PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next Scythes and a few other weapons



Llama513
2017-11-22, 02:21 PM
The title says it all, this is simply stats for a scythe, I may add other variations later, but for now its just a scythe

http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/BkIM0BXxG

Talamare
2017-11-22, 02:57 PM
Do you really need a link for something that says '1d6, finesse'

Ninja_Prawn
2017-11-22, 03:11 PM
Ah, but we might be getting variations later! I can't wait for the war scythe, whip-scythe, greatscythe and scythe-that-turns-into-a-high-powered-sniper-rifle...

On a more serious note, is finesse really the right way to go with this though? Scythes look so cumbersome and unwieldy. Aren't they also the definition of a reach weapon? To be honest, when I DM, I'll be sticking to my previous stance, which is that farm tools are improvised weapons.

Lalliman
2017-11-22, 04:14 PM
A scythe is a terrible weapon in real life, of course, but I think this does a perfectly fine job mimicking the way that scythes are portrayed in fiction. They are for some reason usually associated with agile characters.

Requilac
2017-11-22, 04:43 PM
Llama made this weapon specifically for their homebrew class the “Dread Necromancer”. It was given the finesse property so that the necromancer could have a sickle-like simple weapon that was viable to use even if you have proficiency with the quarterstaff and dagger. Because of this, it is not supposed to be a realistic weapon, it is supposed to be a symbol of death.

I actually made the statistics for this weapon orignally. The scythe is the same thing as a spear except that it does slashing damage and trades the thrown property for the finesse property. Giving the scythe the reach property instead of the finesse property though may be a better solution...

Ninja_Prawn
2017-11-22, 05:13 PM
Llama made this weapon specifically for their homebrew class the “Dread Necromancer”. It was given the finesse property so that the necromancer could have a sickle-like simple weapon that was viable to use even if you have proficiency with the quarterstaff and dagger. Because of this, it is not supposed to be a realistic weapon, it is supposed to be a symbol of death.

I actually made the statistics for this weapon orignally. The scythe is the same thing as a spear except that it does slashing damage and trades the thrown property for the finesse property. Giving the scythe the reach property instead of the finesse property though may be a better solution...

I see. If the dread necromancer relies on Dex for AC, it's never going to have enough Str to justify using a non-finesse weapon.

Well, I've just checked the dread necromancer's fluff, and it sounds like they're meant to be snivelling, bookish, wizard-like sorts that rely on dark magic to get by. Not the kind of strong-backed, scythe-swinging powerhouse that leads their undead horde from the front. Really, I can't see them choosing a scythe over a dagger at all, finesse or no.

demonslayerelf
2017-11-22, 05:15 PM
I made a scythe weapon before. Three different types, actually, a War Scythe, Death Scythe, and just Scythe.

The first is an actual weapon, obviously, and I made that 1d10, Reach, and it grants a +2 AC from other reach weapons.

The Death Scythe, regardless of the stupid name, is what you imagine for a scythe, only it's actually made for a fight, not for farming. 1d8, Finesse, and you can try to Trip people with it(Basically Trip Attack, only 0 damage.)

The last one is a 1d4, and Heavy. It's improvised and prone to breaking, definitely not intended to break people, only plants.

Requilac
2017-11-22, 05:44 PM
I see. If the dread necromancer relies on Dex for AC, it's never going to have enough Str to justify using a non-finesse weapon.

Well, I've just checked the dread necromancer's fluff, and it sounds like they're meant to be snivelling, bookish, wizard-like sorts that rely on dark magic to get by. Not the kind of strong-backed, scythe-swinging powerhouse that leads their undead horde from the front. Really, I can't see them choosing a scythe over a dagger at all, finesse or no.

The dread necromancer would use a scythe over a dagger if they wanted to use a shield (D6 is greater than D4) or wielded the scythe two-handed so they do not need to dual-wield (and thus consume bonus actions) to maintain damage. They would deal the almost the same damage dual wielding a dagger (1D4+Dex then another 1D4) as they would wielding a scythe two-handed (1D8+ dex), the difference is that using the scythe does not eat up your bonus actions.

GalacticAxekick
2017-11-22, 06:32 PM
On a more serious note, is finesse really the right way to go with this though? Scythes look so cumbersome and unwieldy.Agreed.


Aren't they also the definition of a reach weapon?As convenient as that would be for me (since I want simple reach weapons so, so badly), fully half of the scythe's length is held across the body (https://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn.lehmans.com/images/large/9658_9951_large.jpg) instead of away from it. It doesn't reach far. Scythes have been used as polearms, but only after having their blades rotated 90 degrees (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/76/Polish_scythemen_1863.PNG/250px-Polish_scythemen_1863.PNG) to get that crucial bit of reach.


To be honest, when I DM, I'll be sticking to my previous stance, which is that farm tools are improvised weapons.Huh! My stance has been that trade tools (daggers, hammers, axes, sickles, forks, etc) and hunting weapons (slings, some bows, spears, boomerangs) are simple weapons precisely because they're improvised weapons. They're meant for work, but passable against people.

Contrast martial weapons, which are meant for people, but passable for work.

Giegue
2017-11-22, 06:54 PM
[please delete]

demonslayerelf
2017-11-22, 06:56 PM
Man, you hijacked this thread real quick.

Requilac
2017-11-22, 07:35 PM
You are aware that you can delete your own posts, right geigue (sorry if I got the name wrong)? Do not feel too bad, sometimes our pride in our homebrewed accomplishments tends make us all rather boastful. I am pretty sure that I almost hijacked the dread necromancer thread too when Llama created a feature almost identical to one of my class’ features (although, that was a slightly different case). Don’t feel all that guilty, even if you did totally hi-jack the thread you realized your mistake and went back on it. No one is (or at least I am not) going to hold anything against you for that.

Giegue
2017-11-22, 07:40 PM
You can? I have no clue how to delete my own posts, if thats the case....and yeah, I understand. This class has kinda been a pet project of mine since 5e first dropped, and I still feel its nowhere near good enough to post up anyway...its a labor that I've had a lot of love and energy for (I want a true cha-based minion-focused necromancer in 5e, dangit!), so when I talk about it I can get passionate and I apologize.

Requilac
2017-11-22, 08:02 PM
You can? I have no clue how to delete my own posts, if thats the case....and yeah, I understand. This class has kinda been a pet project of mine since 5e first dropped, and I still feel its nowhere near good enough to post up anyway...its a labor that I've had a lot of love and energy for (I want a true cha-based minion-focused necromancer in 5e, dangit!), so when I talk about it I can get passionate and I apologize.

To delete a post, first open the same page that allows you to edit your post (it appears you already know how to do that). Between the yellow “welcome back” banner at the top and the immense “your message” text box is a smaller, but still decently sized, textbook labeled “delete post”. Check off the box that says “delete this post in the following manner” in that textbox . Near the bottom right of this text box there is a small gray button which says “delete post”. That is how you delete a post.

And am I the only who thinks the idea of a charisma based necromancer is weird? It seems rather strange that hanging around reeking, emaciated dead bodies improves your social skills and confidence. I always imagined the process of becoming undead (or raising them) caused one to lose their sense of self and emotional understanding. If anything, they should have unbearably low charisma. But then again, those preconceptions were formed on my experience with lovecraftian fiction, not on anime (which you seem rather fond of Giegue) so perhaps the perception of them is different in that genre. As you could imagine, I do not look upon the spellcasting modifier of Great Old One warlock’s with much agreement either.

