Elves: Why longswords?

[Chronos]

So, the two most common subraces of elves both get free proficiency in a few weapons. Apparently, there's a cultural tradition among elves for use of the shortbow, longbow, shortsword, and longsword. OK, those first three all make sense... but why would elves develop a tradition of longsword use? Elves get a decent bonus to Dex, but none to Str, and longswords can't be used with Dex. In the hands of the average elf, a shortsword does just as much damage as a longsword, and has a better chance to hit. Certainly, there will be some elves who have a Str higher than their Dex anyway, but one would expect that they'd mostly choose to become fighters, barbarians, or rangers, who get all weapon proficiencies anyway, and for whom the racial proficiencies would thus be irrelevant. So why do elves choose to learn to use the longsword, instead of, say, the rapier, which would be better suited to their natural aptitudes?

[Easy_Lee]

Elves have traditionally had the longsword, I believe ever since 1st edition when they were their own class. That said, this is one of the reasons why I think longswords ought to be finesse-able.

[Regwon]

The Elven Racial weapon proficiencies come from their culture of weapons training. They dont take arbitary concepts like damage into consideration, like you dont worry about if a baseball bat or crowbar will deal an extra point of damage.

Also the vast majority of NPCs in a world will not have character classes, so no automatic weapons training, unless you're an elf.

[Jeraa]

Elves have traditionally had the longsword, I believe ever since 1st edition when they were their own class. That said, this is one of the reasons why I think longswords ought to be finesse-able.

Elf was already a race and not a class in 1st edition. You are thinking of pre-1st edition elves.

As for why longswords over rapiers? In my 1st edition PHB there are no rapiers, so they got a bonus with a longsword. It was never changed since.

[Safety Sword]

As far back as I can remember elves have always had relatively high numbers of Fighter/Mages. So I guess the extension of that is that elves use more "fighter-like" weapons. The other consideration is that elves are traditionally thought of as great craftsmen and making a longsword is a whole lot more difficult that making a rapier.

Also, elves have a lot of time to train and master swordplay. On Earth using a longsword with one hand takes an enormous amount of skill. Most of your knightly types actually used shorter swords when dismounted because they are easier to control. So elves being able to be excellent with longer swords is a way to show prowess.

So, all of my reasons come down to "We're elves, we're better than you. Look, we do all of the hard stuff well because we live for 800 years. Suck it."

[VoxRationis]

Tradition. Back in AD&D days, before the rapier and Weapon Finesse were options, elves got bonuses to longsword use. In 3e, they wisely understood that the rapier fit elves better, being Dexterity-focused. I have no idea why they dropped the rapier proficiency for elves in 5e—that's the real question to ask. Perhaps it's because it was a later-period weapon, and didn't seem appropriately ancient? I don't know.

Also, is making a longsword actually harder than a rapier? I would imagine that making the weapon lighter and thinner but retain useful durability would be hard. I don't know that much about weaponsmithing, though.

[Jallorn]

Tradition. Back in AD&D days, before the rapier and Weapon Finesse were options, elves got bonuses to longsword use. In 3e, they wisely understood that the rapier fit elves better, being Dexterity-focused. I have no idea why they dropped the rapier proficiency for elves in 5e—that's the real question to ask. Perhaps it's because it was a later-period weapon, and didn't seem appropriately ancient? I don't know.

Also, is making a longsword actually harder than a rapier? I would imagine that making the weapon lighter and thinner but retain useful durability would be hard. I don't know that much about weaponsmithing, though.

The rapier is made of superior steel that is more flexible and less brittle than what was used in previous eras. It was also shaped by other military pressures, such as guns being more useful, though not yet entirely dominant, in battle, and so speed was valued over armor, which meant a faster sword was also valued over a heavier one. IIRC.

[silveralen]

Originally, in this case Tolkien, Elves were the creators of most magical weapons. Or at least the majority. The majority of magical weapons were longswords, with a few shortswords and bows tossed in. They were the iconic magical weapons afterall. The logic was, if elves predominately make magic items and most magic items are swords and bows, elves favor swords and bows, again backed up by the source material.

Thus they got favored weapons and kept them even as the rules gradually shifted and the association between elves and magic weapons, as well as certain magic weapons being more common, gradually disappeared.

[Safety Sword]

The rapier is made of superior steel that is more flexible and less brittle than what was used in previous eras. It was also shaped by other military pressures, such as guns being more useful, though not yet entirely dominant, in battle, and so speed was valued over armor, which meant a faster sword was also valued over a heavier one. IIRC.

Sounds about right to me.

All of this is hand waved in D&D though. Steel is steel is steel.

As Jallorn says, it's an entirely different fighting style and from a different historical period, so comparisons are not all that fair. They're mashed into one rule set, so, fun times.

[Morty]

The rapier is made of superior steel that is more flexible and less brittle than what was used in previous eras. It was also shaped by other military pressures, such as guns being more useful, though not yet entirely dominant, in battle, and so speed was valued over armor, which meant a faster sword was also valued over a heavier one. IIRC.

Rapiers were not used in battle at all. They were civilian duelling weapons.

My personal theory is that the people in this thread have already put more thought into the matter than anyone designing elves for 5e ever did.

[mephnick]

The fact that the rapier is even a valid combat choice is kind of ridiculous, but, hey, it's a fantasy game.

[Anlashok]

I think it doesn't go any further than "Tolkien elves used longswords".

Maybe with a dash of "4e Eladrin had a strong martial tradition and a lot of emphasis on longswords and 5e rolls the Eladrin and Elf into one race".

[Easy_Lee]

The fact that the rapier is even a valid combat choice is kind of ridiculous, but, hey, it's a fantasy game.

If we want to be realistic, it should be excellent against unarmored and lightly armored targets due to the length, weight, and superior guard. And it should be total crap against armor, since one can't really employ half-swording or bash with it as well as a longsword or two-hander. Knowing these things, I think that I prefer the fantasy.

