What weapons should and shouldn't be finesse weapons?

[Witty Username]

Or if you prefer, I should/n't get my dex bonus to atk & damage because...


What are your thoughts?

[Zhorn]

Finesse for melee weapons that you shouldn't need to apply brute force to make effective.

Chop, Bash, Slam, Thrust = STR
Slice, Poke, Flick = DEX

[da newt]

Shouldn't: Heavy, versatile and 2 handed weapons = D10 and D12 weapons. By the way, these are the current rules if you boil them down to their essence. Everything else is just re-skinning/theme.

[Greywander]

I like to make longswords finesse, but only while wielded with two hands. It makes them a bit more useful to rogues and elves.

Bows could maybe be finesse as well, which in their case would let you use STR instead of DEX (like with darts, which are also a ranged finesse weapon). It seems like a good compromise between the fantasy depiction of bows as "fast" weapons used by slender elves, and the reality that real life archers are jacked because of the upper body strength requirements.

[Dienekes]

Weapons that should be available to be finessed.

Honestly I don't really know from a balance perspective. But from a pseudo-realism one, Javelins, Spears when held in two hands, Longsword when held in two hands.

A strange case would be something like a Flail. Which other than being a weapon so rare there were articles written only a few years back questioning if they even existed. What we have kind of found is that they're just strange. Getting the Flail moving initially is like any other mass weapon, so should probably be under Strength in D&D's somewhat nonsensical Strength/Dexterity divide. But once it gets going, you keep it's momentum up by spinning it, or flicking it about to make it easier to continuously use, which would possibly be seen as Dexterity based.

But getting that to work is way more effort than it's worth for D&D.

[Theodoxus]

I like to make longswords finesse, but only while wielded with two hands. It makes them a bit more useful to rogues and elves.


I do this. Always struck me as odd that rogues got longsword proficiency. The other thing I do, is if the player would rather, swap longsword prof with scimitar prof.

@OP I've gone back and forth on just making generic weapons. Pick a damage type, add whatever properties you want (heavy, two-handed, finesse, light, thrown, etc) and apply the modifiers for each property to get the die size and cost. Seems to work fine, but I've never had a chance to playtest it, and can only measure it against the weapon list in the PhB...

[Witty Username]

Spears are what got me on this question, it does have some game play effect because it would allow a simple finesse option other than dagger. And it does fit in the reputation of spears being an anybody can use weapon.

edit: On rogues I personally think a rogue should care more about proficiency for sneak attack than type of weapon. But short version I agree they should be able to sneak attack with longswords.

[Tanarii]

Off the top of my head, make finesse cost a die size and it'll be balanced with most weapons. It could even be "when used with Dex", as opposed to always on. Like a reverse Versatile. Add in a finesse-only for some weapons and make them a fixed die size.

Dagger 1d3 thrown (10/30), finesse-only
Short sword 1d6 finesse (1d4)
Longsword 1d8 versatile (1d10) finesse (1d6)
Rapier 1d6 finesse-only

[Misterwhisper]

Spears are what got me on this question, it does have some game play effect because it would allow a simple finesse option other than dagger. And it does fit in the reputation of spears being an anybody can use weapon.

edit: On rogues I personally think a rogue should care more about proficiency for sneak attack than type of weapon. But short version I agree they should be able to sneak attack with longswords.

I would love spears to be finesse but then:

They can use dex which is better than str.
They can use PAM
They can one hand with a shield.
They can be thrown.
They have finesse
And it is still just simple.

That is too much.

Maybe adding a feat that gives them finesse and some other bonus and it would be fine.

Ex.

Spear Expert

+1 dex or str
Your spear gains the finesse trait or the reach trait.
You do not suffer disadvantage for throwing a spear at long range.

[Zhorn]

Yeah, not fond of finesse spear.
Martial Arts for spear for DEX attacks works, but that has its own controls/limitations in place, and is distinctly not finesse.

[Dienekes]

I would love spears to be finesse but then:

They can use dex which is better than str.
They can use PAM
They can one hand with a shield.
They can be thrown.
They have finesse
And it is still just simple.

That is too much.

