but the weight behind the broader blade made them more suited to cutting. If used to stab or thrust, you would be required to exert considerable bodily force, putting your entire mass behind the blade, which conveys obvious disadvantages upon a short blade length.
As hilarious as this may sound, the shortsword template which the devs based off the English arming sword and Roman gladius would fall under the Scimitar template in historical practice. Yes, you could perform stabs, but the blades were designed more so with cutting force in mind. Now, obviously something had to use the 1d6 Piercing Finesse Light template, so the dual-purpose English arming sword or Roman gladius fits the template just fine. I simply find it amusing that the template isn't strictly correct.

I also can't agree with your summary of wood axes. I use them in everyday life. What irks me about the Handaxe is that while it is *representative* of the wider small-axe variety, a short handled wood axe is a *very* poor throwing axe whereas a hatchet is pretty well suited to the role. I like the Handaxe mechanically for gameplay, but the idea of somebody sawing down the handle of a proper wood axe and then trying to *throw* it is an almost cringeworthy image in my mind. Hence why I like the idea of a Wood Axe (1d6 Slashing Versatile) and Hatchet (1d4 Slashing Light Thrown) replacing the given Handaxe in the PHB. I get that it's a very inclusive and malleable template, but the stats *as written* make little sense from a realistic perspective. Just some food for thought.

A machete would absolutely be its own thing in the 1d4 category. Since we lack a falchion-type blade -- which the machete owes its origins to -- in this edition (although, the argument can be made that the falchion is covered by the Scimitar, and rightly so!) it follows that we introduce a Finesse version of a Thrown slashing weapon in that dice category. Trust me, you can't expect to throw a machete or cane knife with any level of precision. It very much is *not* built for that purpose.

Anyway, I'm trying to address the template gaps with a mind to realism and I have found alternatives which make sense to implement as homebrew templates. Pay no mind to my lack of handwavium imagination with regard to this issue. It was an interesting experiment to see if I could reduce the gaps in the given templates with realistic and gameplay practical weapons.

 

[Coroc]

[MENTION=6939893]Dylan Wight[/MENTION] Concerning short swords for slashing there are some Katzbalgers which have a rounded tip even, so they are definitely made for slashing. A Wood axe no matter what size is very unsuited for combat. It is far to heavy and thick and ist blade geometry is rather for splintering Wood. To a human it would rather do blunt damage than "cutting" aka slashing damage.

 

[Dylan Wight]

The Elder Scrolls always made a big deal about Blunt vs Blade categories, and it's easy to see why. I agree, a wood axe -- any axe really -- would be more suited to bludgeoning damage or even piercing damage than slashing damage, but as we're trying to fit the template we have to go with slashing as opposed to the more realistic choices.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I agree that the scimitar covers the cutlass, but don't forget that a cutlass is a short saber in form. Historically, the utilitarian cutlass is what you get when you shorten and slightly widen the blade of a saber, making it ideal for ship-to-ship boarding actions. The historical saber is quite a long weapon, easily as long as a typical English long sword. It deserves its own template.
Likewise, a rapier's intended fighting style necessitates quick, precise jabs and thrusts which is definitely an associable trait of a finesse weapon. While you can technically perform cuts with a rapier, this is not how they are intended to be used.

In the same manner, I wouldn't say that the gladius-inspired shortsword template is much of a piercing weapon at all. Their short length was a matter of sidearm convenience, meant to be used when a polearm or spear was impractical or unavailable. They were intended to both cut and stab, but the weight behind the broader blade made them more suited to cutting. If used to stab or thrust, you would be required to exert considerable bodily force, putting your entire mass behind the blade, which conveys obvious disadvantages upon a short blade length.
As hilarious as this may sound, the shortsword template which the devs based off the English arming sword and Roman gladius would fall under the Scimitar template in historical practice. Yes, you could perform stabs, but the blades were designed more so with cutting force in mind. Now, obviously something had to use the 1d6 Piercing Finesse Light template, so the dual-purpose English arming sword or Roman gladius fits the template just fine. I simply find it amusing that the template isn't strictly correct.

I also can't agree with your summary of wood axes. I use them in everyday life. What irks me about the Handaxe is that while it is *representative* of the wider small-axe variety, a short handled wood axe is a *very* poor throwing axe whereas a hatchet is pretty well suited to the role. I like the Handaxe mechanically for gameplay, but the idea of somebody sawing down the handle of a proper wood axe and then trying to *throw* it is an almost cringeworthy image in my mind. Hence why I like the idea of a Wood Axe (1d6 Slashing Versatile) and Hatchet (1d4 Slashing Light Thrown) replacing the given Handaxe in the PHB. I get that it's a very inclusive and malleable template, but the stats *as written* make little sense from a realistic perspective. Just some food for thought.

A machete would absolutely be its own thing in the 1d4 category. Since we lack a falchion-type blade -- which the machete owes its origins to -- in this edition (although, the argument can be made that the falchion is covered by the Scimitar, and rightly so!) it follows that we introduce a Finesse version of a Thrown slashing weapon in that dice category. Trust me, you can't expect to throw a machete or cane knife with any level of precision. It very much is *not* built for that purpose.

Anyway, I'm trying to address the template gaps with a mind to realism and I have found alternatives which make sense to implement as homebrew templates. Pay no mind to my lack of handwavium imagination with regard to this issue. It was an interesting experiment to see if I could reduce the gaps in the given templates with realistic and gameplay practical weapons.

Fair enough. I think that we just have different points at which we draw the line as to how different a weapon has to be from an example in the 5e weapons table before a new weapon category is needed. I do however also have a houserule that weapons may deal different damage types if allowed for by design. So many swords can do either Slashing or Piercing damage, the warhammer can use the pick on the back to do piercing damage instead etc. This may reduce the need for entirely new weapons. (Daggers dealing P/S allows them to incorporate machetes for example.)

I clump all the "small, light, one-handed axes" into the "Handaxe" category, and if a player specifically wants a design that would be harder to throw, then they can choose to describe it as such and to not throw it. At a certain point as axe size increases, it becomes no longer throwable, but more effective in two hands, and therefore uses the battleaxe stats. - If you feel that more granularity is required in that scale, go for it.

Likewise, since sabres, scimitars, tulwar etc are all of generally similar sizes and designs, I'd leave them with the same stats. At the point at which a sabre's blade goes over around 3ft with corresponding weight, I'd probably just start calling it a longsword, and just not use the versatile property. If a player wanted to finesse a katana, the scimitar stats seem to fit: the weapons are actually surprisingly similar. However, the falchion is most definitely not a finesse weapon.

As far as I recall, the gladius was primarily a stabbing weapon: designed to be used in close-order, often against opponents whose longer, cutting weapons would force them to fight further apart. Stabbing requires considerably less bodily force than chopping to get the same level of armour and body penetration. As mentioned, I would allow a shortsword to deal slashing damage of the player desired however.

There have been a fair number of previous threads from a while back that might give you ideas. Some were trying to design a points-based weapon creation system, some just to add a lot more weapons to the existing table.

And yes Coroc, making the quarterstaff an exclusively two-handed weapon was one of my first houserules. My group was a little militant on that regard.