RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Let's face it, daggers are largely considered 'backup' weapons by almost anyone. The Invisible Blade PrC makes them a little more useful but, for most folks (even rogues), the dagger just doesn't make enough of an impact to be used as a main weapon by most characters. Even stealthy rogue/assassin types tend to favor longswords, shortswords, rapiers, or kukris over the humble dagger. Therefore, I propose a few options to make your rogues more 'rogueish.'
First, a new rogue special ability (you know, the ones you get at level 10, 13, 16, & 19): Dagger Specialization. It's identical to weapon specialization except you don't need Weapon Focus and it only works on daggers (and punching daggers).
Second, a new feat:
Dagger Mastery
Prereqs: Weapon Focus (dagger or punching dagger), BAB +6, Dex 17
Benefit: When making a full attack action with a dagger or punching dagger, you may choose to take an additional attack with the weapon but all other attacks in the round suffer a -2 penalty to hit.
It's basically just like Rapid Shot for melee and only applies to the use of daggers or punching daggers. This would allow rogues to get another chance to dish out some sneak attack damage, but would decrease their odds of hitting thanks to the -2 penalty.
And one more new feat for the Assassins out there:
Fatal Shiv
Prereqs: Death attack class feature and either Dagger Specialization class feature or Weapon Specialization (dagger).
Benefit: Death attacks made with a dagger or punching dagger have their save DCs increased by 2.
Doesn't the Complete Adventure have the two Dagger Stance PrCs in it? That helps a bit, but really people keep them as back-ups to say cut yourself out when you are swallowed whole. Maybe using a dagger in the off-hand could reduce the TWF penalties by an additional one.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Maybe using a dagger in the off-hand could reduce the TWF penalties by an additional one.
Great idea! This mirrors one problem I've always had with the automatic -2 penalty for someone skilled in TWF, who wields only a dagger in their off hand.
For quite some time, the dagger was THE preferred off hand weapon. Look at skilled spanish fencers and how they can use a dagger and rapier combo. I don't think that the -2 penalty should apply across the board. As a minor house rule in my homebrew campaigns, I've always ruled that a dagger/punching dagger were only -1 when wielded in the off hand by someone with TWF.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
How about Daggers reduce the TWF penalty by half, so even unfeated they are decent choice for adding an extra attack.
I would not have a problem with that. I would probably balance it with the fact that daggers count as 'extra-light' and thus take an ADDITIONAL -2 penalty on Sunder and Disarm checks when used. Seems fair to me, and somewhat realistic too.
Excellent ideas! Sexi Golem's rogues used to carry daggers and even use them as main weapons. I believe the philosophy was something along the lines of "My weapon damage is going to suck no matter what; all the real damage comes from sneak attack. Thus, I will use a dagger because it is easier to conceal, and can be thrown."
However, I've long realized that daggers have definite advantages IRL that D&D doesn't mimic, and it has always irritated me. I think I'll adopt the feats above, though I'm not sure about the TWF rule.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Nice feats, Fatey!
Thank you. I've always felt that daggers were not properly treated in D&D. They're pretty much one of the crappiest weapons in the game and I always found myself thinking "If these things suck so much, why are they so common historically?" Then I realized that it was because they had been treated poorly by the system. Personally, I also feel that daggers should be a martial weapon instead of simple because wielding a dagger effectively is MUCH harder than swinging a club or quarterstaff. However, I don't make a big deal of it because it is mechanically pretty crappy and thus it's not a big deal to let wizards and other 'simple weapon' classes have the proficiency.
Let's face it, daggers are largely considered 'backup' weapons by almost anyone. The Invisible Blade PrC makes them a little more useful but, for most folks (even rogues), the dagger just doesn't make enough of an impact to be used as a main weapon by most characters. Even stealthy rogue/assassin types tend to favor longswords, shortswords, rapiers, or kukris over the humble dagger. Therefore, I propose a few options to make your rogues more 'rogueish.'