Maybe adding a feat that gives them finesse and some other bonus and it would be fine.

Ex.

Spear Expert

+1 dex or str
Your spear gains the finesse trait or the reach trait.
You do not suffer disadvantage for throwing a spear at long range.

Well there was kind of a reason why the spear was the king of the battlefield for most of human history. They are kind of awesome, but you're probably right that for game balance it is too much.


Yeah, not fond of finesse spear.
Martial Arts for spear for DEX attacks works, but that has its own controls/limitations in place, and is distinctly not finesse.

That's an interesting take, since when wielded in two hands a spear does poke and flick quite easily.
Mind you it also thrusts and chops. But then so do rapiers and I've never seen anyone argue that those aren't finesse weapons.

[Tanarii]

Well there was kind of a reason why the spear was the king of the battlefield for most of human history.They're cheap, they're easy to use in ranks without too much training, and they keep the enemy away?

[Dienekes]

They're cheap, they're easy to use in ranks without too much training, and they keep the enemy away?

Pretty much. They're incredibly simple to use. Do their job well. And pretty much anyone can use one.

That's kind of what a Simple weapon that's also finessable and can be thrown would all equate to really.

[Tanarii]

That's kind of what a Simple weapon that's also finessable and can be thrown would all equate to really.
I was just checking out Wikipedia on spears due to this thread and your comment, and one thing that surprised me is that spears are usually either classified as non-throwing spears, or throwing spears (aka javelins).

So in line with my previous comment:

Spear Simple Melee weapon 1d6 Versatile (1d8) Finesse (1d4)
Javelin Ranged weapon 1d6 Thrown (30/120) Improvised-melee (1d4)

I may be getting carried away with new properties here :smallamused:

[Greywander]

I was just checking out Wikipedia on spears due to this thread and your comment, and one thing that surprised me is that spears are usually either classified as non-throwing spears, or throwing spears (aka javelins).

So in line with my previous comment:

Spear Simple Melee weapon 1d6 Versatile (1d8) Finesse (1d4)
Javelin Ranged weapon 1d6 Thrown (30/120) Improvised-melee (1d4)

I may be getting carried away with new properties here :smallamused:
A spear meant only for throwing that becomes an improvised weapon when used in melee doesn't need a new property. Just make it a ranged weapon with the thrown property. Darts are nearly identical to daggers, except that they are ranged weapons, not melee, so you can't make melee attacks with them (except as improvised weapons).

Now, daggers and darts are both finesse, so if you wanted a ranged weapon that was STR-only, you'd need to add a new property.

[Dienekes]

I was just checking out Wikipedia on spears due to this thread and your comment, and one thing that surprised me is that spears are usually either classified as non-throwing spears, or throwing spears (aka javelins).

So in line with my previous comment:

Spear Simple Melee weapon 1d6 Versatile (1d8) Finesse (1d4)
Javelin Ranged weapon 1d6 Thrown (30/120) Improvised-melee (1d4)

I may be getting carried away with new properties here :smallamused:

Which is true, but there is a bit of wiggle room. For example the Dory is very specifically a non-throwing spear. Thing was 7 to 9 feet long, on the heavy side. That said, there are a handful of examples of them being thrown. And I've thrown one before, it's not that hard. Doesn't go too far but you can do it in a pinch.

On the other side of things the pilum you so nicely have on your avatar is specifically designed to be thrown, despite being a bit heavier than a usual javelin and there are plenty of records of Romans forming up with them to make a phalanx and fight in melee.

Were we going for vague realism we'd kind of get:
Thrown Spear (Javelin, Longdarts, etc.): Bad in melee, finesse, Thrown pretty far
Small Spear (pilum): Decent in melee, Finesse as a melee weapon only, Thrown a decent distance
Spear (Dory, Viking Spears, Yari): Decent in melee. Reach. Versatile. Finesse when used in two hands. Thrown poorly.
Heavy Spear (Hewing Spear, Boarspear, Naginata): Decent in melee. Reach. Two-handed. Deals cutting or piercing damage.
Longspear (Pike, Lance): Double Reach. Two-handed. Special: can be used one-handed when on a horse.

