Slight tweak to longsword - opinions?

[hymer]

I'm wondering if I'm missing something here, so please let me know, good playgrounders. :smallsmile:

Elf-made longswords do not have the Versatile trait, but do have Finesse. Maybe up price to 25gp.

Would that be ok? Should be similar to rapier, but with slashing, and let elves use that particular proficiency more. Short swords should still be useful for two-weapon fighting and dealing piercing damage.
My main reason for thinking along these lines is that I've yet to see a 5e elf wield a longsword, which is strange when they have that racial proficiency.

[JellyPooga]

I'd let it fly in a game I was running.

[Daishain]

In effect you're taking a rapier, switching the damage type, and calling it a longsword. not at all a big change

If the damage type was notably more useful, there might be an issue, but as it stands I see no reason not to allow it.

[Spacehamster]

Tbh could do that with any d8 versatile weapon and it would not unbalance anything. :)
Could make it something you would usually ask a smith to do for you tho. :)

[DracoKnight]

I let my players do this a lot. :smallsmile: We also have a weapons table that adds extra options to the PHB table. These weapons stray from the conventional weaponry quite a lot.

NOTE: if it says "exotic" that's a homebrew tag that means you have to take the Weapon Master feat to grab.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16ivsOrQFwSZcraWrw0QshcED1PFAIR1VNLPUyDiPtLw/edit?usp=sharing

[DanyBallon]

I'm wondering if I'm missing something here, so please let me know, good playgrounders. :smallsmile:

Elf-made longswords do not have the Versatile trait, but do have Finesse. Maybe up price to 25gp.

Would that be ok? Should be similar to rapier, but with slashing, and let elves use that particular proficiency more. Short swords should still be useful for two-weapon fighting and dealing piercing damage.
My main reason for thinking along these lines is that I've yet to see a 5e elf wield a longsword, which is strange when they have that racial proficiency.

You just haven't met my Sun Elf Eldritch Knight yet :smallwink: He wields a longsword so when not casting a cantrip with war magic (well when he'll be 7th level) he can swing is sword with both hands, while he still can use his sword one hand when casting a cantrip. Okay, I must confess, that rolling 18 for STR and 8 DEX tend to get you being more creative the way you play your character. :smallbiggrin:

On topic now: I don't see any problem with a elven blade doing 1d8 slashing and finessable. As long as you don't give finesse AND versatile, it's fine :smallsmile:

[DracoKnight]

On topic now: I don't see any problem with a elven blade doing 1d8 slashing and finessable. As long as you don't give finesse AND versatile, it's fine :smallsmile:

That depends on whether or not you give it a drawback. Easy_Lee has a great How-To-Homebrew-Weapons Guide (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?378583-Weapon-Damage-Logic-Hot-to-Homebrew-and-Why-Some-Weapons-are-Trap-Options). :smallbiggrin:

[Ruslan]

Elf-made longswords do not have the Versatile trait, but do have Finesse.That's just a rapier.
Admittedly, damage type is slashing vs. piercing, but you'd be hard-pressed to find even one case when it matters. So just replace the elven racial longsword proficiency with a rapier.

[Finieous]

That's just a rapier.
Admittedly, damage type is slashing vs. piercing, but you'd be hard-pressed to find even one case when it matters. So just replace the elven racial longsword proficiency with a rapier.

One difference would be that the elven longsword is not a rapier, that is, not a dueling and dress weapon for gentlemen of a certain, relatively short-lived social context.

"First I will begin with the worst weapon, an imperfect and insufficient weapon, and not worth the speaking of, but now being highly esteemed, therefore not to be unremembered. That is, the single rapier, and rapier and poniard." -- George Silver, The Paradoxes of Defence (1599)

:smallwink:

[1Forge]

One difference would be that the elven longsword is not a rapier, that is, not a dueling and dress weapon for gentlemen of a certain, relatively short-lived social context.

"First I will begin with the worst weapon, an imperfect and insufficient weapon, and not worth the speaking of, but now being highly esteemed, therefore not to be unremembered. That is, the single rapier, and rapier and poniard." -- George Silver, The Paradoxes of Defence (1599)

:smallwink:

Your thinking of the smallsword and maybe a few late rapiers...rapiers were like the pistols of the past, they did they're job. Sure they wernt usually used in war (but sometimes were) but they still were very good weapons. Its not like movies where they're floppy pieces of crap that would really just be pointy foils.

