How would you stat an Estoc/tuck sword?

[Spiritchaser]

So let’s imagine a player may have spent a good deal of time playing a certain video game that I personally consider too hard for a uncoordinated person like me to bother with... and happens to want an estoc, an actual sword from late medieval times, which was probably a really really good thrusting only precision weapon. Longer than a rapier it was used two handed and had little or even no edge, and might even have had a triangular (or other un sword-like) section. It was designed to seek out the chinks in heavy plate and poke through to the juicy centre. I’m sure there are many more details but those are the basics I know of.

Clearly two handed finesse weapons would need to be treated with great care, but at least insomuch as finesse melee weapons make any sense, this should likely be one.

My thought would be something like

2d4 damage, however it grants +1 to hit (not damage) against any target with an armour class over X (where x is probably something like 14 to 16, give or take.)

This makes it worse than a great sword against less well protected foes, but about the same against harder to hit opponents. Historically it should likely be better than a great sword against heavy armor, but I’m not going there.

Counterpoint: using the great weapon fighting style, for which it would qualify) would result in lower base damage than a rapier with duelling style, (before you consider that +1, which you may or may not have) and you’d lose the free hand, but going any higher puts a serious strain on the already sub-optimal strength/Dex balance.

Counterpoint: there’s no easy rule about defeating armour due to Dex vs armour due to heavy plates of... whatever in 5e. We’d have to assume this worked against both which probably wouldn’t always be realistic.

Has anyone tried anything like this?

Any thoughts appreciated.

[Kane0]

Wouldnt it basically be a variety of spear?

[OldTrees1]

So I went to find a video to educate myself more about the Estoc before commenting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LoQmuN8sBU&ab_channel=Skallagrim
I am writing this while listening.



I think I would start with the Greatsword stats (Longsword stats = Arming sword. Greatsword stats = IRL Longsword) and be very careful and very simplistic about changes.

For example I would not implement any attack bonus. D&D abstracts attacks enough to not bother with that specificity.

Slashing damage changes to piercing. 5E won't notice that change in most cases but it makes sense.

I am also not sure if I would rate it as finesse. An IRL Longsword benefits from both Strength and Dexterity but the D&D greatsword opts for it to be Strength. From the description of the Thrusting Longsword (Estoc etc), I don't see it as much different in this regard.

There is a Rapier of course if they don't mind it being a bit shorter of as Estoc.

[Greywander]

While there's a temptation to start adding special properties to different weapons, that's a road I'd be cautious of going down. There's certainly potential there, but you'd need to do it for every existing weapon in order to be fair. Otherwise, you risk making something that is heavily overtuned.

For starters, I'd say just refluff a rapier and be done. They're similar enough weapons. If you want something used with two hands, I'd take the longsword and change its damage type to piercing instead of slashing. As a versatile weapon, it could then be wielded in either one or two hands. The estoc strikes me as more of a Strength weapon than a Dexterity weapon (and even in Dark Souls I believe this is true), so I don't know that it needs the finesse property, though that may depend on what sort of character your player is making.

If it must be a finesse weapon, then you might consider one of the houserules I use: Since both elves and rogues get longsword proficiency, and because swords are actually pretty light and easy to wield for less strong people, longswords gain the finesse property when wielded with two hands. This makes them the only two-handed weapon with the finesse property. If the estoc is just a longsword doing piercing damage, then you could easily apply the same rule to it as well.

[bid]

Estoc is a poor war pick because it uses weight instead of haft leverage to deal damage. Maybe the same stats as a morningstar.

[CheddarChampion]

I think a 1d10, two-handed, finesse martial melee weapon would be reasonable and within the bounds of power of existing weapons.

Sure it's 1 damage more than the rapier but by requiring two hands it doesn't allow for using a shield or for dual-wielding. I'd say that's balanced.

I don't know if that would be accurate stats for the estoc, per se.

Alternatively just tell your player to "use a rapier and call it an estoc."

[No brains]

Maybe go with a spear and use PAM to represent a hilt strike while half-swording.

