Dual wield fighter PHB only build [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Sigmar1

2017-01-07, 06:59 PM

Tanarii

2017-01-07, 07:07 PM

ChildofLuthic

2017-01-07, 07:19 PM

Honestly I'd focus on Dex. You'll end up with 1 less AC than you would if you had gotten full plate or half plate and a feat. The dual wielder feat isn't great, the added to hit/AC/average bonus damage is the same as you would get by adding +2 dex.

If you're going Vuman, I'd go Defensive duelist, max out dex, and pick up the dual wielder feat after that, if you like it that much.

Naanomi

2017-01-07, 07:22 PM

Well... Battlemaster (relying on more combat-control type options) or Eldritch Knight (haste for yet another attack) seem the most viable...

I might go with two whips for the imagery of it, maybe pick up the mobile feat to dance around the battle unhindered with your whip action?

Hrugner

2017-01-07, 07:45 PM

The feat Dual wielder gives you about +2 damage if you use rapiers rather than the normal shortsword option. It doesn't have any value unless you're planning on using a shield as an improvised weapon in your off hand, but that would require tavern brawler as well and would be keyed off of strength. Also, dual wielding without the two weapon fighting style is probably a waste of your bonus action, but as a dex fighter the normal "take shield master" advice doesn't hold up. Still, 2d8+stat damage is pretty fun so I can see the draw. The lucky feat would probably net you more damage and be useful in other situations. Taking Alertness sooner rather than later wouldn't hurt either.

An interesting thing to do with dual wielder would be to take the mobility feat. Since any target you attack can't take attacks of opportunity against you, it would let you use that off hand strike to better navigate a cluttered battle field. It could be entertaining to use a goading maneuver in conjunction with the mobility feat to force a couple of targets to attack you grouping them up for a sleep spell or something.

EvilAnagram

2017-01-07, 07:50 PM

I honestly think you'll enjoy Two-Weapon Fighting more than the Defense style. Tanks builds are nice, but you'll be plenty tanky anyways, so snag the extra 3-5 damage.

Tanarii makes a good point though: dual rapiers are stupid. Maybe ask your DM if you can change the damage type to slashing and call them sabers?

napoleon_in_rag

2017-01-07, 07:55 PM

Race: Variant human ( i think Dual Wield Feat at lvl1 is superior to any stat + )

Definitely.

Stats: Dex / Con ( Dex >>> Str )

Because of the AC bonus Dex build with TWF is usually the way to go.

Weapons: 2 rapiers

Depends on your DM. If your DM runs the movement in combat the way you should (usually with a grid and miniatures), a thrown weapon as a second weapon is better. It allows you to intervene in combat across the room. Plus, if you are going Battlemaster, look at the maneuvers you can do with a ranged weapon. Really can make difference.

2 Rapier unmodified average dpr lvl 1: 9hp
1 Rapier/ 1 Dagger unmodified average dpr lvl 1: 7hp

I think the 2hp dpr sacrifice is worth having a ranged weapon. Because if an opponent is out of reach, that second rapier doesn't help at all.

This is one way a Strength build would be better - 1 Longsword/ 1 Handaxe average damage per round: 8hp

(Plus agree with others, wielding twin rapiers is silly)

Fighting Style: Defence ( i think tanky builds are always better)

I don't know. You are getting AC bonus from your Feat and from your High Dex. Why go dual wield of you can't add your modifier to the second attack?

DragonSorcererX

2017-01-07, 07:56 PM

But 2 rapiers? Hell no.

Why not? I have seen an anime character that was a swashbuckler (this was literally his class in the anime) fighting with two rapiers and it was badass... also, one time I saw a picture of one of those old weapon fighting guidebooks and there was an illustration of a guy fighting with two rapiers.

Mongobear

2017-01-07, 08:22 PM

Why not? I have seen an anime character that was a swashbuckler (this was literally his class in the anime) fighting with two rapiers and it was badass... also, one time I saw a picture of one of those old weapon fighting guidebooks and there was an illustration of a guy fighting with two rapiers.

I've seen anime where a normal Human lifts a 400lb sword with a single hand and flips it around like it was a butter-knife. That doesn't mean it isn't dumb/impossible.

Rapiers were at best designed to be used with a small blade in the offhand, like a short sword or dagger for parries/quick counter attacks, not as a matched set to waylay your opponent.

DragonSorcererX

2017-01-07, 08:31 PM

I've seen anime where a normal Human lifts a 400lb sword with a single hand and flips it around like it was a butter-knife. That doesn't mean it isn't dumb/impossible.

Rapiers were at best designed to be used with a small blade in the offhand, like a short sword or dagger for parries/quick counter attacks, not as a matched set to waylay your opponent.

It's not dumb, it's just the way you describe, for exemple:

"You will attack the orc right? Ok, roll."

*Rolls 13 plus 5 from the attack bonus."

"Ok, now roll your off-hand attack."

*Rolls, 16 plus 5 from the attack bonus*

"Roll damage for both attacks."

*Rolls 5 plus 3 from dex modifier for the first attack and 7 plus 3 on the second attack.*

"You killed him in one round, let me describe: You quickly impales both of your rapiers in his chest, but you are so fast that the others around you only see the end of your attack when you are using the momentum from your attack to swing your rapiers in the air to clean them from the disgusting orc blood."

But I hate real life and I use D&D to create my own world with dragons and explosions, and my monks can simply be fantasy pseudo-christians who learned martial arts and dedicated themselves to the temple of their deity while not bearing the burden of being an instrument of their deity in the material plane that clerics do.

bid

2017-01-07, 08:35 PM

I'd rather rapier + whip, at least you'd get some reach.

Defense style is ok, but it's best with shield and AC20. Enemies hitting you on 15+ vs 16+ means a reduction of 15-20% damage received, around AC16 it's closer to 10% damage reduction. Compare to dueling or twf styles which are +20% damage.

Battlemaster is definitely the best choice, although TWF loses its shine after level 11.

bid

2017-01-07, 08:37 PM

It's not dumb, it's just the way you describe
It's dumb because that's not what a draconic sorcerer would do.

DragonSorcererX

2017-01-07, 08:43 PM

It's dumb because that's not what a draconic sorcerer would do.

If it was by me everything would be draconic and fight with badass claws or explosive magic that would make Micheal Bay proud!

BAHAMUT WITNESS ME! I WILL GO TO THE DRACONIC VALHALLA SHINY AND GOLDEN!

Alejandro

2017-01-07, 08:57 PM

Why not? I have seen an anime character that was a swashbuckler (this was literally his class in the anime) fighting with two rapiers and it was badass... also, one time I saw a picture of one of those old weapon fighting guidebooks and there was an illustration of a guy fighting with two rapiers.