Llama513
2017-11-23, 10:53 PM
Sorry about the delay, in responding, I was busy with thanksgiving stuff, I will be leaving the base scythe as it is, as my thought is to match the fanciful representation of scythes. The heavier and special version that are going to be coming will not necessarily have finesse, I will take a closer look at what has been said and take into account the suggestions

endlessxaura
2017-11-24, 10:02 PM
To be fair guys, none of the weapons in DnD are very historically accurate. Swords, for instance, were mostly sidearms because they aren't actually that effective in the hands of a user who wasn't very skilled. Even then, an axe or a mace would deal more damage with a successful hit than a sword would. In general, polearms would be the weapon of choice. Our idea of the gallant knights wading through combat with a greatsword or longsword is inaccurate - Most knights preferred a poleaxe.

That's my long way of saying "A 1d6, finesse scythe is fine for the same reasons a battleaxe and a longsword hit for the same damage die."

GalacticAxekick
2017-11-24, 10:46 PM
Mind, D&D models for small, diverse, expert parties, not masses of half-trained goons. Polarms were the weapon of choice in historic wars because they're straightforward and work well en masse, but bludgeons and blades were ubiquitous in personal defense and dueling.

Though I agree that longswords should be weaker than aches and such, probably in exchange for some versatility in function. It already bothers me that 5e longswords and battleaxe are functionally identical.

Talamare
2017-11-24, 11:27 PM
I just released that this is a strictly superior version of the Short Short

Short Sword is Martial for 1d6, Finesse

This is Simple for 1d6, Finesse, and Versatile

... Also, you wrote "Finesses", instead of just "Finesse"

I would say

Sickle - Simple 1d4, Finesse
Scythe - Simple 1d6, Reach, Two Handed

GalacticAxekick
2017-11-24, 11:34 PM
The shortsword is finesse and light. This makes it viable for two weapon fighting, and therefore more powerful than the 1d6-finesse-reach scythe.

With some Extra Attacks that power gap mostly closes, though, which leads to a weird situation where non-martial characters have the scythe, but would benefit from the shortsword if they could get their hands on it, while martial characters start with the shortsword and gravitate to the scythe as they level up.

Arte
2017-11-25, 08:25 AM
Make it 1d4 finesse and give it reach, probably do away with the versatile unless you add a special provision for in the case you do use it 2 handed you use strength for your attack and damage modifiers.

Ashtagon
2017-11-26, 02:01 PM
I need stats for scythechucks.

Llama513
2017-11-27, 01:14 PM
The shortsword is finesse and light. This makes it viable for two weapon fighting, and therefore more powerful than the 1d6-finesse-reach scythe.

With some Extra Attacks that power gap mostly closes, though, which leads to a weird situation where non-martial characters have the scythe, but would benefit from the shortsword if they could get their hands on it, while martial characters start with the shortsword and gravitate to the scythe as they level up.

Should I make it a martial weapon, my thought was to allow any character that followed one of the Death Domain Deities to use the weapon, but then again if they really want it there are a lot of ways to get proficiency, the weapon master feat and training for proficiency, so I could make it a martial weapon. Should I change the stats if I make it martial

GalacticAxekick
2017-11-27, 02:37 PM
My understanding is that simple weapons include all tools of work and hunt (vs martial weapons, tools if war and dueling).

And my understanding is that finesse weapons require contact, not impact, to deal damage. This is why they are always extremely sharp (never bludgeoning) and very deft (never heavy, two-handed or versatile).

Because the scythe is a farm tool, I'd make it simple. Because it's two-handed (realistically) I'd make it as strong as the greatclub--1d8 slashing--and strip it of finesse.

If you want to push realism a bit, you could make it 1d6 and versatile (1d8), or reach. This would make it more competitive with weapons like the quarterstaff and spear.

Llama513
2017-11-27, 03:21 PM
My understanding is that simple weapons include all tools of work and hunt (vs martial weapons, tools if war and dueling).

And my understanding is that finesse weapons require contact, not impact, to deal damage. This is why they are always extremely sharp (never bludgeoning) and very deft (never heavy, two-handed or versatile).

Because the scythe is a farm tool, I'd make it simple. Because it's two-handed (realistically) I'd make it as strong as the greatclub--1d8 slashing--and strip it of finesse.

If you want to push realism a bit, you could make it 1d6 and versatile (1d8), or reach. This would make it more competitive with weapons like the quarterstaff and spear.

Gotcha, that makes sense

Ninja_Prawn
2017-11-28, 03:03 PM
My understanding is that simple weapons include all tools of work and hunt (vs martial weapons, tools of war and dueling).

I kinda disagree with this understanding. Is a shuriken (i.e. a dart) a hunting tool? Is a mace a work tool? Why not make a miner's pick or a sledgehammer a simple weapon if that's the logic? Personally, I see the simple/martial split as an entirely meta thing based on the weapon's in-game power. That's why I advocate for an 'exotic' category above martial that doesn't necessarily mean 'foreign' or 'weird', it just means more powerful. The balancing factor being, of course, that no one has proficiency with any 'exotic' weapons unless they use the Weapon Master feat.

But that's all an aside. I agree that the scythe should be simple, because that gives you room for a martial war scythe (like the Polish ones in that image you linked).

Twizzly513
2017-11-28, 07:14 PM
I need stats for scythechucks.

Scythechucks: 1d6 badass damage with the light, finesse, and reach properties, because naturally the chains connecting them magically extend so you can throw them out.
Of course, there are also vorpal varieties, and scythechucks that deal extra necrotic damage, and they are perfectly viable options for all of a Battle Master's antics. Let's not forget, also, their use as grappling hooks.

https://www.moviequotesandmore.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/forrest-gump-10.jpgHoly Avenger Scythechucks, Flame Tongue Scythechucks, Regular +3 Scythechucks, Scythechucks that freeze people, Giant Slayer Scythechucks, Vicious Scythechucks...

Llama513
2017-11-28, 07:22 PM
Scythechucks: 1d6 badass damage with the light, finesse, and reach properties, because naturally the chains connecting them magically extend so you can throw them out.
Of course, there are also vorpal varieties, and scythechucks that deal extra necrotic damage, and they are perfectly viable options for all of a Battle Master's antics. Let's not forget, also, their use as grappling hooks.

https://www.moviequotesandmore.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/forrest-gump-10.jpgHoly Avenger Scythechucks, Flame Tongue Scythechucks, Regular +3 Scythechucks, Scythechucks that freeze people, Giant Slayer Scythechucks, Vicious Scythechucks...

That is beautiful

Submortimer
2017-11-28, 07:51 PM
Scythechucks: 1d6 badass damage with the light, finesse, and reach properties, because naturally the chains connecting them magically extend so you can throw them out.
Of course, there are also vorpal varieties, and scythechucks that deal extra necrotic damage, and they are perfectly viable options for all of a Battle Master's antics. Let's not forget, also, their use as grappling hooks.


Axl would like a word (https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/guilty-gear/images/e/e6/AxlRev.png/revision/latest?cb=20160526233911)

GalacticAxekick
2017-11-28, 07:52 PM
I kinda disagree with this understanding. Is a shuriken (i.e. a dart) a hunting tool? Is a mace a work tool? Why not make a miner's pick or a sledgehammer a simple weapon if that's the logic?

