Weapon Finesse

[shurai]

*looks around at all the people who've never handled a real melee weapon*

It's not about balance, people, it's about realism.

If you hold a medeival-style longsword or hand-and-a-half sword in your hands, and it's made of steel, and swing it around a few times, you'll see why Strength makes perfect sense instead of Dexterity. This is one of the things that D&D does right that a lot of other RPGs get wrong. The stronger you are, the faster you can whirl the heavy sword around, the more likely you are to hit your target effectively.

Lighter weapons are more about precision and, yes, finesse. It's less about your body's ability to heft a weight and more about your body's natural speed and fluency. Some larger weapons, like the rapier, are specially designed to be more about being adroit and nimble than powerful, hence the possibility of Weapon Finesse even though they are 'medium'.

If you're curious, the Spiked Chain fit this description perfectly because it seems to be based on a Chinese weapon called the Meteor Hammer. This is a fascinating weapon, actually: A couple of meters of rope or chain, and a heavy weighted ball on either end, sometimes with spikes, though the Hammers I've seen had round balls at the ends.

Maybe this weapon made its way into OA, I don't have the book so I don't know. But this weapon is very complicated to use in that it involves whirling a heavy weight on a flexible cord and allowing it to wrap and unwrap around your body. As you're doing so, it gains tremendous speed with little need for brute strength. However, this speed is dependent on the user being very agile and having excellent coordination. Hence, the Finesse feat.

-S

 

[Bastoche]

*look puzzled*

It's not about balance, people, it's about realism.

D&D is realistic ?

D&D is about balance, not realism IMO. Weapon finesse was though out to "recreate" dexterity oriented fighting style for role-playing reasons in a balanced way.

Although I don't necessarly disagree with your "realism" argument, being medieval sword is a strength oriented weapon, I don't think that argument really takes place in a D&D context. Pushed to the extreme, such argument gets more or less petty IMO. Did you know that a two-handed sword only weights 6 pounds ?

 

[Reiver]

*looks around at all the people who've never handled a real melee weapon*

It's not about balance, people, it's about realism.

If you hold a medeival-style longsword or hand-and-a-half sword in your hands, and it's made of steel, and swing it around a few times, you'll see why Strength makes perfect sense instead of Dexterity. This is one of the things that D&D does right that a lot of other RPGs get wrong. The stronger you are, the faster you can whirl the heavy sword around, the more likely you are to hit your target effectively.

Lighter weapons are more about precision and, yes, finesse. It's less about your body's ability to heft a weight and more about your body's natural speed and fluency. Some larger weapons, like the rapier, are specially designed to be more about being adroit and nimble than powerful, hence the possibility of Weapon Finesse even though they are 'medium'.-S

Well, if you look up some books on medieval weapons, you will see that rapiers weighed as much as any other sword. Some times more. Perhaps you are thinking of a smallsword? A rapier isn't a fencing foil or epee. You aren't going to be doing flicks with it, you won't be riposting at lightning speed. What the rapier does do is thrust, and have a great deal more length on the blade than a typical medieval style cutting sword. The rapier is finessable because the game designers wanted it to be that way, for whatever reason. There is no historical or realistic logic behind it.

Spells are not realistic, twf is not realistic, dragons are not realistic. Honestly, realism has nothing to do with DnD, the game isn't realistic at all. It's not supposed to be realistic. The game is more fun as it is because it is less realistic.

 

[kreynolds]

Good point, out of the previous list, only the hand axe/throwing axe doesn't need an exotic weapon proficiency feat.

The Sickle doesn't need the EWP either. Oh, and there's the Cutlass too.

 

[shurai]

*look puzzled*
D&D is realistic ?

Yes, it is supposed to be so. The abstractions present in the game that make it unrealistic are meant to make it easier to play and more suited to the gaming table as well. The DMG makes it a point to say that most of the time people have an easier time suspending their disbelief and having a good time if the game is more realistic rather than less so.

D&D is about balance, not realism IMO. Weapon finesse was though out to "recreate" dexterity oriented fighting style for role-playing reasons in a balanced way.

But weapon finessed light weapons aren't balanced against strength-based weapons. You have to spend a feat to get your attack bonus up to that of a stronger warrior, and your damage won't be as good. True, a high dex has some advantages, but most of the time sacrificing that to gain an extra feat and more damage is more than worth it, if we're talking about fighters vs. fighters. Obviously, with other classes things will be more subtle.

Did you know that a two-handed sword only weights 6 pounds ?

Only!? Have you ever used one? a 6-lb sword is very heavy for the average person! My sword is much lighter than that, but it still took me months to get used to using it.

-S

 

[kreynolds]

*looks around at all the people who've never handled a real melee weapon*

*looks around at all the people who've never handled a real spell*

 

[Quidam]

realism vs. plausability

I think, rather than saying it's for "realism", people really mean that it's for the sake of "plausability". Obviously magic isn't real. But a great deal of attention has been paid to rules that yield plausable results when used.

 

[Bastoche]

Yes, it is supposed to be so. The abstractions present in the game that make it unrealistic are meant to make it easier to play and more suited to the gaming table as well. The DMG makes it a point to say that most of the time people have an easier time suspending their disbelief and having a good time if the game is more realistic rather than less so.

Then it's useless to further discuss this. You and I have a very different philosophy concerning D&D rules (as oppose to other more "realisitic" systems of rules).

But weapon finessed light weapons aren't balanced against strength-based weapons. You have to spend a feat to get your attack bonus up to that of a stronger warrior, and your damage won't be as good. True, a high dex has some advantages, but most of the time sacrificing that to gain an extra feat and more damage is more than worth it, if we're talking about fighters vs. fighters. Obviously, with other classes things will be more subtle.

You are looking at a very particular aspect. Less damage, sure, but better reflex save and better initiative, one less useful ability (strenght) and most "finesse" warriors are actually rogues. Who's sneak attack damage make up for the low strenght (that would be low anyway). It is balanced with the required feat.

Only!? Have you ever used one? a 6-lb sword is very heavy for the average person! My sword is much lighter than that, but it still took me months to get used to using it.

-S

People seem to usually believe that 2-handed swords weight a ton.

Most "swords" people have these days are in stainless steel. Much heavier than an historical steel sword.

Moreover, nobody truly has a grasp of what medieval martial arts truly used to be. Therefore nobody can call for a realism argument since nobody really know how knights (and swashbuckler for that matter) really used to fight. Some people make research in order to find out how western sword fight used to be thought in martial school, but IMO, nobody really has a clue about it. See http://www.thehaca.com

 

[hammymchamham]

why on the raiper? because medium sized rogues are proficient in raipers, and DEX is the most important stat for rogues, and WF: Raiper allows them to be good with the weapon.

Chain? I don;t know, cause you swing it?

 

[Bastoche]

I do not own any sword. But I own a guitar. The guitar weights 10 pounds. I assure you it's not heavy at all. And it's not even designed to cut people down. 6 pounds for a 2-hd sword is very light IMO !!!