Take it from someone who has fenced epee, saber, and foil. It would be immensely difficult. Much better off with a smaller off hand weapon, but even then, it's rare.

I saw a semi truck turn into a robot in a cartoon, but that sadly didn't happen to the trucks around me.

DragonSorcererX

2017-01-07, 09:16 PM

Take it from someone who has fenced epee, saber, and foil. It would be immensely difficult. Much better off with a smaller off hand weapon, but even then, it's rare.

I saw a semi truck turn into a robot in a cartoon, but that sadly didn't happen to the trucks around me.

Realism is bull****, I would make my own universe with magic and explosions in the void of the space! (Notice that the text is purple (that means evil) and not blue (that means sarcasm and silly stuff)).

And when I say "make my own universe" it means "destroy EVERYTHING".

Lombra

2017-01-08, 03:41 AM

You forgot that variant human gives you an extra skill.
Why defensive duelist when you will always have a weapon in both hands?
Two weapon fighting style is actually what you should aim for, you want to be effective with your off-hand weapon.
As for the feats yes: dual wielder at level 1 is what you want, then you want to max DEX.
As a pure fighter you have loads of ASIs so you are very flexible there. Things such as Tough, Mobile, even Inspiring Leader come to mind

Arial Black

2017-01-08, 06:00 AM

djreynolds

2017-01-08, 06:11 AM

Hello folks, i know that a dual wield fighter is not the best for the class but i want to try and see how dual wield works for myself. So please dont judge my decision about it and give me your opinion about what i really want to ask. And what i want to ask is how is efficient to play a dual wield fighter.

-In my party there will be a Sorc and a Barbarian.
-Our campaign will end at level 8 (part1)
-I have not yet rolled for stats but i want to start with a plan in my mind

Race: Variant human ( i think Dual Wield Feat at lvl1 is superior to any stat + )

Stats: Dex / Con ( Dex >>> Str )

Background: Urchin ( ???? )

Skills: Perception Acrobatics Sleight of hand Stealth (due to BG)

Armor: Breastplate until 20Dex where i change to Studded Leather???

Weapons: 2 rapiers

Fighting Style: Defence ( i think tanky builds are always better)

Feats : Dual Wielder- Defensive duelist - Alert of Observant (depends on my wisdom score)

Archetype: Battle Master ( as a fighter i assume i will do many short rests so i will have my maneuvers on most of the time but i really need your opinion here)

**
If Battle Master is picked over Champion
Maneuvers : Trip Attack, Riposte, ????

Why not ranger than? Grab dual wielder at first and get TWF style at ranger 2

I suggest horde breaker or collussus slayer.
And get some spells. Cure wounds goodberry hunter's mark. And hail of thorns works with a dagger thrown off hand or an arrow or bolt.

Can still get a 20 in Dex at 8th level.

Tanarii

2017-01-08, 09:38 AM

Look up 'Case of Rapiers' (one historical treatise on the form was by Di Grassi: His True Arte of Defence, published in 1595CE); both rapiers were kept in the same scabbard.That isn't a real fighting style. Like many so-called TWF styles, such as Miyamoto, it's a form of a myth. Its not an style that was ever really used in practice.

Edit: that said, as I've said before on this subject, D&D is kind of a game of silly myths brought to life. So if you want to base your character on a pseudo-historical mythic fighting style, do it. After all, we wouldn't really see Samurai at all if we didn't, since pretty much everyone's modern vision of them is based on a shared fantasy anyway. :smallwink:

EvilAnagram

2017-01-08, 09:48 AM

That isn't a real fighting style. Like many so-called TWF styles, such as Miyamoto, it's a form of a myth.

Could you elaborate on this? I'm fairly certain that Miyamoto Musashi is widely regarded as a historical figure who wrote The Book of Five Rings.

Moreover, there are clear patterns in dual wielding fighting styles from around the world. Principally, they were all dueling styles that were never used on battlefields, but were seen as valid, but difficult in single combat.

Sir cryosin

2017-01-08, 09:51 AM

Hello folks, i know that a dual wield fighter is not the best for the class but i want to try and see how dual wield works for myself. So please dont judge my decision about it and give me your opinion about what i really want to ask. And what i want to ask is how is efficient to play a dual wield fighter.

-In my party there will be a Sorc and a Barbarian.
-Our campaign will end at level 8 (part1)
-I have not yet rolled for stats but i want to start with a plan in my mind

Race: Variant human ( i think Dual Wield Feat at lvl1 is superior to any stat + )

Stats: Dex / Con ( Dex >>> Str )

Background: Urchin ( ???? )

Skills: Perception Acrobatics Sleight of hand Stealth (due to BG)

Armor: Breastplate until 20Dex where i change to Studded Leather???

Weapons: 2 rapiers

Fighting Style: Defence ( i think tanky builds are always better)

Feats : Dual Wielder- Defensive duelist - Alert of Observant (depends on my wisdom score)

Archetype: Battle Master ( as a fighter i assume i will do many short rests so i will have my maneuvers on most of the time but i really need your opinion here)

**
If Battle Master is picked over Champion
Maneuvers : Trip Attack, Riposte, ????

So I find two rapiers are silly but that option and I'm not going to try and change you options.

Ok with that said first pick vhuman and pick up duel wielder feat. Your fighting style you should pick two weapon fighting. That's what your building. If you have a STR of 15 just wear heavy armor. If you stay Dex look to pick up medium armor master bring up halfplate to AC18 and no more disadvantage to stealth. I'll go 5lv in battlemaster. Then start taking lvs in ranger there pick up the fighting style def for the +1AC. I love disarming battle maneuver I have disarmed a big bad guy that would of saluter use but he didn't have his weapon because I disarmed and took it.

Tanarii

2017-01-08, 10:03 AM

Could you elaborate on this? I'm fairly certain that Miyamoto Musashi is widely regarded as a historical figure who wrote The Book of Five Rings.

Moreover, there are clear patterns in dual wielding fighting styles from around the world. Principally, they were all dueling styles that were never used on battlefields, but were seen as valid, but difficult in single combat.
He was a historical figure. One. And its debatable how much truth underlies the Book of the five rings, or if he even actually wrote the entirety of it, or wrote it at all. Nor does one book by one historical fighter make a fighting style actually usable in practice. Thus ... a form of a myth.

There were indeed two weapon dueling styles for use in single combat. They almost exclusively used a much shorter blade for defense in the off hand.

gfishfunk

2017-01-08, 10:31 AM

I'm echoing a couple things, but providing a scale.

I would generally go variant human Two Weapon Fighting feat, then bump Dex at Level 4 and 6 with the two weapon fighting style, and get Defensive Duelist at 8.

