Rethinking Finesse in 5th Edition D&D
A brief history of Finesse
The idea of using Dexterity to influence melee attacks in Dungeons & Dragons officially came about in Third Edition D&D with the Weapon Finesse Feat. Before that, all melee attacks were based upon Strength unless one’s DM came up with a house rule. For the first time, this allowed lighter combatants to stand toe to toe against heavier opponents, at least if wielding a rapier, dagger or a handful of other weapons.
Along comes Fifth Edition, and instead of making Finesse a Feat, it becomes a property of particular weapons (All in all, I personally consider this an improvement, though I have a quibble or two I’ll mention later). However, there is a subtle difference between how Finesse works in Fifth Edition than in earlier editions.
In Fifth Edition D&D, Finesse weapons use not only Dexterity, but can also use Strength. This might seem a minor difference, but it can be an important one.
The Fifth Edition Difference
The notion of Finesse as a Dexterity modifier for attacks seems to continue to hold, at least in my experience. Most wielders of Finesse weapons tend to be of the lighter sort, your Fighters with rapiers, Rogues with shortswords and daggers, etc. This makes a certain amount of sense because the majority of Finesse weapons are of the lighter sort and more fitting to agile combatants.
However, allowing Finesse weapons to also be able to utilize Strength provides for some interesting possibilities.
Most noticeably, the dart is a Finesse weapon. You might be saying, “So?” The importance here is that being a ranged weapon, the dart is the only dedicated ranged weapon in Fifth Edition which can make use of Strength instead of Dexterity for ranged combat. There’s also the dagger, but it’s not only a ranged weapon.
What this means is a heavier, stronger combatant can make use of a ranged weapon, though admittedly with a relatively short range, and still have a good chance to hit while also doing good damage. Still, you might be saying, “So?”
Well, think about it. No longer does your heavy Fighter have to carry a bow, a bow with which he or she probably doesn’t have a good chance of hitting anything since Dexterity is likely not one of their higher statistics. No longer does your heavy combatant have to be weighed down with all those arrows or javelins or what-have-you.
Now your tank can wear a belt of light darts, allowing him or her to stay beneath encumbrance levels, and have a ranged weapon at hand, a weapon with which he or she is quite good with. Are you beginning to see how this can make a difference? Of course your Fighter could simply load down with daggers, but daggers weigh a pound each whereas darts only weigh a quarter-pound each.
Then there’s the whip. Yes, the paltry whip, paltry because it only does 1d4 damage. But the whip is a Finesse weapon, which means Strength or Dexterity modifiers can be used for affect. But why would a character want a whip? One word: Reach. Yep, the whip is a reach weapon, and it only weighs three pounds. If encumbrance is important in your game, no longer is there reason to carry around that heavy, bulky, lengthy pike, which weighs in at a whopping 18 pounds, simply in order to have a reach weapon. Roll up that three-pound whip, strap it to your belt, and you’re ready to reach out and touch someone. And, small creatures can make use of the whip, so you halflings should be excited.
All of this could be game changers to a small degree, allowing for uncommon character creations. Sure, some players and Dungeon Masters are probably wise to everything I’ve presented here, but so far I’m not seeing much of it.
Now, the Rapier
Okay, I mentioned I had a couple of quibbles. Here’s the first one.
Why is the rapier a finesse weapon but not a light weapon, especially as it only weighs two pounds, a full pound less than the scimitar, which is both a finesse and light weapon? Is it because of the rapier’s length? Maybe the sometimes bulkiness of the knuckle guard and quillon?
I don’t understand. There must be a reason. Can anyone clue me in?
To add to the confusion, despite what Hollywood shows us, the rapier is actually a somewhat weighty weapon, at least usually. No, it’s no two hander, but historically the average rapier probably weighs about as much as the average longsword, a few pounds or thereabouts. Lengthy a rapier might be, but you can’t have all that length without using a good bit of metal.
Speaking of longswords …
The Longsword … yes, I said, ‘Longsword’
My second quibble: The longsword.
Although Fifth Edition D&D has simplified just about everything compared to earlier versions of the game, in reality the longsword is not a bladed weapon that can be easily quantified.
Some longswords are really, really long. Some, not so much. Some are bulky. Some are slender. Most require two hands to be used properly, or at least to their best potential.
The so-called hand-and-a-half is generally recognized as a longsword, though it is usually shorter and heavier than what is commonly called a longsword. Then there are all the different types of longswords, the different blade shapes, hilts, etc. I could go into a rather lengthy discussion of the Oakeshott typology on medieval swords, specifically the longsword, but some might find that rather boring.