But that's way more than D&D would do with them.

[Luccan]

I can see the argument for Longsword being Finesse, mainly due to the fact that it weighs the same as a Scimitar (which is even a Light weapon). I'd also support it only being Finesse when wielded with two hands, since I assume the argument would be that its weight distribution is why it isn't Finesse already (you need that extra hand for full control). Sadly, Dex and Str are very imbalanced this edition, so there are relatively few options you could argue would be mechanically acceptable to change, even if it might make sense for "realism". Now I'm looking at the weapons table again and being reminded how stupidly redundant it is... Why are tridents even a separate listing? Who in their right mind would use a 5e pike (and why do the designers think they're less deadly than a regular spear?)

[Greywander]

I wonder if STR wouldn't be more appealing if Heavy Armor Master became standard instead of requiring a feat. Maybe HAM could also still exist, and stack, giving a total of -6 damage. That's actually pretty powerful. It's enough that it might leave you standing when you otherwise wouldn't after taking a hit from a powerful creature, like a dragon, but also it can entirely negate the damage from some weaker creatures like goblins.

[Theodoxus]

Now, daggers and darts are both finesse, so if you wanted a ranged weapon that was STR-only, you'd need to add a new property. I'm not sure why darts are both Ranged and Thrown... as well as Ranged and Finesse. Finesse is actually allowing you to use strength with darts, if you wanted (though why anyone would is beyond me, handaxes are a die better, if cost isn't an issue - plus they're light :smallconfused:? (honestly, darts are about the worst weapon, period)).

Really, I don't know why every ranged weapon isn't finesse. Hell, you don't even find out ranged weapons use Dex until you get to the attribute section of the book! It'd be nice if under Ranged it said "You use Dexterity to make Ranged attacks". But nah... thank god for searchable PDFs!

As for strength only ranged weapons... you're thinking like Discus or Shot Put? I'd call that property: Olympian :smallbiggrin:

[JackPhoenix]

I'm not sure why darts are both Ranged and Thrown... as well as Ranged and Finesse. Finesse is actually allowing you to use strength with darts, if you wanted (though why anyone would is beyond me, handaxes are a die better, if cost isn't an issue - plus they're light :smallconfused:? (honestly, darts are about the worst weapon, period)).

Darts are the only thrown weapon that works with the -5/+10 part of Sharpshooter, Archery fighting style, and few other things. Light property on darts (and hand crossbows) is most likely a leftover from the playtest phase where some thing (presumably TWF) worked differently.


Really, I don't know why every ranged weapon isn't finesse.

Because how is strength helping you when you shoot.... well, anything but a longbow, really?


Hell, you don't even find out ranged weapons use Dex until you get to the attribute section of the book! It'd be nice if under Ranged it said "You use Dexterity to make Ranged attacks". But nah... thank god for searchable PDFs!

It's in the combat chapter, where it belongs: "Ability Modifier: The ability modifier used for a melee weapon attack is Strength, and the ability modifier used for a ranged weapon attack is Dexterity. Weapons that have the finesse or thrown property break this rule. Some spells also require an attack roll. The ability modifier used for a spell attack depends on the spellcasting ability of the spellcaster."

[stoutstien]

I wouldn't hate longbows and heavy crossbows having the finesse property.

[Tanarii]

I wouldn't hate longbows and heavy crossbows having the finesse property.
How are you use it Str to hit and damage with a Heavy Crossbow?

Actually, I wouldn't hate:
- finesse only giving Dex to attacks, still uses Str to damage
- bows do Str to damage, but only if you pay x(1+mod) for the weapon and no one of lesser Str mod can use it after that.
- crossbows not using any ability score to damage, but crank up the damage die to d10 and d12. Or even d20 for a heavy, but slow down the rate of fire.

[stoutstien]

How are you use it Str to hit and damage with a Heavy Crossbow?

Actually, I wouldn't hate:
- finesse only giving Dex to attacks, still uses Str to damage
- bows do Str to damage, but only if you pay x(1+mod) for the weapon and no one of lesser Str mod can use it after that.
- crossbows not using any ability score to damage, but crank up the damage die to d10 and d12. Or even d20 for a heavy, but slow down the rate of fire.
I think the strength would best represent how hard it is to actually load and aim a crossbow that is nearly 20 Lbs which is closer to the weight of arbalest.