If you roll super well on stats, go for the following feats, in order:
-Two weapon fighting (obviously)
-Defensive Duelist at lvl 4
- Medium Armor Master at lvl at 6
- Con bump at lvl 8 (end of campaign)

Champion is not terrible for this build, but battle Master is more fun. If your Barbarian goes Wolf Totem (unlikely) then going champion will make much more sense.

Rhedyn

2017-01-08, 10:40 AM

Go dual wielding style. No other style is worth more for a dual wielder.

You will have to decide between dex or strength. Dex fits the group better but then you don't need the feat anymore. Grab skulker and be more rogue-y.

I wouldn't go battlemaster or ek. Dual wielders are action gated so no need to grab sub classes that want to eat more actions. I would go champion. You could grab that defense style later.

Spacehamster

2017-01-08, 11:05 AM

Always this debate about small blade in offhand, why would you want that when in game its inferior?

rooneg

2017-01-08, 11:12 AM

Always this debate about small blade in offhand, why would you want that when in game its inferior?

For in-game optimization the question is less "should I use a shorter weapon in my non-primary hand?" than "should I just use short swords or scimitars instead of burning a feat on Dual Wielder?". Dual wielder gives you potential d8 damage dice vs d6 (so average about 1 more point of damage per hit) and an additional point of AC when you're dual wielding. If you're in light armor an extra two points of DEX gives you the same thing, plus improves your initiative. If you want heavy or medium armor it's possible that increasing DEX isn't as helpful because you've maxed out its AC bonus, but still, it's far from clear that Dual Wielder is better than just getting more DEX.

Lombra

2017-01-08, 11:17 AM

I'm astonished by all the 'two rapiers are stupid' comments, since it was a thing in real life! Moreso than two longswords, and certainly more than two shields! (which you can't TWF with in 5E anyway)

Look up 'Case of Rapiers' (one historical treatise on the form was by Di Grassi: His True Arte of Defence, published in 1595CE); both rapiers were kept in the same scabbard. In use, even though both weapons were the same length, the fencer had one foot and one hand in advance of the other, turned slightly sideways to his foe (like a modern-day boxer). This gave the fencer coverage at two distances (like rapier and dagger) but could be switched simply by advancing or retreating one step.

A highly effective style when used well, but difficult to master; represented well in 5E by requiring the Dual Wielder feat.

I'm sorry but that fighting style was bad even when they wrote the manual. Keeping a dagger to parry is much more effective then having a long metal stick that bumps in your other long metal stick while fighting.

But luckily this isn't real life and a feat solves all the problems, still I can't get over the dual scimitar fighter... it just looks cooler, and the damage loss is worth the aestethics, IMO.

The Shadowdove

2017-01-08, 11:19 AM

IMO a Dual-wield Fighter build is best done Str Max/Dex 16, medium armor master, dual wielder, and Stealth skill from background, either Criminal or Urchin are good because they also give thieves tools. Fight in best medium armor you can afford and sneak around disable traps. Only downside is you don't have the spare ability to get Int as well, but if you're a VHuman or Half-elf you can pick up Investigation to which is what you wanted anyway.

Edit: I mainly think this because dual wield rapiers is just stupid. Longswords, battleaxes ... I'd even be cool with War Picks. But 2 rapiers? Hell no.

Also, I haven't tried any of this. Totally theory on my part.

Done this. It's actually really strong, having max STR/16 Dex and medium armor mastery .

The character used a variety of weapons. So wasn't always dual wielding. Fighter feats allow this.

However, 15armor+3dex is basically the same as Full plate, except you can have decent stealth (no disadvantage) and dex saves. Not to mention longbow damage/accuracy. Maybe unimportant for most tables, but your armor is lighter too obviously. Also, half-plate is easier to come by than full plate due to sheer composition.

rooneg

2017-01-08, 11:37 AM

Done this. It's actually really strong, having max STR/16 Dex and medium armor mastery .

The character used a variety of weapons. So wasn't always dual wielding. Fighter feats allow this.

However, 15armor+3dex is basically the same as Full plate, except you can have decent stealth (no disadvantage) and dex saves. Not to mention longbow damage/accuracy. Maybe unimportant for most tables, but your armor is lighter too obviously. Also, half-plate is easier to come by than full plate due to sheer composition.

There is something to be said for this. Your initial 27 point buy stats for a variant human (the +1s go in STR and DEX) look something like:

STR 16
DEX 15
CON 14

And then INT, WIS and CHA are 10, 10, 8 in whichever order you want. If you don't want your mental stats to be that low and you like to live dangerously you can shave points of CON and put them somewhere else.

You're not in any huge hurry to pick up Medium Armor Master since that extra point of DEX won't do much good for you until you can actually afford Half Plate (if stealth matters you can swap your initial Scale Mail for a Breastplate when you have the cash). The initial feat is Dual Wielder so you can swing your two warhammers or whatever and at level 4 you can bump STR to 16. 6th level you probably have enough money for Half Plate, so you get Medium Armor Master, 8th level you finish maxing out STR.

I don't think it's necessarily the strongest Dual Wielder build, but it does look like fun.

Tanarii

2017-01-08, 12:26 PM

Done this. It's actually really strong, having max STR/16 Dex and medium armor mastery .

The character used a variety of weapons. So wasn't always dual wielding. Fighter feats allow this.

However, 15armor+3dex is basically the same as Full plate, except you can have decent stealth (no disadvantage) and dex saves. Not to mention longbow damage/accuracy. Maybe unimportant for most tables, but your armor is lighter too obviously. Also, half-plate is easier to come by than full plate due to sheer composition.
Honestly though, after reading some of the stuff in this thread and thinking about it, I think it's better to go either Str/Con (starting with hand axes until you take dual wielder) and just wear Heavy Armor. Or just go Dex/Con and skip dual wielder completely, or use (as suggested) two rapiers with the feat.

Like I said in my first post, I was just theory crafting ... and I was largely doing it around my recent thinking of when Medium Armor Master is worth it for a melee(ish) character. Various classes can get acceptable use out of it, and a Str Max/Dex 16 Fighter who wants to be able to stealth effectively & use thieves tools is one of them. But the other side of that is 'why Str'? And as others are pointing out, for dual-wield it's not really that different because of rapiers. The major difference is access to be able to use more magical weapons ... no small thing in many campaigns of course.

If it were a Str Max/Dex 16 with Shield Master, MAM, Stealth and Thieves tools we were discussing it'd be a different matter.

djreynolds

2017-01-08, 12:53 PM

MAM is a fine feat, sames AC as plate and sneaking past the dragon may be better than fighting one.

Dual wielder is fine, especially for human variant... but honestly I would use 2 short swords vs 2 rapier. Or 2 scimitars.... if that's okay.

And only a fighter or fighter/rogue can really afford either feat or both.

