Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback How about a House Rule : Finesse Longsword (not Versatile)

Seriously, long swords look so cool on elf mages. And by default, an elf is proficient with them.

But, you need STR... Shortsword? Too short, and ugly... Rapier? Too narrow, and Drow has proficiency... they don't look "cool".

Would it be unbalanced to have a finesse longsword separately from versatile longsword?

It would be :
1d8 slashing, instead of 1d8 piercing (rapier)
DEX instead of STR (finesse)
can't use it as two-handed (not versatile)
can't use it offhand (not light)

Just a thought.

You can probably mod it relatively easily if you know what you're doing.

If that's what you are looking for, just make the rapier a spada da lato (aka a sidesword). That way you can have slash damage and an elegant weapon.

Spears should be finesse too so you would have a two handed finesse option. Who ever uses a spear anyway? Think of Oberyn from GoT.

Long sword as finesse might be a bit OP since Dex is already so good. Some 1d8 two handed or slashing finesse sword would be cool though. Rapiers and fencing is a bit..meh.

Dex builds are already monstrously superior to strength builds due to the utter void of decent heavy armor on top of all the advantages Dex gets in 5e. They don't need to also be able to use the strength weapons better too.

If anything I'd want to tweak dual wielding rules to allow a longsword in the main hand as long as a light weapon is in the offhand just to make strength dual wielding somewhat viable before 4th level.

Actually, in the game, the long sword is more like what we refer to as a "bastard sword". So if Larian wants to add a proper long sword, why not.

Here is what you can find on wikipedia:
"The term "hand-and-a-half sword" is modern (late 19th century).[8] During the first half of the 20th century, the term "bastard sword" was used regularly to refer to this type of sword, while "long sword" or "long-sword", if used at all, referred to the rapier (in the context of Renaissance or Early Modern fencing)."

Technically, I believe that D&D has gotten sword names messed up since the beginning and thus what people think of as a long sword is not really a long sword.

From what I understand historically, you have:

Swords - This term was used for anything from an arming sword, backsword, broadsword, sidesword, etc.
Long swords - IE a bigger sword, used 2 handed mostly.
Great Swords - even bigger Long Sword, the Montante is here.

Then came Rapiers, these are anything from the fencing blades we know of to the long and thin swept hilt blades mainly for thrusting.

Sideswords actually fit the shortsword category in D&D. Rapiers are LONG. A Sidesword is shorter. My group normally makes sideswords a shortsword that is variable either slashing or piercing damage.

Off-topic: I play a drow rogue, so have rapier proficiency. Yet when I want to dual-wield rapier it will not work. The off-hand will just be replaced with nothing. Shortword + Shortsword, Dagger + Dagger and Swortsword + Dagger works fine. Is there a gameplay reason for this, a level thing, a bug or something in the rules or lore?

Rapier is not a light weapon, you can only dual wield with light weapons. Rapiers are actually kind of heavy (and long) They are a finesse weapon, but not light. IMO most 1handed swords in D&D are actually short swords.

you should be able to dual wield any weapon and just suffer penalties for lack of proficiency. I'm sure modders will make something for this; would be nice in the main game though.

Personally I think daggers should be usable in the off-hand no matter what your main hand weapon's properties are. Rapier+Dagger was a widely used and popular combo for dueling, after all. It is weird that it is entirely impossible with the current system.

It would also make daggers relevant as right now I can't think of a good reason to use a dagger in your offhand over a shortsword which just plain has better damage.

As someone who fenced for 3 years with saber, rapier, epee, and foil, its a silly idea. The only off-hand they ever used was a sword breaker, and that was a wildly niche subset. Longswords are absolutely not finesse, my god. There is no delicacy whatsoever with that weapon. Realism aside, there are entirely too many balance issues with this. Its like it is for a reason.

I really want dual Daggers to be more useful for Rogue, it's a more iconic type of weapons for the archetype.
Dual wielding Rapiers just feels really weird to me.
I think that Rapiers thematically works well with Arcane Tricksters for example as a one-hand Rapier and the other hand free for spells, but with Rogue it just feels strange.
I wish Larian would buff Daggers or something, otherwise I hope modders will fix it.

I don't really care about realism etc, I like historical armor, weapons etc and do read a lot about it but in games I don't really like it unless it's a simulator ( also realism ≠ good game design ).

I'll clarify a little.

I was meaning to add some finesse longswords. Not replace the existing versatile longswords.

Balance? In fact there already is a magic sword named sun blade (it is a star wars lightsaber in fact) : +2 longsword with finesse AND versatile..

Oh well... ok I'll mod it myself in my private games

I agree about twin daggers as a more useful option (not just for Rogues in my view), but the danger has always been weapon-creep where suddenly twinned daggers are twinned shortswords and then twinned 'longswords'/arming swords.

Twin rapiers was a fighting style taught in the C16th. Not terribly popular from what we can tell, but it was certainly a developed style. I'm against using it as a standard combo, but allowing it on a Feat chain seems appropriate.

No. We aren't changing more core DnD rules.

No the Long Sword is a bastardization of a Greatsword hilt and a long sword blade. Longswords and Bastardswords are more or less the same thing. The monstrosity Larian has made is neither. I'm going by the currently used names. The names of swords have changed all through history, usually comparing one blade at the time to another blade at the time.

This makes sense. It's a finesse weapon because of the accuracy you need even if it's heavier. Spear should be the same. You can wield it efficiently with just brute strength, or by accurate strikes hitting weak spots. But Pike is too heavy for such.

I don't know where you get the impression that the BG3 longsword uses a greatsword hilt. The longsword was primarily a two-handed weapon and the hilt was designed to accommodate this. The greatsword (an Early Modern/Renaissance weapon, but hey, so is the rapier) generally had a grip forward of the cross-guard because greatsword fighting styles often required gripping the sword there.

I don't know what you are referring to as 'currently used', whether that is the terminology used by antiquarians and historians, or the term used in RPGs, but I suspect the latter. 'Longsword' to a medievalist or anyone academically involved in history is not a one-handed weapon (that's an arming sword). As a pseudo-medieval setting, a longsword in the Forgotten Realms should look like the one on BG3. Maybe slightly shorter, but not by a huge amount (inches rather than feet).

The 'bastard sword' was actually applied to a sword between the longsword and the arming sword (hence the name).

You're right that names vary, but the medieval 'longsword' nomenclature is pretty well established. Or we could just use Oakeshott's 1960 classifications and sword names could become a spaghetti of Roman numerals.