If we assume that D&D humanoids are much smaller, faster, and can send brain signals more quickly than we can (interpret what they perceive and command their bodies or react more quickly), then some of these things become more excusable. It's more believable, then, for characters like Drizzt to easily parry larger weapons with scimitars, find openings in full plate and reliably strike them, and deal with longer weapons more easily than we can. Or we can just handwave it and say, "whatever, it's cooler that way."

[HugeC]

I'm trying to think of an elf character for whom longsword proficiency would actually be useful and not redundant with proficiencies granted by class. I could say the same thing about dwarf weapon proficiencies I suppose.

Meh, I'll just house-rule it to rapiers in games I run.

[Easy_Lee]

I'm trying to think of an elf character for whom longsword proficiency would actually be useful and not redundant with proficiencies granted by class. I could say the same thing about dwarf weapon proficiencies I suppose.

Meh, I'll just house-rule it to rapiers in games I run.

Maybe a strength-focused favored soul with their medium armor.

[Chronos]

Quoth Regwon:

The Elven Racial weapon proficiencies come from their culture of weapons training. They dont take arbitary concepts like damage into consideration, like you dont worry about if a baseball bat or crowbar will deal an extra point of damage.
They certainly wouldn't talk about it in the same terms that we would, but their military leaders would surely discuss which weapon is more effective, and they've been around long enough and fought enough battles that they surely would have figured out the answer to that by now. Plus, they canonically value things like "grace" and "elegance", and a rapier is certainly more graceful and elegant than a longsword.

As for the tradition argument, elves have always been proficient with the weapon called the longsword, but the weapon called that in earlier editions isn't quite the same thing as the weapon called that now. One could just as easily say that they're traditionally proficient with the swords that do 1d8 damage, which could mean the rapier.


Quoth silveralen:

Originally, in this case Tolkien, Elves were the creators of most magical weapons. Or at least the majority. The majority of magical weapons were longswords, with a few shortswords and bows tossed in. They were the iconic magical weapons afterall.

Quoth Anlashok:

I think it doesn't go any further than "Tolkien elves used longswords".
Tolkien's elves certainly used swords, and many of those swords were magical, but I don't think he ever says what kind of swords they were.


Quoth HugeC:

I'm trying to think of an elf character for whom longsword proficiency would actually be useful and not redundant with proficiencies granted by class. I could say the same thing about dwarf weapon proficiencies I suppose.
Life clerics (who get heavy armor but not weapons), maybe.

[Easy_Lee]

A valor bard might also, conceivably benefit from using a longsword if he went down the master grappler route. Grapple target, extra attack. Next round, shocking grasp, extra attack. And you can use the 1d10 when not grappling. Since bards don't get a fighting style anyway, and can't afford many feats if they want to have good STR/DEX and CHA, this may work for them.

[Anlashok]

Tolkien's elves certainly used swords, and many of those swords were magical, but I don't think he ever says what kind of swords they were.


True. But a longsword is probably the closest thing to a "regular" sword in that context, so I think it still fits.

Also the eladrin thing. 4e Eladrin were practically built around the longsword. Almost to weird levels.

[ad_hoc]

A valor bard might also, conceivably benefit from using a longsword if he went down the master grappler route. Grapple target, extra attack. Next round, shocking grasp, extra attack. And you can use the 1d10 when not grappling. Since bards don't get a fighting style anyway, and can't afford many feats if they want to have good STR/DEX and CHA, this may work for them.

Valor Bards gain proficiency in Martial Weapons.

[Easy_Lee]

Valor Bards gain proficiency in Martial Weapons.

That's true, but you can't attack someone in a grapple with a greatsword if you're busy holding them down (requires a free hand). A dedicated grappler is the one kind of build, that I know of, where a versatile weapon may be optimal. And since they don't get a fighting style, they wouldn't be better off just using dueling and never bothering with the versatile property.

[burninatortrog]

It's because Elves are supposed to be able to use magic swords.

[ad_hoc]

That's true, but you can't attack someone in a grapple with a greatsword if you're busy holding them down (requires a free hand). A dedicated grappler is the one kind of build, that I know of, where a versatile weapon may be optimal. And since they don't get a fighting style, they wouldn't be better off just using dueling and never bothering with the versatile property.

I am missing the part where having the Elven Longsword proficiency helps a Valor Bard.

[warty goblin]

Tradition. Back in AD&D days, before the rapier and Weapon Finesse were options, elves got bonuses to longsword use. In 3e, they wisely understood that the rapier fit elves better, being Dexterity-focused. I have no idea why they dropped the rapier proficiency for elves in 5e—that's the real question to ask. Perhaps it's because it was a later-period weapon, and didn't seem appropriately ancient? I don't know.

Also, is making a longsword actually harder than a rapier? I would imagine that making the weapon lighter and thinner but retain useful durability would be hard. I don't know that much about weaponsmithing, though.
Rapiers aren't necessarily lighter (or even shorter) than longswords, they're just balanced very much towards thrusting from forward guards instead of a compromise between cutting and thrusting like a longsword.


The rapier is made of superior steel that is more flexible and less brittle than what was used in previous eras. It was also shaped by other military pressures, such as guns being more useful, though not yet entirely dominant, in battle, and so speed was valued over armor, which meant a faster sword was also valued over a heavier one. IIRC.
Well yes, but so were the other weapons of the period. Like longswords. And the rapier is primarily a civilian weapon, not a military one.


Originally, in this case Tolkien, Elves were the creators of most magical weapons. Or at least the majority. The majority of magical weapons were longswords, with a few shortswords and bows tossed in. They were the iconic magical weapons afterall. The logic was, if elves predominately make magic items and most magic items are swords and bows, elves favor swords and bows, again backed up by the source material.

Thus they got favored weapons and kept them even as the rules gradually shifted and the association between elves and magic weapons, as well as certain magic weapons being more common, gradually disappeared.
To be technical about it, the arms and armor in Middle Earth are entirely consistent with the Migration era, which is to say precisely the period of literature that Tolkien studied. In which case the swords would be single handed, broad bladed weapons built to deliver powerful cuts. Which is to say, not longswords as the term is generally understood today.

