D&D 5E I hate rapiers. Do you?

[Tony Vargas]

Spells would be a major factor, though, and I could see how just one fireball per day would totally change the nature of battle. That's a whole different conversation, though, and more akin to "What would things look like if it took the same amount of time to master a cannon as to become a surgeon?"

One thought I had when considering a high-magic 3e campaign was that if magic, and thus attacks vs Touch AC, was fairly common, armor might go out of favor or have to find a way to stay relevant. I created a new armor or two, the one I remember was a 'Curaise' that was (like it's gunpowder era namesake) a heavier Breastplate, made with alchemical elements, it was more encumbering than a normal for the same AC, but spells and incorporeal creatures didn't go right through it like it wasn't there, so it added to your Touch AC for those purposes.

I never actually ran that campaign, but the idea's been sitting there in the back of my mind.

 

[Mercule]

One thought I had when considering a high-magic 3e campaign was that if magic, and thus attacks vs Touch AC, was fairly common, armor might go out of favor or have to find a way to stay relevant. I created a new armor or two, the one I remember was a 'Curaise' that was (like it's gunpowder era namesake) a heavier Breastplate, made with alchemical elements, it was more encumbering than a normal for the same AC, but spells and incorporeal creatures didn't go right through it like it wasn't there, so it added to your Touch AC for those purposes.

I never actually ran that campaign, but the idea's been sitting there in the back of my mind.

Kind of a cool idea. If you wanted to push the "advancement" of technology, a simple change to have heavy armor grant disadvantage on dexterity saves would go a long way. Suddenly, that scary fireball is pretty much just as scary as the cannonball and would probably have a similar effect on armor choices. The difference being that you can't put essentially untrained conscripts in charge of the wand of fireballs or issue every troop a wand of eldritch blast, so they're still stuck with swords, bows, maces, etc.

The expense and expertise to make and use the weapons of war (crafted by a few mid-level Wizards and issued to "many" low-level Wizards) would probably make them about as plentiful as any historic artillery. Meanwhile, the common troops (which you'd still need) would be motivated to use guerrilla tactics and create areas of artificial cover, but have less comparable weapons.

Imagine, if you will, World War I -- trenches, mustard gas (cloudkill), explosive artillery (fireball), etc. -- except the infantry only has sabers and crossbows instead of rifles and Tommy guns.

It would make the carnage of the US Civil War look tame. Definitely a Cold War/MAD scenario that would encourage spies, strike teams, and other jobs perfect for mercenary companies... er... um... adventuring parties.

 

[Ganymede81]

While I agree that rapiers, and weapons in general, have been handled in a less-than-elegant fashion in 5e, it is really only a single point of damage per attack. That doesn't matter much in the grand scheme of things.

 

[mrpopstar]

Doing away with rapiers altogether is a compelling idea.

 

[Beleriphon]

Yeah, the idea of having a dueling weapon against heavy armored foes, mindless beast, creature as large as a barn is laughable. I did a lot of fencing once and I can tell you that the main reasoning behind the finess weapon being able to to as much damage as a heavier weapon against an armored adversary; that your PC hits between the plates, is strange. There's no way a fighter with a rapier is able to pinpoint 4 times in 6 seconds the small breach in the armor while the foe is defending himself.

Which seems silly, but hey D&D combat doesn't make much sense in an HP is meet scenario.

Anyway, in my head canon Scimitars are Sabers and Rapiers are Broadswords, longswords are Arming sword, two-handed swords are Longsword.

Longswords are longswords in the historical meaning of longsword, in contrast to the previous version where they were more properly arming swords. And broadswords are baskethilted swords like schianova, which are cut-and-thrust swords. The term was mostly used to contrast the heavier military swords to the generally civilian used rapiers.

And two-handed swords are pretty clearly representative of stuff like zweihanders. While a short sword seems to be anything from a gladius, oversized saexes, all the way up to a Viking sword.

 

[auburn2]

I love my rapier, but in the gamse I play both as DM and player it is definitely NOT as common as longswords, shortswords or scimitars.

My bladesinger has one but they are not overly common in my games I think because:
1. Dex fighters will generally be better off going dual wield which will push them away from rapiers to small weapons.
2. Elves don't get rapiers for free (drow do but not others), they do get longswords and shortswords.
3. You are stuck with piercing damage, which is the worst weapon damage type.

As far as finessing the dragon to death - I would argue a human/humanish being fighting a dragon with any hand held weapon is pretty silly. In fact when you get down to it the very idea of a dragon at all is pretty silly. So if I can suspend disbelief enough to imagine the dragon is there I can probably suspend disbelief enough to imagine that the rapier could kill it.

 

[Brandegoris]

So, the title says it all in this case.

There was a time, long ago in pre-history, before the release of 5e, when I thought rapiers were cool. You know, Three Musketeers. Fencing.

But then 5e came out. With the finesse rules (finesse? really? Ima finesse that Dragon to death!). And something became blindingly obvious to everyone with half a brain.

Look at those weapon tables. Come on ... LOOK AT THEM. Nicely designed. Reasonably balanced. Finally getting to the point where people can (more or less) pick weapons based on choice rather than bizarre quirks in the rules.

...and then there was the Rapier.

Yeah, putting a single weapon at d8 damage in the finesse category. Why? WHY?

Now every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Dex-based character carries a Rapier. It's no longer the Three Musketeers, it's the Randomly Assorted Six Hobomurderers that Decided to Max Dex.

Even Percy the Paladin is Smiting with his Rapier. Because of course he is.*

The sheer number of rapiers in 5e is making me think that AD&D had a veritable dearth of Long Swords. Seriously, "Look kids, it's Big Ben, Parliament, another adventurer trying to slay Orcus with a friggin' Rapier."

Not to mention Rapier has unfortunate connotations. I mean ... there's a reason they re-named rapeseed oil as canola oil, right? Could we at least call it the Canolier?

Scimitars? They are cool. Shortswords? A classic. But Rapiers are nothing more than wannabe Katanas.

Also? A poll. Both to vent, and to help identify the Rapier-lovers out there. If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the rapier problem. No judgment (I'm judging).




*Sidebar- anyone who is playing a Paladin to begin with is probably doing other annoying things like this.

I don't see the problem. For like 25 years every player used the Longsword and no one cared. They just replace that with the rapier. Whats the issue?

 

[Oofta]

I don't see the problem. For like 25 years every player used the Longsword and no one cared. They just replace that with the rapier. Whats the issue?

Right. And a bastard sword was replaced with a longsword. Different label, same weapon.

 

[steeldragons]

On the list of things warranting my hate these days, "rapiers" is reeeeeeeally not on the list.

 

[Guest 6801328]

lowkey seems to have taken me off his ignore list (unwise...) so the least I can do is pop in to say that I agree 100% with him on this one, for all the reasons he mentions. If I could change ONE thing in 5d it would be to get rid of rapiers.