Why do rogues get?

[Sir cryosin]

Why does rogues get proficiency in longswords if they can't use it for sneak attack. Would you let a player use a longswords to sneak attack with. I know if they use it one hand it does the same damage as rapier. But would it be unbalanced if you use it two hand.

[joaber]

The only thing I can imagine is Sun Blade.

But I don't know why they aren't prof with whip.

[EvanescentHero]

I would. The extra two points of maximum damage are nothing compared to the amount of damage they add from sneak attack. The longsword is on their proficiency list, so I don't see a problem.

EDIT:

But I don't know why they aren't prof with whip.

Maybe they were worried about sneak attacking with reach? I have a player who wanted to use a whip as a rogue, so I let her have proficiency with it. It hasn't broken anything.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Why does rogues get proficiency in longswords if they can't use it for sneak attack.

Edition legacy reasons mostly, I suppose. And it may not be unreasonable to let them have that option. It doesn't follow that anything they can use should be stabbity-enabled, though.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Why does rogues get proficiency in longswords if they can't use it for sneak attack. Would you let a player use a longswords to sneak attack with. I know if they use it one hand it does the same damage as rapier. But would it be unbalanced if you use it two hand.
It would be PLUS ONE AVERAGE DAMAGE DO YOU KNOW HOW OVERPOWERED THAT IS?!?!?!? HOW DARE YOU QUESTION WotC'S PERFECT BALANCE!!!1!!

But seriously, you'd be fine. You'd probably be fine letting them sneak attack with a greatsword. Sneak attack is all about the single alpha-strike, meaning the larger weapon die becomes less important as you advance, rather than more as for extra attack users. I was really bummed to find out that I couldn't have a Conan rogue type sneak attack with a non-wimpy sword.

[JakOfAllTirades]

On the other hand, it wouldn't significantly "nerf" the Rogue class to remove the long sword from their weapons list.

After all, it's basically useless to them if they can't sneak attack with it.

Problem solved.

[RickAllison]

On the other hand, it wouldn't significantly "nerf" the Rogue class to remove the long sword from their weapons list.

After all, it's basically useless to them if they can't sneak attack with it.

Problem solved.

By that logic, why should monks have darts when they are better at throwing daggers/javelins? I agree with the earlier poster that the big reason for including it is that it is a legacy and that magic weapons tend to be focused on swords (for better or worse) and so the rogue is able to use every non-Heavy sword when those show up.

[Joe the Rat]

Tradition. Longsword has been an allowed weapon proficiency for Thieves going way back, and the Rogues that followed.

But also consider that just because you can't use a class feature with it doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to use it. Are we taking Javelins and Greatclubs and Maces and Handaxes off their list too? If it was taking up space that could be put to another weapon, then I'd dump it. But it makes no harm leaving it on.

No idea why they don't get whip. Neither do bards. If I were to tweak this, drop longsword and take "one other martial weapon of choice," allowing the classic longsword, or the whip, or the scimitar, or the non-elf sniper longbow, or the not-entirely-useless heavy crossbow. Or the halberd, because you're feeling wacky.

[Sigreid]

Convincing disguises.

[Theodoxus]

The only thing I can imagine is Sun Blade.

Having just pillaged the sunblade in an OotA game, I can say categorically that it works with either long or short sword proficiency...

The DM gave me the sword, as I'm a Life cleric of Lathander (elf, so fortunately I have proficiency), but the rogue wants it so much... not sure what to do about it... I have a 12 in both Str and Dex... so it's not that great in my hands. The rogue, with his 20 Dex is weeping bitter tears I didn't just hand it to him... but the drow in the party aren't my friends, and the Light cowers them... so just as a safety measure, I'm probably better off just keeping it. Tough choices ;)

[Democratus]

Convincing disguises.

This is a great answer. A guy with a longsword can pretend to be a lot of other professions, and he will be convincingly competent with the weapon.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Having just pillaged the sunblade in an OotA game, I can say categorically that it works with either long or short sword proficiency...