Disregard the need for finesse. Technically the increase in proficiency can reflect using an estoc with finesse.

[Spiritchaser]

Wouldnt it basically be a variety of spear?

Well, I guess that’s a fair question, but it had a hilt and guard, and was basically a solid steel rod with a pointy end. I’d say it was more of a sword than a spear, but I’m not really an expert.

[Kane0]

Longsword or Greatsword with damage swapped to piercing

[Kemev]

Well, I guess that’s a fair question, but it had a hilt and guard, and was basically a solid steel rod with a pointy end. I’d say it was more of a sword than a spear, but I’m not really an expert.

Actually, they are pretty similar to a spear. Estocs had a pretty short run on medieval battlefields, and for most of their history they were used as a lighter alternative to a spear for boar hunting. Almost all of the surviving copies are fitted for hunting; they have a weird pseudo-hilt to keep the animal from running up to the wielder. There are a couple older, more finely crafted ones floating around (I think the Wallace collection has one?), but they're one-handed and probably wouldn't function much differently from a rapier.

I'd use the stats for a spear, replacing the thrown ability with the finesse ability.

It's not like it breaks anything in-game... great weapon fighting style is relatively innocuous, and it still wouldn't work with Great Weapon Master (you need a heavy weapon for the -5/+10).

[Morty]

Longsword or Greatsword with damage swapped to piercing

Pretty much, and the difference between slashing and piercing damage types is unlikely to come up in the first place. 5E's weapon list is too long as it is.

[Lorka]

An Estoc it basically a long sword.

I see no problem with versatile weapons wielded two handed having the option of using Dex instead of Str.

While Dex is already arguably the best stat and don’t need a d10 damage die - I don’t think it should be that much of a problem.

[Droppeddead]

I think a 1d10, two-handed, finesse martial melee weapon would be reasonable and within the bounds of power of existing weapons.

Sure it's 1 damage more than the rapier but by requiring two hands it doesn't allow for using a shield or for dual-wielding. I'd say that's balanced.

Well, not really. Being able to backstab with this is kind of crazy.

I'd say just use the stats for a spear.

[Mastikator]

Longsword or Greatsword with damage swapped to piercing

I can't see this being a heavy weapon. According to google it weighs about 2kg (4.4lbs). Longsword though with piercing.

[stoutstien]

Well if you're trying to have some realistic base for one of these they wouldn't really have the finesse tag. The long ones especially, were sluggish and inaccurate but they had a lot of punching power. I personally never made one but I have made a handful of rondel daggers and even on that scale you can feel every ounce.

I would say the closest thing on the weapons table is probably a piercing long sword

[OldTrees1]

I can't see this being a heavy weapon. According to google it weighs about 2kg (4.4lbs). Longsword though with piercing.

(Weights from google)
IRL Longsword (a 2 handed sword) = D&D Greatsword = 2-3 lbs IRL
IRL Arming Sword = D&D Longsword = 2.5 lbs IRL
IRL Estoc = 2 lbs IRL

The IRL Greatsword (Zweihänder for example) is significantly longer than the D&D Greatsword. Yes, it does weight 4.4 lbs. However it would be a reach weapon in D&D.

[Dienekes]

I can't see this being a heavy weapon. According to google it weighs about 2kg (4.4lbs). Longsword though with piercing.

In fairness there are some montante that weigh that much.

But I wouldn’t go looking at equipment/weapon weight in D&D that way lies madness.

Though that said, I’m in the piercing longsword crowd. There were much longer swords called estocs, because all that word means is thrust and all thrusting swords just got called estoc it’s only us modern folks who like to categorize everything.

Unfortunately D&D 5e weapons have very few levers to fiddle with to design new and interesting weapons. While estocs could be used effectively against mail they were not the most effective weapons against mail. That honor goes to pollaxes, lances, guns, and technically flails but the downsides for that weapon are so high they were so rarely used there was a whole movement claiming they never existed on the battlefield at all, though that has fallen into disfavor. And since none of those weapons get any armor busting abilities it would not really make sense for the estoc to get them.