Personally, I see the simple/martial split as an entirely meta thing based on the weapon's in-game power.Why not make the trident simple, going by your logic? It's mechanically equal to the spear. And why not put the war pick, morningstar and flail in an intermediate category, since they're strictly stronger than simple weapons (quartersraff, spear) but strictly weaker than martial weapons (rapier, wahammer). Why not put the club and greatclub in a category lower than simple, since the light hammer and quarterstaff are strictly better?

I think the answer to your question and mine is that 5e doesn't organize weapons based on thematic status or mechanical power. It's favours themes and mechanics at random, and sometimes favours neither (Why isn't the pick simple? Why is the war pick weaker than other martial weapons?)

I'd like it to fit both themes and mechanics by delegating all tools (sledgehammers, felling axes, picks, nets, whips, tridents) to the simple category (and nerfing them accordingly) while raising weak war weapons to par with the rest of the martial category.

Ashtagon
2017-11-29, 04:36 AM
Axl would like a word (https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/guilty-gear/images/e/e6/AxlRev.png/revision/latest?cb=20160526233911)

Those look more like kama than scythes. Curved blade mounted at right angles with the blade facing the haft base, short, and a straight haft with no handles.

When thinking about scythes, a distinction should be made between the agricultural tool and the militarised version.

Traditionally, agricultural scythes have a blade mounted at right angles to the haft, with the blade facing towards the base of the haft. The haft itself also has a complex curve to it and a pair of handles; agricultural usage requires that the haft itself not be directly held. Images of the Grim Reaper typically show him (her? it?) wielding one of these.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythe


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzdjOkLQw1s

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/43/de/9f/43de9f174dd921c9104d170938a5190e.jpg


In contrast, war scythes use the same blade shape (quite often the blades were obtained by taking apart an agricultural scythe), but mounted on a straight haft and perpendicular to the haft. Truthfully, this weapon is functionally no different from a glaive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glaive).


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_scythe

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Polish_scythemen_1863.PNG

demonslayerelf
2017-11-29, 08:34 AM
-Snip-

I think the whole Simple vs Martial thing comes down to one question that WotC asked themselves for each weapon.
Could you pick it up and use it effectively, without any special training?

For some things, like a greatsword, the answer is no. Most people have no clue how you would actually wield one(And no, "Hitting things" is not a good way to use it, sarcastic people who may be reading this). A trident? probably not.

How about a club? It's basically a weighted wacky-stick, a 2 year old could use it. Knives and spears? You could probably use them pretty okay. Darts are the only weird ones here, I think, because not everyone can pick up a set of darts and murder with them.


I think that's what they did. I might be wrong with a couple of them, but I'm pretty sure this is it.

Arkhios
2017-11-29, 09:26 AM
Joining the chorus: Scythe is hardly a finesse weapon. Large unweildy blade in an awkward angle at the end of a crooked pole used to cut down grain and hay in wide arcs is anything but a precise weapon (if worth being called weapon at all), and precision-use is what I'd require from any finesse weapon. Finesse property allows the use of dexterity over strength because they are equally lethal with precision (dexterity) as they are with brute force (strength).

I'd advise to use common sense, even if weapons in D&D are far from historically accurate. Weapon properties are not just lego-pieces you can attach anywhere you like. They have a purpose.

GalacticAxekick
2017-11-29, 11:08 AM
I think the whole Simple vs Martial thing comes down to one question that WotC asked themselves for each weapon. Could you pick it up and use it effectively, without any special training?If that were the case, everyone would gain proficiency with all simple weapons automatically. But that's not the case:
Wizards and sorcerers get daggers, darts, slings, quarterstaffs and light crossbows, but no other simple weapons: not even the clubs you specifically mentioned for being easy to pick up and use.
Druids get clubs, daggers, darts, javelins, maces, quarterstaffs, scimitars (a martial weapon!), sickles, slings, spears, but not simple weapons like light hammers, greatclubs or handaxes.
5e might be restricting things for mechanical reasons (to restrict spellcasters' access to martial roles) or it might be for thematic reasons (to support the assumption that a spellcaster's focus on the mental means neglecting their physical strength and skill: that they cannot handle heavier or finer weapons). But it definitely isn't saying "simple weapons are accessible".

And even if they were, a lot of simple weapons probably shouldn't be accessible. Ask yourself, could you throw darts, fire a shortbow or sling bullets accurately with no practice? And in the same vein, a lot of martial weapons should probably be accessible; would you need much practice to crack a whip or throw a net? Finally, there are some simple and martial weapons that work approximately the same way, yet are categorized separately: the mace is a simple weapon while the morningstar and pick are martial.

I'll say again that 5e organizes weapons for a shifting set of thematic and mechanical reasons. Simple weapons are typically tools, typically easy to use and typically weak. Martial weapons are typically weapons, typically demand practice and typically strong. But there are lots of exceptions.

Ninja_Prawn
2017-11-29, 11:20 AM
Weapon properties are not just lego-pieces you can attach anywhere you like. They have a purpose.

This made me smile. :smallsmile:

How about this then: if I specified that I wanted a d6 simple weapon with finesse and wasn't tied to the dread necromancer's 'harvester of souls' concept, what would you suggest? Maybe a stiletto dagger, since I can't really see one of those being thrown?

Llama513
2017-11-29, 12:58 PM
I will changing the scythe later today, and possibly start working on variants, they are going to happen, I'm just busy working on my Saga Edition conversion at the moment

Arte
2017-11-29, 02:02 PM
On the PDF for my class at the bottom

http://www.dmsguild.com/product/225121/The-Sigil

I had made a scythe, I mean it's technically a legendary but the basics of it were like this:

Scythe (Glaive)
1d4 Damage Dice
1d6 Versatile
Finesse
Reach (10-feet)


Versatile: When using two hands with this weapon the wielder may perform a sweeping attack at up to two creatures in a 90 degree angle of the wielder. The resulting attack and damage uses the wielders strength modifier.

In short when you wield it with one hand its a flavored whip.

When you use it with two hands it can put out as much dpr spread across 2 targets as a great sword or axe can against 1 target.

Lastly I get what some of the folks above are saying but really it comes down to what you intend to do with the weapon as well as what is peritable.

Magic things are far more likely to break the game than mundane weapon reflavoring.

Submortimer
2017-11-29, 02:31 PM
Those look more like kama than scythes. Curved blade mounted at right angles with the blade facing the haft base, short, and a straight haft with no handles.


Yes, that is what they are. A dual Kusari-gama, to be precise.

That said, what ELSE would you expect Scythe Chucks to look like?

GalacticAxekick
2017-11-29, 03:46 PM
Versatile: When using two hands with this weapon the wielder may perform a sweeping attack at up to two creatures in a 90 degree angle of the wielder. The resulting attack and damage uses the wielders strength modifier.

In short when you wield it with one hand its a flavored whip.

When you use it with two hands it can put out as much dpr spread across 2 targets as a great sword or axe can against 1 target.Your sweeping attack ideas is unclear, to me.

First of all, is it one attack roll used against two targets? Or is a separate attack roll made against each? You said "attack," singular, but things get messy if both targets share a roll but only one grants Advantage or Disadvantage.

Second of all, how does the damage roll work?
If it's one damage roll per target—1d6 + Str against each—2d6 + 2 Str per round. That's more than the greatsword's 2d6 + Str.
If it's one damage roll split between the two, you'll need to specify that, since no other attacks work that way. This balances out the damage, but also makes it finicky (how do you split odd damage evenly between two targets?)
If it's one damage roll per target—1d6 + Str and then 1d6—it's finally equal to the greatsword and straightforward. But the finesse and reach properties still make it a bit overpowered.