[Finieous]

Your thinking of the smallsword and maybe a few late rapiers...


I assure you I'm not.



rapiers were like the pistols of the past, they did they're job.


That's true, but their "job" was unarmored single combat. Not D&D adventuring or war.



Sure they wernt usually used in war (but sometimes were) but they still were very good weapons.


"Long rapiers were used for a time, and then set aside." -- Sir John Smythe

Apart from the English Civil War, where they were soon set aside, the sources I've read suggest they were sometimes carried into battle, but there are no documented cases where they were used in actual fighting.

More Silver:

"…when the battles are joined, and come to the charge, there is no room for them to draw their bird-spits, and when they have them, what can they do with them? Can they pierce his corselet with the point? Can they unlace his helmet, unbuckle his armour, hew asunder their pikes with a stocata, a riversa, a dritta, a stramason, or other such tempestuous terms? No, these toys are fit for children, not for men, for stragling boys of the camp, to murder poultry, not for men of honour to try battle with their foes."

For stragling boys of the camp, to murder poultry... That gets me every time. :smallbiggrin:

One of the best things about the Primeval Thule campaign setting is that rapiers and hand crossbows do not exist. I own my biases.

[Mara]

This how I think of rapiers

http://mwp4.me/games/raphael-sorel-soulcalibur-v-12419/#
EDIT: Or like this http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/soulcalibur/images/e/e6/AmySorelSC4.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20080330051022

Yes, 1d8 finesse slashing is fine. Making it a light weapon would be OP.

[1Forge]

I assure you I'm not.



That's true, but their "job" was unarmored single combat. Not D&D adventuring or war.



"Long rapiers were used for a time, and then set aside." -- Sir John Smythe

Apart from the English Civil War, where they were soon set aside, the sources I've read suggest they were sometimes carried into battle, but there are no documented cases where they were used in actual fighting.

More Silver:

"…when the battles are joined, and come to the charge, there is no room for them to draw their bird-spits, and when they have them, what can they do with them? Can they pierce his corselet with the point? Can they unlace his helmet, unbuckle his armour, hew asunder their pikes with a stocata, a riversa, a dritta, a stramason, or other such tempestuous terms? No, these toys are fit for children, not for men, for stragling boys of the camp, to murder poultry, not for men of honour to try battle with their foes."

For stragling boys of the camp, to murder poultry... That gets me every time. :smallbiggrin:

One of the best things about the Primeval Thule campaign setting is that rapiers and hand crossbows do not exist. I own my biases.

Ahh your referencing the "true rapier" yah those things were only intended for unarmored duels. Still besides the very biased source there were good points. The issue is that there were much better examples of rapiers ranging from "sword rapiers or cutting rapiers" to late side swords. Part of the problem in classifying such weapons is that there was a great deal of difference from sword smith to sword smith. I personally do some blacksmithing and from that I see why the rapier was used so heavily for so long.

Sure rapiers wont lop off liches arms, but they are easy to carry and are superior swords when used againset other unarmored or lightly armored swordsmen. (not to mention the superior hand protection) each sword has its merit and the rapiers is its specialization against other swordsmen. But you are correct in a high fantasy or war setting swords like the backsword, side sword, and sabre were a bit more well rounded when combating anything from polearms to greatswords.

[1Forge]

This how I think of rapiers

http://mwp4.me/games/raphael-sorel-soulcalibur-v-12419/#
EDIT: Or like this http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/soulcalibur/images/e/e6/AmySorelSC4.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20080330051022

Yes, 1d8 finesse slashing is fine. Making it a light weapon would be OP.

The first one was a side sword, sabre guard arming sword, or maybe a spadroon. The second was an epee at worst and a tuk/estoc at best.

The tuck /estock would have been optimized for the thrust especially versus armoured opponents. Lighter blades would easily manipulated it but the thick shaft of the estock would be extremely effective when thrusting against heavy armour.

[Mara]

The first one was a side sword, sabre guard arming sword, or maybe a spadroon. The second was an epee at worst and a tuk/estoc at best.

The tuk/estok would have been optimized for the thrust especially versus armoured opponents. Lighter blades would easily manipulated it but the thick shaft of the estok would be extremely effective when thrusting against heavy armour.