First, a new rogue special ability (you know, the ones you get at level 10, 13, 16, & 19): Dagger Specialization. It's identical to weapon specialization except you don't need Weapon Focus and it only works on daggers (and punching daggers).
What about changing the benefit to deal an extra die of sneak attack damage when using a dagger (or punching dagger). That would make it seem more like a rogue ability than a fighter ability, at least to me.
Second, a new feat:
Dagger Mastery
Prereqs: Weapon Focus (dagger or punching dagger), BAB +6, Dex 17
Benefit: When making a full attack action with a dagger or punching dagger, you may choose to take an additional attack with the weapon but all other attacks in the round suffer a -2 penalty to hit.It's basically just like Rapid Shot for melee and only applies to the use of daggers or punching daggers. This would allow rogues to get another chance to dish out some sneak attack damage, but would decrease their odds of hitting thanks to the -2 penalty.
Just a few comments on the phrasing and what it does. It doesn't seem to apply the penalty to the extra attack because it says all other attacks suffer the penalty. Also it seems that this could apply to thrown daggers as well.
Excellent ideas! Sexi Golem's rogues used to carry daggers and even use them as main weapons. I believe the philosophy was something along the lines of "My weapon damage is going to suck no matter what; all the real damage comes from sneak attack. Thus, I will use a dagger because it is easier to conceal, and can be thrown."
However, I've long realized that daggers have definite advantages IRL that D&D doesn't mimic, and it has always irritated me. I think I'll adopt the feats above, though I'm not sure about the TWF rule.
Considering how things work, it would make sense to either enhance effectivity of sneak attack done with daggers or penalize it when done with some other weapon (personally making a sneak attack with, say, longbow or greataxe has always been a bit "you do what?").
And indeed, big way for DM to make daggers more attractive is to start paying attention how characters look like, and make NPCs treat that guy who comes to the tavern in platemail and variety of melee weapons accordingly. If it looks like a troublemaker, chances are it is one and you don't want one in your property.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
Daggers were common for reasons other than utility in battle - they were useful tools, they were fairly portable, they could be concealed, they were potentially a symbol of status, they marked one as armed, and they would do as a weapon in a pinch. But with that, they are still a poor match for a sword, a staff, a mace, a spear, an axe, or nearly any larger weapon. They aren't attractive in D&D as a main weapon for the same reason they weren't attractive in the real world - other things did the job better.
Guess I'm saying, if you want to make a dagger more attractive, make it require some investment in the weapon, because they shouldn't be more attractive than a sword in most conditions.
Guess I'm saying, if you want to make a dagger more attractive, make it require some investment in the weapon, because they shouldn't be more attractive than a sword in most conditions.
I totally agree.
I totally agree.
As do I. The advbantages of the dagger IRL are more than offset by the power and, more importantly, reach of the sword or other standard personal weapon. A dagger presented little threat to a fully mailed trooper, while in game, a rogue who gets in position can slaughter a full plate wearing fighter? Not so much. And if you faced off with a rapier armed duelist you'd be dead in seconds as he stays just outside of your reach and pokes you full of holes. IMO, daggers are slightly OVERPOWERED compared to historical values, because of the distortions we allow to make game play easier. But hey, if you wanna run these feats, go for it. They do exactly what you want them to do, and if you;re havign fun, who am I to argue :)
|
As do I. The advbantages of the dagger IRL are more than offset by the power and, more importantly, reach of the sword or other standard personal weapon. A dagger presented little threat to a fully mailed trooper, while in game, a rogue who gets in position can slaughter a full plate wearing fighter? Not so much. And if you faced off with a rapier armed duelist you'd be dead in seconds as he stays just outside of your reach and pokes you full of holes. IMO, daggers are slightly OVERPOWERED compared to historical values, because of the distortions we allow to make game play easier. But hey, if you wanna run these feats, go for it. They do exactly what you want them to do, and if you;re havign fun, who am I to argue :)
I totally agree.