The DM gave me the sword, as I'm a Life cleric of Lathander (elf, so fortunately I have proficiency), but the rogue wants it so much... not sure what to do about it... I have a 12 in both Str and Dex... so it's not that great in my hands. The rogue, with his 20 Dex is weeping bitter tears I didn't just hand it to him... but the drow in the party aren't my friends, and the Light cowers them... so just as a safety measure, I'm probably better off just keeping it. Tough choices ;)
Tell the player out-of-character to steal it and roleplay out the anger, followed by acceptance after he effectively uses it to help you?

[Biggstick]

Tell the player out-of-character to steal it and roleplay out the anger, followed by acceptance after he effectively uses it to help you?

Definitely going to have to agree with this. How would you feel if he kept something as powerful from you?

[Theodoxus]

Excellent suggestion!

[Hrugner]

I was really bummed to find out that I couldn't have a Conan rogue type sneak attack with a non-wimpy sword.

Two handing a rapier just doesn't feel right. You can get a bit of that action through assassin3/barbarianX but you're still losing sneak attack and you only get your guaranteed axe super crit once.

You could probably make a case for dropping a sneak attack dice for a larger weapon and 3 if you wanted to use the weapon's features like reach, heavy or use with feats.

[Blas_de_Lezo]

I guess for the exactly same reason that elves get longswords instead of rapiers in spite a Dex bonus: poor game design. I mean, every elf on the face of earth would use a rapier (or a shortsword if money is a problem) instead of a longsword.

[Azedenkae]

Don't forget Rogues also get proficiency with all simple weapons. Only a fraction of that can be used with sneak attack.

Who knows why they are proficient with it. But just because sneak attack is a feature doesn't mean that they have to only be proficient with weapons that are useful with sneak attack.

[JumboWheat01]

Don't forget Rogues also get proficiency with all simple weapons. Only a fraction of that can be used with sneak attack.

Who knows why they are proficient with it. But just because sneak attack is a feature doesn't mean that they have to only be proficient with weapons that are useful with sneak attack.

I think it's because it's an explicit addition. It's not like Simple Weapons, which are handwaved to pretty much everyone but Sorcerers (who used to have all simple weapons,) and Wizards. Considering how Scimitars are slashing damage like Longswords, but finesse-able and thus, able to be used with a backstab... err... backslice, they should've gone with that really.

Using the "legacy option" as a reason is probably true, even if it is kinda silly, considering all the other "legacy" things they changed.

[JakOfAllTirades]

By that logic, why should monks have darts when they are better at throwing daggers/javelins? I agree with the earlier poster that the big reason for including it is that it is a legacy and that magic weapons tend to be focused on swords (for better or worse) and so the rogue is able to use every non-Heavy sword when those show up.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with monk weapons.

Bye now.

[RickAllison]

This has nothing whatsoever to do with monk weapons.

Bye now.

By your logic, it does. Your claim was that because the longsword doesn't interact with rogue features, it could just be taken off their list and "Problem solved." Darts don't interact with monk features, so why should they be on their list of proficiencies? It is a legitimate criticism of your argument and pertinent to the discussion. If you don't want to have an honest discussion and instead spout off your opinions without fear of logic being applied back, then post on a blog rather than a forum. Forums are places for discussing and exchanging opinions and arguments and no one is immune to criticism.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Using the "legacy option" as a reason is probably true, even if it is kinda silly, considering all the other "legacy" things they changed.
It's not really legacy, though; Rogues haven't had longsword proficiency in any of the last four editions (4e, PF, 3.5, and 3e as far as I can tell) at the very least.

[JumboWheat01]

It's not really legacy, though; Rogues haven't had longsword proficiency in any of the last four editions (4e, PF, 3.5, and 3e as far as I can tell) at the very least.

In that case, it's even weirder, considering how Scimitar is just sitting there as a finesse weapon, and they gave rogues a very non-finesse weapon.

[RickAllison]

In that case, it's even weirder, considering how Scimitar is just sitting there as a finesse weapon, and they gave rogues a very non-finesse weapon.

That... Doesn't make much sense at all :smallbiggrin:

[JumboWheat01]

That... Doesn't make much sense at all :smallbiggrin:

The day I start making 100% sense is the day the internet implodes.

I was mostly saying that, if Wizards wanted to give Rogues a slashing weapon, one that doesn't work with their features at all isn't a good one to give, especially when there is one not too far down from it on the table that does work.

