new swords

[trentonjoe]

On the main forum, there is a thread bemoaning the lack of sword superiority. I feel that pain. I like to treat swords as weapons of wealth. Peasent heroes don't use swords, knights and nobles do. I want to make these swords "better".

I am thinking about making these changes in order to promote that feel. I welcome comments.


"Normal" (phb) long sword- 15 gp 1-8
"Noble" sword 150 gp, 2d4 (1h) 1d10 (2h)- requires weapon master feat
"Bastard" sword 250 gp 1d10 (1h) 1d12 (2h)- requires feat
Great sword phb price 3d4 (2h)

I am thinking the noble and bastard sword also allow something like the parry reaction 1/ short rest.

I realize this makes the swords "too good". I am thinking about needing some special trainer to confer profiency as well.

 

[Paraxis]

Requiring a feat is odd, it is just not 5th edition. Feats are not gatekeepers of fun toys, they are packages that are full of a few good things.

The parry reaction thing is handled by class features and already existing feats, no reason to make it part of the weapon.

The longsword is fine as is, the only issue is elves, give them prof instead in rapier or let them use longswords one handed as finesse weapons.

3d4 would be crazy with the great weapon fighting style rerolling 1' and 2's, there is no reason to change it from 2d6.

The second you make make a bastard sword 1d10 used one handed, it becomes the weapon of choice for almost everyone, especially dual wielders who will love you using two bastard swords at the same time.

 

[trentonjoe]

I don't intend for it to be taken by the common man, only upper crust elites.

I hadn't thought about GWF and the d4's, that does make the Great Sword very nasty. Which is, you know, what I am looking for.

The purpose of using the Weapon Master Feat is to:

1. Mimic the old "Exotic Weapon" Feal
2. Give that feat some "oomph"

I think it does give the feat the "unlocking of new toys feel". It now grants:

+1 str or dex
+1 damage
and a parrying ability

Thanks for the feedback, even though you didn't like it still made me think about it some more.

 

[Sadrik]

When you compare longsword to battleaxe and and to warhammer, I think of the longsword as something that you can defend and parry with much better because your attacks do not overextend yourself as much as you might with an axe or hammer- you can recover more quickly into a defensive stance. I also think that the long sword should be slashing and piercing, it is very versatile in that way - the whole point of it actually, this would extend to all bladed weapons. As for how the game would treat this is the least advantageous damage type would affect the creature. additionally I think swords should be finesse, all of them.

Do these things and the swords become awesome without bumping their damage.

 

[Drudenfusz]

I play with the idea of having a kind of well-balanced longswords (not sure how I want to call it, Elegant Longsword or maybe Masterwork Longsword). It would get the Finesse trait in addition to everthing a normal longsword has, and that's it. Guess I would treat it like a common magic item, and thus it would cost about 100 GP, but it would be not really magical.

 

[fuindordm]

Swords have a key advantage over other items: you're much more likely to find a magic sword BtB than any other kind of magic weapon. Of course, your DM can toss a Frost Brand (mace) in a treasure hoard, but it looks like this edition is trying to emphasize the iconic weight of the the magic sword.