Finesse and Light weapon properties

[EnnPeeCee]

I've been doing a little reverse engineering of the base weapon tables as provided by WotC to try to come up with a set of rules/guidelines for creating new basic weapons. I'm sure this has been done before, but I've been having fun with it more as a thought experiment than anything else.

One thing that is tripping me up though are the Finesse and Light weapon properties. My initial gut feeling was to lump them together into one single property, but after reviewing the WotC weapons, that is definitely not how they chose to do it.
I'm not claiming that the WotC tables are perfectly balanced, but I'm looking for a baseline to work off of, and I'm curious to see if people agree with the decisions WotC made.

There are several weapons that are light but not finesse, mostly bludgeoning weapons. In fact, there are no bludgeoning finesse weapons. So first question is, should there be? Initially, I would've said yes, but after thinking about it more, I'm not so sure. Game balance-wise, I don't really see an issue with it, but thematically it does't make as much sense. Google results in fairly varied opinions on the subject.

The sickle sticks out to me as something that should have had finesse, which I believe is the only non-bludgeoning light weapon without it.

Two weapons are finesse but not light, Rapier and Whip. The whip is somewhat of a special case weapon, so my main gripe is with the rapier. It seems to me like it would be more appropriately balanced against the other weapons if it was light, finesse, and 1d6 damage. I'm not really sure why it got bumped up to 1d8.

Any reasons other than those above not to lump the light and finesse properties together into a single property that does both?

Additionally, WotC decided not to have any two-handed or reach finesse weapons (again excluding the whip). It seems to me like there should be, makes sense thematically, so I'm guessing the main reason is for balance. My google search resulted in a lot of folks with very strong opinions against allowing finesse on two-handed, but in my opinion were fairly unfounded with their concerns. Thoughts? Is it unreasonable to allow for finesse on two handed or reach weapons?

Just some stuff I've been pushing around, thanks for any thoughts.

[JNAProductions]

Wouldn’t a one-handed light finesse weapon doing 1d6 be a short sword?

[stoutstien]

You hit the nail on the head when you said that balance has a bigger factor then realistic immersion when it came to weapon table design.
as far as light and finesse are concerned I think they do represent two different concepts and are worthy of different tags. Light describes the overall weapon property of being well lightweight where finesse is trying to translate the ability of shot placement over shot power.
an example that comes to mind is the humble farm Ace if you're not familiar with it I suggest looking into it its simplicity is amazing.most of them or forge at a very lightweight so they were extremely easy to w wield but when it came to use there was no finesse about it you hit somebody really hard usually in the head. That's where we get club which are lightweight but not finesse

[BigRedJedi]

The house-rule I use is to allow Versatile weapons, if used 2-handed, to use Dex or Str for attacks and damage. This allows the cinematic use of things like spears and longswords, which seems to be the favored aesthetic of 5E combat, in a more acrobatic manner, while avoiding the slightly sticky issue of giving finesse to certain types of weapons that might be used for sneak attacks outside the expected boundaries (spear + PAM being a single example).

As far as bludgeoning weapons that could be light and finesse, think Daredevil's batons. I see nothing wrong with taking an existent light/finesse weapon and changing the damage type between slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning.

[JumboWheat01]

"Light" weapons, which includes things like the Handaxe, the Light Hammer and Shortsword, are generally smaller weapons. In 5e standards, they are small enough to reasonably be used in both hands to allow two-weapon fighting.

Finesse weapons, Rapiers and Daggers, for example, are weapons that reward precision as much as brute force, and with the exception of the Scimitar and the Whip, they are all Piercing weapons. The only reason I see the Scimitar being a finesse weapon is most likely due (in no small part,) to a certain ranger of the drow persuasion.

Rapiers are probably at a d8 to make make finesse characters feel they can still do a decent amount of weapon damage in melee. Bards, Fighters, Rogues, maybe even some Paladin, could do well with that extra bit of damage. As for two-handed? Yes, Finesse weapons lack that altogether, but on the other hand, with the exception of a few thrown weapons, which are relatively short-ranged, Dexterity dominates in the ranged weapon department. Each has their own realm of dominance.

[EnnPeeCee]

Wouldn’t a one-handed light finesse weapon doing 1d6 be a short sword?