Consider making the attack against a second target a bonus action, like two weapon fighting. 1d6 + Str every attack and 1d6 from a bonus attack is exactly what scimitars and shortswords get, with both hands full and finesse, so we know that's fair. There's still the reach property, though, which makes the attack a bit overpowered. So I really don't think a scimitar should have finesse thematically or mechanically.

demonslayerelf
2017-11-29, 05:31 PM
If that were the case, everyone would gain proficiency with all simple weapons automatically. But that's not the case:
Wizards and sorcerers get daggers, darts, slings, quarterstaffs and light crossbows, but no other simple weapons: not even the clubs you specifically mentioned for being easy to pick up and use.
Druids get clubs, daggers, darts, javelins, maces, quarterstaffs, scimitars (a martial weapon!), sickles, slings, spears, but not simple weapons like light hammers, greatclubs or handaxes.
5e might be restricting things for mechanical reasons (to restrict spellcasters' access to martial roles) or it might be for thematic reasons (to support the assumption that a spellcaster's focus on the mental means neglecting their physical strength and skill: that they cannot handle heavier or finer weapons). But it definitely isn't saying "simple weapons are accessible".

And even if they were, a lot of simple weapons probably shouldn't be accessible. Ask yourself, could you throw darts, fire a shortbow or sling bullets accurately with no practice? And in the same vein, a lot of martial weapons should probably be accessible; would you need much practice to crack a whip or throw a net? Finally, there are some simple and martial weapons that work approximately the same way, yet are categorized separately: the mace is a simple weapon while the morningstar and pick are martial.

I'll say again that 5e organizes weapons for a shifting set of thematic and mechanical reasons. Simple weapons are typically tools, typically easy to use and typically weak. Martial weapons are typically weapons, typically demand practice and typically strong. But there are lots of exceptions.



Wizards... Y U Do dis... U hurt us all with your stupid...

But to be fair, it's easier to hurt yourself with morningstars and war picks than a mace.

And you would probably need some practice throwing darts, but that's more of a three-day period with a bar-darts-master, not a few years practicing with a bow. Slings, too, since those take a bit longer to pick up, but kids do it pretty well anyway.

Also, have you tried throwing a net at someone? It's actually harder than it looks.
And, to be fair, it's easy to crack a whip, but half the time you hit yourself unless you get good practice in.

So, thought; Wizards is using a mix of flavour, realism, and how easy it is to hit yourself when determining what category things are in.

Arte
2017-11-30, 08:28 PM
Your sweeping attack ideas is unclear, to me.

First of all, is it one attack roll used against two targets? Or is a separate attack roll made against each? You said "attack," singular, but things get messy if both targets share a roll but only one grants Advantage or Disadvantage.

Second of all, how does the damage roll work?
If it's one damage roll per target—1d6 + Str against each—2d6 + 2 Str per round. That's more than the greatsword's 2d6 + Str.
If it's one damage roll split between the two, you'll need to specify that, since no other attacks work that way. This balances out the damage, but also makes it finicky (how do you split odd damage evenly between two targets?)
If it's one damage roll per target—1d6 + Str and then 1d6—it's finally equal to the greatsword and straightforward. But the finesse and reach properties still make it a bit overpowered.[/LIST]

Consider making the attack against a second target a bonus action, like two weapon fighting. 1d6 + Str every attack and 1d6 from a bonus attack is exactly what scimitars and shortswords get, with both hands full and finesse, so we know that's fair. There's still the reach property, though, which makes the attack a bit overpowered. So I really don't think a scimitar should have finesse thematically or mechanically.

1. Starting off with the advantage issue, if it is one creature you would have advantage against you could just add +5 to the attack for that creature.

2. As to your second thought, yes, yes this versatile function would in a very specific situation allow someone to use this weapon and deal more damage than a greatsword if they built str mainly on a weapon that is finesse if you use it with one hand.

3. How do you figure 1d4 reach, finesse is over powered? Is it because its named Scythe instead of Whip?

In the version of the weapon I run I do not up the damage dice for the versatile function, I did for the OP because he seemed to want the impact and unless a PC rolls really well they probably wont have enough to pump STR/DEX/CON and whatever their co-attribute is.

In short it is quirky but it isn't going to put out as much damage as a great sword which in any situation will do 2d6+str.

That's my take on it though.

Spread the damage? Maybe in the damage portion just adding "to each target" might clarify it.

GalacticAxekick
2017-11-30, 10:14 PM
1. Starting off with the advantage issue, if it is one creature you would have advantage against you could just add +5 to the attack for that creature.5e introduced Advantage and Disadvantage specifically to remove bonuses and penalties from the game except in in a few cases of modifiers up to 3 (such as magic items, which go up to +3 and no further).


2. As to your second thought, yes, yes this versatile function would in a very specific situation allow someone to use this weapon and deal more damage than a greatsword if they built str mainly on a weapon that is finesse if you use it with one hand.Using the weapon in two hands is trivial. Using Strength with a finesse weapon is permitted. Finding two adjacent enemies is all the player has to do to have the hardest-hitting weapon in the game.

If the scythe were below average against lone enemies but above average against groups, this might be fair. But against a lone enemy the player can use it as if it were the whip, which is perfectly average. There's no downside to justify the upside.


3. How do you figure 1d4 reach, finesse is over powered? Is it because its named Scythe instead of Whip?I figure 2d6 two-handed reach is overpowered. Three ways I could express this.
This hits as hard as the greatsword, but reaches further.
This reaches as far as the polearms, but hits harder
This hits as hard as two shortswords or scimitars, but scales better with Extra Attacks and has reach.

If there was a downside, such as doing poorly against single enemies, this would be fine. But there is no downside. At its worst, your scythe is as strong as the whip.


In the version of the weapon I run I do not up the damage dice for the versatile function, I did for the OP because he seemed to want the impact and unless a PC rolls really well they probably wont have enough to pump STR/DEX/CON and whatever their co-attribute is.Why would the PC need to pump anything? Strength builds can use this weapon without penalty. Finesse weapons can use Strength or Dexterity.


In short it is quirky but it isn't going to put out as much damage as a great sword which in any situation will do 2d6+str.I repeat, it's better than the greatsword when you have multiple enemies in reach, and it's a one-handed reach weapon (compatible with shields!) when you only have one. No downside to balance the upside.


Spread the damage? Maybe in the damage portion just adding "to each target" might clarify it. That clarifies whether or not the damage is being spread or rolled separately against each target. But it doesn't clarify how many attack rolls are made, how (dis)advantage is dealt with, or whether Strength is added to both damage rolls.

I'd phrase your idea like this: When you are wielding the scythe in two hands and you make an attack as part of the Attack action, you can choose two targets instead of one. Make one attack roll and use the result against both targets. Roll damage separately for each target. These attack and damage roll use your strength modifier.

To limit the scythe's power while allowing it to sweep two enemies, I'd recommend this: When you are wielding the scythe in two hands and you make an attack as part of the Attack action, you can use a bonus action to immediately make an attack against a second target.

Arte
2017-11-30, 10:53 PM
5e introduced Advantage and Disadvantage specifically to remove bonuses and penalties from the game except in in a few cases of modifiers up to 3 (such as magic items, which go up to +3 and no further).
This is inaccurate, you receive penalties in 5e for attacking someone in various kinds of cover. You could also just roll twice and take the higher for that specific creature.


Using the weapon in two hands is trivial. Using Strength with a finesse weapon is permitted. Finding two adjacent enemies is all the player has to do to have the hardest-hitting weapon in the game.
This is a nonsequitor, following your logic if DMs run enemies in straight lines lightning bolt becomes more powerful than chain lightning.


If the scythe were below average against lone enemies but above average against groups, this might be fair. But against a lone enemy the player can use it as if it were the whip, which is perfectly average. There's no downside to justify the upside.
Again this argument hinges on a nonsequitor.



I figure 2d6 two-handed reach is overpowered. Three ways I could express this.
This hits as hard as the greatsword, but reaches further.
This reaches as far as the polearms, but hits harder
This hits as hard as two shortswords or scimitars, but scales better with Extra Attacks and has reach.

If there was a downside, such as doing poorly against single enemies, this would be fine. But there is no downside. At its worst, your scythe is as strong as the whip.

I get where you are coming from on this but again I scaled up the damage because that's what he wanted, the original scythe remained 1d4 regardless of versatile or not the only difference was the addition of one extra target.


Why would the PC need to pump anything? Strength builds can use this weapon without penalty. Finesse weapons can use Strength or Dexterity.

The versatile property specifically states you are using the strength not dexterity modifier.



I repeat, it's better than the greatsword when you have multiple enemies in reach, and it's a one-handed reach weapon (compatible with shields!) when you only have one. No downside to balance the upside.


And I repeat, that we agree it is better than a great sword in a very specific situation while a great sword is better than it outside of that situation. We do not disagree here.

Actually you cannot use the versatile property and have a shield equipped. I'm not sure what your argument is here; you can use a whip and a shield and whips are also 1d4 weapon with finesse and reach.

I'm really not getting what your point here is, how is a whip flavored to a scythe competing with a great sword?



That clarifies whether or not the damage is being spread or rolled separately against each target. But it doesn't clarify how many attack rolls are made, how (dis)advantage is dealt with, or whether Strength is added to both damage rolls.
It's an attack roll nothing is stopping the attack roll from being made at disadvantage, the rules of what happens when you attack a creature are not suddenly being redefined because of how you interpreted the targeting.

1. If 2 creatures as you suggest take the same attack roll but one has disadvantage the creature granting disadvantage prompts a second roll and takes the lower or does -5 on the attack roll.
2. If 2 creatures take two separate attack rolls for each on that one attack. The one that grants disadvantage prompts a second roll and takes the lower or does -5 on the attack roll.

So in both interpretations adjudicating the way these two mechanics work doesn't require any kind of lawyering I think.



I'd phrase your idea like this: When you are wielding the scythe in two hands and you make an attack as part of the Attack action, you can choose two targets instead of one. Make one attack roll and use the result against both targets. Roll damage separately for each target. These attack and damage roll use your strength modifier.

To limit the scythe's power while allowing it to sweep two enemies, I'd recommend this: When you are wielding the scythe in two hands and you make an attack as part of the Attack action, you can use a bonus action to immediately make an attack against a second target.

Oh I see well you can rework it however you like, I'm not trying to create a scythe weapon for myself as I'm fine with the vanilla weapons. This was tossed in there as an option for him to adjust how he likes.

GalacticAxekick
2017-11-30, 11:51 PM
This is inaccurate, you receive penalties in 5e for attacking someone in various kinds of cover. You could also just roll twice and take the higher for that specific creature.You're right. Cover, the Shield spell, and the Defensive Duelist feat can all grant bonuses or penalties higher than 3. The first represents a rare circumstance, while your scythe only requires being able to reach two enemies. The second costs a spell slot, while your scythe's attack costs no daily resource. The third costs feat, while your scythe's attack does not compete with your progression.


This is a nonsequitor, following your logic if DMs run enemies in straight lines lightning bolt becomes more powerful than chain lightning.Facing two enemies close enough that I could reach both with a 10 foot pole is common, so the power to attack both significantly increases how useful that pole is relative to other weapons. Facing a conga line or parade, on the other hand, is rare, so chain lightning remains more powerful than lightning bolt.

So you are not, in fact, following my logic.


Again this argument hinges on a nonsequitor.Your weapon is totally average in most circumstances and far above average in others, and therefore above average overall. That idea is totally on topic. How could you construe it to be non sequitor?


I get where you are coming from on this but again I scaled up the damage because that's what he wanted, the original scythe remained 1d4 regardless of versatile or not the only difference was the addition of one extra target.If he wants a higher damage die, he has to trade something, or else balance is broken. I'd remove the extra target.


The versatile property specifically states you are using the strength not dexterity modifier.I know. You missed my point.

You claimed that the d6 damage die is justified because the weapon takes a high ability score investment: Strength for the two-handed mode, Dex for the one-handed mode, and Con for HP. I'm saying that this is untrue, because finesse weapons can use Strength or Dexterity, and aren't forced to use Dexterity. Someone could dump Dex and still get the full benefits of the scythe.


And I repeat, that we agree it is better than a great sword in a very specific situation while a great sword is better than it outside of that situation. We do not disagree here.

Actually you cannot use the versatile property and have a shield equipped. I'm not sure what your argument is here; you can use a whip and a shield and whips are also 1d4 weapon with finesse and reach.

I'm really not getting what your point here is, how is a whip flavored to a scythe competing with a great swordImagine a longsword just like any other: 1d8 slashing, versatile (1d10). But when you have two enemies within reach, this longsword gains the power to damage both with each attack, maybe as if it had the Sweeping Attack manoeuvre. This would obviously stronger be than the normal longsword, right? And by extension, stronger than the battleaxe and the warhammer, since their stats are the same. It would be stronger than all the weapons that those weapons were balanced against. It would be overpowered.

Your scythe has the same problem.


It's an attack roll nothing is stopping the attack roll from being made at disadvantage, the rules of what happens when you attack a creature are not suddenly being redefined [...]Except there are no rules for attacking multiple creatures at once. A few features accomplish this, all in different ways.

The Ranger's Whirlwind Attack, and the Sword Burst cantrip both use separate attack rolls against each target, so (dis)advantage applies normally.

The Fighter's Sweeping Strike requires you choose the order of your targets and reuse the first's roll against the second. (Dis)advantage is "infectious" so to speak.

The Green Flame Blade cntrip requires you to choose the order of your targets and automatically hits both.

Since this is decided on a feature-by-feature basis, you need to explain in your feature how it works.


[...]because of how you interpreted the targeting.
Rolling one attack against two creatures isn't "how I interpreted the targeting". I asked you, and I quote, "is it one attack roll used against two targets? Or is a separate attack roll made against each?" To which you responded "if it is one creature you would have advantage against you could just add +5 to the attack for that creature," implying that one attack roll is made against both.


[...] So in both interpretations adjudicating the way these two mechanics work doesn't require any kind of lawyering I think.Both interpretation were lawyering. Neither solution exists in the base rules.

Giving +5 or -5 instead of advantage is a rule for passive abilities like passive perception, and not for rolls. But you lawyered it in, contrary to 5e's design philosophy of Bounded Accuracy.

Rolling one attack against multiple creatures and rerolling for (dis)advantage individually is also something you lawyered in. It fits 5e philosophy better, but it still has to be specified in the scythe's description.

Arte
2017-12-01, 07:38 AM
You're right. Cover, the Shield spell, and the Defensive Duelist feat can all grant bonuses or penalties higher than 3. The first represents a rare circumstance, while your scythe only requires being able to reach two enemies. The second costs a spell slot, while your scythe's attack costs no daily resource. The third costs feat, while your scythe's attack does not compete with your progression.

Facing two enemies close enough that I could reach both with a 10 foot pole is common, so the power to attack both significantly increases how useful that pole is relative to other weapons. Facing a conga line or parade, on the other hand, is rare, so chain lightning remains more powerful than lightning bolt.

So you are not, in fact, following my logic.

Your weapon is totally average in most circumstances and far above average in others, and therefore above average overall. That idea is totally on topic. How could you construe it to be non sequitor?

If he wants a higher damage die, he has to trade something, or else balance is broken. I'd remove the extra target.

I know. You missed my point.

You claimed that the d6 damage die is justified because the weapon takes a high ability score investment: Strength for the two-handed mode, Dex for the one-handed mode, and Con for HP. I'm saying that this is untrue, because finesse weapons can use Strength or Dexterity, and aren't forced to use Dexterity. Someone could dump Dex and still get the full benefits of the scythe.

Imagine a longsword just like any other: 1d8 slashing, versatile (1d10). But when you have two enemies within reach, this longsword gains the power to damage both with each attack, maybe as if it had the Sweeping Attack manoeuvre. This would obviously stronger be than the normal longsword, right? And by extension, stronger than the battleaxe and the warhammer, since their stats are the same. It would be stronger than all the weapons that those weapons were balanced against. It would be overpowered.

Your scythe has the same problem.

Except there are no rules for attacking multiple creatures at once. A few features accomplish this, all in different ways.

The Ranger's Whirlwind Attack, and the Sword Burst cantrip both use separate attack rolls against each target, so (dis)advantage applies normally.

The Fighter's Sweeping Strike requires you choose the order of your targets and reuse the first's roll against the second. (Dis)advantage is "infectious" so to speak.

The Green Flame Blade cntrip requires you to choose the order of your targets and automatically hits both.

Since this is decided on a feature-by-feature basis, you need to explain in your feature how it works.


Rolling one attack against two creatures isn't "how I interpreted the targeting". I asked you, and I quote, "is it one attack roll used against two targets? Or is a separate attack roll made against each?" To which you responded "if it is one creature you would have advantage against you could just add +5 to the attack for that creature," implying that one attack roll is made against both.

Both interpretation were lawyering. Neither solution exists in the base rules.

Giving +5 or -5 instead of advantage is a rule for passive abilities like passive perception, and not for rolls. But you lawyered it in, contrary to 5e's design philosophy of Bounded Accuracy.

Rolling one attack against multiple creatures and rerolling for (dis)advantage individually is also something you lawyered in. It fits 5e philosophy better, but it still has to be specified in the scythe's description.

So now its down to what you feel is a rare circumstance I can't really win here when the field goals shift at your whim.

I agreed with however you wanted to interpret the attack, it could be one attack or two attack rolls. I said earlier when I run it its one attack roll for each creature in the area so yes again, no lawyering needed.

Okay so in the end your issue it seems deals with one of two things or maybe both.

1. The D6 Damage Die
2. That there is ambiguity about the targeting.

To both things I say... okay?

Arkhios
2017-12-02, 03:22 PM
This made me smile. :smallsmile:

How about this then: if I specified that I wanted a d6 simple weapon with finesse and wasn't tied to the dread necromancer's 'harvester of souls' concept, what would you suggest? Maybe a stiletto dagger, since I can't really see one of those being thrown?

Maybe a punching dagger?
Converting from 3.5, where it was 1d4 with a critical multiplier x3 (potential max. damage before ability modifier = 12).
With 5th edition's critical hits, a 1d6 achieves the same potential maximum.
Besides, Punching Dagger is hardly a thrown weapon. :smallsmile:

demonslayerelf
2017-12-02, 03:27 PM
This made me smile. :smallsmile:

How about this then: if I specified that I wanted a d6 simple weapon with finesse and wasn't tied to the dread necromancer's 'harvester of souls' concept, what would you suggest? Maybe a stiletto dagger, since I can't really see one of those being thrown?

How about a Scimitar?
You know, the d6 Finesse weapon that isn't thrown or a scythe, which is in the PHB.

Arkhios
2017-12-02, 03:53 PM
How about a Scimitar?
You know, the d6 Finesse weapon that isn't thrown or a scythe, which is in the PHB.

Too bad Scimitar is martial weapon, not simple as was requested (also bars shortsword for the same reason)

demonslayerelf
2017-12-02, 04:15 PM
Oh, I missed the "Simple" part. Ignore me lol.

Ninja_Prawn
2017-12-02, 04:22 PM
Oh, I missed the "Simple" part. Ignore me lol.

lol. The scimitar is martial because it can be dual-wielded in addition to being a finesse weapon. Honestly, I'd be inclined to think punch daggers should be light & martial as well...

Arkhios
2017-12-02, 04:43 PM
lol. The scimitar is martial because it can be dual-wielded in addition to being a finesse weapon. Honestly, I'd be inclined to think punch daggers should be light & martial as well...

Very true.

demonslayerelf
2017-12-02, 07:36 PM
How about a Boarding Sword or Cutlass or something similar? I wouldn't call them light weapons, but it's probably finesse, and since it's the same size as a Short Sword, it would be 1d6~ish.

Requilac
2017-12-03, 11:50 AM
Once again, I think you all are missing the point. The scythe was made for a homebrewed necromancer class so it could have a viable weapon to use two-handed or with a Shield. It was Something that was created for a mechanical reason and we suited it to something that was thematically appropriate. It is not supposed to be realistic at all, it is supposed to fill an entirely mechanical niche will still being supporting a theme. Nothing about it is realistic at all, because it is never supposed to be realistic. It is an intentional suspension of disbelief, just like the necromancer class itself. We created the properties of a weapon we wanted to use then slapped a name on it, you all are highly misinterpreting the goals. We are not trying to make a historically accurate scythe, we are trying to make a mechanically and thematically appropriate scythe.



Better question than, if you were trying to be historically accurate, than what simple weapon would reasonably do 1D6 damage and have the finesse and versatile (1d8) property? We just wanted a weapon to fill those properties, and if the scythe is a terrible representation of it, than what else could we use for it?

Ashtagon
2017-12-03, 02:34 PM
Interestingly, it seems that the "two-handed kama" scythe seen in many fantasy depictions is actually historically accurate for mediaeval scythes. The S-curve-hafted scythe (depicted in the PHB that we see today was apparently invented some time in the 19th century.

Arte
2017-12-05, 12:03 PM
Once again, I think you all are missing the point. The scythe was made for a homebrewed necromancer class so it could have a viable weapon to use two-handed or with a Shield. It was Something that was created for a mechanical reason and we suited it to something that was thematically appropriate. It is not supposed to be realistic at all, it is supposed to fill an entirely mechanical niche will still being supporting a theme. Nothing about it is realistic at all, because it is never supposed to be realistic. It is an intentional suspension of disbelief, just like the necromancer class itself. We created the properties of a weapon we wanted to use then slapped a name on it, you all are highly misinterpreting the goals. We are not trying to make a historically accurate scythe, we are trying to make a mechanically and thematically appropriate scythe.



Better question than, if you were trying to be historically accurate, than what simple weapon would reasonably do 1D6 damage and have the finesse and versatile (1d8) property? We just wanted a weapon to fill those properties, and if the scythe is a terrible representation of it, than what else could we use for it?

And with that in mind I said:

1d4 slashing, versatile, finesse, reach

Versatile: When you wield this weapon with two hands the damage dice increases to 1d6 and you use your strength modifier for the attack and damage. You also hit up to two target creatures within 15-feet of each other so long as they are within this weapons reach.