Now the case can be made for finesse. Honestly, the strength/dexterity divide in D&D is already nonsense. An actual rapier requires more strength to wield than a longsword, simply because all the weight is on one hand. And the early ones actually used for fighting are pretty thick. Basically just longer arming swords. Not the thin whiplike things we see in films.

If your player wants it to be finesse, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. I’d argue that’s inaccurate but it’s not more inaccurate than anything else in the game. And D&D is not about accuracy it’s about fulfilling fantasies. He wants a finesse two handed sword, why not give it to him? I’d just cap the damage at 1d10.


(Weights from google)
IRL Longsword (a 2 handed sword) = D&D Greatsword = 2-3 lbs IRL
IRL Arming Sword = D&D Longsword = 2.5 lbs IRL
IRL Estoc = 2 lbs IRL

The IRL Greatsword (Zweihänder for example) is significantly longer than the D&D Greatsword. Yes, it does weight 4.4 lbs. However it would be a reach weapon in D&D.

Issue is again longswords don’t specifically mean two-handed sword. Now most of them were, they got longer and more definitively two handed over time. But the earliest examples were designed for use in both one or two hands.

Which is what the D&D 5e calls longswords. Which is a switch admittedly. Earlier D&D called longswords a one-handed weapon. Those would be arming swords. But now they all seem to have gotten lumped into short swords. So now there’s no real distinction between a xiphos, gladius, spatha, or arming sword anymore.

Like you’re not wrong, exactly. D&D models weapons so poorly I can see where this comes from. Zweihanders, montantes, etc. should be reach weapons. And pikes should have double reach and be unable to do anything but a poor blunt attack if you get adjacent. And pollaxes should have every damage type.

But we’re kinda stuck with what we got. And it seems the intention for 5e is that what they call a longsword is supposed to be what actual people call a late 14th to early 15th century longsword.

[Spiritchaser]

I would say the closest thing on the weapons table is probably a piercing long sword

I’d say given the two handed requirement to use such a long sword, I’’d likely be inclined not to do this.

I don’t really feel there’s a close match, I’m not at all against something special, as long as it’s reasonably balanced.

[stoutstien]

I’d say given the two handed requirement to use such a long sword, I’’d likely be inclined not to do this.

I don’t really feel there’s a close match, I’m not at all against something special, as long as it’s reasonably balanced.

From my understanding most of he longer ones were used hand-n-half style like a spear or had double stopped ricasso but it is hard to be sure due to shifting terminologies over the years. Most of the stuff I've made or seen has been SCA or other Martial weapon contact related so there's that.

There's a formula floating around somewhere for making your own weapons that will fit in the game. Basically you start with a set die size
(1d6 I think)and you -/+ the size depending on features added to the weapon so weapons get a bump up if are martial but lose one if they have the finesse tag and so on. For a two handed weapon with reach that isn't heavy just take the pike and subtract a die size. Want to toss finesse? Drop it one more.


The real issue other weapon table is very general and the term estoc is as well. I'm not familiar with what game you're originally referring to because I don't play a lot of video games.

Speaking of interesting armor piercing swords, the Jian is a personal favorite.its a mace/sword/ throw weapon that has the overlooked feature of blasting through period armor.

[CheddarChampion]

Well, not really. Being able to backstab with this is kind of crazy.

I disagree.
#1 This would require the rogue to multiclass or to pick the feat Weapon Master to get it, thus delaying the increased damage for sneak attack or using up a feat for +1 damage per hit.
Compared to a baseline of 1 rapier, no TWF:
Estoc, defensive style: +1.05 damage, +1 AC
Estoc, GWF style: +1.89 damage
Rapier, Shield, defensive style: +3 AC
Rapier, Shield, dueling style: +2 damage, +2 AC
Heavy Crossbow, archery style: +2 to-hit, attack at a distance

The 0.05 and 0.09 damage increases are from a 5% crit chance and the higher die size rolled twice.

