D&D 5E What’s So Great About Medieval Europe?

[Coroc]

I think if we look at the historical averages we'd find that the average weights of rapiers were mostly the bottom end of average for the longsword. If memory serves the average rapier was about 2lbs, and the average longsword was more like 3lbs. Is that what you meant by close? I think that's a pretty big difference. I wasn't talking about a small sword - those are indeed smaller though, as the name suggests.

As for style, the Rapier is pretty universally acknowledged to be suited to nimble thrusting attacks, and only in a very secondary role as a slashing weapon compared to the longsword. The idea that more strength is required to fight one handed isn't entirely off base, but I think we might want to broaden our discussion to be more about what DBW terms 'melee' rather than a duel, since we're at least trying to use this in terms of D&D. Also, one handed fighting with a longsword was an integral part of at least some schools, more common in the Italian schools than the German. Also, the overall usefulness of thrusting, as far as those schools go, indexes pretty clearly to use against opponents in plate armour, which pretty much ignores slashing type attacks.

Since we're talking about D&D here, maybe we should be talking about both one and two handed play, since that's how it's written up?

15th/16th century rapier is as heavy (2,5 to 3 lbs.) and as long (4-4,5 ft. blade length) as a "long sword" as in 1 1/2 hands aka bastard sword. the point of balance is far more to the hilt than a long sword.

They are so heavy that you eventually want some additional means to parry: main gauge, a buckler, a cloak or a thick gauntlet.

The bastard aka longsword was used 1 handed on horse / with shield but normally two handed (no need for shield since sophisticated plate armor was available, so it was more important to use halfsword techniques to achieve some damage and combined sword / wrestling moves to topple the opponent in armor).

 

[Coroc]

It might be some of my posts you were responding to, not DrBW's. I realised that it might have been a little confusing because I was talking about historical longswords, which were almost exclusively two-handed weapons, not D&D longswords which cover one-handed weapons as well. It is the two-handed grip that allows the user to apply their strength to the movement of the blade better, and hence makes it more suitable for a weaker person. - Compare to the rapier where a similar-length blade is controlled by fingers, wrist and forearm.
You're perfectly correct that when looking at weapons like viking and some arming swords used in one-hand, the strength requirements would be closer.

I flat-out removed the finesse requirement for sneak attack. It seemed the obvious way to allow rogues to sneak attack with weapons like the longsword, which they were specifically given proficiency in.
I've not seen any issues with this houserule yet. A rogue using a longsword two-handed is probably a net damage loss compare to making an off-hand attack for an extra chance at sneak attack.
I've not found it makes Strength pointless either: currently Str-based rogues are still required to use finesse weapons, even though they're still using Str to attack with them. With the houserule, I've seen more strength-based rogues since they can use more iconic weapons.
(I also gave bows and slings the finesse trait, which also reduces dex supremacy, and may also have something to o with this.)

(Also allows any kensai rogue to use their weapons with sneak attack whatever they are. - Even gives them a further advantage, since they can still use dex for any sneak attack due to their magical nature.)

I see the finesse weapon requirement for sneak attack different in as to how easy a weapon can be concealed when doing a sneak attack, so I rather ban rapier but put things like clubs one handed maces or hand axes in.
But that is just me.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

A Kensei rogue using a longsword two handed is probably messing around with the SCAG cantrips and/or the bonus action withdraw ability. Waste of time more often than not.

I might relax rules on weapons the rogue is proficient with allowing sneak attacks on the rogue weapons they can use.

Sneak attack/finesse anything though is subclass specific IMHO and even then it's probably a bad idea. 3.x raging barbarian/rogue memories.

I don't think that there will be any balance issues for mixing rogue and barbarian in 5e.
Of course eel free to adjust thngs to suit you and your group if, for example, you and your group feel sneak attack is incompatible with rage in a thematic sense.

I see the finesse weapon requirement for sneak attack different in as to how easy a weapon can be concealed when doing a sneak attack, so I rather ban rapier but put things like clubs one handed maces or hand axes in.
But that is just me.

As long as it works for you and your group, its all good.
There are some things (such as giving longswords finesse ) that my group disapproves of and might make me twitchy, but work just fine at other tables.

 

[Tallifer]

What is so interesting about the (very much pseudo) medieval tableaux that keeps the community stuck at that well?

The Middle Ages had great comix style: