D&D 5E Is the rapier "necessary"?

[ccs]

You should do whatever adds to your setting. If that means there's no 1h, d8 finesse weapon? Well, so what.

 

[Ancalagon]

You should do whatever adds to your setting. If that means there's no 1h, d8 finesse weapon? Well, so what.

Essentially, this is my question. Would this matter? I'm getting very mixed messages in the thread

 

[MechaPilot]

What I have realized however is I don't have a rapier. And by rapier I don't mean "long thin stabbing sword". I mean "one handed finesse-able weapon that does 1d8 dmg". As a result, a character wanting to fight with a one-handed weapon would be limited to 1d6 dmg weapons.

Now my first instinct here is "this isn't a problem, high dex characters have it too good with dex being so useful all around anyway". But... well I haven't played the game yet, and most (I hope haha) of you have. Would "forcing" dex-based characters to use smaller weapons be a big issue? Or is it a small nerf that might well be needed (seeing how good dex is).

Is it necessary to have it? As in the actual meaning of being needed? No.

However, I would also ask is it necessary to exclude it? The answer for that is most likely also a no.

With no compelling necessity for or against inclusion, I'd include it just for the sake of providing more options. South-east Asia has had a plethora of weapons, and it shouldn't be hard at all to find one that fits the bill.

 

[Hriston]

[MENTION=23]Ancalagon[/MENTION], have you considered using the pata as your d8 finesse sword? I don't know too much about the fighting style, but the form of the blade seems rather rapier-like.

 

[Ancalagon]

Re Pata: based on my fairly brief research, the blade is rather hefty, although a small minority had rapier blades on them (maybe 5%). I'm not really sure how to stat it to be honest - it's like a longsword, but how to account for the gauntlet part and how it impedes handling?

 

[Hriston]

Maybe, but I'm not sure I'd consider those swords finessable.

Sure, but consider this: in D&D you have on the one hand the shortsword, a light finesse weapon, analogous to the Roman gladius and other ancient swords, and on the other hand you have the versatile longsword. There's a gap between the two that represents the majority of sword evolution in the medieval period: the spatha and its descendants, the migration period, knightly, and arming swords. They were neither light (because you couldn't readily wield two of them) nor versatile (because they weren't made to be wielded with two hands). The rapier fills that gap in the D&D rules by losing the light property of its smaller cousin in exchange for a larger damage die, while it retains finesse. I'm inclined to treat all other swords in the one-handed arming sword family the same, because otherwise they would simply be the equivalent of longswords that forgo versatile for no other benefit.

The rapier was likely used because it was very much a backup weapon after you were no longer able to use your musket/bayonet or pike and they likely owned one for civilian use.
The reason that the cavalry were issued broadswords instead is that it was their primary weapon: they were expected to fight in melee using it.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Hriston]

Re Pata: based on my fairly brief research, the blade is rather hefty, although a small majority had rapier blades on them (maybe 5%). I'm not really sure how to stat it to be honest - it's like a longsword, but how to account for the gauntlet part and how it impedes handling?

Actually, I'd probably give it light myself, due to the emphasis on dual wielding pata or pairing it with other weapons. So basically a shortsword, although some of them could be quite long.

 

[TheLoneRanger1979]

I think you can safely drop the rapier out, especially if you drop the large 2 handed axes and swords too. Thus there will be only a 1 die size difference (d6 vs d8) between the Dex and Str based users. Are there any large east Asia weapons from your goal time period that are equivalents to great swords and great axes?

As, for the general DnD state of the weapons:

Sure, but consider this: in D&D you have on the one hand the shortsword, a light finesse weapon, analogous to the Roman gladius and other ancient swords, and on the other hand you have the versatile longsword. There's a gap between the two that represents the majority of sword evolution in the medieval period: the spatha and its descendants, the migration period, knightly, and arming swords. They were neither light (because you couldn't readily wield two of them) nor versatile (because they weren't made to be wielded with two hands).

This really bothers me. If we are to consider it true that there is a weapon size between most short swords (gladius, xiphos) and the two handed swords i.e the long sword, (and there were as mentioned the spatha, migration period swords, knightly - arming swords), then there is not indeed just a gap in the inventory, but a damage die "constriction". Wouldn't then a more proper damage die-weapon proportion include something like this:
-daggers and small blades (up to 20-30cm/10in - d4 (light)
-short swords and curved blades (up to 50cm/20in - d6 (light)
-long(er) swords and scimitars (up to 80-90cm/35in) -d8
-true long swords/bastard swords (90cm+/35in+) -d10 versatile d12 (heavy)
-great swords (renaissance "pike breakers") -2d6 (two handed) (heavy)
???

I would like to have some kind of a penalty involved if a d10 LS was used single handed though. Not being able to dual wield one is not an deterrent enough for a shield user i.e.

 

[Mercule]

Depending on point of view, one could argue that the katana is a finesse weapon. It is very light and sharp. While I'm not exactly a katana fanboy (I prefer Western-style swords), I do have to give it credit for that. Caution should be exercised, though, as you're not far away from a versatile, finesse weapon, at that point.

 

[Jediking]

I don't really think the name of the weapon really matters. The DMG specifically calls out that the weapon table is simplified, and even if it didn't you can call it what you want. Like all broadswords, katanas, machetes, whatever can be listed under longsword. If you don't like the idea of a rapier (I like it for the nobility, but it doesn't give a good image of trying to duel a charging Orc horde), change the image it to a sabre or even a longsword and keep the mechanical stats if you'd like.

As far as 'would taking it out matter for your campaign'? It probably won't. If you just don't like the fact that it is a rapier, you can add any number of 1d8, one-handed, finesse weapons. If you only want 1d6 weapons for Dex players, as has been said it's 1 avg point of damage. It won't change the game too much either way.