Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="D'karr" data-source="post: 3117514" data-attributes="member: 336">Fighting with a dagger is still a "suboptimal" choice in the game as it stands now and the game has way more artificial balance than ever before.  So why would you play a character that fights with a dagger instead of a longsword?  Flavor.In 1e and 2e there were weapons and choices that obviously were more "optimized".  This apparent lack of balance never prevented anyone from doing things differently from the "optimized" track.  As a matter of fact during the same period you mentioned I saw a wider variety of fighting styles than before.  So your experience is as varied as mine.  And that is all it is, an experience.  You said yourself that YOU played the game that way.  Obviously some other people played it differently and balance was not an issue.If we took the balance argument further down the line all weapons should do the same damage.  All classes should only be able to do X damage and any class that did Y would be unbalanced.  In OD&D all weapons used the same damage die.  After a while it was boring.It is obvious that there are weapons that are better at doing damage than others.  People still fight with all kinds of weapons.  I've seen the Greataxe wielding power attacker and the dagger wielding finesse fighter.  Those two styles are obviously not balanced but people still choose them; not because of balance but because of flavor.</blockquote>