I can understand that, but if all of those 1d8 Martial non-finess weapon’s went to 1d10, the Longsword could do 1d10/1d12 etc. Then Str builds suddenly become more attractive by comparison and everybody gets to have their cake and eat it too. Of course, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.
But then the finesse guys would want d10s too. Where does it end? What's inherently /wrong/ with using d6 weapons?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I can understand that, but if all of those 1d8 Martial non-finess weapon’s went to 1d10, the Longsword could do 1d10/1d12 etc. Then Str builds suddenly become more attractive by comparison and everybody gets to have their cake and eat it too. Of course, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.
But then the finesse guys would want d10s too. Where does it end? What's inherently /wrong/ with using d6 weapons?
to be fair, they already want d10 weapons. That is what this post is about.
I can understand that, but if all of those 1d8 Martial non-finess weapon’s went to 1d10, the Longsword could do 1d10/1d12 etc. Then Str builds suddenly become more attractive by comparison and everybody gets to have their cake and eat it too. Of course, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.
But then the finesse guys would want d10s too. Where does it end? What's inherently /wrong/ with using d6 weapons?
They already want d10s, or did you miss the last 6 pages? Nothing would change with my system other than Str builds get better. For example:
If the lowest Finesse weapon used a 1d4, and the highest uses 1d8/2d4 (Revenant Double-Bladed Scimitar) with 1d6 in between.
And if the lowest Str weapon used 1d6, and the the highest was 2d8/4d4 with 1d8, 1d10, 1d12, 2d6, and 3d4 all in between. Would that not simultaneously allow for more weapon variation and make Str builds more viable? I believe it would go a long way towards solving the problem.
The problem is that D&D doesn’t use an actual d3, so there’s nowhere lower to go than a d4. But the highest can go above 1d12/2d6, so it seems the only rout to take is to go up.
I can understand that, but if all of those 1d8 Martial non-finess weapon’s went to 1d10, the Longsword could do 1d10/1d12 etc. Then Str builds suddenly become more attractive by comparison and everybody gets to have their cake and eat it too. Of course, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.
But then the finesse guys would want d10s too. Where does it end? What's inherently /wrong/ with using d6 weapons?
to be fair, they already want d10 weapons. That is what this post is about.
Exactly. it's all powercreep in my eyes.
The finesse guys should be thankful. I learned back in the 2e days. We didn't /have/ fancy finesse weapons. Melee weapons were all str based. Dagger, shortsword, you name it...all str. I did have to look this up because I wasn't 100% positive my memory was serving me correctly. I haven't actually PLAYED 2e in over 20 years. You could get str bows though!
The real fact is, there's nothing /wrong/ with using a d6 weapon. They're solid choices, and the difference is fairly minimal. People just have this mental entitlement to a d8 weapon. If the str users were to get d10s, that mental entitlement would just go up for finesse users.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I can understand that, but if all of those 1d8 Martial non-finess weapon’s went to 1d10, the Longsword could do 1d10/1d12 etc. Then Str builds suddenly become more attractive by comparison and everybody gets to have their cake and eat it too. Of course, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.
But then the finesse guys would want d10s too. Where does it end? What's inherently /wrong/ with using d6 weapons?
They already want d10s, or did you miss the last 6 pages? Nothing would change with my system other than Str builds get better. For example:
If the lowest Finesse weapon used a 1d4, and the highest uses 1d8/2d4 (Revenant Double-Bladed Scimitar) with 1d6 in between.
And if the lowest Str weapon used 1d6, and the the highest was 2d8/4d4 with 1d8, 1d10, 1d12, 2d6, and 3d4 all in between. Would that not simultaneously allow for more weapon variation and make Str builds more viable? I believe it would go a long way towards solving the problem.
The problem is that D&D doesn’t use an actual d3, so there’s nowhere lower to go than a d4. But the highest can go above 1d12/2d6, so it seems the only rout to take is to go up.
It's pure power creep, and it's completely un-necessary. Just scrap the rapier and everything is back in balance. What's wrong with using a d6 weapon?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I can understand that, but if all of those 1d8 Martial non-finess weapon’s went to 1d10, the Longsword could do 1d10/1d12 etc. Then Str builds suddenly become more attractive by comparison and everybody gets to have their cake and eat it too. Of course, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.