I do like your ideas I just didn't want to add more complexity to the game with X stat to attack and Y stat to damage.

[Tanarii]

I think the strength would best represent how hard it is to actually load and aim a crossbow that is nearly 20 Lbs which is closer to the weight of arbalest.

I do like your ideas I just didn't want to add more complexity to the game with X stat to attack and Y stat to damage.
Gotcha. Yes that's a good way to abstract minimum Str requirements. But only if they don't work with Dex. Otherwise a Str 10 Dex 18 char has no problem with a 18 lb (PHB weight) arbalest and the logic falls apart.

Of course, it already falls apart when you're allowing it to fire a bolt every 6 seconds.

[Dienekes]

How are you use it Str to hit and damage with a Heavy Crossbow?

Actually, I wouldn't hate:
- finesse only giving Dex to attacks, still uses Str to damage
- bows do Str to damage, but only if you pay x(1+mod) for the weapon and no one of lesser Str mod can use it after that.
- crossbows not using any ability score to damage, but crank up the damage die to d10 and d12. Or even d20 for a heavy, but slow down the rate of fire.

If we’re going to readjust all the stats. I’m not really certain what bows have to do with Dexterity at all. By the PHB dexterity is agility, reflex, balance, and poise. None of which have anything to do with aiming. By skills we also can add manual dexterity to the list, which at least makes sense since dexterity is the name. But I’ve shot guns and loosed arrows my manual dexterity was irrelevant.

If anything my awareness and intuition were much more relevant to aiming the blasted things. Which would put it under the purview of Wisdom.

That said I haven’t made this change in my own home brew rules for obvious reasons. But I have created the Str to damage warbow. And I’ve modeled crossbows on the SWSE blasters. Meaning they do not add attributes to damage but have much higher base damage. Which I think works pretty well at modeling the idea that crossbows (and guns) are relatively much easier to use. But a master of bows can out damage them if they’re willing to put the effort in. Or in D&D terms if they get about 18 in dex they start overtaking them in anything except crit-fisher builds.

[stoutstien]

Gotcha. Yes that's a good way to abstract minimum Str requirements. But only if they don't work with Dex. Otherwise a Str 10 Dex 18 char has no problem with a 18 lb (PHB weight) arbalest and the logic falls apart.

Of course, it already falls apart when you're allowing it to fire a bolt every 6 seconds.

very true. in my pie in the sky ideal game system i think completely moving away from ability scores as a whole would address a lot of the things that bug me about trying to let players make the character they envision. don't think that is a cow up for slaughter anytime soon.

[greenstone]

No bludgeoning weapons.

Blunt object != finesse.

[Dienekes]

No bludgeoning weapons.

Blunt object != finesse.

This reminds me. Quarterstaves and nunchaku (some kind of special club?) should potentially also be finesse.

[stoutstien]

No bludgeoning weapons.

Blunt object != finesse.

There are 1000s of people who purchase Mall Ninja nunchucks with bruised shins and shattered egos that might disagree with this.

[Blood of Gaea]

I think it would be best to do it with a feat, or half feat. Something like: +1 Dex, non-heavy or special weapons become versatile, and probably some other minor benefit.

Perhaps ping off of Revenant Blade and give +1 AC when not wielding a shield? A 1d4+Dex bonus action attack might be overtuned.


With that, under idead circumstances your weapon damage roll is going up by an average of 1, which is neglible, but it open doors for flavor, as well as actually having a good reason to primarily wield a versatile weapon in two hands.

[Samayu]

If we’re going to readjust all the stats. I’m not really certain what bows have to do with Dexterity at all. By the PHB dexterity is agility, reflex, balance, and poise. None of which have anything to do with aiming. By skills we also can add manual dexterity to the list, which at least makes sense since dexterity is the name. But I’ve shot guns and loosed arrows my manual dexterity was irrelevant.
While it doesn't mention it in the 5e book, dexterity has always been assumed to include hand-eye coordination. So a good dexterity would increase not only your ability to hit, but the damage, since you'd be able to better aim at a vulnerable spot. I get what you're saying about your ability to recognize the vulnerable spots using a mental attribute, but that shouldn't take an ability check.