And it's not that they shouldn't make STR rogues, those can exist if they want to exist, but they still need to use a finesse or ranged weapon in order to actually take advantage of their backstab. And a rogue that doesn't backstab... well, they're not exactly a rogue then, are they? They're like... a crappier fighter.

[EvanescentHero]

The day I start making 100% sense is the day the internet implodes.

I think he was saying WotC didn't make sense, not you.

Mechanically, is there any difference between a shortsword and a scimitar? Maybe that's why they didn't pick it.

EDIT: Slashing. Duh. Don't mind me!

[RickAllison]

The day I start making 100% sense is the day the internet implodes.

I was mostly saying that, if Wizards wanted to give Rogues a slashing weapon, one that doesn't work with their features at all isn't a good one to give, especially when there is one not too far down from it on the table that does work.

And it's not that they shouldn't make STR rogues, those can exist if they want to exist, but they still need to use a finesse or ranged weapon in order to actually take advantage of their backstab. And a rogue that doesn't backstab... well, they're not exactly a rogue then, are they? They're like... a crappier fighter.

Oh you misinterpreted my comment; I meant that not giving the rogues scimitars was what didn't make sense :smallsmile: You're good, you're good.

[Theodoxus]

Perhaps they gave rogues longswords so that those who wanted to use longswords as a halfling... it's the only way to really bring the feel of the old halfling with a greatsword (given it's mechanically identical (outside of crit range) to the small greatsword of 3.P fame). Certainly not the best thing in the world, but I for one loved my old halfling barbarian/rogue with his greatsword from an old 3.5 game. I wouldn't use that combination in 5e, but...

Ok, I got nothing. I kinda wish WotC had used facing, and then Backstab could be a thing, and sneak could be done with finesse per usual and Backstab could be done with anything (because backstabbing with a greatsword should be a thing, imo).

[MeeposFire]

In that case, it's even weirder, considering how Scimitar is just sitting there as a finesse weapon, and they gave rogues a very non-finesse weapon.

It gets even stranger as longsword is for legacy reasons because back when long sword was a standard rogue weapon so was the scimitar.

The only difference I can recall is that in 4e there was a feat that allowed long swords (and bastard swords) to be used with rogue powers and sneak attack but I do not know if it did not work with the scimitar or if it was ignored for other reasons (for instance its smaller prof bonus).

[JakOfAllTirades]

By your logic, it does. Your claim was that because the longsword doesn't interact with rogue features, it could just be taken off their list and "Problem solved." Darts don't interact with monk features, so why should they be on their list of proficiencies? It is a legitimate criticism of your argument and pertinent to the discussion. If you don't want to have an honest discussion and instead spout off your opinions without fear of logic being applied back, then post on a blog rather than a forum. Forums are places for discussing and exchanging opinions and arguments and no one is immune to criticism.

You, sir, are deeply confused.

It's not "my logic" actually. It's the OP's argument. His question, in case you've forgotten, was "Why does rogues get proficiency in longswords if they can't use it for sneak attack." I simply provided him with a straightforward answer: if this bothers him, Rogues don't really need that profiecency. At no point did I assert that they shouldn't have it; I merely stated that removing would be a solution to his perceived conflict.

You keep using that word "logic" but I don't believe for a moment that you have the slightest idea what it means.

We're done now; you're wasting my time.

[RickAllison]

We're done now; you're wasting my time.

Then leave. Those who cannot have a civilized discussion are not wanted anyway.

[Zalabim]

Mechanically, it's for Moonblades, which are Longswords and may magically have the finesse property. Of course, you have to be an Elf to use one, typically. Elves are already proficient with Longswords, typically. So it's for Drow Rogues who find a randomly finesse Moonblade.

[JackPhoenix]

Rules changed a lot during the playtest/NEXT phase. Perhaps it is a relic of those days and poor editing? I can easily imagine rogues having no limits on weapons that allows sneak attack (like in 3.5e), or longswords being finessable, or some feats that would allow it, or something like that. Changing one rule and missing something that depends on that rule isn't an uncommon thing in 5e (Grappler feat, for example)