Well damn, I guess I'll just give those weapons the epee/tuk/estoc/side-sword/sabre-guard-arming-sword/spadroon stats. Oh wait, none of those weapons are on the table! Oh what should I do! I know! I'll just give them rapier stats.

[Joe the Rat]

Sabre might be a good name for the weapon type. I'd prefer to call it a scimitar, but they used that for the backsword.

[Cybren]

I assure you I'm not.



That's true, but their "job" was unarmored single combat. Not D&D adventuring or war.



"Long rapiers were used for a time, and then set aside." -- Sir John Smythe

Apart from the English Civil War, where they were soon set aside, the sources I've read suggest they were sometimes carried into battle, but there are no documented cases where they were used in actual fighting.

More Silver:

"…when the battles are joined, and come to the charge, there is no room for them to draw their bird-spits, and when they have them, what can they do with them? Can they pierce his corselet with the point? Can they unlace his helmet, unbuckle his armour, hew asunder their pikes with a stocata, a riversa, a dritta, a stramason, or other such tempestuous terms? No, these toys are fit for children, not for men, for stragling boys of the camp, to murder poultry, not for men of honour to try battle with their foes."

For stragling boys of the camp, to murder poultry... That gets me every time. :smallbiggrin:

One of the best things about the Primeval Thule campaign setting is that rapiers and hand crossbows do not exist. I own my biases.

Silver did happen to hate the rapier for political reasons as much as practical (you know, what with the fencing masters all being italians)

[1Forge]

Well damn, I guess I'll just give those weapons the epee/tuk/estoc/side-sword/sabre-guard-arming-sword/spadroon stats. Oh wait, none of those weapons are on the table! Oh what should I do! I know! I'll just give them rapier stats.

Lol :P the first would do better with slashing, and the second would probobly not be finesse though it is very much piercing. Though in the end whatever works for you Lol.

Though seriously I'd recommend looking at a short overview of different sword types from a legitimate source (like hema) it really helps weapon understanding in dnd and helps create a more authentic feel (not to mention better DMing) but whatever works in your games.

[DracoKnight]

Lol :P the first would do better with slashing, and the second would probobly not be finesse though it is very much piercing. Though in the end whatever works for you Lol.

Though seriously I'd recommend looking at a short overview of different sword types from a legitimate source (like hema) it really helps weapon understanding in dnd and helps create a more authentic feel (not to mention better DMing) but whatever works in your games.

As a fencer myself, an Epee would be piercing :P

[1Forge]

As a fencer myself, an Epee would be piercing :P

Same! Though I want to switch from sports fencing to historical European martial arts (HEMA) as soon as possible. And yes the epee is definitely piercing. as arming swords are to rapiers, estocks are to epees.

[djreynolds]

I'm wondering if I'm missing something here, so please let me know, good playgrounders. :smallsmile:

Elf-made longswords do not have the Versatile trait, but do have Finesse. Maybe up price to 25gp.

Would that be ok? Should be similar to rapier, but with slashing, and let elves use that particular proficiency more. Short swords should still be useful for two-weapon fighting and dealing piercing damage.
My main reason for thinking along these lines is that I've yet to see a 5e elf wield a longsword, which is strange when they have that racial proficiency.

My biggest beef in the game. I would allow any elf to finesse a long sword period. And it makes taking GWS really cool with finesse weapons, it just expands the picture and is cool.

[1Forge]

My biggest beef in the game. I would allow any elf to finesse a long sword period. And it makes taking GWS really cool with finesse weapons, it just expands the picture and is cool.

You see this is why I homebrewed my combat system its more realistic there are more weapons and you just have more options. The greatest secret 5e revealed is that we dont need the rules and that they are only guidelines so in the end go for it. All your doing is changing a modifier and of course the weapon would probobly now just be an arming sword but unless dnd makes a system for all the obscure weapons out there you'll just have to improvise.

[DracoKnight]

Same! Though I want to switch from sports fencing to historical European martial arts (HEMA) as soon as possible. And yes the epee is definitely piercing. as arming swords are to rapiers, estocks are to epees.

For fencing my favored weapon is the Saber! I just love slashing at my opponents :D And the fact that everything waist up compliments my lefthandedness, as that throws most people off guard :D

[djreynolds]

I just watched LoTR's again. I want Aragorn using his long sword and going from one hand to two hand to one hand.