[HappyDaze]

No bludgeoning weapons.

Blunt object != finesse.

I take it you've never seen an artist with training in Arnis/Kali/Escrima or Silat go at it with a baton then? It's far more about precision, speed, and finesse than sheer power.

[Spiritchaser]

Off the top of my head, make finesse cost a die size and it'll be balanced with most weapons. It could even be "when used with Dex", as opposed to always on. Like a reverse Versatile. Add in a finesse-only for some weapons and make them a fixed die size.

Dagger 1d3 thrown (10/30), finesse-only
Short sword 1d6 finesse (1d4)
Longsword 1d8 versatile (1d10) finesse (1d6)
Rapier 1d6 finesse-only

This could lead to some pretty strange polearm mastery swashbucklers with spears.

I’m not actually sure this is broken at all because the play style is probably pretty high risk for a rogue, plus you could actually do a pretty good Oberon Martell that way (which is currently surprisingly irritating to do well at the moment)

But you would be opening up a fairly reliable path to getting multiple sneak attacks per round with a single class character with no team support... and it could start working at level 3 or 4.

Not necessarily wrong, but certainly worth thinking carefully about the risk/ reward.

[Tanarii]

This could lead to some pretty strange polearm mastery swashbucklers with spears.


Spear simple weapon 1d4 thrown 20/60 versatile (1d6) finesse (1d3)

Or a martial weapon with a die bump. Or remove thrown and bump it up a die. It's still superior to a short sword.

[Spiritchaser]

Spear simple weapon 1d4 thrown 20/60 versatile (1d6) finesse (1d3)

Or a martial weapon with a die bump. Or remove thrown and bump it up a die. It's still superior to a short sword.

It’s not the die sizes, it’s the interaction of a finesse polearm with polearm mastery and sneak attack.

Edit: and again, not actually sure it’s wrong, since to make this work you need to either be a high level arcane trickster for invisibility, have party support, MC sorcerer (or whatever) or, most interestingly, be a swashbuckler and behave in a frontline manner on a chassis that can’t totally handle it. That might be ok.

[Tanarii]

It’s not the die sizes, it’s the interaction of a finesse polearm with polearm mastery and sneak attack.
Add something to Polearm mastery that it only works with Str based attacks.

[Spiritchaser]

Add something to Polearm mastery that it only works with Str based attacks.

Or CHA or INT?

No reason to kick Battlesmiths and hexblades.

Again, I’m not actually sure that this is wrong... just worth some careful thought

Edit: I’m indirectly presuming that heavy weapons wouldn’t be valid choices here. If they were, then an inquisitive rogue with PAM, sentinel and a halberd could work.

[Gryndle]

I like to make longswords finesse, but only while wielded with two hands. It makes them a bit more useful to rogues and elves.

Bows could maybe be finesse as well, which in their case would let you use STR instead of DEX (like with darts, which are also a ranged finesse weapon). It seems like a good compromise between the fantasy depiction of bows as "fast" weapons used by slender elves, and the reality that real life archers are jacked because of the upper body strength requirements.

I appreciate the complement, but I am in no means "jacked". 100 shots w 50lb twice a week when possible, at ranges from 50' (too expensive, i split my own arrows) to 100 yards (where'd the target go?). My neurologist told me to get back into archery a year ago. As activities like that have show some benefit for illnesses like mine.

I def agree in spirit, that bows have a STR component though. If it wouldn't be another shot to martials I would say they use DEX to hit and STR damage. For me it is one of those things where realism is going to interfere with the game in a negative way

[Morty]

From a balance point of view, it's probably best to make sure two-handed weapons can't be finesse. I'm not sure about versatile, but it's not as if the versatile tag is ever relevant - then again, if there's no two-handed melee weapons, the versatile ones are the next best thing. On the yet other hand, it's not as if the difference between a d8 and d10 weapon is particularly notable. To keep rogues' damage consistent, it's best to say they can only use Sneak Attack with one-handed and ranged weapons, whether they're finesse or not.

