The Modos RPG Ode to Daggers

GMMichael

Guide of Modos
Modos Ode to the Dagger:

Well, as it stands (my code for "I'm open to ideas"), a dagger does 1d4+1 damage. Minimum damage 1 (per all weapons), max damage 5. Average damage, 3.5.

The average person has 10 Physical health. So average joe can get stabbed about 3 times, or with 2 good hits, and be Mostly Dead.

Joe doesn't like this idea, so he dons the best armor that average people can get: padded armor (d4). The next time Joe gets stabbed, he gets to roll a d4 to reduce that dagger's damage. His armor's average protection is 2.5. So on a good hit, Joe will take 4 damage (5 damage less 4 protection). On a bad hit, Joe will take 1 damage (minimum successful hit) (2 damage less 4 protection). After 2 good dagger hits, Joe will still be hating life. (If both sides take half, Joe takes 1 damage).

So Joe gets promoted to Superior Joe, and gets issued a shiny new suit of scalemail (d8). Scale, we'll assume, has some good spots for dagger penetration. Joe can now take half on all his protection against daggers, and the dagger will only be able to do 1 damage. However, if Joe rolls, the dagger can do max damage of 4 (5 damage less 1 protection), minimum damage of 1 (2 damage less 1 protection).

The dagger looks pretty wimpy against medium-armored opponents. Enter the Backstab perk, which grants another +2 damage against unaware opponents. (If the dagger-wielder only takes backstab once) now if Superior Joe takes half on his protection, he'll take 3 damage on a good, sneaky dagger attack.

Or you could add a mod for critical hits: an attacker rolling an unmatched 20 gets to avoid armor protection on his attack.

And let's not forget Hero Points: if the player of the dagger-wielder feels lucky, he can add hero points to his damage roll, and that dagger stab will gain an average of 3.5 more damage on a successful hit.

(For the record, characters gain 1 "hit point" per level, unless they spend their level perk on 3 more hit points).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Foxwarrior

First Post
But when would someone want to use a dagger instead of some stronger weapon? It seems like there's a very large incentive to use a weapon that's at least a little bit better than the target's armor.
 

Dethklok

First Post
But when would someone want to use a dagger instead of some stronger weapon?
Ask the Spartans - the Laconian Xiphos is essentially a heavy dagger.

I'm not trying to argue with you, Fioxwarrior; I agree with you. But I want to point out that any set of rules aiming for plausibility needs to explain why the most feared fighting force of the Hellenic world armed itself with spears and daggers, with its primary defense coming from big shields.

After that, the next and even more difficult challenge is for a system to explain how Musashi was able to defeat Kojiro using a whittled down oar against Kojiro's katana. Note that "Musashi was of higher level" doesn't answer the question, since Kojiro was a master swordsman, undefeated at the time Musashi killed him.

Are the apparent advantages given by weapon damage and armor protection actually red herrings?

(Hint: weapon damage and armor protection are usually red herrings.)
 

GMMichael

Guide of Modos
When to use a dagger?
1) Daggers are easily concealed, making it easier to be armed in a combat-free zone.
2) Daggers are light. Rather than hump around two 8 pound longswords, why not just carry a dagger for backup?
3) Weapon focus. Modos allows bumping up the damage of your daggers with perks.
4) Daggers can be thrown effectively. Heavier weapons, not so much.

I'm not trying to argue with you, Fioxwarrior; I agree with you. But I want to point out that any set of rules aiming for plausibility needs to explain why the most feared fighting force of the Hellenic world armed itself with spears and daggers, with its primary defense coming from big shields.

After that, the next and even more difficult challenge is for a system to explain how Musashi was able to defeat Kojiro using a whittled down oar against Kojiro's katana. Note that "Musashi was of higher level" doesn't answer the question, since Kojiro was a master swordsman, undefeated at the time Musashi killed him.

Are the apparent advantages given by weapon damage and armor protection actually red herrings?

Spartans: I'm thinking that a dagger is 1) in case you lose your big, heavy spear, and 2) a lot cheaper to make than enough swords for an entire army.

Musashi and Kojiro: if they're as old as the Spartans, their story has probably lost some accuracy in translation. Even if they're not, there could have been some creative license involved. If THAT wasn't the case, let's consider that a master swordsman probably spends all his time fighting against other swordsmen, so it might be easier to catch him off-guard with a non-sword.

How does Modos explain Musashi and Kojiro? Simple. Musashi used all his hero points on a successful hit.

Red herrings: You keep saying that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.
 

Foxwarrior

First Post
I believe that the actual uses for daggers were more like:
Daggers are light, cheap, and generally useful, so every person had one. It's just basic cutlery and whittling equipment, you know.
Daggers are much better at stabbing people who are less than arm's length away than spears.
Daggers are really good for finishing people in full plate. (Look up rondel daggers and videos about fighting in full plate)

I'm afraid that your pricing angle isn't going to be very interesting for a small squad game where each player can probably afford to buy the best mundane equipment after a few sessions.
 


Dethklok

First Post
Spartans: I'm thinking that a dagger is 1) in case you lose your big, heavy spear, and 2) a lot cheaper to make than enough swords for an entire army.
Spartan warriors didn't use substandard equipment for the sake of cutting costs. They were well supplied by a large population of helots.

Musashi and Kojiro: if they're as old as the Spartans
Um, Musashi Miyamoto was born in the 16th century; the Spartan warriors came before the Roman Empire.

let's consider that a master swordsman probably spends all his time fighting against other swordsmen, so it might be easier to catch him off-guard with a non-sword.
Interesting thought. But is this a point your system would suggest?

How does Modos explain Musashi and Kojiro? Simple. Musashi used all his hero points on a successful hit.
Would your system explain why Kojiro didn't use all his hero points and hit him first?

