Bill Zebub
“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”
I have this suspicion that at least some of the posters in this thread totally missed the part about two-handed.
No, I caught it. But you also wrote, "It would really just be a flavor option." If it's just about flavour, then why do we need a new rule
that chips away at what little remains of strength as a viable stat?
This seems to me like a solution in search of a problem. I see no reason to allow it. If you want to do so in your game, feel free, but I'm not into it.
I get not liking it for aesthetic reasons; that’s valid. But “solution in search of a problem” seems like an inapplicable cliche. Problem: as a Ranger, I want to swing a melee weapon with two hands AND be a good archer. Solution: versatile weapons are finesse when used with two hands.
I guess since nobody has pointed out an actual mechanical exploit I have my answer.
Guess we need a dedicated 2Handed finesse weapon.I get not liking it for aesthetic reasons; that’s valid. But “solution in search of a problem” seems like an inapplicable cliche. Problem: as a Ranger, I want to swing a melee weapon with two hands AND be a good archer. Solution: versatile weapons are finesse when used with two hands.
I guess since nobody has pointed out an actual mechanical exploit I have my answer.
The core problem is STR and DEX are so unbalanced in base 5e and likely base 1D&D that a 2 dice shift is not enough.Guess we need a dedicated 2Handed finesse weapon.
greatsword 2d6->remove Heavy, becomes d12->add finesse, becomes 1d10.
Then again, greatsword should be 2d8 from the start so that imagined 2Handed finesse weapon should be d12.
But that is another topic/problem for 5E.
d12 vs. 2d8 is 2,5 damage per swing.The core problem is STR and DEX are so unbalanced in base 5e and likely base 1D&D that a 2 dice shift is not enough.
So 2H Finesse Longsword 1d10 would only be okay if 2H Greatsword is allowed to be 1d16 (or 2d8).
It should be more. At least 3. Preferably 4d12 vs. 2d8 is 2,5 damage per swing.
That will add up fast.