But then the finesse guys would want d10s too. Where does it end? What's inherently /wrong/ with using d6 weapons?
They already want d10s, or did you miss the last 6 pages? Nothing would change with my system other than Str builds get better. For example:
If the lowest Finesse weapon used a 1d4, and the highest uses 1d8/2d4 (Revenant Double-Bladed Scimitar) with 1d6 in between.
And if the lowest Str weapon used 1d6, and the the highest was 2d8/4d4 with 1d8, 1d10, 1d12, 2d6, and 3d4 all in between. Would that not simultaneously allow for more weapon variation and make Str builds more viable? I believe it would go a long way towards solving the problem.
The problem is that D&D doesn’t use an actual d3, so there’s nowhere lower to go than a d4. But the highest can go above 1d12/2d6, so it seems the only rout to take is to go up.
It's pure power creep, and it's completely un-necessary. Just scrap the rapier and everything is back in balance. What's wrong with using a d6 weapon?
What’s wrong with a little power creep? What’s your objection to the max going from 2d6 to 2d8?
I can understand that, but if all of those 1d8 Martial non-finess weapon’s went to 1d10, the Longsword could do 1d10/1d12 etc. Then Str builds suddenly become more attractive by comparison and everybody gets to have their cake and eat it too. Of course, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.
But then the finesse guys would want d10s too. Where does it end? What's inherently /wrong/ with using d6 weapons?
They already want d10s, or did you miss the last 6 pages? Nothing would change with my system other than Str builds get better. For example:
If the lowest Finesse weapon used a 1d4, and the highest uses 1d8/2d4 (Revenant Double-Bladed Scimitar) with 1d6 in between.
And if the lowest Str weapon used 1d6, and the the highest was 2d8/4d4 with 1d8, 1d10, 1d12, 2d6, and 3d4 all in between. Would that not simultaneously allow for more weapon variation and make Str builds more viable? I believe it would go a long way towards solving the problem.
The problem is that D&D doesn’t use an actual d3, so there’s nowhere lower to go than a d4. But the highest can go above 1d12/2d6, so it seems the only rout to take is to go up.
It's pure power creep, and it's completely un-necessary. Just scrap the rapier and everything is back in balance. What's wrong with using a d6 weapon?
What’s wrong with a little power creep? What’s your objection to the max going from 2d6 to 2d8?
The system math is flat, with weapon and spellcaster being relatively in-tune. There's no reason to buff everything up...just because the rapier is stupid. Fix the problem, ie broken rapier, and leave the rest alone because the rest works just fine as is.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I can understand that, but if all of those 1d8 Martial non-finess weapon’s went to 1d10, the Longsword could do 1d10/1d12 etc. Then Str builds suddenly become more attractive by comparison and everybody gets to have their cake and eat it too. Of course, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.
But then the finesse guys would want d10s too. Where does it end? What's inherently /wrong/ with using d6 weapons?
They already want d10s, or did you miss the last 6 pages? Nothing would change with my system other than Str builds get better. For example:
If the lowest Finesse weapon used a 1d4, and the highest uses 1d8/2d4 (Revenant Double-Bladed Scimitar) with 1d6 in between.
And if the lowest Str weapon used 1d6, and the the highest was 2d8/4d4 with 1d8, 1d10, 1d12, 2d6, and 3d4 all in between. Would that not simultaneously allow for more weapon variation and make Str builds more viable? I believe it would go a long way towards solving the problem.
The problem is that D&D doesn’t use an actual d3, so there’s nowhere lower to go than a d4. But the highest can go above 1d12/2d6, so it seems the only rout to take is to go up.
It's pure power creep, and it's completely un-necessary. Just scrap the rapier and everything is back in balance. What's wrong with using a d6 weapon?
What’s wrong with a little power creep? What’s your objection to the max going from 2d6 to 2d8?
The system math is flat, with weapon and spellcaster being relatively in-tune. There's no reason to buff everything up...just because the rapier is stupid. Fix the problem, ie broken rapier, and leave the rest alone because the rest works just fine as is.
I disagree that the rest works just fine as is. I think increasing the damage of weapons ever so slightly would rebalance Melee weapon’s against spells like Eldritch Blast etc. in a positive way since I think Str builds have way more to compete with than just Dex. I think the problem is that a Greatsword only does 2d6 instead of 2d8. I think the problem is that a Longsword is 1d8/1d10 when it should be 2d4/2d6. I think an Arming Sword should exist and be 1d10.