I actually dislike that you can use a shield with duelist style. Where in the world is this extra damage coming from if you're wielding a shield as well anyhow?

I mean what's the sense of playing Aragorn if he gets the same +2 damage if he uses a shield or does not? I always pictured that extra damage came from the fact that was at some point he was two handing the weapon, or the rapier guy was lunging.

Lets say I'm using a versatile long sword, when I use it two-handed its 1d10 and I can benefit from GWS and the cleave portion of GWM, but when I use it one-handed I'm still doing 1d8 +2 and can use a shield, but if I pull out an off-hand dagger I lose it.

Nothing is set in stone, changing rules for flavor and style and historical accuracy or something that seems at least thematically appropriate is why you're the DM. The game will not blow up because an elf is finessing two-long swords, which cool.

[Mara]

I just watched LoTR's again. I want Aragorn using his long sword and going from one hand to two hand to one hand.

I actually dislike that you can use a shield with duelist style. Where in the world is this extra damage coming from if you're wielding a shield as well anyhow?

I mean what's the sense of playing Aragorn if he gets the same +2 damage if he uses a shield or does not? I always pictured that extra damage came from the fact that was at some point he was two handing the weapon, or the rapier guy was lunging.

Lets say I'm using a versatile long sword, when I use it two-handed its 1d10 and I can benefit from GWS and the cleave portion of GWM, but when I use it one-handed I'm still doing 1d8 +2 and can use a shield, but if I pull out an off-hand dagger I lose it.

Nothing is set in stone, changing rules for flavor and style and historical accuracy or something that seems at least thematically appropriate is why you're the DM. The game will not blow up because an elf is finessing two-long swords, which cool.

I call Aragorn a hunter with the Archery Style but higher strength than dex.

[djreynolds]

I call Aragorn a hunter with the Archery Style but higher strength than dex.

Since he's Aragorn, I'd give him both Archery and GWS, just cause he's 87.

[Firechanter]

That's just a rapier.
Admittedly, damage type is slashing vs. piercing, but you'd be hard-pressed to find even one case when it matters. So just replace the elven racial longsword proficiency with a rapier.

Since you're making a houserule anyway, why not just make a houserule that lets the player play what he wants?

[djreynolds]

If you can show me where, than you can do it. Have fun.

[hymer]

Thank you all very much! :smallsmile:


Admittedly, damage type is slashing vs. piercing, but you'd be hard-pressed to find even one case when it matters.

Well, it would matter for the elven druid I'm currently playing in one campaign. She might well be wielding a longsword in melee over a short sword. Elves often have casting classes that allow them to make good use of their racial proficiencies.
That aside, this is more a matter of gut feeling more than mechanical effect. I've been playing since second edition, and it's firmly imprinted on my mind that certain elven cultures favour longswords for melee. It feels wrong to have them either switch weapons or suffer a mechanical penalty.


So just replace the elven racial longsword proficiency with a rapier.

Oh ye generation of vipers! He that blasphemeth against the Second Edition shall be taken to the city gates, and surely be dipped in a large vat of chocolate custard, until he crieth out 'Hold! Enough!'!

[Coffee_Dragon]

I'd let it fly in a game I was running.

I'd only let it fly if it was magical.

[ruy343]

I'm wondering if I'm missing something here, so please let me know, good playgrounders. :smallsmile:

Elf-made longswords do not have the Versatile trait, but do have Finesse. Maybe up price to 25gp.

Would that be ok? Should be similar to rapier, but with slashing, and let elves use that particular proficiency more. Short swords should still be useful for two-weapon fighting and dealing piercing damage.
My main reason for thinking along these lines is that I've yet to see a 5e elf wield a longsword, which is strange when they have that racial proficiency.

You already solved the major problem with the re-skin by disallowing the "versatile" property, so I would say that you're good to go! Granted, elves become more likely to wield this weapon by virtue of their class abilities, but if you're fine with a little boost to that race, then there shouldn't be a problem.

However, to be honest, I hate elves. Players in my group play elves too often because they get a bonus to dexterity (the best stat in the game), but don't take the small size penalties.

That is all.

[Firechanter]

We just got our first Bladesinger in the group, and we introduced that "Elven Thinblade" thing with 1d8 Slashing Finesse.



