D&D 5E The fall from grace of the longsword

[Grainger]

In that case, why do we have damage types at all? Or different damage dice?

Well, different weapon properties give some flavour, without us having to specify detailed fighting instructions/tactical moves each turn. Obviously, we want some flavour in D&D, but not too much detail. Where "too much" detail lies is a matter of taste; personally I find the likes of even GURPs' "simple" combat too involved, but that type of system is there for people who want it. I'm glad 5e abstracts the combat, while giving players some interesting choices.

 

[Uchawi]

That is one of my disappointments with 5E. You see a lot of innovation on the magic side of things to rewrite casters, spells, rituals and magic from the ground up. But mundane items, armor, and martial ability are frozen in time or have regressed.

 

[aramis erak]

Honestly, if a group would rather have more "realistic" weapons effects, they wouldn't be that hard to house-rule. Give plated enemies resistance to non-bludgeoning attacks or something, maybe demand higher strength bonuses to use certain weapons( longbow).

I'd suggest only versus slashing and ranged piercing, and spears/javelins. In melee, there are lots of places to put a short piercing weapon... like any articulation. Certain forms of dagger are optimized for just this kind of work.

Spears and javelins are just too long to readily go up the articulations on a standing target. But they can still hit elbows and sometimes knees.

But if you're going there... chain is resistant to slash and pierce, but not so good against bludgeoning.

Scale and leather are the "generally good" armors. They're about equally bad about all three.

 

[Mike Schneider1]

To me that brings longswords in line with how it was used in medieval times. Maces and battleaxes were often preferred in battle.

They weren't "preferred", they were just more plentiful because they were easier to make and therefore cheaper.

 

[Sage Genesis]

They weren't "preferred", they were just more plentiful because they were easier to make and therefore cheaper.

This thread is three years old, by the way.

 

[Mistwell]

I have been an avid player of elven characters since 1st edition. As such, many of my elves used longswords and I'm not afraid to say it was not only because of their racial tendencies but also because the weapon always had some niche that made it a preferable one-handed weapon. Whether it was the 1d12 large damage of 1st and 2nd, or the 19-20 crit range for a 1d8 weapon of 3rd, or the +3 proficiency bonus of 4th there has always been something that made the longsword shine. In 5th edition, the choice to use a longsword is purely aesthetic. As a matter of fact, in my opinion it may be the worst of the 1d8 versatile (1d10) weapons. The warhammer weighs less and deals bludgeoning damage, which is an advantage against skeletons and certain oozes. The battleaxe weighs a little more buts costs 5gp less to buy. The only positive to the longsword is that it weighs slightly less than the battleaxe. The fact that it no longer has any mechanical advantage strikes me as odd.

It has a massive mechanical advantage.

The adventures are LITTERED with magic longswords.

I started my fighter with a glaive. We found a magic longsword (of course) and nobody else could use it so I said OK I will carry that along with my glaive. A level later it's all I am using...the magic was just too useful. So I picked up a shield and my DM let me change my fighting style to duelist. And at fourth level I grabbed shield mastery as a feat. So much fun.

And now we've found a second longsword. And someone is looking to find a way to use it in the party...because we need magic items to harm some creatures effectively.

This might not be the reason you're looking for...but it's a real reason.

 

[Sunseeker]

I personally hope 5E is a transition away from individualized weapon stats. The weapon you wield should be a function of character aesthetic IMO. With damage dice based only on size, and damage type based on design. Granular weapon charts where each weapon has a different die-type, damage type, or speed or whatever should become an optional rule.

 

[delericho]

Yay?

Sorry, but I really like the decision to remove any obvious weapon choice for mechanical reasons. I feel like it frees up the character to use whatever you want, as opposed to the obvious "best."

A while back I started letting people sub the "best" quality weapon for whatever else they wanted it to be; so like a great axe that used 2d6 instead of 1d12 (unless they wanted the 1d12, of course). So this feels pretty natural to me.

This sounds like a good move.

(Actually, my preference would be the have the base weapons be equal, but have a different set of magical options that can be applied to them - so maybe only swords can be flaming, and only hammers can be thundering, and so on. But that's beyond the scope of this thread. Oh, and on a similar vein, I'd likewise be inclined to differentiate the weapons a bit more in the Fighting Styles - but again, that's ideal for a 5e equivalent of "Complete Warrior" or similar... and since that book is unlikely to be forthcoming...)

 

[Stalker0]

For the 4e historians in the thread. Generally the +3 of the longsword was a good pick with most powers, especially the "get X effect on a hit".

However, there was a sweet of powers that focus more on weapon multipliers. For these powers, the +2 big weapon die weapons were preferable.

Personally I am fine that 5e made weapons mostly interchangable. That said, if they did want to differentiate them....its actually the best environment to do so. Between the lack of need for highly magic weapon combined with the ease this edition allows for weapon swapping....there's never been a better time for a player to play the "golfbag of weapons" character should they wish to.

 

[Rod Staffwand]

What's missing is that the sword is just a massively more useful close combat weapon than a mace/hammer smashy thing or axe choppy thing. You have more vectors of attacks and are dangerous at a greater range of distances. You can jab, use heavier blows, backhand your attacks, use it defensively to fend off attackers, and you even have some options in a grapple. While it lacks in raw power to cleave through metal or stun an enemy in heavy armor, it reigns supreme in versatility (actual versatility, I mean, not just a damage bonus for 2-handed use). They also fit nicely in scabbards and can be drawn quick enough. Readying an axe or mace that is not in hand might be tricky in the midst of battle.

As others have noted, they aren't quite as useful against plated foes as some other weapons. They are also expensive and easy to nick, bend or break (either intentionally or unintentionally) so it behooves the well-armed gentleman to keep it in reserve and use another weapon for the start of the melee, bringing out the sword once you're disarmed or the fighting gets really frantic.

Digression: In an opposite vein, the simple spear was also one of the most popular weapons (if not the most) due to its ease of use, exceptional range, and utter affordability. If I had to fight a dragon (please don't make me), I would absolutely choose a spear (as long of one as I could comfortably wield) to keep the thing at range. Even an accidental bump from a multi-ton beast would be crushing.

Back on track: So, yes, I agree that the longsword is a bit underwhelming in 5e, especially compared to weapons like rapiers and hand crossbows which are too potent. At least we don't have to deal with spiked chain nonsense in this edition. I did allow sword wielders to inflict piercing damage if desired. It came up a lot in my first campaign since I was playing around with S/B/P damage types. I'd also support a strong feat or fighting style for sword specialists to differentiate them a bit more (at the cost of optional complexity).

But, in general, D&D weapons and armor have long been problematic (don't get me started on longbows) and if you go down the rabbit hole of improving things you'll never come out. Just roll your attacks and damage and kill them orcs.