We disagree on the problem, so we can never agree on the solution. Therefore I’m going to absent myself from this conversation since it seems you are getting a little agitated and I don’t need that static today. As they say in Shadowrun: “Good luck with yer struggles chummer.”
There's no difference between eldritch blast and a heavy crossbow. No rebalance is necessary.
I do note that you were completely unwilling to answer the question I posed numerous times about what's wrong with a d6 weapon. I'm just going to assume that you can't answer it because you know there's nothing wrong with it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
There's no difference between eldritch blast and a heavy crossbow. No rebalance is necessary.
I do note that you were completely unwilling to answer the question I posed numerous times about what's wrong with a d6 weapon. I'm just going to assume that you can't answer it because you know there's nothing wrong with it.
What is your deal?!? Fine, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a 1d6 weapon. There is also absolutely nothing wrong with the Rapier.
And wtf does a crossbow have to do with rebalancing Melee Strength attacks against magic?!?
Crazyhawk is fishing for someone to offer a reason why "just a d6 weapon" is a bad thing so he can dismantle it, primarily by citing the billion and three things Dex does that Strength doesn't. It's a common complaint. Dex is a superstat, absolutely nobody can really afford to drop it, while Strength is lumped in with Intelligence in the 'nobody really NEEDS this, it doesn't do spit' category of Free Dump Stats for Everybody.
I would point out that Strength, unlike Intelligence, is an excellent dump stat until everybody in the party dumps Strength and you realize you have an entire teamful of skinny nerds with excellent fine motor control who are nevertheless completely stymied by a simple door bar. When one decides to go against the grain and play a very strong character, Strength has a sneaking way of proving quite useful after all. Unlike poor Intelligence, which is a free dump for everybody everywhere all the time unless you're a wizard or an artificer. Ugh.
Nevertheless. There is nothing wrong with a d6 weapon. There's also nothing wrong with wanting a stronger weapon, especially if you're playing an off-meta concept. The courtly Paladin, trained in the arts of the Code Duello who fights with an elegant rapier rather than a big brutish greatsword or an arming sword and shield, is a personal favorite of mine. I do think that 2d4 should have been a valid damage die for weapons in D&D, and it would fit the rapier well. A 1d6 rapier is just a strictly worse version of the shortsword, and we need less Spear/Trident kerfuffles in the game, not more. Rapiers get to exist because a great many cool character ideas rely on them, and 2d4 makes the rapier more of a precise, reliable weapon. 2d4 slashing for a saber would also be a good fit, allowing these weapons a niche to exist in.
There's arguments to be made that Finesse in general is a problem, as it removes one of the key differentiators for Strength. This would be more fair if not for the creeping proliferation of autogishing from things like the Hexblade or the Battlesmith, wherein a character is allowed to attack with a mental stat rather than a physical one. Cantrips also upset the balance. Anyone who believes a heavy crossbow - with its ridiculous weight figure, two-handed use requirement, and the double limitations of the Loading and Heavy properties - is somehow equivalent to even just Fire Bolt, let alone a decently built Eldritch Blast, is lunacy. Even if you make a build that centers on the heavy crossbow and removes as many of these limitations as possible, that's an entire build dedicated to doing what Eldritch Blast, in particular, does with one cantrip pick and one Invocation.
The math works out balance-wise, yes. But the existence of autogishing and the numerous class abilities that allow a caster to add their primary stat modifier to their spell/cantrip damage also proves that the game math does not particularly care which stat you attack with. Any attempt to emphasize Strength is basically getting into the territory of a complete combat overhaul. Which, in my mind at least, would be excellent and something I'd love to see in a 5.5e Optional Advanced Rules book, but it's beyond the scope of anything for basic 5e.
The rapier does not break the game. Strength is less underpowered than Intelligence and nobody except me cares about the Intelligence issue, so bleh. If the rapier offends thine senses banish it from your table, but be prepared for irritated players wondering why they can't make cool courtly duelists anymore.
The real issue is just that the 5E weapons table is small and boring. There's very little options for outside-the-box thinking in the game. I want a naginata just because I'd like an option for a dex-based fighter who uses a two-handed weapon and lighter armor rather than be straight-jacketed into using a rapier.