That's a buffed version for a spell caster that might not have enough points to pump Str, Dex, Int and whatever their sub stat is.

If you wanted a more balanced version of the item you could drop the 1d6 and just keep it at 1d4 so:

Versatile: When you wield this weapon with two hands you use your strength modifier for the attack and damage. You also hit up to two target creatures within 15-feet of each other so long as they are within this weapons reach.

Or, you could add the specific class requirement and make it a unique magical item.

I think doing the last thing might make it very fun, cause then you could add stuff that outside of flavor and quirky mechanics could be helpful to the necromancer.

Ashtagon
2017-12-05, 12:59 PM
Once again, I think you all are missing the point. The scythe was made for a homebrewed necromancer class so it could have a viable weapon to use two-handed or with a Shield. It was Something that was created for a mechanical reason and we suited it to something that was thematically appropriate. It is not supposed to be realistic at all, it is supposed to fill an entirely mechanical niche will still being supporting a theme. Nothing about it is realistic at all, because it is never supposed to be realistic. It is an intentional suspension of disbelief, just like the necromancer class itself. We created the properties of a weapon we wanted to use then slapped a name on it, you all are highly misinterpreting the goals. We are not trying to make a historically accurate scythe, we are trying to make a mechanically and thematically appropriate scythe.

Better question than, if you were trying to be historically accurate, than what simple weapon would reasonably do 1D6 damage and have the finesse and versatile (1d8) property? We just wanted a weapon to fill those properties, and if the scythe is a terrible representation of it, than what else could we use for it?

So...


1d6 damage
Finesse
Versatile (1d8)


How about an estoc (https://myarmoury.com/review_mrl_estoc.html)? If you imagine one with a far longer blade than reality and a grip capable of hand-and-a-half techniques, it kind of works.

Alternatively, it lacks any credible way to make it versatile, but I've always thought the urumi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urumi) lacks love in D&D.

Requilac
2017-12-05, 03:27 PM
So...


1d6 damage
Finesse
Versatile (1d8)


How about an estoc (https://myarmoury.com/review_mrl_estoc.html)? If you imagine one with a far longer blade than reality and a grip capable of hand-and-a-half techniques, it kind of works.

Alternatively, it lacks any credible way to make it versatile, but I've always thought the urumi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urumi) lacks love in D&D.

Wow, I can’t believe it, the unholy whip/sword combination is actually a thing. Okay then... I suppose that could work, It would certainly not be a simple weapon though. The estoc I suppose is a good starting point though, that might be a better choice.



And @arte, that scythe is not quite what I am looking for. First of all, it does not have the finesse property when wielding it with two-hands and it does not do the amount of damage I requested, it does much more. And I am kind of confused as to how its “sweeping attack” works. By also hit up to two target creatures, does that mean you gain one bonus attack or you get two bonus attacks with it? And are you making an entirely separate attack roll for each attack or does it use the same attack roll for all of them? I do not really understand completely how that feature would behave. Thank you for giving it a try though, it was a good idea concept to look into.

Arte
2017-12-06, 10:51 AM
Wow, I can’t believe it, the unholy whip/sword combination is actually a thing. Okay then... I suppose that could work, It would certainly not be a simple weapon though. The estoc I suppose is a good starting point though, that might be a better choice.



And @arte, that scythe is not quite what I am looking for. First of all, it does not have the finesse property when wielding it with two-hands and it does not do the amount of damage I requested, it does much more. And I am kind of confused as to how its “sweeping attack” works. By also hit up to two target creatures, does that mean you gain one bonus attack or you get two bonus attacks with it? And are you making an entirely separate attack roll for each attack or does it use the same attack roll for all of them? I do not really understand completely how that feature would behave. Thank you for giving it a try though, it was a good idea concept to look into.

Hey yea,

Run it how you will, I do a separate attack roll much like the whirlwind feature.

In place of finesse you get to do an additional 1d4 or 1d6 (based on whichever you go with).

If you choose to go 1d6 you are bumping the damage of this up to a great sword, if you go any higher its going to be better than any other weapon imo.

I use it as a 1d4 weapon.

If you want to use it for the 1d6 versatile then maybe restricting it to necromancers could balance it out if a fighter wants to grab one. If you don't care to do that then leaving it 1d4 is pretty fair.

When I run the sweeping attack I do 2 attack rolls; one on each target.

And hey, just trying to help, anyway good luck.

demonslayerelf
2017-12-06, 02:35 PM
So, to confirm, a Simple, versatile, finesse weapon, which is 1d6.

I mean, a Kris would be good. Or even just, like, a butcher knife(Not cleaver).
Neither of those are explicitly versatile, but I've seen people(Mostly in movies) stab people with 2 hands with a big knife.




And as a personal note, I think that weapons and armour shouldn't be totally historically accurate. If they were, bows and crossbows would ignore AC from armour and deal a ton of damage.
It's about thematic appropriateness, so there's not a problem with a scythe being not horrible. Arte's scythe has balancing issues, but the OP's scythe has nothing too wrong with it.
In media, scythes are shown(At least in dark souls, anime, etc.) as graceful, almost dancing weapons in the right hands. In the hands of a grim reaper-figure, they cause immeasurable travesty.

Is it accurate? No, of course not. That wouldn't be nearly as fun. Take your weapons with a grain of salt and a pinch of fun and fantasy

Requilac
2017-12-06, 03:14 PM
And as a personal note, I think that weapons and armour shouldn't be totally historically accurate. If they were, bows and crossbows would ignore AC from armour and deal a ton of damage.
It's about thematic appropriateness, so there's not a problem with a scythe being not horrible. Arte's scythe has balancing issues, but the OP's scythe has nothing too wrong with it.
In media, scythes are shown(At least in dark souls, anime, etc.) as graceful, almost dancing weapons in the right hands. In the hands of a grim reaper-figure, they cause immeasurable travesty.

Is it accurate? No, of course not. That wouldn't be nearly as fun. Take your weapons with a grain of salt and a pinch of fun and fantasy

Under the conditions that your comment was intended for me, I actually agree with you and have been stating the exact same thing ever since the thread began. I am even the person who suggested to Llama (the OP) to give Dread Necromancer proficiency with the scythe and created the original stats of the scythe. We were trying to create a weapon a simple finesse weapon that is good for two-weapon fighting and dueling that was thematically appropriate, so scythe is what first came to mind. I am rather well aware how unrealistic it is, I just don’t care because that was never me nor Llama’s intention.

Llama513
2017-12-22, 07:32 PM
Added Chain Scythe, Great Scythe, War Scythe, and Kama

I don't think there are any fantasy variants for mundane scythes, I will add magic scythes later, suggestions welcome

demonslayerelf
2017-12-22, 08:33 PM
So, three things.

1- These are soooooo boring! It's the same thing with slightly altered attributes. They're just carbon copies of eachother, and other weapons in some cases. The Great Scythe is LITERALLY just the Greataxe, only it costs half as much.

2- Do you know what a Kama is? It's a sickle. That's it. It's just a sickle, with a straighter blade. So why is this thing not light, and REACH AND TWO HANDED!? 10 points for making no sense.

3- I'm going to assume that the "Chain Scythe" is the Japanese Kusarigama, because there isn't another "Chain Scythe" in existence. Why isn't it finesse? And how does it count as a scythe at all? One piece of it has a resemblance, sure, but the style(Both narratively and actual fighting style) is so different from a scythe, it's insane to call them in the same category like this. You might as well say a sledgehammer attached to a sword via chain is the same as a warhammer, at that point.