Honestly as a fighter, duel wielding is fine. But you will need a damage increase, and it will not come from battlemaster.

Ranger, rogue, are better choices for TWF. IMO take magic initiate for hex instead of dual wielder feat, and snag 2 cantrips if you want to be a TWF fighter.

Rhedyn

2017-01-08, 01:06 PM

The main benefit of strength is the mounted dual lances option. It's like dual rapiers but you could be on a goat.

EvilAnagram

2017-01-08, 02:07 PM

He was a historical figure. One.
Most historical figures are individual people, yes.

And its debatable how much truth underlies the Book of the five rings, or if he even actually wrote the entirety of it, or wrote it at all. Nor does one book by one historical fighter make a fighting style actually usable in practice. Thus ... a form of a myth.
You're using the fact that there is an ongoing debate about historical swordplay to assert that your position is correct. This is an extremely poor argument.

There were indeed two weapon dueling styles for use in single combat. They almost exclusively used a much shorter blade for defense in the off hand.
And the key word is almost.

I'm not saying that you're wrong about the historical prevalence of dual-wielding, but you're not necessarily right, either. There's an ongoing debate, and the historical record contains evidence that these styles existed. The may never have been used in actual combat, but we can't know for certain, and acting as though the concept deserves ridicule is a bit disingenuous.

djreynolds

2017-01-08, 02:52 PM

The main benefit of strength is the mounted dual lances option. It's like dual rapiers but you could be on a goat.

We'll ofcourse dueling lances is too cool.

What I do like about strength is the ability to give up one attack and dump someone with an athletics check.
So I could see merit for a strength based TWF with the dual wielder feat, but no MAM, just use plate.
It's just PAM which is very similar to TWF, does it for a feat minus the +1AC.

I just think duel wielding rapier is expensive when short swords do almost the same.

Gignere

2017-01-08, 03:55 PM

napoleon_in_rag

2017-01-08, 04:15 PM

Look up 'Case of Rapiers' (one historical treatise on the form was by Di Grassi: His True Arte of Defence, published in 1595CE); both rapiers were kept in the same scabbard. In use, even though both weapons were the same length, the fencer had one foot and one hand in advance of the other, turned slightly sideways to his foe (like a modern-day boxer). This gave the fencer coverage at two distances (like rapier and dagger) but could be switched simply by advancing or retreating one step.

If you read Di Grassi carefully, he says they this style was suitable for "the lists" or tournaments and not for real combat.

EvilAnagram

2017-01-08, 05:34 PM

Unlike most posters I don't see the value of going dex with dual wield. Get 16 Str and con to start put a 10 in dex and wear heavy armor. What does dex do for you besides initiative and stealth? No go nuts and dual wield axes, or axe and hammer, or whatever the hell you want.

Dex provides better initiative, boosts three fairly common skills, removes the need for heavy armor and it's drawbacks, allows for better ranged options, and improves one of the two most common saves.

Strength provides equal damage for dual wielders, a less important save boost, and only one skill. For dual wielding, Strength is the loser.

Naanomi

2017-01-08, 05:39 PM

The struggle with strength dual wielding is then you start comparing things to polearm mastery and it doesn't look very impressive next to that

napoleon_in_rag

2017-01-08, 06:34 PM

The struggle with strength dual wielding is then you start comparing things to polearm mastery and it doesn't look very impressive next to that

Unless you do the "Nute the Barber" build.

Variant Human
Sharpshooter Feat
Two Weapon Fighting Style
And Hand axes.... Lots and lots of Hand axes.

rooneg

2017-01-08, 07:55 PM

Unless you do the "Nute the Barber" build.

Variant Human
Sharpshooter Feat
Two Weapon Fighting Style
And Hand axes.... Lots and lots of Hand axes.

Umm, I'm pretty sure Sharpshooter doesn't work with thrown weapons. It requires ranged weapons, thrown weapons are a ranged attack with a melee weapon.

DragonSorcererX

2017-01-08, 08:03 PM

So I find two rapiers are silly but that option and I'm not going to try and change you options.

Ok with that said first pick vhuman and pick up duel wielder feat. Your fighting style you should pick two weapon fighting. That's what your building. If you have a STR of 15 just wear heavy armor. If you stay Dex look to pick up medium armor master bring up halfplate to AC18 and no more disadvantage to stealth. I'll go 5lv in battlemaster. Then start taking lvs in ranger there pick up the fighting style def for the +1AC. I love disarming battle maneuver I have disarmed a big bad guy that would of saluter use but he didn't have his weapon because I disarmed and took it.

I wonder what is this obsession with historical fidelity you guys have, it's D&D and this means Rule of Cool > Realism, look at 3.5 Spiked Chain...

Mongobear

2017-01-08, 08:32 PM

I wonder what is this obsession with historical fidelity you guys have, it's D&D and this means Rule of Cool > Realism, look at 3.5 Spiked Chain...

Unlike dual Rapiers, a spiked chain had a real world basis in Eastern themed weaponry, Kusari-gama, Meteor Hammer, and various other weapons on lengths of chain spun around and stuff. The issue with double Rapier is that outside of an un-named Anime you mentioned and one extremely vague and apparently highly debated manual from Europe, it was and is never used as an actual fighting style. Fencing is an Olympic sport, NONE of the actual weapon types used involve twin Rapiers or whatever the modern day equivalent to them would be.

Also, D&D has skewed a Rapier so out of touch with what they actually were that it is impossible to even tell which weapon is which between editions:

3.PF they were 1d6+expanded crit range+non-Light but Finessable anyways because reasons.

But then suddenly 3.5 also came out with the Elven Lightblade(same as Rapier, but actually was a Light weapon for twf and other stuff) and Elven Thinblade(1d8, literally the same as a basic Rapier in the phb but the damage dice was higher in Races of the Wild which were just slightly better versions of the basic Rapier, but required extra Feats unless you were an Elf.

4e I believe they remained much the same but I didnt really play 4e much

Now suddenly in 5e they're 1d8 Finesse and there is no analogue to them for other damage types. They are a giant pile of confusion because no edition has ever solidified what a Rapier actually was supposed to be, and then the next one comes along and throws it all up in the air.

DragonSorcererX

2017-01-08, 09:19 PM

Unlike dual Rapiers, a spiked chain had a real world basis in Eastern themed weaponry, Kusari-gama, Meteor Hammer, and various other weapons on lengths of chain spun around and stuff. The issue with double Rapier is that outside of an un-named Anime you mentioned and one extremely vague and apparently highly debated manual from Europe, it was and is never used as an actual fighting style. Fencing is an Olympic sport, NONE of the actual weapon types used involve twin Rapiers or whatever the modern day equivalent to them would be.