And while I'm complaining about weapons, I'd really like it if rogues could sneak attack with more weapons- I'd really love it if I could build a half-orc rogue who performs sneak attacks via mace to the back of the head.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The good thing is that you can. For all the mathy reasons Crazyhawk has been pointing out, there's no balance reason why the rogue can't use a 1d4 truncheon instead of a 1d4 dagger - especially in a game where you're explicitly allowed to turn the 1d4 dagger around and strike with the pommel for nonlethal blunt damage. The game is expecting that rogue to Sneak Attack every turn and is willing to let the rogue do that with a 1d8 weapon in one hand. even if you subscribe to Crazyhawk's notions and feel the rapier shouldn't exist, the game still offers plenty of options for a 1d6 Sneak Attack weapon. Talk to your DM and ask him if your rogue can use billyclubs and other street bruiser weapons for their Sneak Attack.
Similarly, a dexy fighter with a 1d8 weapon in one hand is already perfectly legal. Using a 1d8 weapon in two hands with the same stats won't break the game, there's no mathematical reason to disallow spear with Dex. If a player wanted to build that route there's not really any reason to say no. Even if the rogue wants that shit because they want to start building a Polearm Master/War Caster w/Booming Blade Sneak Attack cheesemonkey, that just means this player was going to optimize like a mother****er anyways and now you know the direction he's going. Even then, that Polearm Muenster rogue is giving up two-weapon fighting without adding yet a third feat into the mix.
Yeah, it's all homebrew, but it's homebrew of the very lightest sort. If it's in pursuit of a cool character idea and not egregious munchkinism, there's little reason not to let it slide.
There's no difference between eldritch blast and a heavy crossbow. No rebalance is necessary.
I do note that you were completely unwilling to answer the question I posed numerous times about what's wrong with a d6 weapon. I'm just going to assume that you can't answer it because you know there's nothing wrong with it.
What is your deal?!? Fine, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a 1d6 weapon. There is also absolutely nothing wrong with the Rapier.
And wtf does a crossbow have to do with rebalancing Melee Strength attacks against magic?!?
My deal is I dislike power creep when it's not necessary. The game is well balanced as it is, so there's no need to go buffing everything else because one weapon is poorly implemented.
Now that we have established that there's nothing /wrong/ with a d6 weapon we can move on from the fact that rapiers break the balance paradigm that they have set up, and thus are the problem. Rapiers are broken because they break what's otherwise a well designed, balanced system by becoming a one solution to all problems weapon. That's bad. Buffing everything else for <reasons> is also bad. When you look at balance issues, you should /always/ take the least intrusive method possible...that's nerfing the imbalanced rapier (which I've already explained WHY it's imbalanced and will not do so again) not changing everything around it.
Currently, melee and magic are in relative mathematical balance against each other. Str already offers better damage options than dex does which is the point of fighting to deny 2 handed dex weapons. The problem is with one handed weapons. You do not buff every other one handed weapon when mathematically, the numbers look good already. You remove the single outlier (the rapier) and the problem is eliminated without the risk of swinging the pendulum too far in the other direction. Simple, elegant. dex is still quite viable, with a small mathematical advantage to str. Choices are good.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
The real issue is just that the 5E weapons table is small and boring. There's very little options for outside-the-box thinking in the game. I want a naginata just because I'd like an option for a dex-based fighter who uses a two-handed weapon and lighter armor rather than be straight-jacketed into using a rapier.
And while I'm complaining about weapons, I'd really like it if rogues could sneak attack with more weapons- I'd really love it if I could build a half-orc rogue who performs sneak attacks via mace to the back of the head.
It's small because it /expects/ that you will reskin. Saber is a scimitar for example. The weapons table is simply a mathematical representation which is otherwise irrelevant. As long as you don't change the system math, you don't break the balance.
I agree with you on rogues too, they should be able to sneak attack with any one handed weapon. A Sap is a classic rogue trope that is just completely unsupported even via a reskin unless you get really crazy and make finesse maces.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
The real issue is just that the 5E weapons table is small and boring. There's very little options for outside-the-box thinking in the game. I want a naginata just because I'd like an option for a dex-based fighter who uses a two-handed weapon and lighter armor rather than be straight-jacketed into using a rapier.
