To clarify something further for you, historically the long sword and the bastard sword are pretty much the same thing, also called a hand-and-a-half sword- the trick is that there's supposed to be something called an arming sword that you would use one handed with a shield- for us it's pretty much a short sword- though there's not much reason to do it because in 5th edition a longsword (bastard sword) doesn't require the exotic proficiency it did in prior editions, ergo, you don't need any special training over a short sword to use it...
Oddly, Jeremy Crawford answered a tweet from me and said mithral armor by RAW doesn't weigh any less than regular armor even though it's described as a light metal that can be worn under your clothes and has no strength requirement to wear.
5th did a lot of compression of unnecessary complexity of weapons from 3.5 and thank the Devs at Wizard for getting rid of "Exotic Weapons".
With a few minor exceptions all the weapons seem to be pretty balanced and standardized. Which I like. I like choose my weapon because it fits my character without feeling like I'm "losing" mechanically for my choice. (I don't need special rules for a Khopesh, I just want a cool looking Longsword for my Paladin of Ra)
Battleaxe, Longsward, and Warhammer are all exactly the same weapon (1d8 damage with Versatile).
Rapier is 1d8 with Finesse, while shortsword & scimitar lose a die and gain Light.
I can't FATHOM why the Warpick, Morningstar, and Flail is 1d8 and lacks versatile... it seems dumb to single it out as a all around "worse" choice. Unless they are specifically given to "non martial" classes as "better then simple" but not "tier 1" weapons.
If you look all "polearms" (Glaive, Halberd, Pike) are exactly the same: 1d10, heavy, reach, two-handed, they just change damage types.
I still don't know why Tridents are Martial... they are literally equal to the Spear so cost more for what is mechanically a Simple Weapon.
Also, there isn't a point to a Mithirl Chainshirt.
Mithirl makes armor "light", and so negates the strength requirements of armor and negates the stealth penalty.
Chainshirt have niether.
Mithral armor specificially calls out making a chain shirt able to be worn under normal clothes (and presumably it means it's not obvious you are wearing armor when doing so), which is a point even if it's a minor one that only really matters in corner cases of Lord of the Rings emulation or a campaign scenario in which obviously wearing armor is impossible or carries some noteworthy negative.
Realistically, the 5e system probably is better than having weapons with a lot of arbitrary properties to keep track of, I just kinda wished that they'd streamlined it further and done them by category, so you're never using a short sword or schimitar but some "light blade" that does 1d6, and you can decide what it is. Maybe even include the application of properties like finesse as optional cost tack-ons like silvering a weapon currently is handled- i dunno maybe that would be more complicated but I feel as if the abstraction of weapons would be helpful.
The Monk class already allows for substitution of weapon "skin", as such:
"Certain monasteries use specialized form s of the monk weapons. For example, you might use a club that is two lengths of wood connected by a short chain (called a nunchaku) or a sickle with a shorter, straighter blade (called a kama). Whatever name you use for a monk weapon, you can use the game statistics provided for the weapon in chapter 5."
I don't think it's a leap to allow the same for anything else. I know I allow it and it hasn't broken anything (it can't, since you're still using weapons from the rules, just call them differently).
Want a Tetsubo? That's a Maul. Want a Katana? Obviously a Longsword. Want a scythe? Uh...
They can't include ALL weapons in history and/or fantasy, what's the stats for a yatagan or a kukri for example? It's a fantasy game, we should use our imagination at some point.
To answer the original question, if by Bastard Sword you mean a sword that can be used with either 1 hand or 2 hands; Longsword is your friend. Versatile property makes it usable with 2 hands and deal more (1d10) damage. Just describe it a little longer or broader than a default longsword.
Since I don't exactly agree with some of the weapon stats in the PHB which make certain options flat out better; in my homebrew I added a handful of properties and adjusted things to make sense to me. The way I handle a scythe is that it is similar to a glaive in that it's a heavy, two-handed, martial weapon. The only real differences are that the damage die is 2d4 (1d8 also works, but I went with 2d4 for legacy reasons) and instead of having reach, it has one of my "new" properties called High Crit. What that does is that if you score a critical hit with a scythe (or my version of the greataxe) you triple the dice you roll rather than doubling. I also added a Double property (so I can potentially create things like the Dwarven Urgrosh) as well as a Monk property (with corresponding changes to Martial Arts).