Also, D&D has skewed a Rapier so out of touch with what they actually were that it is impossible to even tell which weapon is which between editions:

3.PF they were 1d6+expanded crit range+non-Light but Finessable anyways because reasons.

But then suddenly 3.5 also came out with the Elven Lightblade(same as Rapier, but actually was a Light weapon for twf and other stuff) and Elven Thinblade(1d8, literally the same as a basic Rapier in the phb but the damage dice was higher in Races of the Wild which were just slightly better versions of the basic Rapier, but required extra Feats unless you were an Elf.

4e I believe they remained much the same but I didnt really play 4e much

Now suddenly in 5e they're 1d8 Finesse and there is no analogue to them for other damage types. They are a giant pile of confusion because no edition has ever solidified what a Rapier actually was supposed to be, and then the next one comes along and throws it all up in the air.

But, I still don't get why not let someone play a dual rapier wielder and describe it on a cool way, if it is something RAW, it's not broken and looks cool, there is no reason to not let someone do it.

And the anime is Log Horizon.

Also, I don't want to start killing catgirls here, but someone at WotC probably heard that the smaller the area the higher the pressure and made the Rapiers a d8, but this guy also forgot that the thing you are using to apply such pressure must be able to resist it (or something like that, I'm not sure), but yeah, it's fantasy! Screw it!

This is the guy that fights with two rapiers in Log Horizon (and yes, he is with one of his hands on his back, it's not an weirdly animated frame):
https://orderofsyncletica.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/nyanta.png

Mongobear

2017-01-08, 09:26 PM

But, I still don't get why not let someone play a dual rapier wielder and describe it on a cool way, if it is something RAW, it's not broken and looks cool, there is no reason to not let someone do it.

And the anime is Log Horizon.

We're not saying you can't do it.

We're saying that aesthetically it looks dumb and for some people it literally would be an impossible way to fight. It would be like in Rambo when Stallone uses an m60 with one hand and mows down like 20 dudes, that is literally impossible, no matter how awesome it was. Real m60's took atleast 2 men and a bi-pod to properly use, it was never capable of being one-armed like he does in the movie.

mephnick

2017-01-08, 09:29 PM

Umm, I'm pretty sure Sharpshooter doesn't work with thrown weapons. It requires ranged weapons, thrown weapons are a ranged attack with a melee weapon.

I think the range and cover parts of the feat work but the +5/+10 doesn't but I'm AFB.

napoleon_in_rag

2017-01-08, 09:33 PM

Umm, I'm pretty sure Sharpshooter doesn't work with thrown weapons. It requires ranged weapons, thrown weapons are a ranged attack with a melee weapon.

According to the PHB, a ranged weapon is any weapon with a range listed in the properties. Which includes spears, daggers, and Hand axes. If you have a source that says otherwise, please cite it.

Naanomi

2017-01-08, 09:36 PM

Unlike dual Rapiers, a spiked chain had a real world basis in Eastern themed weaponry, Kusari-gama, Meteor Hammer, and various other weapons on lengths of chain spun around and stuff.
'Soft' weapons were super-rare; and probably almost exclusively just thrown weapons that you could bring back with the rope/chain, improvised weapons, or *maybe* swung around to deter people from approaching. They weren't fancy swing around trip everyone weapons... that image was popularized first in theater (it made for a good show) then king-fu movies. And none were the 'one step more rediculous' whip chain or impossible to handle safely silliness of the 3.X 'spiked chain'...

Mongobear

2017-01-08, 09:40 PM

'Soft' weapons were super-rare; and probably almost exclusively just thrown weapons that you could bring back with the rope/chain, improvised weapons, or *maybe* swung around to deter people from approaching. They weren't fancy swing around trip everyone weapons... that image was popularized first in theater (it made for a good show) then king-fu movies. And none were the 'one step more rediculous' whip chain or impossible to handle safely silliness of the 3.X 'spiked chain'...

I agree that mechanically the Spiked Chain was a giant pile of BS coated in BS with a BS flavored candy center.

But aesthetically, it wasn't too far out of the bounds of realistic weaponry.

DragonSorcererX

2017-01-08, 09:44 PM

We're not saying you can't do it.

We're saying that aesthetically it looks dumb and for some people it literally would be an impossible way to fight. It would be like in Rambo when Stallone uses an m60 with one hand and mows down like 20 dudes, that is literally impossible, no matter how awesome it was. Real m60's took atleast 2 men and a bi-pod to properly use, it was never capable of being one-armed like he does in the movie.

But this is the most AWESOME thing in Rambo! Well, I think that when you guys play D&D you want something like Brave Heart with low magic and some monsters while I want High Fantasy High Magic Avengers, so this discussion will never end.

Naanomi

2017-01-08, 09:46 PM

But aesthetically, it wasn't too far out of the bounds of realistic weaponry.
Far enough outside of realistic weaponry bounds that it makes a poor counter example to two-rapiers

bid

2017-01-08, 09:53 PM

According to the PHB, a ranged weapon is any weapon with a range listed in the properties. Which includes spears, daggers, and Hand axes. If you have a source that says otherwise, please cite it.
Nope, the "range" property never uses "ranged weapon" in its description.

According to the PHB p146, the table on p149 classifies weapon as either melee or ranged. Handaxe is listed as a "simple melee weapon". Hard to argue against facts here.

Gignere

2017-01-08, 09:53 PM

Dex provides better initiative, boosts three fairly common skills, removes the need for heavy armor and it's drawbacks, allows for better ranged options, and improves one of the two most common saves.

Strength provides equal damage for dual wielders, a less important save boost, and only one skill. For dual wielding, Strength is the loser.

At the cost of potentially lower wis save, lower perception checks, even potential multi class, no paladin multi for smite, and one feat less no MAM. I don't think it is a loser if you have to give up potential multi class, lower your wis save, lower perception and blow an ASI.

Not worth it, if you want to stealth grab mithral full plate.

Tanarii

2017-01-08, 09:55 PM

According to the PHB, a ranged weapon is any weapon with a range listed in the properties. Which includes spears, daggers, and Hand axes. If you have a source that says otherwise, please cite it.
PHB p149, weapons table. It defines what as melee weapons and what are ranged weapons.

You're confusing ranged weapons (defined on the PHB table), range (PHB 147, which defines the range a ranged attack can be made at with a ranged weapon or melee weapon with the thrown property) and ranged attack (PHB 195, which is the type of attack made with a ranged weapon or melee weapon with the thrown property). Just having Range doesn't make it a ranged weapon. Melee weapons with the Thrown property also have Range.

Gignere

2017-01-08, 10:16 PM

Yes only two thrown weapons in the PHB can be used with Sharpshooter, dart and net.

djreynolds

2017-01-09, 01:29 AM

Strength does allow you to shove someone prone, dexterity only prevents it.

