I was wondering if there was a balance issue with DEX martial weapon users and their limit to the piercing damage type. As of now, without house rules, the only option a Paladin would have (for optimized damage) would be a rapier for piercing with a 1d8 or a scimitar for a 1d6. My group has come up with switching the flail to finesse for bludgeoning damage, the rapier for slashing and a modified war pick for percing, all mechanically the same as the rapier except for damage type. My question is if this would upset the balance of the game as it seems like one of the draw backs of DEX is its limitation to percing damage.
Also not sure if this belongs in the DM help or player help thread, seems like a bit of both.
Not really. I've been playing a finesse Battle Master that uses a reskinned rapier (i.e. elven curve blade) for slashing damage. Most things that resist piercing damage also resist slashing and bludgeoning damage.
BearSheriff wrote:
I had a hard time justifying bludgeoning weapons as well. I think slashing is a little easier, and as pointed out most things that resist piercing also resist slashing. I created the saber for 1d8 finesse slashing (YMMV on the name. It's not historically accurate, but then neither is anything else in D&D)
Finesse weapons should be balanced just past the hilt... though some prefer them a bit more tip heavy.
Just sayin'
Jordan175 wrote:
One might argue an exotic weapon like a spiked chain for bludgeoning.
Thanks for the feedback. 
I think that "finesse" and "blunt instrument" do not go in the same sentence.
Also, I think that ObeseBoyWonder's weapon is not a katana, it's a sabre.
Yeah, on my dexadin I use a rapier as my main weapon but have a scimitar for slashing, sling for bludgeon and longbow for range. Just in case the damage types ever actually do matter. So far though after three 6 hour sessions it hasn't. Guessing that might come into play later on at higher levels.
Nunchucks could be a reasonable finess bludgeoning weapon - they are all about speed and coordination.
Remeber that DEX is strictly superior to STR given equivalent weapon selection, because it also boosts AC and initiative. Limiting damage types of finesse weapons serves as small check.
It won't break the game if you have 1d8 slashing and bludgeoning finesse weapons, but it invalidates most weapons on the table. If you do, you might was well not even have weapons, and just let everyone roll 1d8 for damage.
The rapier is one of the handful of weapons that are, IMO, is imbalanced. They keep company with the hand axe, spear and quarterstaff as being strictly better than other things on the table.
A blunt weapon should not be a finesse weapon. It is a balance issue (albeit, a minor one).
RCanine wrote:
Using Dex Finesse Weapons has alot of benefits.
1. Ability to use ranged weapons very effectively even if it isn't your preferred style
2. Ability to easily apply sneak attack damage
3. Higher Initiative
4. Dex is a better save to have than Str
***I feel that dex boosting ac isn't important in the comparison between str and dex. A character that only gets light armor is going to go dex regardless of weapons at that point. Any character that gets medium or better armor has their choice in dex or str.
The problem for Finesse Weapons is that ranged weapons and great weapons both have better feat and class synergy than they do. For example:
Longbows:
1. You get everything that finesse weapons offer and the ability to do so at range and with sharpshooter feat support. (Well compared to some finesse setups you may lose out on a bonus action attack or a shield).
Hand Crossbows
1. You get everything that fineese weapons offer including the bonus action attack and additionaly the feat support of sharpshooter and the required feat of crossbow expertise (only thing you can't typically do is use a shield, but even that is allowed at some tables).
As the game currently stands it's almost impossible to find a way in which finesse weapons are better than ranged ones. I think a Paladin might be the only class where a finesse weapon is better than the ranged counterpart.
Dex has more uses than STR, and should definitely be capped at D8.
A Monk using a Quarterstaff two handed technically has a D8 bludgeoning damage as a "finesse weapon" from my reading of the Martial Arts ability.
As for balance issues with piercing vs slashing... uh. The slashing/piercing/bludgeoning distinction seems barely used at all, unless I'm missing something.
Only skeletons, black puddings, ochre jellys, treants and the rakshasa (maybe) cares about weapon damage types. from a brief glance of the MM. And can't find reference to it in PHB spells or class abilities.
Being able to hurt treants doesn't seem massively over powered to me.
I think finesse weapons should use Dex for attack and Str for damage.