However, to be honest, I hate elves. Players in my group play elves too often because they get a bonus to dexterity (the best stat in the game), but don't take the small size penalties.


I don't know if you ever played AD&D2, but if you didn't, I advise you never try it. You'd go bonkers over all the extra stuff they get: +1 to Dex and the possibility to get Dex 19 (which really meant something), +1 to Attack with Swords and Bows, lots of Elf-exclusive kits ("Archetypes") like Bladesinger and Elven Archer, and so on and so on... their only drawback is that they can't be revived with Raise Dead (so you need a Resurrection or Wish. In AD&D1 even Resurrection explicitly didn't work).
:smallbiggrin::smallcool:

[ruy343]

I remember that... Good times...

[Coidzor]

I'm wondering if I'm missing something here, so please let me know, good playgrounders. :smallsmile:

Elf-made longswords do not have the Versatile trait, but do have Finesse. Maybe up price to 25gp.

Would that be ok? Should be similar to rapier, but with slashing, and let elves use that particular proficiency more. Short swords should still be useful for two-weapon fighting and dealing piercing damage.

So making the slashing counterpart to rapier the same way that scimitars are the slashing short sword. Yeah, sure.


My main reason for thinking along these lines is that I've yet to see a 5e elf wield a longsword, which is strange when they have that racial proficiency.

It's where bladesingers get their proficiency with longswords from, IIRC, so there's that, as of SCAG.

I think partially it's that dwarf outcompetes elf in that battlehammers and battleaxes are comparable to longswords and dwarf gives armor proficiencies on top of weapon proficiencies.


However, to be honest, I hate elves. Players in my group play elves too often because they get a bonus to dexterity (the best stat in the game), but don't take the small size penalties.

Excuse Me Sir, Do You Have a Moment (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20041203a) to Talk About Zarus (http://community.wizards.com/forum/other-published-worlds/threads/989226)? :smallamused:

[unwise]

IMC my PCs have caught on to the usefulness of the Rapier. They figure, if you put on a foppish hat, a puffy shirt and too much perfume, guards never take them off you. They are seen as a fashion accessory that any well-to-do gentleman must have. You can get most of the way towards a throne room before you are stopped to disarm, if you are at all.

You don't have to use dex with them, one recent game saw the barbarian dismantling guards with a rapier, he was surprisingly good in a gentleman's duel as he of course had unarmored defense.

[Raxxius]

call it an arming sword and you're good to go.

Rapiers are weird in D&D imo because it's a weapon which is really ahead of the time period of most D&D settings. Additionally most rapier images I see asociated with D&D are more like an Epee over the actually quite large and mostly double edged weapon which is the rapier.

[DanyBallon]

Does it truly matter that the D&D weapon called a rapier is in fact a arming sword, or an epee, rather than the historical rapier? The only thing that really matter is that when you talk about a D&D rapier, people have an image of the Three Musketeers, or any similar image, even if it not accurate. The D&D rapier is a weapon longer and thinner than a short sword, mostly use it's pointy tip to deal damage and that allows you to use your dexterity. There's nothing more than that. Having a slashing equivalent called an Elven long sword is good as well, as people traditonnaly associates elven swordfigthing with fencing and grace but not automatically with a D&D rapier.

[Raxxius]

Well I guess here's where I chip in and say I generally use combat and tactics (2nd ed) weapon tables, they're comprehensive and more or less well thought out. The obvious exception is the japanese sword fanboying, but droping them down a die suffices.

[1Forge]

Does it truly matter that the D&D weapon called a rapier is in fact a arming sword, or an epee, rather than the historical rapier? The only thing that really matter is that when you talk about a D&D rapier, people have an image of the Three Musketeers, or any similar image, even if it not accurate. The D&D rapier is a weapon longer and thinner than a short sword, mostly use it's pointy tip to deal damage and that allows you to use your dexterity. There's nothing more than that. Having a slashing equivalent called an Elven long sword is good as well, as people traditonnaly associates elven swordfigthing with fencing and grace but not automatically with a D&D rapier.

...umm rapiers wernt really thinner than other swords of the time usually exept at the distill taper on true rapiers. And I get what your saying it doesn't matter as long as people have their own image of it, but it can lead to misconceptions. Not to mention you can end up with confusion when different people describe it as different things in a fight.