Unless of course you consider dagger variants like the
stiletto, which could find the smalles chink in armor and push through, or the
rondel capable of incredibly powerful strikes at angles that swords couldn't generate reducing the effectivenss of armor or
the main-gauche, with curved quillons, making off handed disarms possible or
those wierd russian ones that were effectivly triangles doing huge tissue damage
anyway...
The biggest advantage of daggers is the speed with which they strike. This would be a paperwork nightmare, but after any full attack with a dagger, your initiative improves by 2.
Unless of course you consider dagger variants like the... snip...
Ok, get inside my long sword guard and shield :) Those weapons were generally used as backups do dispatch an already felled foe, or as an assasination tool against unarmored enemies, but on the historical battle field, soemone wandering around with just a dagger sized wepaon would be quickly dispatched. But we deal with these distortions to make the game more fun :)
The biggest advantage of daggers is the speed with which they strike. This would be a paperwork nightmare, but after any full attack with a dagger, your initiative improves by 2.
I know 2nd ed had speed rules, but i shudder to think about going back to figuring out how may more strikes a dagger wilder can get vice a great axe wielder, or some one with a lucerne hammer. Ugh. I'll take ease of play over high granularity realism thanks :)
|
|
Unless of course you consider dagger variants like the... snip...Ok, get inside my long sword guard and shield :) Those weapons were generally used as backups do dispatch an already felled foe, or as an assasination tool against unarmored enemies, but on the historical battle field, soemone wandering around with just a dagger sized wepaon would be quickly dispatched. But we deal with these distortions to make the game more fun :)
The biggest advantage of daggers is the speed with which they strike. This would be a paperwork nightmare, but after any full attack with a dagger, your initiative improves by 2.I know 2nd ed had speed rules, but i shudder to think about going back to figuring out how may more strikes a dagger wilder can get vice a great axe wielder, or some one with a lucerne hammer. Ugh. I'll take ease of play over high granularity realism thanks :)
The problem is that D&D is almost never the "historical battlefield". When is the last time a party formed a shield wall, or used any form of tactics other than 'I do what I do best'
And, with my proposal, daggers never get extra attacks as a result, they may go from going after their target to going before their target, but no extra attacks.
When is the last time a party formed a shield wall....
Heck, when was the last time your party used a shield at all? Most of the people who would be in a position to do so either go for THF or TWF. How historically accurate is that?
But the dagger does stick out in one's mind as the tool of assassination, i.e., stealth kills, which is what rogues tend to be all about. However, it just seems unattractive in D&D, which kind of forces a break with the classical mental image (which is far more important in this game than historical accuracy!).
Not that you were actually arguing against this.
My party has never used a shield wall, but the gnolls they have been fighting make use of it quite often to keep the casters safe. Gnoll War 1 with the shield wall feat and a tower shield get full cover, and the caster behind them gets +4 AC and no AoOs from enemies with reach. It usually only lasts a round or two, low level mooks being what they are, but it has allowwed me to get off some serious damage and my players couldn't do anything about it :)
My party has never used a shield wall, but the gnolls they have been fighting make use of it quite often to keep the casters safe. Gnoll War 1 with the shield wall feat and a tower shield get full cover, and the caster behind them gets +4 AC and no AoOs from enemies with reach. It usually only lasts a round or two, low level mooks being what they are, but it has allowwed me to get off some serious damage and my players couldn't do anything about it :)
Now that's a way to make your players think tactically. :)
Personally, I also feel that daggers should be a martial weapon instead of simple because wielding a dagger effectively is MUCH harder than swinging a club or quarterstaff.
Now you are just arguing with yourself... ;-)
There is a huge difference between being able to wield a weapon, and wield it effectively.
Yes, wielding a dagger effectively is harder than swinging a club or quarterstaff. Then again, wielding a club or quarterstaff effectively is harder than stabbing with a dagger.
