Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dylan Wight" data-source="post: 7442929" data-attributes="member: 6939893">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.</blockquote>

Verification