[Droppeddead]

I disagree.
#1 This would require the rogue to multiclass or to pick the feat Weapon Master to get it, thus delaying the increased damage for sneak attack or using up a feat for +1 damage per hit.
Compared to a baseline of 1 rapier, no TWF:
Estoc, defensive style: +1.05 damage, +1 AC
Estoc, GWF style: +1.89 damage
Rapier, Shield, defensive style: +3 AC
Rapier, Shield, dueling style: +2 damage, +2 AC
Heavy Crossbow, archery style: +2 to-hit, attack at a distance

The 0.05 and 0.09 damage increases are from a 5% crit chance and the higher die size rolled twice.

That's not really how math works, but sure.

[Hytheter]

It's literally 1 damage over what a rogue would do anyway. Hardly seems an issue to me.

[Galithar]

That's not really how math works, but sure.

I would tend to disagree. Can you show proof that his calculations are wrong? Because they all seem accurate to me.

[Droppeddead]

I would tend to disagree. Can you show proof that his calculations are wrong? Because they all seem accurate to me.

Besides you quite disingenuously editing your post? Sure. The difference between a D8 and a D10 isn't one point of damage, to begin with, it's two. You also don't lose AC by not using a shield or not taking the Defence fighting style.

As another sidenote, picking a feat does not delay sneak attack damage progression.

Either way, being able to backstab with a twohanded sword doesn't eally fit the spirit of the game so just for that fact alone it shouldn't be a weapon capable of backstabbing.

[Hytheter]

The difference between a D8 and a D10 isn't one point of damage, to begin with, it's two.

The max damage differs by two, but the actual damage on average differs by only a single point - 4.5 vs 5.5.

[Galithar]

Besides you quite disingenuously editing your post? Sure. The difference between a D8 and a D10 isn't one point of damage, to begin with, it's two. You also don't lose AC by not using a shield or not taking the Defence fighting style.

As another sidenote, picking a feat does not delay sneak attack damage progression.

Either way, being able to backstab with a twohanded sword doesn't eally fit the spirit of the game so just for that fact alone it shouldn't be a weapon capable of backstabbing.

1. I never edited my post. The site records edits with a timestamp. My only post in the conversation (the one you quoted) has never been edited. And your quote of the other poster also matches word for word the quoted post, so was clearly taken after his last edit.

2. As another poster already put up, he was talking about average damage as most people use that as a basis for comparisons.

3. Picking the feat doesn't, gaining proficiency in the weapon to be able to would require a dip or the taking of another feat that is very suboptimal.

4. I don't think it has any conflict with the "spirit of the game" though that is an extremely subjective measure. We're already discussing homebrew, so breaking the standard mold is often assumed.

5. Those were comparisons to a baseline. So comparing having defense style is a valid comparison to look at. If a choice increases your damage, but another choice would increase your AC you can have balance without equality.

Edit: Added point 5 after realizing I didn't address one of your points.

[Morty]

A rogue wielding a two-handed weapon is also not dual-wielding, which means they only have one chance at sneak attack - their real source of damage. "Sneak attack with a two-handed weapon" sounds scary, but isn't such a big deal. Of course, it would mean rogues would have no particular reason to use rapiers.

That being said, a 1d10 finesse two-handed or versatile weapon would have a pretty narrow use-case in any event. A rapier with the dueling style deals 1d8+2 damage, which is better than a d10, while still allowing you to use a shield or do something else with your off-hand. You could use the two-handed style with it, but I feel like it would bring the damage up to the level of the dueling style at best, while still lacking AC.

[Hytheter]

You could use the two-handed style with it, but I don't know if it'd be worthwhile.

It is in fact entirely worthless. A versatile weapon actually deals more damage in one hand than in two if you have the appropriate styles. d8+2 = 6.5. d10 reroll 1s and 2s = 6.3.

[Morty]

It is in fact entirely worthless. A versatile weapon actually deals more damage in one hand than in two if you have the appropriate styles. d8+2 = 6.5. d10 reroll 1s and 2s = 6.3.