Red herrings: You keep saying that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.
From Dictionary.com:

red herring

noun

1. a smoked herring.

2. something intended to divert attention from the real problem or matter at hand; a misleading clue.




Snappy quotes from movies: They do not make random objections suddenly meaningful.

I believe that the actual uses for daggers were more like:
Daggers are light, cheap, and generally useful, so every person had one. It's just basic cutlery and whittling equipment, you know.
Daggers are much better at stabbing people who are less than arm's length away than spears.
Daggers are really good for finishing people in full plate. (Look up rondel daggers and videos about fighting in full plate)

I'm afraid that your pricing angle isn't going to be very interesting for a small squad game where each player can probably afford to buy the best mundane equipment after a few sessions.
I agree wholeheartedly. But I'm wondering whether someone can also explain, from within the framework of a roleplaying game system, why the Spartans would rely on spears for their main weapon and shields for their primary defense, rather than outfitting themselves with two handed swords?

Roleplaying games don't have to be plausible; sometimes implausibility is part of the fun. In this case, the entire issue devolves into questions about whether having some weapons deal more damage than others is fun or not. But this isn't what I see. It seems to me as though a great deal of time and effort is put into homebrews and house rules to make them "realistic," when the rules they use are no more realistic than those of any other rpg. If the goal is greater realism, then I think that DMMike and anyone else designing roleplaying games would be well advised to make most weapons deal identical damage, and differentiate weapons primarily in their reach, and secondarily by wieldiness. After this, their ability to penetrate armor might also be an issue. Differences in damage rate below even this - in real life, all weapons can kill in one hit.
 

Meatboy

First Post
...I agree wholeheartedly. But I'm wondering whether someone can also explain, from within the framework of a roleplaying game system, why the Spartans would rely on spears for their main weapon and shields for their primary defense, rather than outfitting themselves with two handed swords?

In game terms spears would have a reach advantage. With the spartans being stacked together they could potentially attack a single target 6 times (if they are all in 5 foot spaces 3 in the front 3 in the back and each get one attack.) Also if they have some kind of training/feat that grants them whatever kind of armor bonus not only of their shield but also that of their adjacent allies then a spartan style shield wall could totally make sense. Even if they weren't that high level they could be extremely tough fighting team.
 

GMMichael

Guide of Modos
[MENTION=7068]fox[/MENTION], pricing: Characters will, in all likelihood, be able to afford all the larger weapons they want. So yes, that is not likely a deciding factor for choosing to take daggers.
Finishing people in full plate: probably a job for grappling rules, since up-close is the best place to get away from sword attacks.
[MENTION=3987]Bagpuss[/MENTION], heavier weapons: improving the damage of a waraxe is great, but it's a lot easier to sneak a dagger past the palace guards.
[MENTION=6746469]Dethklok[/MENTION]:
"Would your system explain why Kojiro didn't use all his hero points and hit him first?"
Well, no better than any system can explain what a PC does. But here's a shot:
Kojiro didn't use his hero points on his first attack because he wanted to use them once he was in a favorable attack position, spending them on damage instead of attack. Or, the "Kojiro" character is impressively tough, so his player spends hero points on protection rolls, but in this case, they weren't enough.

Red Herring: sorry, but my take on the red herring is that it's a plot device, or an argument technique, intended, as the Dictionary says, "to divert attention." Since weapons and armor don't have a plot, there's not a lot of diverting to be done.

Realistic RPGs: Modos is decidedly not bent on realism. Its purpose, from the get-go, was to be very streamlined, yet playable. So if the game runs smoothly and quickly, I've accomplished my goal.
Although I gotta say - roleplaying games probably wouldn't be very popular if most weapons were one-hit-killers.
[MENTION=40857]Meatboy[/MENTION] and Dethklok:
Does Modos provide an incentive for spear-and-dagger combat style? Not the core rules. Well, two-weapon-fighting is rewarded with a free attack action. But under core rules, you'd be better off with a short spear and long sword, instead of a dagger and longspear.
I say under core rules, because another Modos objective is to provide enough flexibility for anyone to turn the game into whatever they want it to be.
 

Dethklok

First Post
In game terms spears would have a reach advantage. With the spartans being stacked together they could potentially attack a single target 6 times (if they are all in 5 foot spaces 3 in the front 3 in the back and each get one attack.) Also if they have some kind of training/feat that grants them whatever kind of armor bonus not only of their shield but also that of their adjacent allies then a spartan style shield wall could totally make sense. Even if they weren't that high level they could be extremely tough fighting team.
Absolutely! Do you know of any published roleplaying games that do this? Suddenly I can't remember how D&D 3rd Edition handled it, and I don't think the other versions even came close. The only game I can think of with good shieldwalls is Mazes and Minotaurs, and maybe Nikolas Llord's Newcastle Quite Decent rules (but that isn't even an rpg).

Red Herring: sorry, but my take on the red herring is that it's a plot device, or an argument technique, intended, as the Dictionary says, "to divert attention." Since weapons and armor don't have a plot, there's not a lot of diverting to be done.
So you'll correct me for using words the way the dictionary uses them rather than the way you personally use them.

Realistic RPGs: Modos is decidedly not bent on realism. Its purpose, from the get-go, was to be very streamlined, yet playable. So if the game runs smoothly and quickly, I've accomplished my goal.
You're rolling to hit, then for damage, and additionally for armor reducing damage. This isn't streamlined. Maybe it's fun, but if so then the fun must come from rolling pots of dice.

Although I gotta say - roleplaying games probably wouldn't be very popular if most weapons were one-hit-killers.
What? Have you never heard of OD&D? Even in BECMI fighters could die in one hit!

(Good old OD&D, with 1d6 damage for all weapons. People who haven't seen that should really see it.)
 

Remove ads

Top