Well yes, correct.

What I'm trying to dig down to is how to value the Light and Finesse properties. The rapier stands out to me as an outlier. Since the rapier is 1d8, same as weapons like flail and morningstar, the rapier implies that Finesse should be a "free" property that doesn't effect the damage dice on a weapon. That just seems off to me.

I know any set of guidelines I put together aren't going to align 100% with the weapons WotC put together, since it looks like they didn't follow a strict set of rules for balancing them. But I'm trying to get a close approximation put together.

[Lunali]

IMO, the biggest concern with making weapons finesse is the ability to use it for sneak attack. With that in mind, there should definitely be a bludgeoning finesse weapon, specifically blackjacks and saps, bludgeoning weapons specifically designed for sneak attacks.

[stoutstien]

Well yes, correct.

What I'm trying to dig down to is how to value the Light and Finesse properties. The rapier stands out to me as an outlier. Since the rapier is 1d8, same as weapons like flail and morningstar, the rapier implies that Finesse should be a "free" property that doesn't effect the damage dice on a weapon. That just seems off to me.

I know any set of guidelines I put together aren't going to align 100% with the weapons WotC put together, since it looks like they didn't follow a strict set of rules for balancing them. But I'm trying to get a close approximation put together.

What formula are you using if you don't mind me asking? Rapier falls as a 'standard' option in mine. You want to see out of wack look at the handaxe.

[EnnPeeCee]

What formula are you using if you don't mind me asking? Rapier falls as a 'standard' option in mine. You want to see out of wack look at the handaxe.

I'm still in the progress of building my ruleset, and I'm not super happy with it currently, but here's the gist of what I have:

Start with a 1d8 damage die as the baseline, the plus/minuses are steps in the dice (IE a net -1 from my tables results in one step down from 1d8, or 1d6)

Range Class
+0 Melee
-1 Melee + Thrown
-1 Melee + Reach
-2 Ranged Ammo
-1 Ranged Loading

Handed
+0 One Handed
+1 Two Handed

Weight
-1 Light/Finesse
+0 Normal weight
+1 Heavy

[Evaar]

I'm still in the progress of building my ruleset, and I'm not super happy with it currently, but here's the gist of what I have:

Start with a 1d8 damage die as the baseline, the plus/minuses are steps in the dice (IE a net -1 from my tables results in one step down from 1d8, or 1d6)

Range Class
+0 Melee
-1 Melee + Thrown
-1 Melee + Reach
-2 Ranged Ammo
-1 Ranged Loading

Handed
+0 One Handed
+1 Two Handed

Weight
-1 Light/Finesse
+0 Normal weight
+1 Heavy

If I understand this correctly, you're missing Versatile.

That's where I see the tradeoff of the Rapier. It's Finesse, sure, but it can't be Versatile while the Longsword can.

[MrCharlie]

So I worked something out similar a while back...But first, your questions!

The two-handed finesse weapon is something that has been dealt with in other content-Eberron in particular has double scimitars, which can be made finesse with a feat and have other properties. The main gripe is not balance per say-there is nothing unbalanced about a finesse two-handed weapon unless you let rogues re-roll their sneak attack dice with two-handed fighting style. Irrespective of that outlier, it's as effective as a strength based two-handed weapon with a property, like a Glaive; I would say it's as valuable as reach. Two-handed by itself is pretty much a sheer disadvantage, as the main builds that work with two-handed weapons also require the heavy property, which is separate from it.

As for the rapier-this is, in part, tradition. In previous editions, rapiers were the only finesse "one-handed" non light weapon that could be used with finesse, with the exception of the spiked chain which was a ridiculious weapon; it could trip, +2 disarm, and finesse, and two-handed, and reach, and could be used against adjacent foes, and did 2d4 damage, but was an exotic weapon and thus required a feat unless you found a cheat.

In 5e, there is no reason you can't have a bludgeoning finesse weapon-rogues at least can already sneak attack with bludgeoning because slings exist, and letting them do that in melee should be fine. Heck, it's probably even worth upgrading the dice.

But there is a logic that applies for every other weapon in terms of properties, and basically, beneficial properties decrease damage dice while negative properties increase them. But i'll talk on that in a second.