[DanyBallon]

...umm rapiers wernt really thinner than other swords of the time usually exept at the distill taper on true rapiers. And I get what your saying it doesn't matter as long as people have their own image of it, but it can lead to misconceptions. Not to mention you can end up with confusion when different people describe it as different things in a fight.

I'll assume your right about historical rapier description, I'm not well versed in weaponry. As for you second point, I totally agree that it may lead to misinterpretation, and that's why the different weapons are often illustrated in the book, so we can have a common reference. I must admit that previous edition did a better job in that aspect, that 5e does.

[1Forge]

I'll assume your right about historical rapier description, I'm not well versed in weaponry. As for you second point, I totally agree that it may lead to misinterpretation, and that's why the different weapons are often illustrated in the book, so we can have a common reference. I must admit that previous edition did a better job in that aspect, that 5e does.

Yeah its usually ok though as long as you talk to your DM and its even better if the DM has done their own research beforehand. I think ill make an online quiz for DMs to take to dispel misconceptions that might exist.

[Coffee_Dragon]

One might also ask this question: why is it important that the weapon should have the damage die of a longsword and not the damage die of a scimitar, as long as the flavour is the same?

[Coidzor]

One might also ask this question: why is it important that the weapon should have the damage die of a longsword and not the damage die of a scimitar, as long as the flavour is the same?

Having racial proficiencies actually be useful rather than counterintuitive, as per the OP I believe.

[Coffee_Dragon]

To put it another way, then: if it's felt that the racial proficiency should be for a weapon that has finesse (but not necessarily also versatile), why not change what weapon the proficiency points to (to scimitar), instead of changing the weapon the proficiency points to (into a scimitar with a higher damage die)?

[Firechanter]

Scimitars are for dual wielding. You know, for all the aspiring Drizzt clones.

[HoarsHalberd]

To put it another way, then: if it's felt that the racial proficiency should be for a weapon that has finesse (but not necessarily also versatile), why not change what weapon the proficiency points to (to scimitar), instead of changing the weapon the proficiency points to (into a scimitar with a higher damage die)?

Because for it to have the damage die of a scimitar it would have to be light, which means that you could dual wield longswords with no special training.

[Anonymouswizard]

However, to be honest, I hate elves. Players in my group play elves too often because they get a bonus to dexterity (the best stat in the game), but don't take the small size penalties.

I'm jealous. I wish my players actually looked at racial stats before deciding on elves. I tend to steer towards humans and dwarves, which ended up with the hilarious case of the character with the highest dex, wielding a weapon with elf in the name, was the only non elf/half elf in a Pathfinder game. He was also the highest op to make up for his appalling damage.

I also once got so annoyed that I decided that the PCs had managed to get every elven Shadowrunner in the city in one team.

On the thread's question, sure, sounds fine.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Because for it to have the damage die of a scimitar it would have to be light, which means that you could dual wield longswords with no special training.

As I understand it it wasn't supposed to be an actual longsword, but an "elven longsword" or thinblade. I think no one was suggesting being able to dual-wield longswords, and if the thinblade were made to be just a particular flavour of scimitar, being able to dual-wield it wouldn't be an issue anyway.

The juxtaposition of non-light, slashing and finesse does bug me a bit; slashing weapons rely on weight for doing damage, so it kinda makes sense that the only non-light finesse weapon (besides the stupid whip) is piercing.

[hymer]

As I understand it it wasn't supposed to be an actual longsword, but an "elven longsword" or thinblade.

Here's what I meant: A longsword is a longsword is a longsword. It's a game term used in a fictional world, and equally fictitious surface elves are proficient in them. Yet these elves (with one exception as mentioned in this thread) never use them. What sort of houserule could make elves use the longsword that they have spent enough time training with that they are all proficient? My answer to that question was that there are certain longswords, made by elven smiths, which are made to take particular advantage of elven physiology, capacity and grace.
My only concern with this house rule was whether this would have unforeseen consequences. None have been pointed out, and that's great.

[foobar1969]

That's just a rapier.
Admittedly, damage type is slashing vs. piercing, but you'd be hard-pressed to find even one case when it matters.
Cutting a soft thing, skewering a thick thing, or crushing a hard thing, when your DM has even a slight tendency towards verisimilitude.

Also, fighting a Flameskull, although you're right, I was hard-pressed to find that. There's only a handful of cases where physical damage type makes a RAW difference.