However you hit the key point I think, which is that swords are the primary magical weapon, simply because there's a very long culture in Europe of the sword being the most prestigious symbol of martial proficiency around. A spear is more common, a hand axe is a cheaper side arm, but the sword is the mark of a professional warrior and therefore has the greatest cachet. And since through at least 3rd Edition, longswords referred to the longer sort of single handed swords and not weapons meant to be used primarily in two hands but suitable for use in one


Sounds about right to me.

All of this is hand waved in D&D though. Steel is steel is steel.

As Jallorn says, it's an entirely different fighting style and from a different historical period, so comparisons are not all that fair. They're mashed into one rule set, so, fun times.
It's not really a different time period, insofar as you can say D&D is any time period, since rapiers coexisted with greatswords, plate armor and longswords. It's a different context; the rapier is a primarily civilian weapon, while the longsword and its ilk is more of a military sidearm that you could also (depending on your social status and location) wear in public.

As to the grace thing, I can't say I find rapiers particularly more graceful than longsword, or single handed sword and shield for that matter. The movements are often larger with cutting oriented weapons, but when used properly there's a definite flow of one stroke into the next which as a certain grace. But then I find the entire Finesse weapon thing kinda dumb anyway, since a whole lot of what determines damage is simply skill with the weapon. Not just ability to hit, mind, but actual damage dealt, since the more skilled user will line up their edge better, pull or push the hilt with more control, and hence generate a deeper wound than the unskilled fighter.

[Easy_Lee]

I am missing the part where having the Elven Longsword proficiency helps a Valor Bard.

Ah, true, I see your point. Well, favored soul and certain clerics are probably it, then.

[Karl Aegis]

{scrubbed}

[Rhaegar14]

{scrubbed}

Except, you know, a rapier is definitely, 100% a thrusting weapon (joke aside).

[tarlison]

A longsword might be more graceful to look at on an experts hand remember longsword tactic include using almost all parts the tip for piercing the edge for cutting the pummel for pummeling and the cross guard for tripping and hooking things up some times even use. As an axe/hammer like weapon tranfering from one. Use to the other requires grace

[eastmabl]

Tolkien influence on Gygax game design as adopted through 5 editions of the rules.

[Karl Aegis]

Except, you know, a rapier is definitely, 100% a thrusting weapon (joke aside).

The weapon has two cutting edges and isn't very thick. If you did thrust with it it would get stuck in someone's armor and break, unless you used it as a finishing move after you knocked your opponent off balance, where you could retrieve it without resistance. It lends itself more to quick motions into the armpit so you can disable a foe's sword-arm. If you miss, the weapon is light enough so you can quickly move it away from your opponent to defend yourself or attack another place on the opponent. The weapon lends itself to feinting because the user can change the direction of the slash or stop a thrust with little effort.

[Rhaegar14]

The weapon has two cutting edges and isn't very thick. If you did thrust with it it would get stuck in someone's armor and break, unless you used it as a finishing move after you knocked your opponent off balance, where you could retrieve it without resistance. It lends itself more to quick motions into the armpit so you can disable a foe's sword-arm. If you miss, the weapon is light enough so you can quickly move it away from your opponent to defend yourself or attack another place on the opponent. The weapon lends itself to feinting because the user can change the direction of the slash or stop a thrust with little effort.

The only form of fencing that they teach you slashing attacks in is saber, and sabers are not rapiers. For foil and epee (the forms that are close to actual rapiers) it's all thrusts. Also, rapiers were not used against people wearing armor. It's a civilian weapon.

[Raxxius]

This is an issue with renaming the bastard sword to longsword and not having an arming sword.


Seeing as arming swords are the stereotypical fantasy weapon, 5th not having one always struck me as odd.

[cobaltstarfire]

The only form of fencing that they teach you slashing attacks in is saber, and sabers are not rapiers. For foil and epee (the forms that are close to actual rapiers) it's all thrusts. Also, rapiers were not used against people wearing armor. It's a civilian weapon.


Also flicks...horrible horrible welt inducing flicks. (I have always wondered if flicking was something done way back in the day, or if that was something born from the flexibility of a foil)




In fairness though, some historical rapiers do have edges, just not very much of one. So there may have been a bit of cutting going on, even if it's mostly been lost in its modern iteration.

[Rhaegar14]

That's true, but to claim that a rapier is primarily a slashing weapon and not intended to be used for thrusting is wrong.

And I'm pretty sure the flicks were born of foil flexibility (and the fact that foil is a sport more than a martial art). For one, while it's certainly painful, I have trouble seeing how you would seriously injure someone with that (compared to a lunge, with which you could impale somebody). For two, I don't think any sword that's meant for actual use would be flexible enough to bend like that.

[cobaltstarfire]

Yeah most likely...I've had people try to flick me in epee too, and those are much stiffer...but probably again something born of the sport.


I think after reading this thread if I ever ran a game I'll probably tweak the elves to be proficient with the Jian and call it an "Elvin Long Sword". It'd basically be slashing weapon with rapier stats.

[calebrus]

Maybe with a dash of "4e Eladrin had a strong martial tradition and a lot of emphasis on longswords and 5e rolls the Eladrin and Elf into one race".

They rolled Eladrin and Elf into one race because Eladrin is just an Elven subrace.
The Elves of 4e are what were previously called Wood Elves and Wild Elves.
The Eladrin of 4e are what were previously called High Elves and Grey Elves (or Sun Elves and Moon elves, or Qualinesti and Silvanesti, etc, depending on setting).

An High Elf in 4e was not an Elf, it was an Eladrin.
Eladrin have always been Elves. In fact, 4e's Eladrin are more the standard elves than 4e's Elves were, as 4e's Elves were the woodland elves.