From a thematic point of view, absolutely every shape of weapon should be allowed to have the finesse tag, provided the rules add up. Axes, maces, spears, staves... why not? What do we lose by allowing more character concepts, exactly? I played a halfling fighter with a rapier reskinned as a spear and a shield and the game somehow didn't explode. My rogue had a "rapier" that was in fact a hatchet which she used when she had to fight in melee (which wasn't often). Once again, her character sheet didn't catch fire (well, the sheet was on Roll20, but the servers didn't melt either).

[HappyDaze]

I def agree in spirit, that bows have a STR component though. If it wouldn't be another shot to martials I would say they use DEX to hit and STR damage. For me it is one of those things where realism is going to interfere with the game in a negative way

I wish all classes were MAD. Give people reasons to value all attributes for all characters (even if not all are equally important for all). However, that's not 5e.

[Yakmala]

The longsword is a really odd case. Of the martial weapons, Rogues are specifically allowed to use Hand Crossbows, Rapiers, Shortswords and Longswords. Among those, only Longsword cannot be used with Sneak Attack.

This seems like an oversight. The question is, was the oversight not making the longsword a finesse weapon or was the oversight giving Rogues longsword proficiency in the first place? And why was the Rogue not given proficiency with the Scimitar, which is both light and a finesse weapon?

[Luccan]

The longsword is a really odd case. Of the martial weapons, Rogues are specifically allowed to use Hand Crossbows, Rapiers, Shortswords and Longswords. Among those, only Longsword cannot be used with Sneak Attack.

This seems like an oversight. The question is, was the oversight not making the longsword a finesse weapon or was the oversight giving Rogues longsword proficiency in the first place? And why was the Rogue not given proficiency with the Scimitar, which is both light and a finesse weapon?

I've been told Rogues have longsword proficiency so they can use the fighter's old stuff. And that this was a thing in the older editions. Like, old-old, not 3.X. It's a bit of a weird situation, though, because that's one of those things about old-school D&D that hasn't survived very well into the modern day; few modern tables won't somehow outfit everyone interested in physical combat with a magic weapon suited to their fighting style. And being outside your fighting style is much worse for a Rogue in 5e, since SA is easier to get than Backstab was for Thief.

[jas61292]

From a mechanical perspective, I think anything with a d4 or d6 can be finesse, as least as long as you are not stacking every other beneficial property on top of it. Handaxes that are d6, thrown and light are fine not being finesse, while the dagger which is the same but with a smaller die is perfect for finesse. But really, in the d6 and lower range, I really don't care.

If I am to take any bold stance on finesse weapons, its the rapiers should not exist. That is to say, no d8 weapon should be finesse. Dex has enough benefits as is. You want to use it? Use a smaller die. And if you like rapiers? Great, call your short sword a rapier. That's what people who like tons of other weapons have to do already. Small damage die weapon can use Dex, big damage dies use strength. That's how it should be.

[greenstone]

I take it you've never seen an artist with training in Arnis/Kali/Escrima or Silat go at it with a baton then? It's far more about precision, speed, and finesse than sheer power.

I have and I still stand by my comment.

[Luccan]

From a mechanical perspective, I think anything with a d4 or d6 can be finesse, as least as long as you are not stacking every other beneficial property on top of it. Handaxes that are d6, thrown and light are fine not being finesse, while the dagger which is the same but with a smaller die is perfect for finesse. But really, in the d6 and lower range, I really don't care.

If I am to take any bold stance on finesse weapons, its the rapiers should not exist. That is to say, no d8 weapon should be finesse. Dex has enough benefits as is. You want to use it? Use a smaller die. And if you like rapiers? Great, call your short sword a rapier. That's what people who like tons of other weapons have to do already. Small damage die weapon can use Dex, big damage dies use strength. That's how it should be.

I don't think it's that big a deal. Rapier doesn't work for TWF without a feat, so it's not particularly good for most melee rogues, who will get a lot more out of two shortswords. I think it's mostly set up how it is so Dex warriors aren't required to go TWF or Archery (or so that Archers can fight with a shield if they want).