That's what I arrived at myself after making that post, yes.

[Dienekes]

It is in fact entirely worthless. A versatile weapon actually deals more damage in one hand than in two if you have the appropriate styles. d8+2 = 6.5. d10 reroll 1s and 2s = 6.3.

That is partially because two-handed got a particularly bad style. But I don’t think rogues get styles naturally and I doubt a two-handed user is going to drop a level or a feat just to get it. I suppose the real decider here is if both sides take optimal feats which comes out ahead.

Not that I think two-handed rogue actually will. I’ve stated my opinion up thread that I’d personally allow finesse versatile weapon if that’s what the player wants. It just doesn’t seem that big of a deal.

And besides they’re already sneak attacking with a 3.5 foot long rapier. What’s another half foot for an estoc?

[Martin Greywolf]

The key to understanding estocs is to know where they came from. And they came from longswords.

The thought process was something like this: oh dear me, full plate armor is a thing now. We used to be able to get pretty good thrusts against partial plate, but the armorers sure did reduce the size of those gaps, these days, you can only get to them if you halfsword, and even then, there's mail in them. Against something like that, sharp edges are absolutely pointless, and the damned things are becoming more widespread. I mean, we have infantry in full plate nowadays! Infantry! And even the not-fully-armored footmen have at least some mail or brigandine on them, and you can't cut that.

So, since sharp edges were becoming increasingly pointless, a solution had to be found. One of those was the horseman's pick or one handed warhammer, or a mace. Problem was, those had really, really short reach, and if you are on a horse, you want to be able to reach out and stab someone in the groin. You can't do that with a warhammer, you have to bash him on the head and hope for the best.

Something like a longsword, modified to be a great thrusting weapon, however... not only does it have reach and is excellent for halfswording, you can use it in a charge as a replacement lance if your actual lance breaks - somthing lances were, at this point, often designed to do. Even better, you use it in almost the same way you use a longsword - you can still cut defensively, or to create binds, and you attack the actual person with thrusts, even if fencing unarmored for some reason.

With all this, it should be clear that the estoc is a weapon designed to fill a specific niche - a backup weapon for fully plated man on a fully plated battlefield. And that also explains why it went away just as quickly as it came - once army sizes started increasing and armor was too costly to afford, more people started to wear armor with large gaps, and your standard swords and sabers were once again reigning supreme. Well, reigning with fancier hilts.

So, what stats should it have in DnD 5e? Hard to say.

Functionally, it's whatever stat you use for a two-handed sword, but with piercing damage replacing the slashing.

Is it finesse? I mean, not really? I'd argue that longswords are finesse weapons in the first place, and an estoc is no more or less finesse'd than that.

The primary use of estoc, as a halfswording anti-armor weapon that counts on you having a full plate armor on, can't be modelled by DnD without homebrew.

As for the one handed estocs... it's a rapier. It's a rapier with a slightly different hilt that is not as protective because it counts on you having a gauntlet. Give it rapier stats.

[Hytheter]

That is partially because two-handed got a particularly bad style.

Yup! If I was building a two-hand fighter, GWF would not be my first or even second or third choice for a fighting style.

[moonfly7]

Longsword or Greatsword with damage swapped to piercing


Pretty much, and the difference between slashing and piercing damage types is unlikely to come up in the first place. 5E's weapon list is too long as it is.


I can't see this being a heavy weapon. According to google it weighs about 2kg (4.4lbs). Longsword though with piercing.
Definitely needs to be a piercing long/great sword, no other stat changes. 5e isn't designed for major weapon stats. The room to work without throwing off balance is very minimal when it comes to weapons homebrew. I love making realistic weapons and they're what drew me to RPGs, but 5e is not the kind of game where you can let a weapons realism effect stats very much. Literally just swapping the damage type is going to give your guy what he wants and minimize the issues it causes. Making this not heavy or finesse is going to have consequences. There's a reason we don't already have a d10 finesse weapon. Mainly rogues. But also because it balances out dex fighters who have high AC and good attack. Giving them a high damage weapon as well could be an issue.
So stick to mostly flavor changes, especially for any variety of sword, since 90% of swords got into the general categories in the PHB.

