D&D 5E (2014) The woes of the elf and his longsword

[dwayne]

Ok so I have a 14 or 15 str and some one has a 18 so I do 2 less points than them so what. With the way this system is does not have to be min maxed to be fun or to play your class. It is exactly that mentality is why MMO's don't do it for me, and never will. I have ran games with exploiters and min maxers and now if some one is one I do not let them play as they tend to drag down the fun for most everyone else. A wizard with a long sword what use is it? what if you can not use your magic or that cantrip does not do any thing to what you are fighting or a minion is attacking you and a quick hit could take care of the little guy because the spells are not effecting them or helping them. I could go on but I always find it good to have a back up plan because you never know.

 

[Paraxis]

Ok so I have a 14 or 15 str and some one has a 18 so I do 2 less points than them so what. With the way this system is does not have to be min maxed to be fun or to play your class.

If you have an elf with a longsword and 14 strength at level 1 you are +4 to hit and 1d8+2 damage, with a 18 dexterity and a rapier you are +6 to hit and 1d8+4 damage, so its two points of damage and two points of attack bonus. That +2 to hit effects DPR a fair bit, turning
Let's not forget about how dex is used for more skills, initiative, and a much more common saving throw.

If you don't like rapier for cultural or whatever silly reasons, then just use a short sword and you are still better off.

The wizard thing, the moments when a wizard cares about what kind of melee weapon he is using are so few and far between that it might come up a handful of times over the course of a campaign, but when it does a dagger using dex to hit and damage will be a much better option for wizards than a longsword.

 

[Joe Liker]

From an evolutionary standpoint, if the D&D world existed, it seems odd that the classic elf weapon of choice isn't something that their evolution would have made them better at.

Evolution, which is a very broad-strokes process, doesn't really apply to the minuscule difference between a rapier and a longsword. Generally speaking, natural selection only cares that they are using weapons at all.

It is a cultural bias, nothing more. As such, it doesn't have to make sense to someone who isn't an elf.

 

[Sacrosanct]

If you have an elf with a longsword and 14 strength at level 1 you are +4 to hit and 1d8+2 damage, with a 18 dexterity and a rapier you are +6 to hit and 1d8+4 damage, so its two points of damage and two points of attack bonus. That +2 to hit effects DPR a fair bit, turning
Let's not forget about how dex is used for more skills, initiative, and a much more common saving throw.

If you don't like rapier for cultural or whatever silly reasons, then just use a short sword and you are still better off.

The wizard thing, the moments when a wizard cares about what kind of melee weapon he is using are so few and far between that it might come up a handful of times over the course of a campaign, but when it does a dagger using dex to hit and damage will be a much better option for wizards than a longsword.

Yeah...um...nothing you posted here does anything to refute his or her point that you "do not have to be min maxed to be fun or play your class."

 

[Eric V]

I was thinking more along the lines of the elves (as a very intelligent race) noticing increased efficiency as a whole with rapiers as opposed to longswords.

 

[Paraxis]

Yeah...um...nothing you posted here does anything to refute his or her point that you "do not have to be min maxed to be fun or play your class."

It's the second part "play your class" that I have issue with.

If you choose to wear leather armor instead of studded leather, use a longsword when your dex is higher than your strength, and other silly "roleplay" things than I say you are not playing your class and filling your role in the party. If I am running a character in the group and his life depends on your abilities and skills and you choose to make horrible optimization choices, my character starts to point out how we should replace you on the team because you obviously don't care about group safety.

So pick up the rapier and set down your grandfathers longsword, put on the studded leather I don't care if it clashes with your boots, and realize the fate of the village, kingdom, or world rests on your shoulders and now is not the time to be incompetent.

But yes some people can have fun playing horribly inept characters that are only good at underwater basket weaving and have fun for them, but trust me they are impeding the fun of the other players at the table.

 

[Sacrosanct]

If you choose to wear leather armor instead of studded leather, use a longsword when your dex is higher than your strength, and other silly "roleplay" things than I say you are not playing your class and filling your role in the party. If I am running a character in the group and his life depends on your abilities and skills and you choose to make horrible optimization choices, my character starts to point out how we should replace you on the team because you obviously don't care about group safety.

Ah, and now we get to the meat of it, and one of the biggest things I have a problem with. You seem to have this belief that unless another player optimized their PC, they are hurting you directly. I don't buy that for a second. If I'm a player, I want to play the concept I want to play. Not the PC *you* think I should play.

But yes some people can have fun playing horribly inept characters that are only good at underwater basket weaving and have fun for them, but trust me they are impeding the fun of the other players at the table.

And since I haven't seen a single player choose to play a truly inept PC who was only good at underwater basketweaving, this is a false argument that never actually happens. I really wish you (and people who present this same argument) would stop with the assumption that if a PC isn't optimized to your standards, they are inept. That is flat out false.

And to be honest, I think your attitude does the hobby a huge disservice. Telling people their concepts are inept or worthless because they don't meet your DPR standards makes them not want to play the game. You're turning away potential players.

In fact, that's the reason I didn't get into 3e. I wanted to play an arcane archer, and was told repeatedly that it was a worthless concept and I could do a better concept by following this alternative build path. I said, "screw 3e, I don't need that crap" right off. Luckily for me, I had been playing D&D for decades before that, so I kept playing my AD&D and was happy. If I were a brand new player? That would have turned me off to the hobby as a whole.

 

[Joe Liker]

I was thinking more along the lines of the elves (as a very intelligent race) noticing increased efficiency as a whole with rapiers as opposed to longswords.

Elves who are Dex-based fighters do know that, and they probably use rapiers for the most part.

Elves who are not fighters at all (the only people for whom this discussion matters) just can't seem to get the hang of rapiers. I guess longswords and shortswords are just easier for an elf to use, for some reason!

 

[Sacrosanct]

When folks ask me why would I ever play an elf with a less optimized weapon? Because I find stuff like this just freaking cool

(also, factor in practicality. Blazing a trail in the woods is a lot harder with a rapier than a longsword or axe)

 

[Blue]

Does anyone else find it odd that the preferred weapon of the elf sword and shield fighter is no longer the optimal weapon for that race? I am of course speaking of the longsword. The favored weapon of the wood and high elf no longer really fits them. If using point buy, the dwarf, human, half-orc, and dragonborn can all start at a 16/17 str yielding a +3 hit/dam. The high elf and wood elf can only start at a 15 str and only get a +2 hit/dam. So why is the dwarf using the longsword better than the elf? Flies totally in the face of reason in my book.

Ah, you're looking at it from the eyes of a PC. A completely reasonable viewpoint, but not the only one.

Out of the race of elves (or dwarves, or whatever), how many have maximum str (15 before racial mods)? Really, it's not a huge deal when looking at all of them. Think more of the elven encampment where every man and woman aims a bow (with proficiency) at marauders, and draws a finely crafted sword if they close. Just like orcs and whatever other monster manual race has weapons they get reasonable to-hit numbers with, the elves do as well. It's a unifying visual theme with their wooden bows and elegant blades.

Want to take bow/sword proficiency away and give them all cantrips? Fits the same game niche and creates a different feel for the elves.

There are some PCs that can directly benefit from it numerically as a weapon. But every elf PC will benefit with the shared community of walking around with the bow on their back, just like all the other elves.