[Willie the Duck]

The entire Dex/Str split in D&D is gamist artifice. Both qualities IRL are helpful in wielding weapons (a game like GURPS, where for all weapons Dex influences your to-hit and Str influences damage, is probably more logical). D&D making a special exception through the monk class (+kensai archetype) where XYZ is dex-based for-martial-artists-only only adds to the confusion.

In gamist terms, so long as you aren't trying to argue that your wizard should be able to pick up a greatsword and wield it with their Dex (moving from maybe 1d4+2 with their dagger to 2d6+2), nor for your martial-type to stack sneak attack, PAM/XBE-induced bonus action attacks, SS/GWM -5/+10, along with sneak attack or smite, all on the attribute most favored, I don't see a problem. Let a rogue sneak attack with a longsword? sure. Use dex with a Morningstar? I guess. The difference between 1d4 and 2d6 just isn't that big. It's when you start stacking effects that it becomes an issue.


The longsword is a really odd case. Of the martial weapons, Rogues are specifically allowed to use Hand Crossbows, Rapiers, Shortswords and Longswords. Among those, only Longsword cannot be used with Sneak Attack.
This seems like an oversight. The question is, was the oversight not making the longsword a finesse weapon or was the oversight giving Rogues longsword proficiency in the first place? And why was the Rogue not given proficiency with the Scimitar, which is both light and a finesse weapon?

I've been told Rogues have longsword proficiency so they can use the fighter's old stuff. And that this was a thing in the older editions. Like, old-old, not 3.X. It's a bit of a weird situation, though, because that's one of those things about old-school D&D that hasn't survived very well into the modern day; few modern tables won't somehow outfit everyone interested in physical combat with a magic weapon suited to their fighting style. And being outside your fighting style is much worse for a Rogue in 5e, since SA is easier to get than Backstab was for Thief.

In original D&D, there were only three classes (cleric, fighting man, and magic user). The fighter had the advantage of being the only class that could use magic swords. Swords dominated the magic weapons chart, and could have all sorts of amazing side abilities like getting 1/day fireball or 3/day cure wounds or other really nice abilities. It was effectively a class feature. When Supplement I: Greyhawk introduced the Thief class (what would become the Rogue), they got the ability to use other classes' magic items as one of their special class features. Rogues have been wielding swords ever since. AD&D codified the different swords and classified longswords as swords meant to be wielded most often in one hand (relatively incorrectly, the most common English term for that kind of sword is 'arming sword,' and longsword is more closely associated with the 1-or-2 handed swords that 5e uses the term to represent, which AD&D referred to as bastard* swords). Thieves still got to have proficiency in those. 3.5 moved Thieves to Rogues and moved them to having proficiency in rapiers (perhaps moving them more towards swashbucklers and lowering the connotation that they should be wholly crime-themed). 5e gave them back longswords (perhaps as a nod to the grognards they were trying to bring back to the game), but made them relatively useless by making Sneak Attack finesse-weapon only (mind you, a Strogue can still use their STR mod to fight with a finessable weapon and get SA, so it is all muddled).

[Joe the Rat]

Indeed, D&D and its immediate descendants are the only games that aren't agility-to-hit, strength-to-damage.

generally, the dex-based weapons (including current finesse) are about precision - aim and timing. The speed factor is about quickness of aim and delivery, as opposed to the f=mv2 of strength-based attacks. With three exceptions (sling, whip, scimitar) dex-attacks are piercing attacks. Sling is ranged. Whip is a unique case where extreme precision is pretty much essential to make the thing dangerous to crunchy enemies. That leaves scimitar as the odd man out - most likely a gamist inclusion (effing drow rangers).

Now talking about what should be finesse, we are asking two questions:

1) What should allow dex-to-hit
2) What should allow sneak attack

Because these two traits are combined, your choices need to be inclusive of both. You should also consider game balance here as well - Dex is pretty kingly, stat-wise.) with game vs realism. Every versatile weapon is going to be easier to control with two hands. and will allow more powerful strikes with two hands. requiring two hands for versatile finesse means always more damage. Now if you made it a trade-off: 1d6, versatile (1d8 or finesse) on a spear, for example you are getting back to balance.