In 5e, instead of having two different (standard or main) kinds of Elves, with two different (standard or main) subraces for each, they have an all-encompassing Elven race, with all previous subraces under the same banner. High Elf being one such subrace, and Eladrin being separate, means that Eladrin of 5e are now what were previously known as Moon/Grey/Silvanesti/etc Elves instead of both standard Elven subraces.

They didn't just roll Eladrin into Elves haphazardly, or without reason. It was done that way because that's where they belong.

[Gwendol]

The longsword tradition in Tolkien's work is not that strong: Legolas uses a long knife to complement his bow.

In BECMI the elf is both a race and a class. They gain proficiency with any armor and weapon, and THAC0 of a Fighter.

[Anlashok]

They didn't just roll Eladrin into Elves haphazardly, or without reason. It was done that way because that's where they belong.
Maybe, maybe not. Where you think they do or do not belong wasn't really the point though.

[ShikomeKidoMi]

Eladrin have always been Elves.
Except in 3rd edition where they were npc outsiders with alternate forms. Oh, and their first appearance in back in 2nd Ed Planescape, where they were pretty much the same.

Hm... I wonder if this means they'll go back to using the term eladrin for Celestials now that they've made those racial traits simply Elvish again?

[Sindeloke]

Hm... I wonder if this means they'll go back to using the term eladrin for Celestials now that they've made those racial traits simply Elvish again?

They will not, since they already added Eladrin as an elvish subrace in the DMG.

Much to my dismay. I liked the magical holy dog-knight angels.

[ShikomeKidoMi]

They will not, since they already added Eladrin as an elvish subrace in the DMG.Much to my dismay. I liked the magical holy dog-knight angels.
Too bad, so did I.

Anyway, back to the Elf sword situation, if they're proficient with both Short and Long swords, then it looks like Elves just train shortswords for their finesse warriors and longswords for their strength ones, which means they don't need to bother with rapiers. Presumably their racial focus on archery means most of their high dex people prefer a smaller blade as a back-up weapon for when they can't engage at range, anyway.

[Chronos]

Actually, in 5e, grey, valley, Silvanesti, sun, Qualinesti, and moon elves are all considered high elves. See pg. 23 of the PHB.

[silveralen]

The longsword tradition in Tolkien's work is not that strong: Legolas uses a long knife to complement his bow.

In BECMI the elf is both a race and a class. They gain proficiency with any armor and weapon, and THAC0 of a Fighter.

He was the iconic elf, but notice how pretty much every magic sword in that story was Elven made? It was one of those odd situations where, given a choice between deciding elves made the sort of weapons humans favored for no real reason or elves normally favored those weapons and Legolas was an exception (or they also favored the bow, his choice), they went with the latter.

Though again, short sword and long knife are not that distinct from one another.

[Longcat]

In case you want a houserule solution, here is my proposal: Give High/Wood Elves the ability to use Longswords with Dexterity as the to hit/damage stat, but do not make it count as a finesse weapon to avoid unintentional side effects such as buffing Rogues. Kind of like the wording on the Monk's martial arts feature that lets them use Dexterity with simple melee weapons, but doesn't treat them as finesse either.

[Ralanr]

When people say elven long swords, I imagine two handed sabers. I don't imagine human longswords.

Though racial weapons aren't really a thing in 5e. A dwarven warhammer has the same stars as a human warhammer.

Unless it's a magic item. Like the dwarven thrower.

[VoxRationis]

Which is kind of weird, when you think about it. The differences between an elf and a slim human aren't big enough to mandate vastly different weapon designs, but dwarves? Dwarves have much shorter limbs for just as much mass. That's got to be something they'd take into account when designing weapons.

[Gwendol]

What I'm saying is that while the elves in Tolkien's work do not seem to favor longswords in particular, they are the smiths of Orcrist, Glamdring, and some other blades. Because of the prominent use of shields in Tolkien's work, one might suggest the swords are mostly of the one-handed variety.
For D&D elves this may be an influencing factor, as is the habit of making elves skilled at combat while being caster.

[squiggit]

Except in 3rd edition where they were npc outsiders with alternate forms. Oh, and their first appearance in back in 2nd Ed Planescape, where they were pretty much the same.

Even in 4e they're explicitly outsiders who live in another realm and have overt magical abilities that you can't emulate with the 5e high elf. And a strong emphasis on fey courts and elemental affinities (though those were fluff, not mechanics).

[tarlison]

Even in 4e they're explicitly outsiders who live in another realm and have overt magical abilities that you can't emulate with the 5e high elf. And a strong emphasis on fey courts and elemental affinities (though those were fluff, not mechanics).

Personally when doing a kata I think the longsword will be a lot more graceful and beautiful to look at than a rapier and elfs love beauty not really much on practicality

[Knaight]

He was the iconic elf, but notice how pretty much every magic sword in that story was Elven made? It was one of those odd situations where, given a choice between deciding elves made the sort of weapons humans favored for no real reason or elves normally favored those weapons and Legolas was an exception (or they also favored the bow, his choice), they went with the latter.

Though again, short sword and long knife are not that distinct from one another.

Plus, it was all swords all the time in LotR. There's tons of them, just about every major character uses them, and the Silamarillion has elven swordsmen* out the wazoo. There's also the primacy of the sword in general in the European narrative tradition, that often existed right alongside battlefields dominated by things that aren't swords. Tolkien inherited and perpetuated it, D&D inherited it to some degree, and sticking the typical swords on elves is a continuation of that.

*Swordelves?

[calebrus]

Except in 3rd edition where they were npc outsiders with alternate forms. Oh, and their first appearance in back in 2nd Ed Planescape, where they were pretty much the same.

Eladrin have been elves as long as the have been PC races. So as long as players have had the option of playing Eladrin without a specific DM hand wave, those Eladrin have been elves.

[obryn]

It goes back to the tabletop wargame origins of D&D, IIRC, where elves could fight and use magic. It certainly goes back to OD&D where elves could switch back and forth.