Just let it be said, there are a lot of different types of longswords.
For those who are experienced in using a longsword (probably HEMA and ARMA folks, for the most part), I think the general agreement would be that this particular bladed weapon makes more use of one’s agility and hand coordination than it does of one’s physical power, at least when used in a style for facing unarmored foes.
In other words, the longsword should be a Finesse weapon. At least some of the time.
Again, not all longswords are the same, so perhaps not all of them should be Finesse weapons. But when used in two hands against an opponent only wearing clothing or maybe light armor, the speed and location of the blows are generally more important than the strength with which they are landed.
Admittedly, against armored foes, we are talking a different matter. Here a technique known as half swording is generally accepted for use, and Strength would probably be more important. Basically the long sword is used sort of like a spear or other short, poled weapon, with one hand on or near the hilt and the other hand extended halfway or more down the length of the blade.
But that’s against armored individuals, usually plated foes. What about creature’s with naturally heavy armor? Well, here we’re venturing deeper into fantasy territory, and that I’ll leave up to the individual players and DM. However, I will say I would not want to face a rhinoceros or grizzly bear with only a longsword at hand.
Armored foes, unarmored foes, different types of swords, it’s all kind of a mix depending on the situation. If one were so interested, house rules could be applied here. Perhaps a Feat could be created, one which allowed Finesse with the longsword against lightly-armored opponents, but also allowed for half swording against heavier foes.
All in all, Fifth Edition does a good job of handling its weapons. The list of those weapons is fairly short compared to earlier editions, but that’s in the tradition of this version of the game. I can live with that. House rules can handle the rest.
Besides, I’m not meaning to change any opinions here, merely to open some eyes to possibilities. After all, it’s you all* who make those house rules.
And it’s you all who Stay Nerdy!
* I’m from Kentucky. Can you tell? Go Blue.
Blake Gardner
April 16, 2016 at 6:02 pmThe D&D combat system is too abstracted in order to create a "realistic" combat system. Combat is mainly about getting a killing/mortal/crippling blow, rather than "pinging" a character to death. True, fatigue does play a role, but stamina is entirely separate from health. Fatigue can be restored over a night, or at most, with a day off, but an injury can take weeks to deal, or might be permanent. A "realistic" system would require creating what would essentially be a new game, or almost a new type of game.
The hitpoint system seen almost everywhere is an abstraction: in a realistic setting, a hit typically does damage or it doesn't, and if does do damage, the effects are generally significant, except when there are significant size differences between combatants. In most instances, a hit is going to incapacitate, or at least impair (such as a hit to a limb). Their might be some place for hit points, such as determining how many spears are needed to take down an elephant, but a good stab to a vital organ or hammer to the head would mortally wound any humanoid-sized creature.
Maybe, a character should have various target zones, with wounded and incapacitated states for each zone, or at least the limbs. The character can target a given zone in melee, with the limbs generally having a lower AC. A wounded or incapaciated leg slows a character, or forces it into a prone position, while a wounded arm can not be used to hold a weapon, spell focus, or shield. A hit to the torso or head (those two could be the same zone for practical purposes) would incapacitate a character.
kiro
April 21, 2017 at 5:36 pmThe reason why the rapier is not classed a light weapon is purely a mechanical one. It has a d8 damage die. For it to be a light weapon it would have to be brought down to 1d6 and make it mechanically identical to the shortsword.
D. E. Wyatt
April 27, 2017 at 8:09 pmI’m just happy it looks like they FINALLY fixed the weight issues. I can’t tell you how annoying it was to look at the longsword and see “Weight: 6lbs.”
😐
Also, ditching the bastard sword (which is really just a synonym for the shorter forms of longsword) is also nice to see. It REALLY irked me that for some bizarre reason 3rd Ed. decided to tag it as an “exotic” weapon.
Arthur Tesh
June 1, 2017 at 2:51 pmFirst time comment. Fencing coach here, so I’ll address the rapier bit if it hasn’t been addressed already.
Light isn’t, in game mechanics, a measure of mass or weight. It’s simply whether or not the weapon can be effectively used in the off hand. If you’ve ever seen a fencing en guards stance, there’s not really a way for us to use the weapon effectively in whichever hand is our “off hand” at the moment. In ambidextrous and can switch, but having a rapier in one hand makes that my lead hand out if necessity of the stance.
Hope that helps