[DanyBallon]

Here's what I meant: A longsword is a longsword is a longsword. It's a game term used in a fictional world, and equally fictitious surface elves are proficient in them. Yet these elves (with one exception as mentioned in this thread) never use them. What sort of houserule could make elves use the longsword that they have spent enough time training with that they are all proficient? My answer to that question was that there are certain longswords, made by elven smiths, which are made to take particular advantage of elven physiology, capacity and grace.
My only concern with this house rule was whether this would have unforeseen consequences. None have been pointed out, and that's great.

Just asking, but what if elves use longsword as any other races do. Elves still use strength weapon as anybody, their bonus to dex reflect their nimbleness, their accuracy with bows, etc. As player we prefer to use finesse weapon because we have limited ability points to assign to our character and since Dex is one of the most useful ability, it make sens to try to make the best use possible of that attribute, but outside of metagaming perspective there's no need for elves to favor using finesse weapon.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Still not sure this makes sense to me. I mean, with this change you're going to have two different weapons, the "original longsword" and the "slashing rapier". Calling them by the same name, and/or having one proficiency cover two weapon entries, won't change that fact.

Personally I would probably write off the feature that a "finessy" race gets proficiency in a heavy chopping weapon to be a clunky relic of earlier editions and either repoint it to an actual finesse weapon (such as reflavoured scimitar) or just shrug and move on, but you can of course do anything you like. I believe very little is disastrous in practical play with sensible people, even if hanging around optimization boards can give the opposite impression.

[hymer]

Just asking, but what if elves use longsword as any other races do.

They don't. I've never seen it happen, and I know the exact reason. It bugs me that they are proficient in weapons they never use, and I want to do something about it so it will stop bugging me.


Still not sure this makes sense to me. I mean, with this change you're going to have two different weapons, the "original longsword" and the "slashing rapier". Calling them by the same name, and/or having one proficiency cover two weapon entries, won't change that fact.

I don't know what to tell you. You don't get it? That's okay, it seems unlikely you'll ever encounter this particular houserule. :smallsmile:

[DanyBallon]

They don't. I've never seen it happen, and I know the exact reason. It bugs me that they are proficient in weapons they never use, and I want to do something about it so it will stop bugging me.

You've never seen it happen, in litterature, or in play? Because, for the later, as I said above, it may be only for metagaming reason. It make perfect sense from a player perspective to try playing a character that isn't MAD. But it's by no mean a reason to ban longsword from Elven weapon proficiency, as in litterature it may be a common occurrence.

[hymer]

You've never seen it happen, in litterature, or in play? Because, for the later, as I said above, it may be only for metagaming reason. It make perfect sense from a player perspective to try playing a character that isn't MAD. But it's by no mean a reason to ban longsword from Elven weapon proficiency, as in litterature it may be a common occurrence.

Thanks for your opinion.

Edit: Sorry, that was rude. But I'm not interested in the distinction you're drawing. I'm interested in seeing 5e elves using longswords - without being mechanically penalized for it.

[Finieous]

Still not sure this makes sense to me. I mean, with this change you're going to have two different weapons, the "original longsword" and the "slashing rapier". Calling them by the same name, and/or having one proficiency cover two weapon entries, won't change that fact.


What's the problem? The "short sword" is a light, finesse 1d6 piercing weapon, while the "scimitar" is a light, finesse 1d6 slashing weapon. Why is it a problem to have a "rapier" that is a finesse 1d8 piercing weapon and a "side sword" or "elven longsword" that is a finesse 1d8 slashing weapon?

[DanyBallon]

Thanks for your opinion.

Edit: Sorry, that was rude. But I'm not interested in the distinction you're drawing. I'm interested in seeing 5e elves using longswords - without being mechanically penalized for it.

As I already at the beginning of this topic, having a blade that is 1d8 finesse, it's just fine. You can call it a Elven longsword, or any other name you want. But I agree with Coffee_Dragon, that having a longsword that is 1d8 finesse for elves, and 1d8 versatile for any other races, may be confusing.
If you need a fix, replace the longsword weapon proficiency by your new weapon name, and voila! Otherwise, your fix for elves using lonsword, will be either confusing (2 kind of longsword) or penalize an other one that wnated the traditionnal longsword (change longsword from versatile to finesse)

[hymer]

As I already at the beginning of this topic, having a blade that is 1d8 finesse, it's just fine. You can call it a Elven longsword, or any other name you want. But I agree with Coffee_Dragon, that having a longsword that is 1d8 finesse for elves, and 1d8 versatile for any other races, may be confusing.