Ever since then, elves have had bonuses to (or at least proficiency with) longswords. It's a D&Dism, and 5e is nothing if not slavishly devoted to tradition.

[VoxRationis]

It's a D&Dism, and 5e is nothing if not slavishly devoted to tradition.

Not that that's a bad thing. That attention to tradition and nostalgia I feel has helped 5e feel like D&D again, something that was a huge problem in late 3rd edition and all through 4th.

[Chronos]

Not all of the magic swords in Tolkien's works were made by elves. Most of the best ones were, but the hobbits' Barrow-Blades were made by humans, and the original Narsil was made by dwarves. Nor were all of the magic weapons longswords: The Barrow-Blades and Sting were shortswords, Angrist (also made by dwarves) was a knife, Aeglos was a spear, and Grond was a warhammer. And of course, the greatest weapons of all, like Elbereth's sickle and Tulkas' chain, weren't made by any hnau at all, but by the Valar (mostly Aulë).

[Sindeloke]

In fairness, in D&D, the equivalent of anything made by Aulë would be a legendary level 40 artifact used to bind Tiamat to the Source Wall or something. It wouldn't realistically factor into thematic decisions about what's available to and important to mundane player characters. (Unless it were a dwarf, I suppose.)

[Vogonjeltz]

Also flicks...horrible horrible welt inducing flicks. (I have always wondered if flicking was something done way back in the day, or if that was something born from the flexibility of a foil)

Flicking is basically a meta-game to take advantage of the rules of first touch to win the point. If it's about fighting to the death and not about scoring points the person using flicking would simply get run through after they scored first blood, which seems rather self defeating.

[Finieous]

It's way older than Tolkien. In the Poetic Edda, Volundr (Ang.: Wayland, Wayland the Smith) is explicitly identified as an elf. He was hamstrung and forced to forge items for King Nidud, including a sword the king subsequently wore. He also fashioned the mail shirt worn by Beowulf. From Wikipedia, here are the swords said to have been forged by Volundr:

Adylok / Hatheloke, the sword of Torrent of Portyngale, according to The Romance Torrent of Portyngale.
Almace, the sword of Archbishop Turpin, according to Karlamagnus Saga.
Caliburn, in Mary Stewart's Arthurian Legend, is the sword of Macsen, Merlin, and Arthur.
Curtana, the sword of Ogier the Dane, according to Karlamagnus Saga.
Durandal, the sword of Roland, according to Karlamagnus Saga: though in Orlando Innamorato Durandal is said to have been originally the sword of Hector of Troy.
Mimung, which he forged to fight the rival smith Amilias, according to Thidrekssaga; Karlamagnus Saga relates that Mimung later came into the possession of Landri or Landres, nephew of Charlemagne.
The unnamed sword of Huon of Bordeaux, according to Lord Berners.
An unnamed sword whose history is related by Rudyard Kipling in Puck of Pook's Hill.
The unnamed sword of the hero in the Chanson de Gui de Nanteuil.
"Un ouvrier de Galan", a journeyman of Wayland's, is said to have forged the hero's sword Merveilleuse in the Chanson de Doon de Mayence.
Gram, the sword of Sigmund, which would be destroyed by Odin, and is later reforged by Regin and used by Sigmund's son Sigurd to slay the dragon Fafnir, according to the Völsunga saga.

This idea gets picked up by Tolkien, but also other swords & sorcery writers, including Poul Anderson in The Broken Sword (Imric the Elf-Earl!).

[Gwendol]

In LotR, in general, the best weapons are made by either dwarves or Elves. Dwarves certainly favor axes (its in their warcry even) as does many others.

[HoarsHalberd]

The only form of fencing that they teach you slashing attacks in is saber, and sabers are not rapiers. For foil and epee (the forms that are close to actual rapiers) it's all thrusts. Also, rapiers were not used against people wearing armor. It's a civilian weapon.

Actually you're both right. The rapiers attacks to kill would be thrusting moves, however a rapier is not an epee or a foil. It is thicker and sharp on both sides and was designed to make shallow cuts as well as deadly thrusts.

[cobaltstarfire]

Flicking is basically a meta-game to take advantage of the rules of first touch to win the point. If it's about fighting to the death and not about scoring points the person using flicking would simply get run through after they scored first blood, which seems rather self defeating.

That really depends on the rule set. In foil there's right of way, first to touch isn't a guaranteed point.

In epee, flicks, when they happen are aimed at the arm/wrist, it's not too terrible likely to get you run through.

Though if you'll read more of that conversation we were having on flicking and stuff you'll see that I agree'd it's likely just a thing born of the sport, even if epee is much stiffer than foil, it's probably still more flexible thing than an actual rapier.



Actually you're both right. The rapiers attacks to kill would be thrusting moves, however a rapier is not an epee or a foil. It is thicker and sharp on both sides and was designed to make shallow cuts as well as deadly thrusts.

Uh, foil was literally born as training for rapier. No one is saying that it's only a thrusting weapon, but it primarily is, which is why Foil and Epee are thrusting sports.

[RedMage125]

I always thought of the Elven Thinblade from 3.5e Races of the Wild as an epee. Nasty piercing weapon that does good damage and high crit chance? Sounds good. Epees, with their triangular blades were particularly horrible to be wounded by back in their heyday.

[VoxRationis]

But would an epee really do more damage than a rapier, an amount of damage equal to that of an arming sword? I can tell you which I'd rather get stuck in my torso.

[Knaight]

That really depends on the rule set. In foil there's right of way, first to touch isn't a guaranteed point.

In epee, flicks, when they happen are aimed at the arm/wrist, it's not too terrible likely to get you run through.

Though if you'll read more of that conversation we were having on flicking and stuff you'll see that I agree'd it's likely just a thing born of the sport, even if epee is much stiffer than foil, it's probably still more flexible thing than an actual rapier.
Regardless of which typical fencing rules are used, there's some way in which you can hit someone, get hit, and still get a point. Realistically speaking, both of you getting stabbed isn't a desirable ending, and while taking someone you know is better than you down with you might be a goal, it's not something that's going to be particularly trained for. That's before getting into the way the flicks rely on swords being way more flexible than is realistic, the way they wouldn't actually do any real damage, and the plethora of other problems.



