Finesse weapons

To be honest, it's starting to look to me like the list is getting bigger, as more people rule that their favourite weapon should be a finesse weapon. I'm not going to do that here, despite being an advocate of the German/Italian longsword fighting style.

I would suggest that the only weapons that should really be finesse are ones that you require no more strength than that required to hold it up (since strength doesn't play a part at all in the use of these weapons). That would be the dagger and shortsword/rapier - piercing weapons. All you really need to do with a rapier is point it at someone and let them walk onto it, but with a katana or scimitar, you still have to swing it.

Anything that does blunt or slashing damage - even the katana - is going to require some strength to swing it. All weapons require dexterity of some sort, and tbh, I think it's long been a flaw in D&D that a weapon's attack bonus depends entirely on strength and not at all on dexterity, because I could make the case that even a two-handed sword requires some dexterity (contrary to popular belief, you don't just whirl it around like a brute - that'll get you absolutely nowhere).

So, how about, instead of attack/damage bonuses, we simply rule that the base attack bonus is half-strength + half-dex (rounded down) for ALL weapons, and finesse weapons are a special type of weapon that rogues can use (since they can't use martial weapon)?

Alternatively, it could be argued that bigger weapons require more strength to lift, maneuver and swing effectively (because a weakling could not swing a two-hander - but he might be able to use a rapier). Smaller weapons are easier to wave around, which is why they decided to go the finesse route...but I think it's unreasonable to decide that it either requires all dex and no strength, or the other way round.

So, we could say:

Finesse weapons: entirely dexterity
Simple and Martial weapons: half strength, half dex
Heavy weapons: entirely strength
Everything expressed in this post is my opinion, and should be taken as such. I can not declare myself to be the supreme authority on all matters...even though I am right!
I think Finesse should be a Weapon Property instead of a Weapon Category.

A Sun Cleric currently isn't even proficient with the dagger for exemple because its a Finesse Weapon.  

I would suggest that the only weapons that should really be finesse are ones that you require no more strength than that required to hold it up (since strength doesn't play a part at all in the use of these weapons). That would be the dagger and shortsword/rapier - piercing weapons. All you really need to do with a rapier is point it at someone and let them walk onto it, but with a katana or scimitar, you still have to swing it.



Theses are good points. 

 Alternatively, it could be argued that bigger weapons require more strength to lift, maneuver and swing effectively (because a weakling could not swing a two-hander - but he might be able to use a rapier). Smaller weapons are easier to wave around, which is why they decided to go the finesse route.



But remember a small weapon doesn't always equate a finesse weapon. Say for example a Katar or Galidus (both are considered small) neither of them rely on the finesse of the user.  While a Aara (Rajput Whip Sword) or Sanjiegun (Chinese Three part staff) are both large weapons which require a great deal of finesse to use properly.

I think the problem stems from the fact we tend to forget that this is a playtest only. I don't believe that the finesse weapon mechanic we see now will be how it works in the final product (at least I hope not).  

I think Finesse should be a Weapon Property instead of a Weapon Category.



I agree and I hope the broad category of Finesse weapons will be narrowed down, cleaned up and organized in the final product.
"We are men of action, lies do not become us" ~ D.P.R.
Good point, actually! Some of these weapons should be usable as simple weapons as well, if you don't have the finesse proficiency.

I suspect this is the case with the quarterstaff, judging by the cleric's attack/damage bonus.

I do quite like the idea of having a separate category, though, as it's easier to simply say "rogues are proficient with this list, clerics are proficient with that list, and fighters are proficient with everything."

I think the problem stems from the fact they were tend to forget that this is a playtest only. I don't believe that the finesse weapon mechanic we see now will be how it works in the final product (at least I hope not).



I know, but this is where we give our feedback regarding what we know. If we see something that we think shouldn't be, now's the time to mention it...doesn't necessarily mean that what we say will happen, but if nobody says it then it definitely won't happen.
Everything expressed in this post is my opinion, and should be taken as such. I can not declare myself to be the supreme authority on all matters...even though I am right!
Good point, actually! Some of these weapons should be usable as simple weapons as well, if you don't have the finesse proficiency.

I suspect this is the case with the quarterstaff, judging by the cleric's attack/damage bonus.

I do quite like the idea of having a separate category, though, as it's easier to simply say "rogues are proficient with this list, clerics are proficient with that list, and fighters are proficient with everything."

I think the problem stems from the fact we tend to forget that this is a playtest only. I don't believe that the finesse weapon mechanic we see now will be how it works in the final product (at least I hope not).



I know, but this is where we give our feedback regarding what we know. If we see something that we think shouldn't be, now's the time to mention it...doesn't necessarily mean that what we say will happen, but if nobody says it then it definitely won't happen.




True That.
"We are men of action, lies do not become us" ~ D.P.R.
I am torn.

For simplicity's sake, I like it the way it is.
But I'd prefer both finesse and heavy to be properties.

Module?

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

looks lik module is the new rule 0 lol.

bt really, i have.... issues, with finesse weapons.

agreed, it should be a property, and it's only bonus should be str or dex

TWF should work off of something else, i find it kind of dumb that my dwarf can't DW hatchets, seeing as they are small and balanced, and something that could be easilly DW'd, as opposed to rapiers, which are LONG and would be stupidly hard to DW.

maybe *offhand* be a property for weapons that can be put in an offhand?
I am torn. For simplicity's sake, I like it the way it is. But I'd prefer both finesse and heavy to be properties. Module?