Llama513
2017-12-22, 08:50 PM
1) Weapons have a tendency to be copies of each other, in particular when they aren't magical, especially in 5e

2) I was thinking kusarigama when I said kama, and I am including it as it is sickle on a chain, it is a scythe variant

3) As for the chain scythe, my thought was similar to a kusarigama but a heavier variant of the weapon

As for them making total sense as scythes, that is not the point, they are scythe variants, and going into a fantasy game, so I will add what I feel is a variant on the scythe theme of weapons

Ninja_Prawn
2017-12-23, 05:43 AM
3) As for the chain scythe, my thought was similar to a kusarigama but a heavier variant of the weapon

Perhaps you could re-purpose that name for a weapon like this (http://i.imgur.com/csNnCot.jpg): like a whip but with actual metal blades along its length. The overall effect would be very 'scything'...

Llama513
2017-12-26, 02:03 PM
Perhaps you could re-purpose that name for a weapon like this (http://i.imgur.com/csNnCot.jpg): like a whip but with actual metal blades along its length. The overall effect would be very 'scything'...

I tweaked it to work like the sword used by Ivy, by bringing over the segmented property from my warrior of the dancing chain and applying it to the weapon, which I am calling the bladed whip.

A segmented weapon is one that has been split into sections that are connencted together with a chain or metal wire. This allows the weapon to be extended and to curve and wrap like a whip. As a bonus action you can extend your weapon granting it the reach property, however due to the difficulty of controlling many whipping segments you have disadvantage on attacks against creatures within 5ft of you. You can collapse the weapon back to its original form as an action.

Arkhios
2017-12-27, 05:41 AM
I tweaked it to work like the sword used by Ivy, by bringing over the segmented property from my warrior of the dancing chain and applying it to the weapon, which I am calling the bladed whip.

A segmented weapon is one that has been split into sections that are connencted together with a chain or metal wire. This allows the weapon to be extended and to curve and wrap like a whip. As a bonus action you can extend your weapon granting it the reach property, however due to the difficulty of controlling many whipping segments you have disadvantage on attacks against creatures within 5ft of you. You can collapse the weapon back to its original form as an action.

So... basically Urumi (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urumi)?

spinningdice
2017-12-27, 11:09 AM
Can I just ask a question? What on earth is a Scythe, because I'm seeing Finesse, Light and Versatile being thrown around here and what I picture as a Scythe and what Google image search seems to show as a Scythe is in no way any of these things, not unless you go full anime anyway.

The Sickle doesn't get most of these things and that's essentially a small scythe.

Ninja_Prawn
2017-12-27, 11:37 AM
Can I just ask a question? What on earth is a Scythe

Oh, my sweet summer child.

This thread was never about scythes. It's best to just accept it and play along, rather than fighting the tide.

Llama513
2017-12-27, 11:52 AM
So... basically Urumi (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urumi)?

Yes definetely, in truth my thoughts were pointing me to


https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/soulcalibur/images/c/c0/Valentine.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20080805170106

demonslayerelf
2017-12-27, 01:45 PM
So in the search to make stats for a variety of scythes... You make stats for a Snake Blade.
Claps. Just so much clapping.

(Oh, and Spinningdice, a scythe normally isn't finesse or the like. We had this conversation though, go back to the bottom of page 2.)

Requilac
2017-12-27, 02:13 PM
So in the search to make stats for a variety of scythes... You make stats for a Snake Blade.
Claps. Just so much clapping.


What did you expect? We are playgrounders after all. I am fairly certain most people realized that the outcome of this thread would not be the creation of a scythe by the time we where halfway through the second page.

All i asked for was a thematically appropriate weapon that did 1d6 damage and had the finesse and versatile property, but instead we had to create an entire arsenal of obscure Asian weapons, none of which had the desired statistics. I still don't have that weapon, so I am sad. (*I say this in an affectionate, joking tone*) Screw you all and your cache of anime armaments that are not going to ever be used by the class we designed them for, I am leaving to go re-think my life decisions, and I am taking my oversized Estocs with me.

Llama513
2017-12-27, 02:44 PM
What did you expect? We are playgrounders after all. I am fairly certain most people realized that the outcome of this thread would not be the creation of a scythe by the time we where halfway through the second page.

All i asked for was a thematically appropriate weapon that did 1d6 damage and had the finesse and versatile property, but instead we had to create an entire arsenal of obscure Asian weapons, none of which had the desired statistics. I still don't have that weapon, so I am sad. (*I say this in an affectionate, joking tone*) Screw you all and your cache of anime armaments that are not going to ever be used by the class we designed them for, I am leaving to go re-think my life decisions, and I am taking my oversized Estocs with me.

While these will not be used woth necromancer, the stats for the scythe in the necromancer class have remained unchanged

tarlison2k1
2019-05-29, 06:27 AM
Just thinking
Scythe Simple 1d8 slash
Properties:heavy, Two handed, special#

As for War Scythe they are practically glaive

Chain spike. Martial 1d8 pierce
Properties: Two handed, heavy, finesse, reach,

Special#:can be use as spell focus as staff, or holy symbol for cleric for the death domain and Oath Breaker Paladin or a druidic focus,. note can be use one handed. When use as a spell focus or holy symbol or a druidic focus

I can't imagine a scythe as a finesse weapon, saw some in real life use that, it was clumsy , as for reach the swinging motion didn't give any reach

tarlison2k1
2019-05-29, 06:54 AM
Yes definetely, in truth my thoughts were pointing me to


https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/soulcalibur/images/c/c0/Valentine.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20080805170106

I think that sword will have less damage than your normal shortsword because the structure is not as solid because of its links I will give it

Whip sword Martial 1d4 slash
Properties: light, finesse., reach

Breccia
2019-05-29, 12:05 PM
Second Edition: okay, we have the Awl Pike, Bardiche, Bec De Corbin, Bill-Guisarme, Crusher, Fauchard, Fauchard-Fork, Giant-kin Halberd, Glaive, Glaive-Guisarme, Guisarme, Robert Guillaume (https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0347039/), Guisarme-Voulge, Gythka, Halberd, Hook Fauchard, Lucern Hammer, Military Fork, Naginata, Partisan, Quad Fauchard, Ranseu, Spetum, Tetsubo, Trika, Voulge, and of course, multiple forms of Lances, Spears, and Tridents. I think that's enough blades at the end of sticks for now.

This Thread: Thresh some grain, ferment the grain, and hold my beer.

In all fairness, the idea of a "scythe class" of weapons is obviously rich enough to suggest a group of people (religion? mercenary group?) that focuses in them. If you're going from kama to war scythe, a Feat is called for that gives them nifty powers (such as "they stop doing suck damage and actually hit hard" or "disarms"). Perhaps a D&D group where some main villains are death cultists? Or a Caves of Chaos/Children of the Corn crossover?

tarlison2k1
2019-05-29, 11:22 PM
Kusari-Gama Martial. 1d4 slash or 1d4 blunt. Properties: Two Handed Reach. Special#

Special#: it can be use as two separate weapon one in each hand one do 1d4 slash one do 1d4 blunt, The weapons must be place on both hands of the wielder, treat as using two weapons both change
Properties to light, properties change to light weapon in for each weapons, as a bonus action you may combine it to one single weapon or Seperate it back to normal ...combine it change again , stat is... dmg 1d4 slash properties will change to versatile(1d6)