As for sickles-the dagger is the only simple light melee weapon with finesse; other light weapons without finesse include handaxes light hammers, and clubs. Of those, sickles and clubs are basically just awful weapons; handaxes and light hammers are also thrown, and have higher or equal dice to either of them! The real story here is that sickles and clubs are terrible weapons that only exist so you can 1. wield branches as improvised clubs and use proficiency with them in dire straights and 2. hold a sickle in combat as a druid/cleric, and then never make an attack roll with it while representing the glorious revolution, comrade. Clubs exist for improvised weapons rules, sickles for flavor. Don't look at them when making new weapons.

What that leaves is that the simple weapons with finesse don't have light 2/3 times. It makes sense when you realize light is really a free property, and does not impact the damage dice of a weapon at all. Really, the dagger has the properties of a martial weapon if you try to balance it (it has a d4 dice and two properties, both useful, while the shortsword is a d6 dice with one property, so the dagger made a balanced trade but is on an inferior weapon list). The dagger is just a really good weapon, much like the handaxe, spear, and javelin, which are only one the simple list because they're "easy to use".

Now the formula-

For simple weapons, the base die is a d6. If it uses two-hands, it can do a d8. For every useful property you drop down a dice.

For martial weapons, the base die is a d8. For every beneficial property, it drops from a d8 down one step. If it uses two-hands, it can do 2d6 damage, but every beneficial property drops the dice by two steps.

Versatile, heavy, and light are free properties. The first has no real benefit as the number of times I've seen someone use it can be counted on no hands. The second is a penalty, without feats. And the third does nothing unless you two-weapon fight, which has it's own cons.

Given this system, rapiers do cheat, still. As you can see, daggers, handaxes, and javelins used the martial weapon formula, but are on the simple weapon list, having a free property for their damage dice. A similar formula exists for ranged weapons-start at a d6 for simple and a d8 for martial, go up for negative properties (loading) and down for beneficial properties (one-handed). You can even take it a step further and say that being ranged counts as a beneficial property, if you count them as two-handed weapons (martial ranged weapons deal one less damage dice than they should, but it almost works).

Some weapons are particularly bad, or otherwise cheat but have special properties-Lances for instance, as well as nets which barely work here at all. But this is a good rule for making a weapon in general.

[EnnPeeCee]

If I understand this correctly, you're missing Versatile.

That's where I see the tradeoff of the Rapier. It's Finesse, sure, but it can't be Versatile while the Longsword can.

You're correct, I don't explicitly have Versatile in there. But those rules do correctly predict the 1d8/1d10 weapon damages for a WotC Versatile weapon if looking at the one-handed and two-handed as separate weapons.

But I see what you mean, if you value Versatile as a weapon property, it can balance out the value of finesse on the rapier. Although that does throw off the morning star, flail, etc.

[MrCharlie]

If I understand this correctly, you're missing Versatile.

That's where I see the tradeoff of the Rapier. It's Finesse, sure, but it can't be Versatile while the Longsword can.
The problem is the versatile is utterly useless and never used, and finesse is not.

I suppose it becomes 1% less useless when you account for specific magical weapons that are versatile and you want to use two-handed, but 99% of the time even those are always better used with a shield. Even if you have the two-handed fighting style.

[JackPhoenix]

The problem is the versatile is utterly useless and never used, and finesse is not.

I suppose it becomes 1% less useless when you account for specific magical weapons that are versatile and you want to use two-handed, but 99% of the time even those are always better used with a shield. Even if you have the two-handed fighting style.

Not if you want to do stuff other than just weapon attacks. Versatile weapon allows you to grapple and use better damage die any time you're not grappling, or cast spells, or do anything that would occupy one of your hand while still allowing you to attack without having to juggle a two-handed and one-handed weapon at the same time.

Also, elves and dwarves give proficiency with versatile weapons, but not shields. They may still use bigger damage die if they are wizards or bards or something.

[Speely]

The problem is the versatile is utterly useless and never used, and finesse is not.

I suppose it becomes 1% less useless when you account for specific magical weapons that are versatile and you want to use two-handed, but 99% of the time even those are always better used with a shield. Even if you have the two-handed fighting style.