Uh, foil was literally born as training for rapier. No one is saying that it's only a thrusting weapon, but it primarily is, which is why Foil and Epee are thrusting sports.

Foil was born as training for the smallsword, not the rapier. There's a reason they aren't a foot longer than they are. As for them being thrusting weapons, while both do work better that way there's some documentation suggesting that there are some circumstances where they get more heavily used as cutting weapons - particularly in more chaotic fights with more people in them.

[Safety Sword]

I always thought of the Elven Thinblade from 3.5e Races of the Wild as an epee. Nasty piercing weapon that does good damage and high crit chance? Sounds good. Epees, with their triangular blades were particularly horrible to be wounded by back in their heyday.

Not to mention the shame of being Epee'd on, I suppose.

[Nathiar]

Elves have traditionally had the longsword, I believe ever since 1st edition when they were their own class. That said, this is one of the reasons why I think longswords ought to be finesse-able.

I think that all weapons should be able to determine accuracy with Dex but only some should be able to determine damage with Dex.

[calebrus]

I think that all weapons should be able to determine accuracy with Dex but only some should be able to determine damage with Dex.

I disagree only with the word all.
If there were a third option which used either Str or Dex to attack and used Str for damage, that would be fine. Like maybe anything with either the Light or Versatile properties could be used with Str/Dex attack and use Str damage. That sounds decent. But allowing all weapons to use Dex for attack just doesn't sit right with me.
Greatsword with Dex to attack? No way.
Larger, heavier, and more unwieldy weapons should require Str.

[Morty]

There's nothing heavy or unwieldy about real-life two-handed weapons. Polearms might be difficult to handle, but that's due to their length, not weight. And they still require manual dexterity.

Realistically speaking, any weapon requires both that which falls under D&D's strength, and that which falls under dexterity. Many systems that use similar attributes use a "dexterity for accuracy, strength for damage" breakdown. But D&D is balanced around combatants using one attribute for their attacks.

[calebrus]

Realistically speaking, any weapon requires both

All weapons require both, sure, but not in equal measure. Some can be used with equal measure, but some require more power than agility. That's not to say that agility isn't required, but rather that it is far and away less important.

Just because I am agile enough to get that greataxe into the right place doesn't mean that I have enough force to actually do significant harm with it. And if I am actually agile enough to use it effectively, that's only because I'm strong enough to bring that agility to bare.
If I can't even lift that greatsword and swing it in a controlled manner, then it's useless in my hands, no matter how agile I am.

The only middle ground is to require minimum Str scores to use weapons, which adds a layer of complexity that basically becomes redundant due to the fact that you use Str to attack anyway.

For some other systems it works fine. For DnD 5e, that makes it more complex than they wanted.

[Knaight]

If I can't even lift that greatsword and swing it in a controlled manner, then it's useless in my hands, no matter how agile I am.

If you're dealing with a sword intended as a weapon and competently made (as opposed to some of the really heavy ceremonial parade sword stuff) the only way you're going to have issues with lifting and basic swing control is if you're either a small child or have some sort of degenerative muscular disease - provided you're using it correctly. The fantasy portrayal of two handed swords as really heavy, clunky things that can barely be handled is total nonsense.

[calebrus]

And for simplicity, DnD 5e is designed around the concept that larger, heavier, more unwieldy weapons require Str.
Consider a maul.
Have you ever swing a ten pound sledge hammer? It's not something that you can do very well, if at all in the manner needed, unless you are strong enough to handle it properly.
You can try to explain why greatswords should be used effectively with Dexterity all you want to from a realism or simulationist perspective, but the game wasn't designed with those parameters in mind.
It effectively treats all heavy (and even some of the less heavy) weapons with the same ideology that one would use for a maul.
You don't have to agree with it, but that's what house rules are for.

[Keltest]

Because an elf waving around a pair of short swords is boring, and a pair of rapiers looks silly. But a pair of long swords looks awesome.

[Grayson01]

I disagree only with the word all.
If there were a third option which used either Str or Dex to attack and used Str for damage, that would be fine. Like maybe anything with either the Light or Versatile properties could be used with Str/Dex attack and use Str damage. That sounds decent. But allowing all weapons to use Dex for attack just doesn't sit right with me.
Greatsword with Dex to attack? No way.
Larger, heavier, and more unwieldy weapons should require Str.

Not to mention bludgeoning weapons. As much as I miss my Light mase and Light hammer from 3.5 and the ability to do SA with bludgeoning weapons, finessing a weapon that it's source of Damage (both base and AB Damage) comes from blunt force trauma should not come from Dex. Strength IMO is the only ability score that makes sense. But then again it's fantasy.

Oh and to the Original Topic: The reason that Elves get the longsword comes from the tradition of DnD with the elven culture of Sword play. Why they lost rapier not sure, but the longsword has always been a staple of their culture and it is removed from the gamest prospective of elves have a Dex Bonus.

[warty goblin]

I disagree only with the word all.
If there were a third option which used either Str or Dex to attack and used Str for damage, that would be fine. Like maybe anything with either the Light or Versatile properties could be used with Str/Dex attack and use Str damage. That sounds decent. But allowing all weapons to use Dex for attack just doesn't sit right with me.
Greatsword with Dex to attack? No way.
Larger, heavier, and more unwieldy weapons should require Str.

Personally I'd rather accuracy be mostly determined by training at arms; same for damage. Alice, who spends an hour or more a day drilling and sparring and test-cutting should really totally kick the ass of Bob, who took a few fencing lessons but can bench a lot more. As in, Bob should figure out exactly how outclassed he is when he gets his very impressive biceps sliced to the bone in the first bind.

Which would be bad game design for something like D&D, but having training count for more than raw physical power is certainly something that a simple, low lethality system can do.