So strength has its perks right there. You can give up an attack to prone someone and then smash.

But unfortunately you can do the same as PAM or GWM or shield master even.

For the OP, IMO very humbly hunter ranger is just better at TWF simply because of horde breaker and hunter's mark. And with 2 light weapons, daggers and hand axes can be thrown and used with conjure barrage, lightning arrow etc.

So go ranger/fighter if you want, its very doable. As for fighter archetype, I would go with champion on this one if only for the increase of crits, but mainly ranger.

I think dual wielder is fine, but there are other feats out there that are stronger. You are starting human variant so go for it and squeeze it in.... but for me stick with short swords/scimitar and off hand dagger. Your dex modifier from TWF stlye, hunter's mark or hex, and the occasional lightning "dagger" or hail of daggers will carry you.

__________________________________________________ ___________________________________

Here is my build for the OP

You want a dexterous TWF

10/15/15/10/11/10 10/16/16/10/11/10

1 Fighter Urchin athletics/acrobatics/SOH/stealth/perception dual wielder
2 fighter
3 fighter BM precision, menacing, trip
4 fighter ASI dex (18) 10/18/16/10/11/10
5 fighter
6 fighter ASI dex (20) AC 18 with studded leather 10/20/16/10/11/10
7 fighter riposte, cleave, disarm
8 fighter resilient wisdom (12) 10/20/16/10/12/10

AC 18 in studded leather, 5 initiative, 76 HP (average) 14 passive perception, 8 in dex skills

Aside from riposte and sweeping attack these all work with a bow also

The issue for me is this build screams for 2-5 levels of rogue. Expertise in 2 skills, stealth (saves on spells like invisibility) and perception (no need for observant), cunning action there when you need it, 3 all the archetypes are good but I would grab swashbuckler for rakish audacity/fancy footwork or AT for cantrips like BB/GFB and other spells not worth your sorcerer's time, 4 another ASI, 5 uncanny dodge.

Solunaris

2017-01-09, 05:11 AM

Is no one going to mention it? What's that? It's a dumb idea?

Race: Stout Hafling
Stats: As much Strength and Con as you can get
Build: 1st level as Fighter and the rest as Barbarian for Two Weapon Fighting Style
Weapons: As many Handaxes as the DM lets you strap to your tiny rage filled body
Combat: Draw Handaxe, Rage, Attack, Draw other Handaxe, Continue to Rage, Attack twice
Ranged Option: If the enemy tried to fly away throw the handaxe and draw another, you have plenty

If you get an odd score in Strength, take the Tavern Brawler feat. In my own game, it's RP usefulness was more than made up for the 1 ASI I gave up for it. Ignore the Dual Wielder Feat as you use your Bonus Action to rage on the first turn anyway.

Theodoric

2017-01-09, 06:28 AM

Didn't Kenway in that pirate-set Assassin's Creed game walk around with two rapiers? That didn't look that dumb.

Knaight

2017-01-09, 06:40 AM

Rapiers were at best designed to be used with a small blade in the offhand, like a short sword or dagger for parries/quick counter attacks, not as a matched set to waylay your opponent.
There is evidence of a niche case though - yes, it's rare, and yes, it generally showed up outside the context of serious fighting, but given the ludicrous amount of equipment based stretching already going on this doesn't exactly add much. The two cases we're talking about are a rapier+dagger and heavy armor, or a rapier+rapier and heavy armor. Around the time the heavy armor made for war made it in, the rapier was already out of place. Adding a second one doesn't really make it worse. Rapiers showing up as battlefield weapons alongside armor was also a niche case; it happened but rarely. Clearly niche cases are treated as fine in general, and this one might as well be.

Unlike dual Rapiers, a spiked chain had a real world basis in Eastern themed weaponry, Kusari-gama, Meteor Hammer, and various other weapons on lengths of chain spun around and stuff. The issue with double Rapier is that outside of an un-named Anime you mentioned and one extremely vague and apparently highly debated manual from Europe, it was and is never used as an actual fighting style. Fencing is an Olympic sport, NONE of the actual weapon types used involve twin Rapiers or whatever the modern day equivalent to them would be.
You'll notice that all of those involved a rope or chain with something dangerous at one end. Taking the chain, removing the business end, and then putting spikes down the length takes those weapons from incredibly niche to completely ludicrous. Dual rapiers is as grounded in comparison to it as a spear and a shield is in comparison to dual rapiers.

djreynolds

2017-01-09, 07:12 AM

Sir cryosin

2017-01-09, 08:57 AM

I wonder what is this obsession with historical fidelity you guys have, it's D&D and this means Rule of Cool > Realism, look at 3.5 Spiked Chain...

Dragonsorcerer don't drag me into the arguments of realism. I never said it was unreal or real. I just said it was silly I'm my opinion. When I think duel wielding I think two long or short swords, two daggers, or two hand axes, to war hammers. Is see a rapier as what it is a quick jabbing. And the cool maneuvers, Perrys, blocks. That you see in duel wielding combat does not work for how to use a rapier. No dual-wielding swords of any make be a Rapier or a longsword in realism. Is highly debatable if it is actually practical or not which if you've ever picked up and had any training with a sword you realize how extremely difficult it is to fight with two swords. All the fights that you see on movies TV shows or anything and media is highly choreographed dance routines. You do not see fencers or any other sword training martial artists training in any dual wielding techniques.

Now I love duel wielding in games and other media.

Naanomi

2017-01-09, 09:15 AM

Sir cryosin

2017-01-09, 09:26 AM

Saber (and sometimes, but much more rarely, epee) sport fencing has two-weapon styles... as does kendo (but not with two full sized weapons). Kind of a niche thing that is more done in practice than competition, but it does exist.

Dual lances however is up there with 'blades whip' levels of silliness

I know that but I didn't touch on that because. That's not the same duel wielding as two of the same weapons. Those fighting styles use daggers for catching, Perrys, deflecting, and if IF the wielder has a opening attack.

On a side note I love the rule of cool but I want to slap any player that comes to my table wanting to play a duel lance character. Even in fantasy you don't see that.

gfishfunk

2017-01-09, 09:54 AM

I am very confused why everyone is attacking the OP for wanting to play what he wants to play, in a style found in literature and history (even if rare), where the rules clearly have a way to build it.

Its cool if you don't want to play it. Stop harassing the OP by attacking the historical context and all. You don't like it. Its not your flavor of ice cream. Fine - its his -- let him have it.

mephnick

2017-01-09, 10:06 AM

Its cool if you don't want to play it. Stop harassing the OP by attacking the historical context and all. You don't like it. Its not your flavor of ice cream. Fine - its his -- let him have it.

For a forum that demands everyone use polearms in one hand with PaM whenever possible I found it a bit odd to attack another fightingstyle based on those criteria, yes.