Usually, yes, but there are outliers. Monks swinging a quarterstaff 2-handed, or Kensei monks using a longsword at lower to mid Monk levels. Not that it makes Versatile a significant variable to factor into these kinds of calculations, mind you, but it does get a little use ;)

[Chronic]

Everything you need you'll find there: dandwiki.com/wiki/Scoring_Homebrew_Nonmagical_Weapons_(5e_Guideline)
Just add www in front, this is my first post and I can't post complete link. I have no idea how they managed to rate every dmg dice or property tho, but I use this method to create every homebrew weapon I need for my games and it work wonders.

[JNAProductions]

That looks both poor and vastly over complicated.

[JackPhoenix]

That looks both poor and vastly over complicated.

The site name wasn't enough of a hint?

[Chronic]

Except it's not on both account. But I guess you actualy have to read it to realize it.

[JackPhoenix]

Except it's not on both account. But I guess you actualy have to read it to realize it.

Realize what? That the only use that thing have is to determine if a weapon should be simple or martial?

I have much shorter "formula" for that: "Do I want everyone who's ever gonna use a weapon be proficient with this, or not?"

[BurgerBeast]

IMO, the biggest concern with making weapons finesse is the ability to use it for sneak attack. With that in mind, there should definitely be a bludgeoning finesse weapon, specifically blackjacks and saps, bludgeoning weapons specifically designed for sneak attacks.

I see what you’re driving at, here, but I am firmly in the camp that distinguishes finesse as “relies more on placement than force” and light as “a person can reasonably wield one in each hand without special training, without penalty.”

But I have long been annoyed by saps and handaxes not matching my expectations. Perhaps sneak attacks should require a light weapon instead of a finesse weapon. Would exclude rapiers but include clubs and handaxes.

[Chronic]

If it's all you can understand from it there is nothing I can do for you.
What this provided me is an easy and simple way to design balanced weapon, I wish the guy who created this explained his methodology, but any experienced player would pretty much agree with the rating he gives the already existing weapons, which means his method seems to be solid. What more do you want?

[JNAProductions]

If it's all you can understand from it there is nothing I can do for you.
What this provided me is an easy and simple way to design balanced weapon, I wish the guy who created this explained his methodology, but any experienced player would pretty much agree with the rating he gives the already existing weapons, which means his method seems to be solid. What more do you want?

It's vastly overcomplicated for one.

[Chronic]

Is it? Because when you look at it, it's 8 step, the last two are quasi irrelevant for most people (price and weight), and the 5th consist in checking where the weapon created scores to determine if it should be simple, martial, or magical which shouldn't take more than 5 seconds (I'm generous).
And the 4 first step consist in simple additions or substractions with values already determined.
Maybe you should reassess your expectations for accurately designing a weapon, because you are expecting a lot in my opinion.

[EnnPeeCee]

Everything you need you'll find there: dandwiki.com/wiki/Scoring_Homebrew_Nonmagical_Weapons_(5e_Guideline)
Just add www in front, this is my first post and I can't post complete link. I have no idea how they managed to rate every dmg dice or property tho, but I use this method to create every homebrew weapon I need for my games and it work wonders.

Thanks for sharing. I'll take a look and see what I can incorporate from this.

[diplomancer]

I believe some weapons (like the flail and morning star, for example), are simply not for PCs (or are there if a PC really wants it, being willing to sacrifice small mechanical advantages for flavor).

They are usually worse than its category equivalents, but cheaper (which is actually a factor for NPCs).

[Chaosticket]

Its interesting how little is discussed about the mechanics of the game.

#1 Light weapons are for Dual Wielding. This is a carryover from 3rd edition D&D.

#2 Finesse weapons are Rogue Sneak Attack and high Dexterity builds. This is a consolidation of 3rd edition D&D rules about the Weapon Finesse feat and Agile weapon enchantment.

There aren't many character classes that can really use these together.

#1 Rogues have Dexterity as a Primary ability score only get 1 attack as an action and lack Two-Weapon Fighting Style.
#2 Rangers and Fighters get multiple attacks and Two-Weapon Fighting Style, but they don't have Sneak Attack.
#3 Monks benefit from Dexterity but lack any other abilities focused on Dexterity builds.