 

They probably will save it for a "optional weapon rule" within a detailed Arms and Equiment guide (like the 2e and 3e ones). I hope that it there will be optional weapon rules presented in 5e's PHB but let's face it....it is the "business" thing to do and while I might complain about it being money hungry and all, I'd probably sill buy it. Embarassed Hopefully I'll be proven wrong. But in the end it doesn't really matter as I'll just use my DM powers to *GASP* change the rules to fit me and my group's style of play.
"We are men of action, lies do not become us" ~ D.P.R.
Rian, honestly I think the greatest thing so far about this packet and this edition is how *easy* it seems to be to change rules as we see fit. The simplicity of the core rules makes it incredibly straightforward to houserule.
Rian, honestly I think the greatest thing so far about this packet and this edition is how *easy* it seems to be to change rules as we see fit. The simplicity of the core rules makes it incredibly straightforward to houserule.




your right in this, i'd like to keep it this way,

i mean, it makes sense, modules are essentill bundled house rules anyways.
looks lik module is the new rule 0 lol.

bt really, i have.... issues, with finesse weapons.

agreed, it should be a property, and it's only bonus should be str or dex

TWF should work off of something else, i find it kind of dumb that my dwarf can't DW hatchets, seeing as they are small and balanced, and something that could be easilly DW'd, as opposed to rapiers, which are LONG and would be stupidly hard to DW.

maybe *offhand* be a property for weapons that can be put in an offhand?

Exactly, offhand is a property. Not only can you use this as a second weapon in the offhand, but offhand weapons are the only ones combatants can use while grappling.


“Handedness” Properties
• Off-handed
• One-handed
• Hand-and-Half
• Two-Handed  

Finesse is separate: a Dagger is an off-handed finesse weapon, but a staff is a two-handed finesse weapon.
I dunno...there could end up being too many modules, and is it really reasonable to say "if you want to use a certain weapon in two hands and gain a dex bonus, you have to buy the Historical Martial Arts module, and persuade your GM to use the rules out of it!". I'd rather they get the table right out of the box.

Properties: yeah, they could include "off-hand" and "hand and a half" properties, giving additional rules to certain weapons.

Off-hand: weapon can be used in your off-hand as well as your main hand, if you have whatever two-weapon fighting rules we add.
Hand and a half: weapon can be used in one hand, for one damage die type lower (i.e. 1d10 becomes 1d8 etc), allowing you to use a shield. When used in this way, it is treated as a heavy weapon.
Everything expressed in this post is my opinion, and should be taken as such. I can not declare myself to be the supreme authority on all matters...even though I am right!

I would suggest that the only weapons that should really be finesse are ones that you require no more strength than that required to hold it up (since strength doesn't play a part at all in the use of these weapons). That would be the dagger and shortsword/rapier - piercing weapons. All you really need to do with a rapier is point it at someone and let them walk onto it, but with a katana or scimitar, you still have to swing it.



Have you ever tried holding a rapier? With the length there's quite a bit of torque, and that's really tiring on the shoulder. I find doing a fireman's carry is easier than holding a rapier up.

Have you ever tried holding a rapier? With the length there's quite a bit of torque, and that's really tiring on the shoulder. I find doing a fireman's carry is easier than holding a rapier up.



Indeed, and this is a case for removing - or at least changing - the whole "weapon finesse" mechanic completely. The problem I have with this is that strength plays no part at all - it isn't a requirement, it doesn't affect attack or damage rolls, and it can quite happily not be there. Someone simply needs to have enough strength to not be encumbered by it, and high dex, and they're a master of the rapier/katana/spiked chain etc.

However, since the design of the game rules that dexterity alone controls the attack bonus with those weapons, I'm suggesting possible alternatives. Personally, I'm a fan of having ALL damage rolls from melee attacks be strength based, and either:

1) having simple/martial weapons based on an average of strength and dex (as opposed to purely strength), with finesse and heavy weapons working as they do currently, or:
2) having no ability scores added to attack rolls, and bonuses depend on your "weapon skill", which is defined by your class, levels and feats etc.
Everything expressed in this post is my opinion, and should be taken as such. I can not declare myself to be the supreme authority on all matters...even though I am right!
Have you ever tried holding a rapier? With the length there's quite a bit of torque, and that's really tiring on the shoulder. I find doing a fireman's carry is easier than holding a rapier up.



Indeed, and this is a case for removing - or at least changing - the whole "weapon finesse" mechanic completely. The problem I have with this is that strength plays no part at all - it isn't a requirement, it doesn't affect attack or damage rolls, and it can quite happily not be there. Someone simply needs to have enough strength to not be encumbered by it, and high dex, and they're a master of the rapier/katana/spiked chain etc.

However, since the design of the game rules that dexterity alone controls the attack bonus with those weapons, I'm suggesting possible alternatives. Personally, I'm a fan of having ALL damage rolls from melee attacks be strength based, and either:

1) having simple/martial weapons based on an average of strength and dex (as opposed to purely strength), with finesse and heavy weapons working as they do currently, or:
2) having no ability scores added to attack rolls, and bonuses depend on your "weapon skill", which is defined by your class, levels and feats etc.



Fair point. Finesse should come with Strength prerequisites. In other words, you have to be strong enough to wield a weapon comfortably, before being able to benefit from agility.

So, 
• Finesse dagger and finesse staff have no Str prereq.
• Finesse arming sword (short sword) with gladius and rapier has Str 13 prereq.
• Possibly, to finesse a hand-and-half longsword has Str 15 prereq (but rarely comes into play, since few have both Str 15 and Dex 18, which is fine).

But anything “heavy” cannot benefit from finesse.
Sign In to post comments