[VoxRationis]

Personally I'd rather accuracy be mostly determined by training at arms; same for damage. Alice, who spends an hour or more a day drilling and sparring and test-cutting should really totally kick the ass of Bob, who took a few fencing lessons but can bench a lot more. As in, Bob should figure out exactly how outclassed he is when he gets his very impressive biceps sliced to the bone in the first bind.

Which would be bad game design for something like D&D, but having training count for more than raw physical power is certainly something that a simple, low lethality system can do.

That almost sounds like a high-lethality system to me: it doesn't matter how much force is behind the weapon, since it will kill almost immediately anyway.

[Knaight]

Personally I'd rather accuracy be mostly determined by training at arms; same for damage. Alice, who spends an hour or more a day drilling and sparring and test-cutting should really totally kick the ass of Bob, who took a few fencing lessons but can bench a lot more. As in, Bob should figure out exactly how outclassed he is when he gets his very impressive biceps sliced to the bone in the first bind.

Which would be bad game design for something like D&D, but having training count for more than raw physical power is certainly something that a simple, low lethality system can do.
D&D has had this before. BAB +20/+15/+10/+5 produces more accuracy than a strength difference of 40 points.


That almost sounds like a high-lethality system to me: it doesn't matter how much force is behind the weapon, since it will kill almost immediately anyway.
Weapon skill determining accuracy doesn't necessarily mean that all shots are hugely damaging, particularly once armor gets introduced.

[tarlison]

I think its more on looks and dance grace ( or Kata) long swords which include the hand and a half sword and a katana as well as as shortsword which include the gladius and the wakshahi/kodachi definitely can show more grace in a dance and elf are almost dance fanatics in a way , their fighting style place heavy emphasis on beauty and grace on its looks which the rapier lacks it not much on effectiveness

[VoxRationis]

I think its more on looks and dance grace ( or Kata) long swords which include the hand and a half sword and a katana as well as as shortsword which include the gladius and the wakshahi/kodachi definitely can show more grace in a dance and elf are almost dance fanatics in a way , their fighting style place heavy emphasis on beauty and grace on its looks which the rapier lacks it not much on effectiveness

The gladius is the epitome of brute functionality as far as swords go. It is designed for stabbing (and some hacking) repeatedly in close quarters, when formations are pressed up shield to shield. It isn't even a traditional Roman weapon; they adopted it from the inhabitants of Hispania and abandoned it in the Late Empire when it was no longer useful. It's just about the opposite of a sword an elf would use.

Also, you keep citing Japanese swords and techniques. Elves do not, in most campaign settings, hail from that kind of culture (although I will admit their use of curved swords in the Lord of the Rings films may have lent the more recent imagination the impression of a similar style of armament).

[tarlison]

Even a hand and a half sword (longswords or bastard swords) are themselves pretty graceful to look at in a master's have or when use in a kata. have seen traditional technic of longsword and its pretty graceful ....comparable to the techinc in grace with the katana

[Beleriphon]

Why longswords? Well elves are in D&D are traditionally archers, courtesy of Tolkien, but when the fight gets up close and ugly elves still focus on a martial culture which lends itself to longswords (which actually now closer to what would be a medieval longsword). Longswords are good choices on that front, being excellent switch hitter weapons for either two-handed use or with a shield.

[LastGreatMith]

The rapier is made of superior steel that is more flexible and less brittle than what was used in previous eras. It was also shaped by other military pressures, such as guns being more useful, though not yet entirely dominant, in battle, and so speed was valued over armor, which meant a faster sword was also valued over a heavier one. IIRC.

Actually, I think most people who used rapiers in civilian life preferred sabers on the battlefield during that era. Weapons are about context. Rapiers are incredibly effective weapons against lightly or unarmored targets. Against a heavily armed target like a knight though, a longsword is a much better option.


Tradition. Back in AD&D days, before the rapier and Weapon Finesse were options, elves got bonuses to longsword use. In 3e, they wisely understood that the rapier fit elves better, being Dexterity-focused. I have no idea why they dropped the rapier proficiency for elves in 5e—that's the real question to ask. Perhaps it's because it was a later-period weapon, and didn't seem appropriately ancient? I don't know.

Also, is making a longsword actually harder than a rapier? I would imagine that making the weapon lighter and thinner but retain useful durability would be hard. I don't know that much about weaponsmithing, though.

I don't think it really is harder either way. At least, I can't imagine it being so. Rapiers, to my knowledge, evolved from civilian use and in an era where you didn't wear a lot of armor (because guns reduced their effectiveness). Rapiers have an advantage over longswords in unarmor or lightly armored fighting, since the rapier is longer and offers more mobility. But the rapier can't really cut deeply (it can gash someone, but most of the cuts aren't anywhere close to lethal), but rather its power came from its piercing capability.

Rapiers probably fit better contextually for elves than longswords. Especially since most of the writers and artists confuse longswords with arming swords (ie, short swords).

[Rowan Wolf]

The gladius is the epitome of brute functionality as far as swords go. It is designed for stabbing (and some hacking) repeatedly in close quarters, when formations are pressed up shield to shield. It isn't even a traditional Roman weapon; they adopted it from the inhabitants of Hispania and abandoned it in the Late Empire when it was no longer useful. It's just about the opposite of a sword an elf would use.

Also, you keep citing Japanese swords and techniques. Elves do not, in most campaign settings, hail from that kind of culture (although I will admit their use of curved swords in the Lord of the Rings films may have lent the more recent imagination the impression of a similar style of armament).

It think the whole curved blade thing comes from the idea of a more organic aesthetic, bring to mind the shape of leaves. At this point the longswords are kind of an always been there factor (it got reinforced with creation of the moonblades). I am not entire sure why other than some mechanical reason short sword (which I recall was part of the elven bonus to hit from 2nd ed) got switched for rapier in the 3rd edition.

