D&D 5E rapier+dagger and/or longsword+dagger?

[Salamandyr]

This whole thread reminds me that I want to re-write the D&D equipment lists to more accurately reflect the time and tech level of my campaign world, and then I think about how nobody who plays in my game really gives a fig and how it would just complicate the game for them and possibly take away some of their fun by adding unnecessary complexity and give it up as a bad job.

EDIt: aand how Dexterity has a controlling stat for melee combat makes less and less sense to me. I could see it if it was a controlling accuracy stat for all weapons (say dex adds to hit and strength to damage), or if it added to none, but as is, it just feels like it's just that way to make point buy easier.

 

[Herobizkit]

I treat cutlass & sabre as equivalent to rapier, ie d8 finesse. These are much better weapons than Mongol or Saracen scimitars, which were more for cutting down fleeing infantry from horseback - I heard the Mongol scimitars didn't do too well vs Japanese blades in the invasion of Japan.

I would normally treat those as Falchions. YMMV of course.

 

[S'mon]

I would normally treat those as Falchions. YMMV of course.

? There's no Falchion in the 5e PHB.
I'd treat a Falchion or Messer 'chopper' type blade as a 1-handed martial non-finesse slashing weapon doing d8 damage. Arming Sword much the same, but should be able to do either piercing or slashing damage.

I guess it's pretty arbitrary at what point a weapon becomes 'finesse' - if you have a dark ages or medieval setting and want low-str, high dex swordsmen to be fully viable, then reskin rapier as arming sword etc.

 

[Herobizkit]

Right, forgot that - in which case it'd be a "longsword" (d8 versatile, upped to d10 for two-handed).

I miss 3e Falchions though.

 

[Hriston]

I agree with that. Like you I would use longsword stats for Katana even though it's short, though really d6/d10 might be more accurate - using a katana 1-handed vs a European arming sword or longsword would be a bad idea.

Conversely, you could stat a katana as a non-light scimitar with versatile (1d8). TWF with wakizashi (scimitar) would still require a feat, but otherwise you'd open up the possibility of dual wielding katanas without the feat, which is just no.

Taking the same approach with the rapier leads to the same result. If you make rapiers light, to enable use of main-gauche, then what's to prevent TWF with two rapiers? Even if damage is lowered to 1d6, it just seems wrong.

I don't know why scimitars are called out separately. d6 finesse looks right for a typical scimitar. Some of the larger more advanced Indian Tulwar type blades could reasonably be statted as d8 finesse slashing, same as sabre & cutlass - they're all pretty comparable blades (sabre good on horse, cutlass on foot).

I forgot about the one difference: slashing vs. piercing. I suppose that's useful as a model for how to stat different weapons. I'm beginning to see what a fluid system this is, rather than trying to fit every weapon into an existing category, especially with reference to damage type.

 

[Hriston]

"I'd place the arming/knightly sword along with the spatha, migration period sword, and Viking sword in the spot currently occupied by the rapier."

I would keep all those as d8 non-finesse martial weapons, being STR-only makes them feel slightly inferior and 'cruder', and helps explain why DEX-based Roman legionaries might prefer their shortswords to the STR-based barbarians' longer blades.

Game-wise, if they don't have finesse, then they're just the same as a longsword used one-handed without the option of two-handed use. I'd keep finesse, personally, but distinguish them from rapiers, estocs, etc. by having them do slashing rather than piercing. Cut and thrust swords seem to be in an awkward place as far as the rules go. I'm not that comfortable giving players the option of damage type on a given weapon.

Also, the Romans did adopt the spatha as the primary weapon for heavy infantry in the early centuries A.D., leaving the gladius used only for light infantry. It was also used by the cavalry. Of course, this doesn't necessarily support giving these swords finesse, but the alternative is to once again leave the medieval-setting campaign without a 1d8 finesse alternative besides rather late developments, like the estoc and spada da lato.

 

[S'mon]

Game-wise, if they don't have finesse, then they're just the same as a longsword used one-handed without the option of two-handed use.

Yeah, that is definitely my preference:
Arming Sword - d8, 1-handed, 12gp, slash or pierce.
Falchion, Messer - d8, 1 handed, 8gp, slash.
And I'd allow a longsword & greatsword to do either slashing or piercing damage.