And while I'm complaining about weapons, I'd really like it if rogues could sneak attack with more weapons- I'd really love it if I could build a half-orc rogue who performs sneak attacks via mace to the back of the head.
It's small because it /expects/ that you will reskin. Saber is a scimitar for example. The weapons table is simply a mathematical representation which is otherwise irrelevant. As long as you don't change the system math, you don't break the balance.
The problem is that the system math has obvious gaps in it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I'm kinda with crazy on this one. I always feel a little cheaty using a rapier and the 2d4 suggested is even sillier. You can take it out and just reflavor your guy's shortsword to a rapier if it's important to your character concept. We have to do it for countless other weapons so I don't know why having to do that for rapiers would be so devastating.
Moreover, it's much simpler than readjusting a bunch of other weapons, and simpler fixes are better fixes.
I believe Hawk's intent is that Dex-based characters should be either shoehorned into missile weapons (which, pro tip: a traditional medieval longbow requires enormously more strength than any typical melee weapon of the time) or accept that they should, by default, deal significantly less damage than Strength characters because Dex characters get a bunch of other stuff. The 'gaps' in the system math are to account for this idea that DX should not be a damaging stat.
Now frankly I can see that. I'm a fan of the GURPS system, in which your skill (i.e. hit chance) is based on your DX but your damage is based on ST. The nimble-fingered rogue with the light, easy-to-use dagger deals very little damage next to the hulking barbarian and his two-handed greataxe, but the rogue has enough skill to spare with his weapon to make called-shot attempts to magnify his damage by hitting weak points. It works very well, but it's also completely anathema to 5e's policy of "simply the rules, then simplify the simplified rules, then simplify the double-simplified rules AGAIN", so we get stuck with Finesse. And angry barbarian players.
But then the finesse guys would want d10s too. Where does it end? What's inherently /wrong/ with using d6 weapons?
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
to be fair, they already want d10 weapons. That is what this post is about.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
They already want d10s, or did you miss the last 6 pages? Nothing would change with my system other than Str builds get better. For example:
If the lowest Finesse weapon used a 1d4, and the highest uses 1d8/2d4 (Revenant Double-Bladed Scimitar) with 1d6 in between.
And if the lowest Str weapon used 1d6, and the the highest was 2d8/4d4 with 1d8, 1d10, 1d12, 2d6, and 3d4 all in between. Would that not simultaneously allow for more weapon variation and make Str builds more viable? I believe it would go a long way towards solving the problem.
The problem is that D&D doesn’t use an actual d3, so there’s nowhere lower to go than a d4. But the highest can go above 1d12/2d6, so it seems the only rout to take is to go up.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Exactly. it's all powercreep in my eyes.
The finesse guys should be thankful. I learned back in the 2e days. We didn't /have/ fancy finesse weapons. Melee weapons were all str based. Dagger, shortsword, you name it...all str. I did have to look this up because I wasn't 100% positive my memory was serving me correctly. I haven't actually PLAYED 2e in over 20 years. You could get str bows though!
The real fact is, there's nothing /wrong/ with using a d6 weapon. They're solid choices, and the difference is fairly minimal. People just have this mental entitlement to a d8 weapon. If the str users were to get d10s, that mental entitlement would just go up for finesse users.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
It's pure power creep, and it's completely un-necessary. Just scrap the rapier and everything is back in balance. What's wrong with using a d6 weapon?
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
What’s wrong with a little power creep? What’s your objection to the max going from 2d6 to 2d8?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The system math is flat, with weapon and spellcaster being relatively in-tune. There's no reason to buff everything up...just because the rapier is stupid. Fix the problem, ie broken rapier, and leave the rest alone because the rest works just fine as is.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
I disagree that the rest works just fine as is. I think increasing the damage of weapons ever so slightly would rebalance Melee weapon’s against spells like Eldritch Blast etc. in a positive way since I think Str builds have way more to compete with than just Dex. I think the problem is that a Greatsword only does 2d6 instead of 2d8. I think the problem is that a Longsword is 1d8/1d10 when it should be 2d4/2d6. I think an Arming Sword should exist and be 1d10.