[Knaight]

Also, you keep citing Japanese swords and techniques. Elves do not, in most campaign settings, hail from that kind of culture (although I will admit their use of curved swords in the Lord of the Rings films may have lent the more recent imagination the impression of a similar style of armament).

Curved swords are hardly a uniquely Japanese thing though. I mean, take the words "saber" and "scimitar". It's pretty clear which language they weren't pulled from.

[VoxRationis]

Curved swords are hardly a uniquely Japanese thing though. I mean, take the words "saber" and "scimitar". It's pretty clear which language they weren't pulled from.

Didn't say they were. I was responding to Tarlison's comment, in which every other word was a Japanese sword type.

[Knaight]

Didn't say they were. I was responding to Tarlison's comment, in which every other word was a Japanese sword type.

I know. Point is, I'm not sure I'd even buy LotR creating that perception, given that the existence of sabers isn't exactly unknown. The armament LotR evokes really isn't all that similar.

[Hawkstar]

The extent of a Rapier's slashing capability is almost entirely restricted to delivering painful/distracting but nonlethal cuts that create openings for lethal stabs to finish foes off, or to attack while still keeping a guard up (You can knock the opponent's rapier aside AND slash his face open!)

[cerin616]

The real answer is that "Dex to damage" is new.

In previous editions, it was very hard to get dex to damage.
1st and 2nd didnt have weapon finesse. Attack and damage came from str. Some elves used long swords because they did a little more damage.

3rd added weapon finesse. Now attacks can come from dex, but damage is still str. so a short sword now does less damage, but might hit more often if you have higher dex.

4th made it into "melee training" which let you pick any stat, and use it as attack, and half of it as damage. This is kinda dumb, but keeping the same concept, now the short sword does equal, or more damage than the long sword and has more chance to hit if your dex focused.

5th made weapon finesse add dex to damage. So its not until right now that short swords are almost unequivocally better than longswords for a dex character.

Im betting that change happened after they wrote elves, and/or didnt see the point in taking out longswords, because sometimes an elf just wants to be strong.

[Morty]

My observation about the people in this thread putting more thought into it than the designers ever did remains, and in fact becomes stronger with each post.

[Gwendol]

My observation about the people in this thread putting more thought into it than the designers ever did remains, and in fact becomes stronger with each post.

LOL! So very true!

[darkscizor]

... but why would elves develop a tradition of longsword use? Elves get a decent bonus to Dex, but none to Str, and longswords can't be used with Dex.

Elves lack the racial ability to metagame. And they don't care about damage or stats- longswords look cooler.


Final point: Don't argue, it's tradition.

[KorvinStarmast]

You all have convinced me to go and dig up my original boxed set and see if Elves got a +1 with swords in Men and Magic, or if that happened in Greyhawk. Now I have to dig it out of the attic.

I recall that by 1st Edition AD&D Elves got +1 with long swords.

Another point made up there is that the old "bastard sword" hand and a half sword is gone and longsword has taken its place.

My old ranger builds used to be bastard sword and long bow, which the elves fit into nicely if I want to do ranger as my next character.

Our current campaign has me as a cleric, which back in Boxed set was the original compromise between the fighter and the magic user.

My, how far we have come.

[Easy_Lee]

You all have convinced me to go and dig up my original boxed set and see if Elves got a +1 with swords in Men and Magic, or if that happened in Greyhawk. Now I have to dig it out of the attic.

I recall that by 1st Edition AD&D Elves got +1 with long swords.

Another point made up there is that the old "bastard sword" hand and a half sword is gone and longsword has taken its place.

My old ranger builds used to be bastard sword and long bow, which the elves fit into nicely if I want to do ranger as my next character.

Our current campaign has me as a cleric, which back in Boxed set was the original compromise between the fighter and the magic user.

My, how far we have come.

I still remember bastard swords in Neverwinter Nights being just fantasy longswords. It looked just like a longsword, except way thicker and broader than it needed to be, which would have made the thing over ten pounds and unwieldy in one hand. Good times.

[djreynolds]

I'm not sure if I like finesse weapons anymore. All my guys dump an attack stat. Just cause you have a bonus to dexterity doesn't mean you drop strength. I like a balance. I like tradition. Elves have long bows and swords, halfings throw rocks, dwarfs have hammers and axes. Hitting home run takes strength and dexterity. It takes wisdom and insight. It takes intelligence. Intimidating the pitcher is better then him throwing "in". My point is negatives are too common now in ability scores. Negatives should hurt more. If a negative one on an attack is something to avoid so is charisma or strength or dexterity. I think a negative should always count against you, this prevents optimization. A negative in strength should really hurt your build.

[Safety Sword]

I'm not sure if I like finesse weapons anymore. All my guys dump an attack stat. Just cause you have a bonus to dexterity doesn't mean you drop strength. I like a balance. I like tradition. Elves have long bows and swords, halfings throw rocks, dwarfs have hammers and axes. Hitting home run takes strength and dexterity. It takes wisdom and insight. It takes intelligence. Intimidating the pitcher is better then him throwing "in". My point is negatives are too common now in ability scores. Negatives should hurt more. If a negative one on an attack is something to avoid so is charisma or strength or dexterity. I think a negative should always count against you, this prevents optimization. A negative in strength should really hurt your build.

There are other ways that aren't combat to make dump stats relevant to the characters.

Dumping DEX? Look at all of those balancing checks you have to make?

Dumping STR? That door appears to be stuck. That rock is in the way and it looks heavy.

Don't go out of your way to make it harder for characters that dump a particular stat, but also don't ensure they never have to use the stat just because they chose to dump it.

[Takewo]

Tolkien's elves certainly used swords, and many of those swords were magical, but I don't think he ever says what kind of swords they were.

He does say so. I can't remember in the Silmarillion, but in the Lord of the Rings, most (if not all) of the important swords are longswords: Andúril, Glamdring, the swrods of the Nazgûl... and, anyway, if somebody is fighting with a sword and bears no shield, it is safe to assume that he is using a longsword.