Homebrewing is an entirely different beast, and I'm all for it, but the system as it stands can support a wide variety of weapons without any specific changes to rules - and even more with just slight changes, like changing around the damage type or an existing trait.
With homebrewing, you can truly bring your own setting to life, with things such as whip-swords, or blades that can shoot a crossbow bolt, or giant slabs of metal called swords - inspirations galore in popular media.
On an irrelevant note, Henshin, doesn't High Crit wreck havoc with Sneak Attack or some Smites?
I always liked the 2d4 scythe from 3e. I feel like d4s never get much love (aside from Magic Missiles obv) despite being the most dangerous die in existence (seriously, you instantly die when you step on one for at least a few seconds).
I feel like it would be a polearm type weapon (lance, glaive, halberd, etc...) in 5e though; where it's 1d10 2h + heavy.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
On an irrelevant note, Henshin, doesn't High Crit wreck havoc with Sneak Attack or some Smites?
Divine Smite yes, Sneak Attack no, nothing I've made with the High Crit property is a ranged or finesse weapon so they're automatically ineligible for use with Sneak Attack, specifically because that would break things far too much. As for Divine Smite, I figured that most Paladins save their slots so they can Divine Smite when they get a critical hit and since a single classed Paladin only has a 5% chance of getting a critical hit it doesn't happen with enough consistency to break the game. To throw back a question, why would anyone ever use the default Greataxe over a Greatsword or Maul when the latter are superior in practically every way? I wanted to change that so that individuals would have to choose between the more consistent damage of the Greatsword or Maul, or the higher burst damage of a Greataxe crit.
I also wouldn't be expecting his Homebrew to unbalance the game for the reasons he stated.
If you wanted something similar, I'd say tripling the weapon damage (a better version of the HalfOrc power)
Which now makes me think that power is more underwhelming then I thought it was, because it just adds a die! (So a great Axe adds +d12, a Greatdsword add +d6!)
What are the 5E stats for a Bastard Sword and Mithril Chain shirt?
In 5th edition, the "bastard sword" is the same thing as the longsword (1d8 slashing damage, versatile 1d10)
A mithral chain shirt is just a combination of a chain shirt (AC 13 + Dexterity modifier to a maximum of +2) and the mithral armor type of magic item.
To clarify something further for you, historically the long sword and the bastard sword are pretty much the same thing, also called a hand-and-a-half sword- the trick is that there's supposed to be something called an arming sword that you would use one handed with a shield- for us it's pretty much a short sword- though there's not much reason to do it because in 5th edition a longsword (bastard sword) doesn't require the exotic proficiency it did in prior editions, ergo, you don't need any special training over a short sword to use it...
Oddly, Jeremy Crawford answered a tweet from me and said mithral armor by RAW doesn't weigh any less than regular armor even though it's described as a light metal that can be worn under your clothes and has no strength requirement to wear.
5th did a lot of compression of unnecessary complexity of weapons from 3.5 and thank the Devs at Wizard for getting rid of "Exotic Weapons".
With a few minor exceptions all the weapons seem to be pretty balanced and standardized. Which I like. I like choose my weapon because it fits my character without feeling like I'm "losing" mechanically for my choice. (I don't need special rules for a Khopesh, I just want a cool looking Longsword for my Paladin of Ra)
Battleaxe, Longsward, and Warhammer are all exactly the same weapon (1d8 damage with Versatile).
Rapier is 1d8 with Finesse, while shortsword & scimitar lose a die and gain Light.
I can't FATHOM why the Warpick, Morningstar, and Flail is 1d8 and lacks versatile... it seems dumb to single it out as a all around "worse" choice. Unless they are specifically given to "non martial" classes as "better then simple" but not "tier 1" weapons.
If you look all "polearms" (Glaive, Halberd, Pike) are exactly the same: 1d10, heavy, reach, two-handed, they just change damage types.
I still don't know why Tridents are Martial... they are literally equal to the Spear so cost more for what is mechanically a Simple Weapon.