Coredump00 wrote:
Yes seriously - why, you really want to see DEX based finesse 2handers in melee, the d8 Rapier isn't enough?
you have as high an AC, without the disadvantages of heavy armor, you have higher initiative, you have higher DEX saves (what exactly does STR saves get you that DEX don't?)
Edited by Orc_Barrons: Inappropriate Content violates the Code of Conduct: http://company.wizards.com/conduct'
Truthfully, I think that people really put too much emphasis on Dex being so much better than Strength.
1) There are about 42 creatures in the DMG that call for Strength saving throws. Meanwhile there are about 40 or so critters that call for Dex saving throw. This count didn't include various dragon ages (so, adult and ancient blue dragons were counted as one, but red dragon counted differently), or an in depth look at creatures that had spells.
If we include spells (a number of which appear to be variant rules), there are about 10 more dex saves, and 4 or so strength saves. Primarily, this is the result of creatures casting fireball, lightning bolt, faerie fire, and the occasional flame strike, while the strength spells include entangle style spells.
So, in the end, "Dex being a better save" is actually open to debate. Better against evokers, but evokers are just one kind of spellcaster, and not every monster is a spellcaster.
2) If you don't have a character with Stealth proficency, the extra skills aren't a big deal. And there's lots of other skills to take. If you're just not designing a sneaky character, then stealth and pick pocketing aren't skills you worry about. Athletics and Acrobatics are roughly equal.
3) Bows are better than thrown weapons, but glaives and greatswords beat out finesse melee weapons.
4) If you get Shield Master, you can knock people prone. A rapier and shield warrior can't do that well (strength save DC). If you have a Grapple character, its Strength checks there.
5) Heavy and Light armors average out equally for DC.
The only thing that Dex has over Strength is the increased Initiative. After that, it comes down to a preference of build styles.
"Limit to piercing" isn't a drawback of finesse weapons. Its actually just that, realistically, weapons that rely on finesse over brute force just make sense that way. Blunt force trama needs strength to use in reality. Letting you use dexterity with it just doesn't make a lot of sense. And there are plenty of finesse slashing weapons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKhUZBWwels
There you go a finesse blunt weapon that can be dual welded though he only uses one in the video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56MAYSb6ajo
23 seconds in is dual sticks
Mephi1234 wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
I think it's odd that people list Dex bonus to AC as a positive factor... how many encounters do your characters face naked? Barbarians and Sorcerers are exceptions, but otherwise, 18 AC from heavy armor is more than 17 from light/medium. Shield can work for either.
So the biggest losses are initiative and stealth, for +1 armor, greater weapon selection (also PM, GWF), and in the Paladin's case, easier multiclassing.
If Strength is still significantly behind, perhaps it's time for players and DMs to stop ignoring encumbrance. 10 ft of speed would help balance things out.
FrogReaver wrote:
RCanine wrote:
Kostoglot wrote:
FunkySpunk wrote:
RealSeolfor wrote:
Dex is generally better. (mostly due to inititive).
It is not strictly better.
Mephi1234 wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Mephi1234 wrote:
Mephi1234 wrote:
mellored wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
I'd allow clubs to work with finesse (think blackjacks/saps, or tonfas). I'd also allow daggers to slash.
mellored wrote:
Mephi1234 wrote:
I think Dex is more powerful than Str. But... As of know I believe the rest of the game rules kind of balance it. (Still a working theory)
A Dex Build can use Dex for attk and Dmg and AC
A Str Build can only use Str for attk and Dmg... but can use Heavy Armor for AC.
BUt further... Str builds open up things like Shield Master and Great Weapon Master and Pole Arm master. Its not exact, a Dex fighter can dip Rogue1 and grab Ath expertise... but its still a tax...
The problem is if they create a Dex version of those feats.
They did. It's called sharpshooter ;)
Coredump00 wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
So...give a non-finesse weapon the finesse property? Or give a finesse weapon a non-piercing property? Or both? Shades of the same and they kinda negate each other: 1d8 or less piercing can be finesse, or any finesse weapon can also be slashing/bludgeoning. And you can call that 1d8 weapon whatever. Katana. Light Saber. ASP baton. Shoe razor...
At the end of the day I just don't see a scenario where a re-skinned non-piercing finesse weapon can do anything to disrupt the fun of a game.
feartheminotaur wrote:
mellored wrote:
Mephi1234 wrote: