D&D 5E Old Vexed Question: All too Important Dexterity Stat and Finesse Weapons, namely the Rapier

[Paul Farquhar]

I have yet to see anyone come up with any evidence that this is an actual problem in actual gameplay, rather than a bee in theorycrafters' bonnets.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

Not if you're using the gladius properly. Again, once you get past the first few inches, it makes no difference.

Now, yes, with the longer blade, you're more likely to achieve that full penetration (ahem). But that, in D&D terms, is a matter of hitting, not damage. Plus, again, if we're taking that into account, we also have to take into account the fact that most short swords have much wider--and often thicker--blades than rapiers. Those factors should at least cancel one another out, in broad gaming terms.

Actually, the intensity of the hit (the *ahem* you discussed) is all about damage. There is no difference between rolling a 10 and a 19 if both hit (only a 20 is different), but rolling a 4 or an 8 is vastly different. Thus, damage determines how significant the hit is. As I've mentioned before, I would be fine with rapiers only doing 1d6 or not even having them in the game. Many campaigns take more off a enlightened/renaissance feel, even with swashbuckling pirates and such, but my campaigns never follow those genres so there are no rapiers.

But why would we do that? They're totally different weapons. The classic sabre is more akin to what D&D calls a scimitar--a curved slashing blade, as opposed to a straight piercing one.

I would compare rapiers to sabres because, like sabres, they were often used in fencing or Dex-based forms of sword play despite having an edged blade, as opposed to the more direct, harder style used by broadsword, longsword, etc. As you point out, since D&D considers the sabre likely a form of scimitar, the sabre would also be a finesse weapon. And why would they consider scimitars a light weapon, weighing 3 lbs, but a rapier (only 2 lbs) are not a light weapon???

Either way, the point was simply that rapiers aren't just piercing weapons historically and had edged blades, often on both sides, allowing a greater damage potential due to a longer slashing edge than a shortsword such as a gladius. Even most short bladed weapons were also edged on at least one side.

Ultimately, I believe the development teams for 5E simply wanted to select one melee weapon for finesse characters that would do a d8, instead of a d6. They could have just as easily selected the scimitar to be 1d8 and left the rapier at 1d6. Like you point out, longer edged blade but smaller cross-section than a gladius. Sure, those could cancel each other out easily enough. But the traditional scimitar is much longer than a shortsword such as a gladius, with a wider blade as well if you go with the cresent-shaped version. However, the scimitar is not usually used with a thrusting motion, which a sabre often is, making it more akin to a rapier in that aspect.

LOL that was kind of all over the place! Hope it makes sense.

 

[jmartkdr]

I'll believe this is a problem when I play a game where no one uses two-handed melee weapons.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Are you even playing 5E really? This is way more than I would ever want as a player or DM, but if it works for you that's cool.

You could make an argument that it technically qualifies as being a very extensive set of house rules, since 5E is so open about that sort of thing, but I put a new name on the ruleset to avoid anyone carrying over assumptions that no longer hold.

According to how 5E is described, all of the classes and races (and spells, feats, etc) in all of the books are entirely optional, as long as you still have some races and classes; and homebrew races and classes can account for that. None of the individual changes that I make would cross the line individually - you could play 5E, and incorporate the changes to saving throws that I mentioned, for example - but the collective changes are probably too far to consider it the same game.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

You could make an argument that it technically qualifies as being a very extensive set of house rules, since 5E is so open about that sort of thing, but I put a new name on the ruleset to avoid anyone carrying over assumptions that no longer hold.

According to how 5E is described, all of the classes and races (and spells, feats, etc) in all of the books are entirely optional, as long as you still have some races and classes; and homebrew races and classes can account for that. None of the individual changes that I make would cross the line individually - you could play 5E, and incorporate the changes to saving throws that I mentioned, for example - but the collective changes are probably too far to consider it the same game.

Very true, but I was looking at the collective changes. I agree with some of the issues with saves at higher DCs and other points.

I have a house-rule that allows a character one ASI and a skill, tool, language, two martial weapons, or shield proficiency at 5th, 11th, and 17th when they advance into a new tier. The other option is they can choose an armor proficiency or a save proficiency (but no ASI for those options!). If a player elected the save proficiency, they would have 5 out of 6 by the top tier of play.

 

[cbwjm]

I'm not really all that concerned any more about the d8 for a rapier, it really doesn't mean much in the long term. Previously, I had considered giving it the shortsword stats and really I think more weapons could have just been merged so that you end up with examples of weapons that fit the stats.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

I find a good general solution to characters hitting too often/doing too much damage is to modify the enemies they are fighting, rather than making house rules for the players to deal with when making characters. A small boost in HP or AC for the enemies, or upping their Dex a bit can turn a cakewalk into a tough fight. Also, as I have seen many others say here before, if the PCs can do it, so can their enemies, or at least some of them.

As for finesse itself, weapons with that property generally deliver piercing damage primarily. You aim for the opponent's weak spots, rather than just slashing and smashing, so Dex instead of Str makes sense for both hit and damage. Of course, you could always require the damage bonus for a finesse weapon, and maybe light weapons too, to be an average of Str and Dex. Dex to hit the right spot and Str for the force to penetrate deeply enough to do real damage to the target. That might at least reduce the number of characters with negative Str mods.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Actually, the intensity of the hit (the *ahem* you discussed) is all about damage. There is no difference between rolling a 10 and a 19 if both hit (only a 20 is different), but rolling a 4 or an 8 is vastly different. Thus, damage determines how significant the hit is.

Oh, I know. I was getting into more IRL considerations. And giving a rapier a better chance to hit over a short sword would require a whole new level of granularity that the game frankly doesn't need.

But my point was that, even if we assume a perfect hit, the rapier shouldn't do more damage than the short sword, and one could even make the argument it should do less.

As you point out, since D&D considers the sabre likely a form of scimitar, the sabre would also be a finesse weapon. And why would they consider scimitars a light weapon, weighing 3 lbs, but a rapier (only 2 lbs) are not a light weapon???

We agree here. The scimitar as presented in D&D--which is on the smaller end of what scimitars look like IRL--should absolutely be a finesse weapon.

Ultimately, I believe the development teams for 5E simply wanted to select one melee weapon for finesse characters that would do a d8, instead of a d6.

Yep. That, and trying to encourage a particularly common fantasy image--the duelist/swashbuckler/musketeer--are most likely major considerations that went into the decision.

And I do 100% get why they did that. I'm just unsure I personally agree with the final decision.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

And I do 100% get why they did that. I'm just unsure I personally agree with the final decision.

Yeah. Personally, I will probably house-rule the Scimitar to a d8 weapon and push Rapier to d6 but make it Light. I would like Druids to have a d8 weapon as much as Rogues (which would still get longswords).

 

[TwoSix]

Honestly, if the rapier was initially listed as a 1d6 weapon, I doubt many people would be yelling it should be a d8. It works either way I suppose, but I don't have them anyway as they came about much later in history and don't fit my campaign setting.

Obviously, a rapier should use a d7.