Tanarii

2017-01-09, 10:25 AM

Honestly, it boils down to triggering my 'munchkin level optimization' alarm. When something is so blatantly and obviously a mechanical choice that has absolutely nothing to do with anything else, and in fact flies actively in the face of any semblance of something an in-game character would choose to do, that alarm goes off.

But on the grand scheme of all things 5e, this mechanical choice is not really munchkin. I mean, it's not like he's taking the Great Weapon Master or Polearm Master feats.

Knaight

2017-01-09, 10:29 AM

But on the grand scheme of all things 5e, this mechanical choice is not really munchkin. I mean, it's not like he's taking the Great Weapon Master or Polearm Master feats.

Neither of which are on par with picking a spell caster. The power of GWM and PM overall are greatly exaggerated.

gfishfunk

2017-01-09, 10:43 AM

But on the grand scheme of all things 5e, this mechanical choice is not really munchkin. I mean, it's not like he's taking the Great Weapon Master or Polearm Master feats.

Correct - its not munchkin at all, its fluff. Good fluff, really. It gives the player the mechanical sense and style that make the character feel amazing - like a total bad*** that managed to master a difficult style. Even though that same style is, mechanically, weaker than PAM, GWM, or archery.

A character that feels powerful and fun beats out a character that runs mechanically strong 9 times out of 10.

EvilAnagram

2017-01-09, 10:52 AM

Neither of which are on par with picking a spell caster. The power of GWM and PM overall are greatly exaggerated.

Do we really need that awful meme to show up in every thread?

Tanarii

2017-01-09, 10:53 AM

Neither of which are on par with picking a spell caster. The power of GWM and PM overall are greatly exaggerated.
Wrong in the first sentence. Especially given that many classes are both warrior-type and caster-types, so it's a false distinction anyway.

But regardless, the comparison that matters is warrior-type with GWM or PAM to warrior-type using another method of fighting. Not warrior-type vs caster-type.

Correct - its not munchkin at all, its fluff. Good fluff, really. It gives the player the mechanical sense and style that make the character feel amazing - like a total bad*** that managed to master a difficult style. Even though that same style is, mechanically, weaker than PAM, GWM, or archery.

A character that feels powerful and fun beats out a character that runs mechanically strong 9 times out of 10.
Trying to cast a hard mechanical-only choice as a fluff-choice is exactly what munchkins do.

gfishfunk

2017-01-09, 11:29 AM

Trying to cast a hard mechanical-only choice as a fluff-choice is exactly what munchkins do.

All mechanical choices are fluff choices, and this is an optimization thread in a forum where people routinely discuss optimization. The OP said that he was not interested in other builds - he just wants to play a two-weapon rapier wielding fighter. That is deciding for the look, the feel, the style (the Fluff) first, and then decided to make it mechanically viable. That sound entirely reasonable to me.

Edit: Fluff is the wrong word. An RP choice / style choice that leads to mechanical choices is what I am talking about.

rlc

2017-01-09, 03:02 PM

A two weapon fighter is probably okay if you're not expecting to go past level 8, if we're being honest. The bonus attack gives you an extra chance to do all of the stuff that attacking something does (actually hit the thing, break concentration, etc), and dueling isn't really that much more powerful when you have only one or two attacks.
But, yeah, definitely go with two weapon fighting style if you're going to use two weapon fighting.

Socratov

2017-01-09, 03:46 PM

As someone who has run the math on wielding 2 weapons (for mainly barbarian (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21511194&postcount=3) and for mainly paladin (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21511280&postcount=7)), I can tell you that the Fighter class might not be the very best at wielding 2 weapons (sure, I may not have run the numbers on the fighter, but the fighter class has little to offer in the department of on hit bonuses). In fact the only thing you want from fighter (or any other class that grants it) is the TWF fighting style. That's it.

Now what you can benefit from very well is bonus damage on hit. Not just bonus damage on the attack action (as it triggers on the action and thus once a turn), but on a hit. or instance a paladin's Smite damage or a Barbarian's Rage damage. Indeed, A barbarian seems awfully well equipped to dual wield (even if this is not necessarily prevalent in the class description) in the fact that it has the single strongest melee to-hit buff there is: Reckless Attacks, coupled with a way to survive the throes of front line fighting (Bearbarian rage, d12 HD and if you do well, decent AC).

In fact, Reckless attacks is sooooo good that fighter 1/bearbarian 2/ paladin [rest] is pretty fun to do (imagine going berserk and going critfishing for smites... extremely fun). And paladin has a great damage booster in Improved divine Smite (you know the 1d8 radiant damage on hit at lvl 8), to compare, that is on average 4.5 dmg on every hit. And due to not having to-hit reducers like the sharpshooter/GWM crowd (not to mention the great benefits from Reckless attacks) you don't worry all too much about missing. All you need to do is to get those crits to line up and smite like the vengeful son of a female dog you were born to be.

Tanarii

2017-01-09, 04:49 PM

All mechanical choices are fluff choices, and this is an optimization thread in a forum where people routinely discuss optimization. The OP said that he was not interested in other builds - he just wants to play a two-weapon rapier wielding fighter. That is deciding for the look, the feel, the style (the Fluff) first, and then decided to make it mechanically viable. That sound entirely reasonable to me.

Edit: Fluff is the wrong word. An RP choice / style choice that leads to mechanical choices is what I am talking about.
I know what you meant, and my comment still applies. But the OP wasn't doing that. Despite what you're trying to claim, he didn't try to justify his mechanical choice as fluff, RP, or style. He just stated a mechanical build.

Arial Black

2017-01-10, 06:16 AM

If you read Di Grassi carefully, he says they this style was suitable for "the lists" or tournaments and not for real combat.

Which is true of the rapier generally.

The rapier evolved from a 'dress sword'; the kind of sword you would carry around in everyday life, as opposed to choosing to take onto a battlefield. The people at the time were worried about being jumped in the street by ruffians, and various weapons and fighting styles evolved to cope with that situation.

You start with an assumption that you would not be wearing armour, carrying a shield (maybe a buckler), heavy ranged weaponry (like longbows or crossbows) or reach weapons. You are just wearing your normal clothes and are out shopping or whatever, and carrying only the kind of weapon you would have in polite society. Then you get attacked! You need The Arte of Defence, or some such methodology, so that you could survive. The 'art of defence' became 'fencing'.

But even though these weapons and styles evolved quite far, they were appropriate for their environment, and that was the mean streets, not the battlefield. Just like you wouldn't carry a pike around town and expect it to help you against being mugged.

But just because pikes aren't useful on the street, and just because rapiers aren't much use against plate armour, does not make either weapon 'silly' in D&D.