So what they basically did was dumb the game down by making everything the same more or less?
They were always almost exactly the same.
I don't think "dumb the game down" is a fair statement.
By removing all those additional weapons and stats, they made the game more flexible and the weapons are mostly consistent.
Would it actually be a bad thing if the rules read something like:
You can then decide what your weapon is yourself.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
Also, there isn't a point to a Mithirl Chainshirt.Mithirl makes armor "light", and so negates the strength requirements of armor and negates the stealth penalty.Chainshirt have niether.I retract my statement with AaronOfBarbaria's comment.
Realistically, the 5e system probably is better than having weapons with a lot of arbitrary properties to keep track of, I just kinda wished that they'd streamlined it further and done them by category, so you're never using a short sword or schimitar but some "light blade" that does 1d6, and you can decide what it is. Maybe even include the application of properties like finesse as optional cost tack-ons like silvering a weapon currently is handled- i dunno maybe that would be more complicated but I feel as if the abstraction of weapons would be helpful.
The Monk class already allows for substitution of weapon "skin", as such:
"Certain monasteries use specialized form s of the monk weapons. For example, you might use a club that is two lengths of wood connected by a short chain (called a nunchaku) or a sickle with a shorter, straighter blade (called a kama). Whatever name you use for a monk weapon, you can use the game statistics provided for the weapon in chapter 5."
I don't think it's a leap to allow the same for anything else. I know I allow it and it hasn't broken anything (it can't, since you're still using weapons from the rules, just call them differently).
Want a Tetsubo? That's a Maul. Want a Katana? Obviously a Longsword. Want a scythe? Uh...
...hm.
What would people say is a scythe?
I'd probably just use a Glaive for a Scythe, unless I decided to homebrew something up, thought it'd probably look very similar.
Do you have difficulty fitting everything you want into your signature? Then check out the Extended Signature thread!
Here's my Extended Signature!
They can't include ALL weapons in history and/or fantasy, what's the stats for a yatagan or a kukri for example? It's a fantasy game, we should use our imagination at some point.
To answer the original question, if by Bastard Sword you mean a sword that can be used with either 1 hand or 2 hands; Longsword is your friend. Versatile property makes it usable with 2 hands and deal more (1d10) damage. Just describe it a little longer or broader than a default longsword.
Since I don't exactly agree with some of the weapon stats in the PHB which make certain options flat out better; in my homebrew I added a handful of properties and adjusted things to make sense to me. The way I handle a scythe is that it is similar to a glaive in that it's a heavy, two-handed, martial weapon. The only real differences are that the damage die is 2d4 (1d8 also works, but I went with 2d4 for legacy reasons) and instead of having reach, it has one of my "new" properties called High Crit. What that does is that if you score a critical hit with a scythe (or my version of the greataxe) you triple the dice you roll rather than doubling. I also added a Double property (so I can potentially create things like the Dwarven Urgrosh) as well as a Monk property (with corresponding changes to Martial Arts).
Homebrewing is an entirely different beast, and I'm all for it, but the system as it stands can support a wide variety of weapons without any specific changes to rules - and even more with just slight changes, like changing around the damage type or an existing trait.
With homebrewing, you can truly bring your own setting to life, with things such as whip-swords, or blades that can shoot a crossbow bolt, or giant slabs of metal called swords - inspirations galore in popular media.
On an irrelevant note, Henshin, doesn't High Crit wreck havoc with Sneak Attack or some Smites?
I very much prefer the smaller amounts of weapons and the idea of just "skinning" weapons.
Earlier editions of the game had some massive tables of weapons.
Remember all those polearms, described in detail and assigned their own statistics and then 90% of them pretty much never used?
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
I feel like it would be a polearm type weapon (lance, glaive, halberd, etc...) in 5e though; where it's 1d10 2h + heavy.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
I also wouldn't be expecting his Homebrew to unbalance the game for the reasons he stated.
If you wanted something similar, I'd say tripling the weapon damage (a better version of the HalfOrc power)
Which now makes me think that power is more underwhelming then I thought it was, because it just adds a die! (So a great Axe adds +d12, a Greatdsword add +d6!)