Effectiveness is reflected in base attack bonus.
Ease of use is covered in weapon class.
Anyone can pick up a kitchen knife and wield it as well as they can wield a monkey wrench as a club (strength permitting). That is why they both (dagger and club) fall under simple weapons.
One of things that always ticked me off with WoW was how effective daggers were against plate armor. I remember debating this with my guild, and the same points would always come up about 'finding the chink in the armor'. I always retorted that I also know where those chinks are, and should be able to adjust accordingly.
I consider daggers to mainly be for utility that can also be used in combat if required. Those other knives really weren't developed until after firearms made armor obsolete.
Oh, the other week I bought a Kukri from a Ghorka a few weeks ago. It's really, really cool. This is only remotely on-topic, but I wanted to throw it in there.
One of things that always ticked me off with WoW was how effective daggers were against plate armor. I remember debating this with my guild, and the same points would always come up about 'finding the chink in the armor'. I always retorted that I also know where those chinks are, and should be able to adjust accordingly.
I consider daggers to mainly be for utility that can also be used in combat if required. Those other knives really weren't developed until after firearms made armor obsolete.
Oh, the other week I bought a Kukri from a Ghorka a few weeks ago. It's really, really cool. This is only remotely on-topic, but I wanted to throw it in there.
Whats this about chinese in armor? Oh, wait.... Full plate is generaly backed up with mail to cover the joints, so a flat bladed dagger wouldn't have a snowballs chance in hell of getting to the guy inside, with the exception of the vision slit. Which is EXACTLY why late midieval daggers were so long, to finish off your foes (Le Misericorde).
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Whats this about chinese in armor?
Poor form, old chap. Poor form indeed.
I agree that daggers should not be nearly as effective as they are in WoW but, if they were more 'realistic' then anyone armed with a dagger could never, ever, EVER defeat a plate wearer in combat. As a player of a level 70 rogue, I can say that it's hard enough already. No need to make things worse. :P
One of things that always ticked me off with WoW was how effective daggers were against plate armor. I remember debating this with my guild, and the same points would always come up about 'finding the chink in the armor'. I always retorted that I also know where those chinks are, and should be able to adjust accordingly.
I consider daggers to mainly be for utility that can also be used in combat if required. Those other knives really weren't developed until after firearms made armor obsolete.
Oh, the other week I bought a Kukri from a Ghorka a few weeks ago. It's really, really cool. This is only remotely on-topic, but I wanted to throw it in there.
Not to get too critical, but you're upset about the realistic qualities of WoW? I mean... I can understand where the people are coming from in D&D that want to make it a reality simulation. But, WoW is... just not. Even close. At all. Ever. :)
(Hope that wasn't offensive- didn't mean it that way)
Whats this about chinese in armor?Poor form, old chap. Poor form indeed.
I know, I prefer the term "gaps" when referring to armor meself, I just couldn't resist. Poor impulse control :)
Not to get too critical, but you're upset about the realistic qualities of WoW? I mean... I can understand where the people are coming from in D&D that want to make it a reality simulation. But, WoW is... just not. Even close. At all. Ever. :)(Hope that wasn't offensive- didn't mean it that way)
Nah, I was never "upset" it was just one of the many things that kinda irked me about the game. I would just get drunk and subject the rest of my guild to my mad ramblings. I was also disapointed to find out I couldn't heal members of the Horde, altho I did find a way...
How about Daggers reduce the TWF penalty by half, so even unfeated they are decent choice for adding an extra attack.I would not have a problem with that. I would probably balance it with the fact that daggers count as 'extra-light' and thus take an ADDITIONAL -2 penalty on Sunder and Disarm checks when used. Seems fair to me, and somewhat realistic too.
Daggers would actually be really hard to sunder, simply because they are so light that they have incredible give in someone's hand and can be moved about with ease. I'd say that it is FAR more likely that a successful sunder attempt would knock the dagger out of the person's hand and send it flying rather than break it.