The Case of Rapiers was a real thing. Just because this style was not appropriate for the battlefield, this does not mean they were 'silly' when used in the intended environment, like on the street or in a duel.

It was a very rare style. So what? Are we really going to restrict what style D&D players can choose based on our imperfect knowledge of a style's historical usage?

When I think of D&D 'silliness' I'm not thinking of twin rapiers, I'm thinking of dual-wielding shields! Or using a shield along with a quarterstaff used in one hand as handily as if you were using both hands!

If I was to ban a style based on 'silliness' it would be PAM with a one-handed quarterstaff and shield.

Arial Black

2017-01-10, 06:38 AM

Unlike dual Rapiers, a spiked chain had a real world basis in Eastern themed weaponry, Kusari-gama, Meteor Hammer, and various other weapons on lengths of chain spun around and stuff. The issue with double Rapier is that outside of an un-named Anime you mentioned and one extremely vague and apparently highly debated manual from Europe, it was and is never used as an actual fighting style. Fencing is an Olympic sport, NONE of the actual weapon types used involve twin Rapiers or whatever the modern day equivalent to them would be.

Dual rapiers was a real thing; it's rarity doesn't make it unreal, it's usage in duels rather than the battlefield doesn't make it unreal.

Flexible weapons like the kusari-gama were real in the same way as dual rapiers: they existed, but were not battlefield weapons and are cooler in fiction than in reality. They were a weapon on a string. What's silly about the 3E spiked chain was that instead if it being a weapon on a string it was just the string! Twin rapiers was far more real than the spiked chain.

No matter how vague the manual, all those manuals are vague! That doesn't mean that the things they imperfectly describe didn't really exist!

If the criteria for the weapon styles allowed in D&D were those allowed in the Olympics, D&D would be very different!

Also, D&D has skewed a Rapier so out of touch with what they actually were that it is impossible to even tell which weapon is which between editions.

Again, this is true for all D&D weapons! As a game, D&D has to have definite stats for each weapon, and a name for each weapon. The names they choose for the D&D version may or may not be related to the names used for similar weapons in history. Back in the day, they didn't use D&D terms like 'longsword' or 'shortsword' to refer to defined weapons. When they said 'longsword' they may well have been referring to what D&D would call a 'greatsword'. Meanwhile, 'arming sword': what did they call that in history? What does D&D call it? We can have an answer, but it would not be the only 'correct' answer because they weren't precise terms. Weapons evolved in sleight ways, ways that the D&D weapons table cannot cover.

In the Albedo RPG (which is about anthropomorphic animals) swords are simply rated by weight. So you have quarter-pound swords or half-pound swords and so on, and the game stats are simply based on sword weight. They do this to cope with the massive size differences between the PC races. One guy could be playing a mouse while you are playing a rhino; you are both wielding swords which are 'shortswords' to you, but objectively there is a massive disparity.

So to call out the D&D rapier as being not very accurate historically is to miss the point that all of the weapons on the D&D weapons table are on equally shaky historical foundations. Therefore, rapiers (dual wielded or not) are no more or less 'silly' than any other weapon on the D&D table.

Knaight

2017-01-10, 07:28 AM

So to call out the D&D rapier as being not very accurate historically is to miss the point that all of the weapons on the D&D weapons table are on equally shaky historical foundations. Therefore, rapiers (dual wielded or not) are no more or less 'silly' than any other weapon on the D&D table.

Some of them are on much shakier foundations than others. The general lengths of swords, specific polearm lists, so on and so forth are an imperfect model for a set of real weapons which don't fit most historical names (largely because cultures had a tendency to just call whatever the common sword was in their time and place a sword, whatever the common spear was a spear, etc. with some translation wrinkles). Then you have things like the spiked chain, which was made up for the game out of thin air.

Socratov

2017-01-10, 12:00 PM

Some of them are on much shakier foundations than others. The general lengths of swords, specific polearm lists, so on and so forth are an imperfect model for a set of real weapons which don't fit most historical names (largely because cultures had a tendency to just call whatever the common sword was in their time and place a sword, whatever the common spear was a spear, etc. with some translation wrinkles). Then you have things like the spiked chain, which was made up for the game out of thin air.

To add to that, rapiers have been made in all shapes and sizes, depending on whatever was in vogue back then, some were more slender, others slightly broader. other characterstics liek flexibility, shape and model of the basket (domed plate or a weave of iron rod), the crossguard (if any), the shape of the point, and last but not very least: the length. These days we have various names for them and classified them for the sport called fencing (being sabre, foil and epee). A DnD Rapier is pretty much a superset of swords you would use for fencing (form a slightly historical perspective), be they foil, epee, or sabre. Now dual wielding itself was a rare occurrence as a shield provided much needed cover form at the very least another melee opponent, and quite likely, enemy archers. In a skirmish or full blown war it was the sensible thing to keep in your offhand. When fencing, a fencing dagger (gauche a main)n engineered towards catching and breaking/trapping an opponent's sword was preferred as it offered even more protection from an enemy fencer and you did not need a shield to do so (even worse: a shield would slow you down and give an opponent an advantage). That said, some people disliked off-hand daggers and wore a buckler instead. When war came you did not see anyone wearing fencing swords, instead preferring short swords at the front (long swords were too unwieldy in close quarters in a shield wall), or axes or anything that was able to stab the enemy and/or hook effectively behind your enemy's shield opening up the enemy to a stabbing from your neighbour. If I recall correctly the only reason to get a bigger/longer sword was if you were a noble and not fighting the common rabble but instead chose more heavily armoured targets and opted for a weapon with more reach (so you see where you struck) and more weight (to render the enemy's armour moot). Well, that and I can certainly imagine a sword's length being analogous with today's ownership of a car's power, assumed power (through bodykits etc.), a car engine's loudness, or a car's size.

This all matters zip and zilch as dnd is not a history simulator but a fantasy emulator. First and foremost I'd like you to pay attention to the differences between a simulator and an emulator: one is designed towards creating a good as possible likeness to a certain situation in another place or another time (be they past, present or future), the other is trying to create a set of circumstances that otherwise don't exist. Being a fantasy emulator dnd has jack all to do with historical perspective and instead is geared towards creating a somewhat level playing field (at least within an order of magnitude of each other on most occasions) and a somewhat internally consistent set of rules (though Odin knows the folly of trying to achieve that when your main consumer base is best described using descriptors like 'above average aptitude to mathematics', 'passionate', 'possesses attention to detailminutiae' and 'will debate anything regarding the subject'). And for the love of Freya, stop applying the realism/verisimilitude argument to weapon use in a game that features people snapping their fingers to force reality on its knees as the submissive spank hungry [female dog] it is. If "A wizard did it" is goo denough for Owlbears, then a fighter swinging two rapiers around like a puppy being fed is juuuust fine.