High Dexterity builds are possible, but limited to Rogue-themed weapons if you are melee and or ranged martial weapons.

Sneak Attack has become confusing as it was formerly know as Backstab, which explained what you were doing.

[HappyDaze]

Its interesting how little is discussed about the mechanics of the game.

#1 Light weapons are for Dual Wielding. This is a carryover from 3rd edition D&D.

#2 Finesse weapons are Rogue Sneak Attack and high Dexterity builds. This is a consolidation of 3rd edition D&D rules about the Weapon Finesse feat and Agile weapon enchantment.

There aren't many character classes that can really use these together.



Your #2 should say "Finesse weapons are Rogue Sneak Attack and/or high Dexterity builds."

Now there are plenty of Fighters and Rangers that can use these together.

[Morty]

I see what you’re driving at, here, but I am firmly in the camp that distinguishes finesse as “relies more on placement than force” and light as “a person can reasonably wield one in each hand without special training, without penalty.”

But I have long been annoyed by saps and handaxes not matching my expectations. Perhaps sneak attacks should require a light weapon instead of a finesse weapon. Would exclude rapiers but include clubs and handaxes.

If I were to run a 5E game, I'd just declare that any one-handed weapon can be used for sneak attack, whether it uses strength or dexterity. This still prevents rogues from using anything with a larger die than 1d8 while cutting through a lot of weirdness. When I played a rogue, she had a "rapier" that was actually a 1d8 finesse hatchet which she used on the rare occasion she was in melee. Somehow the game didn't break.

The weapons list is mostly a mess of legacy elements and eyeballing. The finesse property may be the most glaring example, because of how inconsistent it is. It's okay for such weapons to deal equal damage to non-finesse ones if they're one-handed, but not if they're two-handed. I don't know what the reasoning is and I honestly doubt there was one. Maybe the whole thing was just thrown together to look familiar to old-time D&D players.

[stoutstien]

I'm still in the progress of building my ruleset, and I'm not super happy with it currently, but here's the gist of what I have:

Start with a 1d8 damage die as the baseline, the plus/minuses are steps in the dice (IE a net -1 from my tables results in one step down from 1d8, or 1d6)

Range Class
+0 Melee
-1 Melee + Thrown
-1 Melee + Reach
-2 Ranged Ammo
-1 Ranged Loading

Handed
+0 One Handed
+1 Two Handed

Weight
-1 Light/Finesse
+0 Normal weight
+1 Heavy

This looks ok besides missing simple/Martial. Simple probably is -1 also.

Both thrown and versatile are worth -.5 each which is a pain but it's the best I can see doing.

[Chaosticket]

Now there are plenty of Fighters and Rangers that can use these together.

Already covered that with lines you didn't quote.

Light and Finesse weapons are for specific character builds.

[GlenSmash!]

I always found this thread http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?378583-Weapon-Damage-Logic-How-to-Homebrew-and-Why-Some-Weapons-are-Trap-Options to be the finest analysis on 5e weapons that I've seen

[Chronic]

I always found this thread to be the finest analysis on 5e weapons that I've seen

I pretty much agree with everything the OP said Except for the whip and the heavy property. The whip is the only one handed with reach, and with finesse. Those are the two best affix a weapon can have, without any drawback (neither heavy or two handed, and yeah heavy is a drawback), 1d4 is justified. The whip is the apex of finesse weapon alongside the rapier for martial and the dagger for simple.

[malachi]

In my signature, I have my determination of the baseline weapon rules (plus some additional weapon traits for more varied weapons).

As for the original questions:
I'd say it's better to not lump light/finesse together (because of things like light hammers and rapiers).
I don't see a balance reason to prevent bludgeoning or two-handed finesse weapons - it feels entirely like a thematic reason to have that distinction. (Which is why I retained that distinction in my rules)
There's already a finesse weapon with reach (the whip), so there's no reason to prevent that in the future.


Looking at the DanDwiki link, it's definitely more complicated than I want to deal with. The link GlenSmash! is much simpler, and gives pretty similar results to what I came up with, and he identified most of the same issues with the weapon table I did (although he didn't point out handaxes being martial weapons pretending to be simple, and rates daggers as better than I do).