We disagree on the problem, so we can never agree on the solution. Therefore I’m going to absent myself from this conversation since it seems you are getting a little agitated and I don’t need that static today. As they say in Shadowrun: “Good luck with yer struggles chummer.”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
There's no difference between eldritch blast and a heavy crossbow. No rebalance is necessary.
I do note that you were completely unwilling to answer the question I posed numerous times about what's wrong with a d6 weapon. I'm just going to assume that you can't answer it because you know there's nothing wrong with it.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
What is your deal?!? Fine, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a 1d6 weapon. There is also absolutely nothing wrong with the Rapier.
And wtf does a crossbow have to do with rebalancing Melee Strength attacks against magic?!?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Calm, Sposta. We got this.
Crazyhawk is fishing for someone to offer a reason why "just a d6 weapon" is a bad thing so he can dismantle it, primarily by citing the billion and three things Dex does that Strength doesn't. It's a common complaint. Dex is a superstat, absolutely nobody can really afford to drop it, while Strength is lumped in with Intelligence in the 'nobody really NEEDS this, it doesn't do spit' category of Free Dump Stats for Everybody.
I would point out that Strength, unlike Intelligence, is an excellent dump stat until everybody in the party dumps Strength and you realize you have an entire teamful of skinny nerds with excellent fine motor control who are nevertheless completely stymied by a simple door bar. When one decides to go against the grain and play a very strong character, Strength has a sneaking way of proving quite useful after all. Unlike poor Intelligence, which is a free dump for everybody everywhere all the time unless you're a wizard or an artificer. Ugh.
Nevertheless. There is nothing wrong with a d6 weapon. There's also nothing wrong with wanting a stronger weapon, especially if you're playing an off-meta concept. The courtly Paladin, trained in the arts of the Code Duello who fights with an elegant rapier rather than a big brutish greatsword or an arming sword and shield, is a personal favorite of mine. I do think that 2d4 should have been a valid damage die for weapons in D&D, and it would fit the rapier well. A 1d6 rapier is just a strictly worse version of the shortsword, and we need less Spear/Trident kerfuffles in the game, not more. Rapiers get to exist because a great many cool character ideas rely on them, and 2d4 makes the rapier more of a precise, reliable weapon. 2d4 slashing for a saber would also be a good fit, allowing these weapons a niche to exist in.
There's arguments to be made that Finesse in general is a problem, as it removes one of the key differentiators for Strength. This would be more fair if not for the creeping proliferation of autogishing from things like the Hexblade or the Battlesmith, wherein a character is allowed to attack with a mental stat rather than a physical one. Cantrips also upset the balance. Anyone who believes a heavy crossbow - with its ridiculous weight figure, two-handed use requirement, and the double limitations of the Loading and Heavy properties - is somehow equivalent to even just Fire Bolt, let alone a decently built Eldritch Blast, is lunacy. Even if you make a build that centers on the heavy crossbow and removes as many of these limitations as possible, that's an entire build dedicated to doing what Eldritch Blast, in particular, does with one cantrip pick and one Invocation.
The math works out balance-wise, yes. But the existence of autogishing and the numerous class abilities that allow a caster to add their primary stat modifier to their spell/cantrip damage also proves that the game math does not particularly care which stat you attack with. Any attempt to emphasize Strength is basically getting into the territory of a complete combat overhaul. Which, in my mind at least, would be excellent and something I'd love to see in a 5.5e Optional Advanced Rules book, but it's beyond the scope of anything for basic 5e.
The rapier does not break the game. Strength is less underpowered than Intelligence and nobody except me cares about the Intelligence issue, so bleh. If the rapier offends thine senses banish it from your table, but be prepared for irritated players wondering why they can't make cool courtly duelists anymore.
Please do not contact or message me.
The real issue is just that the 5E weapons table is small and boring. There's very little options for outside-the-box thinking in the game. I want a naginata just because I'd like an option for a dex-based fighter who uses a two-handed weapon and lighter armor rather than be straight-jacketed into using a rapier.