If we like spear-based rogues.

You could take it the other way - one hand finesses, two does not, but that creates a cascade of consequences.

Now we also could just look at agile weapons (Dex to hit option) and Rogue weapons (Can sneak) as separate functions. Monks justify both aspects: They can dex to hit any one-handed or versatile weapon that is classed as a Monk weapon (or kensei weapon), and what they can use is defined within the class as opposed to being reliant on a specific weapon trait. I suppose that allows for even more arbitrary distinctions.

[Magicspook]

The whole str vs dex thing is incredibly gamey and not based on any kind of realism, but on stereotypes and popular perception of certain weapons.

What réally matters for both hitting and damaging an opponent is skill. If you ask me, proficiency bonus is the only thing that should matter here, but that is going contrary to the way dnd is set up.

[Evaar]

I'm not sure why darts are both Ranged and Thrown... as well as Ranged and Finesse. Finesse is actually allowing you to use strength with darts, if you wanted (though why anyone would is beyond me, handaxes are a die better, if cost isn't an issue - plus they're light :smallconfused:? (honestly, darts are about the worst weapon, period)).

Our party was actually in this situation just last week. Our Fighter had obtained some +2 darts, because that's what was available - he didn't have the opportunity to pick a handaxe.

But the fact that he could use his strength meant he could still hit a mage at range and disrupt his concentration on Cloudkill, saving the rest of us from having to make saving throws when our turns rolled around.

[Dienekes]

The whole str vs dex thing is incredibly gamey and not based on any kind of realism, but on stereotypes and popular perception of certain weapons.

What réally matters for both hitting and damaging an opponent is skill. If you ask me, proficiency bonus is the only thing that should matter here, but that is going contrary to the way dnd is set up.

It is, as always, more complicated than that.

While there is really no formula for how things work, I'd say that in swordfighting there are really these features that come up as important.

Accuracy/Technique: This should be a no brainer. How accurate you are with your weapon is important. If you swing about wildly, it doesn't matter the rest of your attributes, you're not hitting anything that knows what they're doing.
Strength: This makes your attacks hit harder, but more importantly this makes your single strike attacks faster so they are harder to avoid or parry. If you have decent strength you can blow clean through your opponents defenses (assuming your technique is adequate).
Agility: Your ability to move your body so that your attacks align where you want them to go, and your opponent has the smallest window to hit. Is partially useful with getting force behind certain lunges, but not all.
Hand Quickness/Manual Dexterity: Only useful when doing a quick feint or adjusting around the enemy's weapon. But it's pretty much the most important thing when doing those two things.

But it's even more complicated than that. Because while strength makes your attacks better/faster/stronger there is an upper limit to how much you can effectively use depending on your body type. There comes a point where your muscles can actually get in your way of your technique. Famously Arnold Schwarzenegger had to lose some muscles mass to be able to use his sword effectively as Conan, and if you watch Hafthor Bjornsson perform as Gregor Clegane you can actually see times where he tries to use the sword but his arms won't let him close the line of defense correctly.

Now I use longsword. And I'm certain that other weapons have a bit different technique involved. Medieval rapier I think is pretty similar, with more emphasis the aforementioned feints and lunges. And with the modern sabre, foil, and epee the weapons have now gotten so light that even a wrist flick is an effective method of swinging the blade but won't actually do much in the way of damage.

In D&D Accuracy and Technique are represented by your Proficiency modifier. So that's good. But everything else has gotten abstracted or streamlined to fit into slots where they only sorta make sense.

Manual Dexterity has jack all to do with Agility. But they got lumped together in Dexterity. Sort of. A lot of things that actually do require natural agility got lumped into Athletics which is Strength based. Or Dodging which is just an Action anyone can do with no real baring on your ability scores.

And trying to make all that work is just a mess. You can use your Dexterity to your AC when you're trying to parry certain light weapons, but anything bigger and you have to use your Strength. Certain attack types require either Strength, Dexterity, or both to make work. It's just not worth it.