D&D 5E The D&D rapier: What is it?

[Satyrn]

Rapier 1d8 (Finesse weapons, light)

. . .

Also, the rapier should be a light weapon. You should be able to hold a dagger in your offhand.

I don't understand what you're getting at with this. Rapiers aren't light weapons.

Or are you saying that light weapons should do 1d8 damage (instead of the 1d6 that shortswords and scimitars do)?


As for the dagger thing, I agree. But rather than nerfing the rapier down into "just another shortsword," my fix would be to give the dagger itself a special rule that would let it be paired with any other weapon.

 

[Thurmas]

I don't understand what you're getting at with this. Rapiers aren't light weapons.

Or are you saying that light weapons should do 1d8 damage (instead of the 1d6 that shortswords and scimitars do)?


As for the dagger thing, I agree. But rather than nerfing the rapier down into "just another shortsword," my fix would be to give the dagger itself a special rule that would let it be paired with any other weapon.

I suppose its maybe not that rapier should be a light weapon, but maybe the two handed rules should be that only the off hand weapon has to be light. It just annoys me that RAW, you can't dual wield a rapier and a dagger without a feat. But this really just gets more to the problems with 2 weapon fighting in a general then a commentary on the rapier.

Regarding your other point, personally I'd like to see the scimitar move to 1d8 damage as a martial, and lose the light property, and the short sword become a simple weapon (but retain all the other properties it has).

 

[Satyrn]

It just annoys me that RAW, you can't dual wield a rapier and a dagger without a feat.

And once you have that feat, you'd be rather silly to wield a 1d4 dagger instead of a 1d8 sword.

As I said, I think the quickest, cleanest solution is to give the dagger a special property. And then I'd add in a 1d4 hatchet - or maybe a pick - with that same special quality for the dwarves. Oh! And give it to the sap for the thugs.

 

[Coroc]

At some point, maybe the 19th century, antiquarians took to calling some straight, single-edged cavalry weapons 'broadswords,' I have no idea why. In fantasy gaming 'broadsword' is sometimes taken, quite literally, as a big honking sword that's improbably wide across the blade, but not overlong, like a cut-down fantasy greatsword, I suppose.

Agreed.

A broadsword is an arming sword, any mainly cutting but also capable of thrusting medium length straight blade
will fall into that category (E.g. Shiavona, the 1 handed basket hilt claymore, but also roman spatha and knightly swords to be used mainly in conjunction with a shield up to about 12th or 13th century)

In game terms 1 handed 1d8 slashing.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

When i think of a rapier I usually think of the sabre- like so

 

[Thurmas]

And once you have that feat, you'd be rather silly to wield a 1d4 dagger instead of a 1d8 sword.

As I said, I think the quickest, cleanest solution is to give the dagger a special property. And then I'd add in a 1d4 hatchet - or maybe a pick - with that same special quality for the dwarves. Oh! And give it to the sap for the thugs.

It's not always about maxing damage output, though. Sometimes it's about flavor and two swords doesn't make sense just to max damage if the character concept asks for something else.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Exactly. It's 1 point of damage. So why even add this silly anachronism to the game? Dexterity is superior to Strength in every way...what's wrong with saying that if you want a Dex build you are going to do slightly less damage?

It isn't an anachronism though. Feel free to point to the historical period in our world where elven smiths worked in a thousand year old tradition to design weaponry to fight monsters that are too big to physically exist.

 

[Coroc]

When i think of a rapier I usually think of the sabre- like so

The upper one is a broad sword the lower one is a sabre.

 

[Satyrn]

It's not always about maxing damage output, though. Sometimes it's about flavor and two swords doesn't make sense just to max damage if the character concept asks for something else.

Aye, that's true. I'd figure that person would be happy with a shortsword and dagger, though, and get better use out of some other more interesting feat than Dual Wielder

This all hypothetical what if, of course. But I can add that I have no interest in taking Dual Wielder for my gnome battlemaster because it's so boring compared to other choices. Shortswords are fine.

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

Rapiers aren't smallswords either - they are the smallsword's predecessor, same way the small sword became the olympic fencing weapon. Smallswords are far shorter, lighter and have a simpler hilt

So what is a rapier. A rapier is a long bladed sword, with a very narrow blade, complex hilt and devoted to the thrust. It was carried by civilians and frequently used in duels. Something a bit like this:

In my campaigns the shortsword is what historicly was the small sword.
The rapiers tend to have advanced ring guards, instead of full cup hilts.
something ike :