Only time real homebrew comes up with weapons is when your players want a ball'n chain or an atlatl or something else that can't just be a reflavored weapon. And even then, atlatl is basically just a one handed longbow(for dnd purposes, not actually in real life. Don't kill me ancient weapons enthusiasts).

[Hytheter]

There's a reason we don't already have a d10 finesse weapon. Mainly rogues. But also because it balances out dex fighters who have high AC and good attack. Giving them a high damage weapon as well could be an issue.

As we've covered, the damage difference for rogues is an entire 1 point and a fighter would actually be worse off. There may well be a reason for the lack of finesse two handers, but balance ain't it.

[Morty]

The balance between finesse and non-finesse weapons is difficult to nail down, because there's no real consistency. A dexterity-focused character can't use a two-handed weapon, but if they stick to one-handed weapons, their damage is identical to a strength-focused one. The versatile tag is largely inconsequential, as explained before - so a longsword/battlaxe and a rapier are functionally identical most of the time. This is compounded by two-handed weapons having a poor fighting style... but then they've got a very strong feat.

[greenstone]

I think a 1d10, two-handed, finesse martial melee weapon would be reasonable and within the bounds of power of existing weapons.

Right up until you see a great weapon master rogue monk…

[stoutstien]

Right up until you see a great weapon master rogue monk…

I'm guessing you are referring to the new feature focus aim or something? That would get expensive fast.

[Galithar]

Right up until you see a great weapon master rogue monk…

That actually isn't scary. GWM would reduce a rogues damage output by butchering their accuracy. +10 damage is nothing compared to +5d6 damage.

Also, it wouldn't actually work. GWM requires the heavy trait for that.

[Hytheter]

Right up until you see a great weapon master rogue monk…

Doesn't sound very scary to me. The weapon doesn't work with the relevant part of the feat because it isn't heavy.

edit: oh, beaten to it by an entire day. What I get for replying before finishing reading the thread.

[N810]

I'd count it as a longsword with finesse and versatile, but it only does piecing damage.
(d8 one handed, d10 two handed)

[Morty]

It's interesting how "two-handed/versatile finesse weapon" provokes a knee-jerk "this isn't right" reaction, because it's not something D&D has ever done. Then you look at how it would actually work in play and see it might not be even useful, much less overpowered.

[OldTrees1]

It's interesting how "two-handed/versatile finesse weapon" provokes a knee-jerk "this isn't right" reaction, because it's not something D&D has ever done. Then you look at how it would actually work in play and see it might not be even useful, much less overpowered.

That would be interesting however it is not the whole picture

1) I see many reactions that are not "knee-jerk" reactions. Unless you are focusing on that weird subthread about a Rogue/Monk multiclass?
2) D&D has done two-handed/versatile finesse weapons before. 3E had an Elven greatsword that was finesse.
3) The objective, as I understand it, is an Estoc, not a two-handed finesse weapon. There is evidence that thrusting longswords* (versatile piercing sword) would be similar to other non-finesse swords like longsword and greatsword.

*Video on the Estoc and Tuck swords: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LoQ...nel=Skallagrim

However I think you are right that it would not be overpowered. It would buff Dex warrior damage. I think it would be wise to buff Str warriors to compensate. But that buff is not an overpowering buff. I just don't think it would be an Estoc.

[Darzil]

There is at least one 5e versatile finesse weapon : https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/sun-blade

[JackPhoenix]

There is at least one 5e versatile finesse weapon : https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/sun-blade

And some moonblades can get finesse property. Though neither is something you should rely on.

There's also the double-bladed scimitar with the Revenant Blade feat, though that's two-handed, not versatile (also 2d4, which is better than d8, but worse than d10), if you're playing Eberron.