Thank you. I'll be very clear to my players when I explain it. Though the idea of cultural- or material-specific stats is nothing new to them, so I foresee no problems along those lines.


If you need a fix, replace the longsword weapon proficiency by your new weapon name, and voila! Otherwise, your fix for elves using lonsword, will be either confusing (2 kind of longsword) or penalize an other one that wnated the traditionnal longsword (change longsword from versatile to finesse)

It won't penalize the hypothetical strength-high rather than dex-high elf, because they can just buy the regular version of the longsword.

[Raxxius]

Thank you. I'll be very clear to my players when I explain it. Though the idea of cultural- or material-specific stats is nothing new to them, so I foresee no problems along those lines.



It won't penalize the hypothetical strength-high rather than dex-high elf, because they can just buy the regular version of the longsword.

Calling it a longsword adds confusion. Already 5th ed changing the longsword into the bastard sword is confusing enough.

I'd rename it to side sword or arming sword, or just elf sword.

Sabre, Jian, broadsword, Sparta, backsword. Sir choppy mc chopfest, just not longsword.

[Coffee_Dragon]

What's the problem? The "short sword" is a light, finesse 1d6 piercing weapon, while the "scimitar" is a light, finesse 1d6 slashing weapon. Why is it a problem to have a "rapier" that is a finesse 1d8 piercing weapon and a "side sword" or "elven longsword" that is a finesse 1d8 slashing weapon?

It's much easier to envision a scaled-up piercing weapon being used for precision attacks (finessability) than a scaled-up slashing weapon. Sabres and falchions are used for whacking at people, just like longswords (and I assume they don't appear in the weapons table precisely because they are contained within the longsword entry and don't need individual stats). Note that the 3E elven thinblade was piercing.

[Finieous]

It's much easier to envision a scaled-up piercing weapon being used for precision attacks (finessability) than a scaled-up slashing weapon.

Okay, it's very easy for me to envision side swords, because I can go and look at pictures of them. :smallbiggrin:

Anyway, not worth arguing about. Sounds like the OP has his solution.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Okay, it's very easy for me to envision side swords, because I can go and look at pictures of them. :smallbiggrin:

Since I'm not super knowledgeable about swords, the existence of the side sword/arming sword tells me only there are intermediate forms between the longsword (slashing, versatile) and the rapier (piercing, finesse), but it doesn't tell me in which order those properties are toggled on and off along the spectrum - specifically, it doesn't logically tell me there is a historical weapon that is properly reflected in the game by having d8, slashing, non-versatile, finesse. But if there's a consensus among sword aficionados that this is just what the side sword is, I can offer no good argument except pphhbbhlllt.


Anyway, not worth arguing about. Sounds like the OP has his solution.

Can't we use the thread to argue just for fun though

[MeeposFire]

Meh I would be willing to make longswords finesse anyway heck I thought about making them finesse only used two handed to model the movies with rogue like characters (such as in the D&D movie) where the rogue uses a longsword type weapon two handed often. It would give them a unique reason to use a longsword and have a unique mechanical reason as it gives slightly more damage than other finesse weapons but you give up shield benefits and two weapon fighting which is significant for classes that tend toward dex set ups.

Honestly though I would be tempted to just make long swords usable with dex. I think people way overvalue the small damage difference between a d8 die and a d10. Also before you ask no it does not bother me at all that the idea of using such a sword with more deft movements than brutish ones.

[DracoKnight]

Meh I would be willing to make longswords finesse anyway heck I thought about making them finesse only used two handed to model the movies with rogue like characters (such as in the D&D movie) where the rogue uses a longsword type weapon two handed often. It would give them a unique reason to use a longsword and have a unique mechanical reason as it gives slightly more damage than other finesse weapons but you give up shield benefits and two weapon fighting which is significant for classes that tend toward dex set ups.

Honestly though I would be tempted to just make long swords usable with dex. I think people way overvalue the small damage difference between a d8 die and a d10. Also before you ask no it does not bother me at all that the idea of using such a sword with more deft movements than brutish ones.

This. Meepos, I agree with you 100%.