And while I'm complaining about weapons, I'd really like it if rogues could sneak attack with more weapons- I'd really love it if I could build a half-orc rogue who performs sneak attacks via mace to the back of the head.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The good thing is that you can. For all the mathy reasons Crazyhawk has been pointing out, there's no balance reason why the rogue can't use a 1d4 truncheon instead of a 1d4 dagger - especially in a game where you're explicitly allowed to turn the 1d4 dagger around and strike with the pommel for nonlethal blunt damage. The game is expecting that rogue to Sneak Attack every turn and is willing to let the rogue do that with a 1d8 weapon in one hand. even if you subscribe to Crazyhawk's notions and feel the rapier shouldn't exist, the game still offers plenty of options for a 1d6 Sneak Attack weapon. Talk to your DM and ask him if your rogue can use billyclubs and other street bruiser weapons for their Sneak Attack.
Similarly, a dexy fighter with a 1d8 weapon in one hand is already perfectly legal. Using a 1d8 weapon in two hands with the same stats won't break the game, there's no mathematical reason to disallow spear with Dex. If a player wanted to build that route there's not really any reason to say no. Even if the rogue wants that shit because they want to start building a Polearm Master/War Caster w/Booming Blade Sneak Attack cheesemonkey, that just means this player was going to optimize like a mother****er anyways and now you know the direction he's going. Even then, that Polearm Muenster rogue is giving up two-weapon fighting without adding yet a third feat into the mix.
Yeah, it's all homebrew, but it's homebrew of the very lightest sort. If it's in pursuit of a cool character idea and not egregious munchkinism, there's little reason not to let it slide.
Please do not contact or message me.
Thank you. 🙏
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
My deal is I dislike power creep when it's not necessary. The game is well balanced as it is, so there's no need to go buffing everything else because one weapon is poorly implemented.
Now that we have established that there's nothing /wrong/ with a d6 weapon we can move on from the fact that rapiers break the balance paradigm that they have set up, and thus are the problem. Rapiers are broken because they break what's otherwise a well designed, balanced system by becoming a one solution to all problems weapon. That's bad. Buffing everything else for <reasons> is also bad. When you look at balance issues, you should /always/ take the least intrusive method possible...that's nerfing the imbalanced rapier (which I've already explained WHY it's imbalanced and will not do so again) not changing everything around it.
Currently, melee and magic are in relative mathematical balance against each other. Str already offers better damage options than dex does which is the point of fighting to deny 2 handed dex weapons. The problem is with one handed weapons. You do not buff every other one handed weapon when mathematically, the numbers look good already. You remove the single outlier (the rapier) and the problem is eliminated without the risk of swinging the pendulum too far in the other direction. Simple, elegant. dex is still quite viable, with a small mathematical advantage to str. Choices are good.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
It's small because it /expects/ that you will reskin. Saber is a scimitar for example. The weapons table is simply a mathematical representation which is otherwise irrelevant. As long as you don't change the system math, you don't break the balance.
I agree with you on rogues too, they should be able to sneak attack with any one handed weapon. A Sap is a classic rogue trope that is just completely unsupported even via a reskin unless you get really crazy and make finesse maces.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
The problem is that the system math has obvious gaps in it.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I'm kinda with crazy on this one. I always feel a little cheaty using a rapier and the 2d4 suggested is even sillier. You can take it out and just reflavor your guy's shortsword to a rapier if it's important to your character concept. We have to do it for countless other weapons so I don't know why having to do that for rapiers would be so devastating.
Moreover, it's much simpler than readjusting a bunch of other weapons, and simpler fixes are better fixes.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I believe Hawk's intent is that Dex-based characters should be either shoehorned into missile weapons (which, pro tip: a traditional medieval longbow requires enormously more strength than any typical melee weapon of the time) or accept that they should, by default, deal significantly less damage than Strength characters because Dex characters get a bunch of other stuff. The 'gaps' in the system math are to account for this idea that DX should not be a damaging stat.
Now frankly I can see that. I'm a fan of the GURPS system, in which your skill (i.e. hit chance) is based on your DX but your damage is based on ST. The nimble-fingered rogue with the light, easy-to-use dagger deals very little damage next to the hulking barbarian and his two-handed greataxe, but the rogue has enough skill to spare with his weapon to make called-shot attempts to magnify his damage by hitting weak points. It works very well, but it's also completely anathema to 5e's policy of "simply the rules, then simplify the simplified rules, then simplify the double-simplified rules AGAIN", so we get stuck with Finesse. And angry barbarian players.
Please do not contact or message me.
GURPS rules also let an unaugmented human attack 3-4 times in one second.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.