Dagger Damage

[Thartiel]

I've been DMing a game with some friends and they are all really mad ( mostly at me ) Because they found out that instead of going through a bunch of checks to conceal a dagger to kill the baron, When they could have done the same damage by punching him in the face.

So I've proposed to either Move the daggers dice to 1D6 or 2D4 , What are your thoughts?

 

[Siberys]

The dagger has other benefits aside from damage over unarmed attacks.

• +3 higher proficiency bonus
• Ranged capability
• Off-hand (for Tempest fighters who want the ranged capability noted above, jic. Most DMs probably rule that unarmed attacks can be used off-hand, though.)
• Light blade (for the rogues.)

Upping the damage any higher would make it a throwable short sword - in other words, it'd make it a simple weapon that was strictly better than the corresponding military weapon. The dagger is already one of the better simple weapons anyways.

EDIT: Another thing to note is that, unless there's someone who can use Ki focuses or you've done some houseruling, unarmed attacks can't be enchanted. That's BIG.

(As an aside, I've made that very house rule - certain items can be enchanted to "bestow" their enchantment on natural weapons. It fills up a rather glaring design hole, IMO. Ki Foci don't even cover it, as you need to have that as an implement from your class...)

 

[the Jester]

I've been DMing a game with some friends and they are all really mad ( mostly at me ) Because they found out that instead of going through a bunch of checks to conceal a dagger to kill the baron, When they could have done the same damage by punching him in the face.

So I've proposed to either Move the daggers dice to 1D6 or 2D4 , What are your thoughts?

I would recommend against it. Daggers already have a bunch of advantages, especially for the rogue.

 

[keterys]

Yep, daggers are good simple weapons. Compare them to short swords and see they're on par with military weapons.

 

[DreamChaser]

I've been DMing a game with some friends and they are all really mad ( mostly at me ) Because they found out that instead of going through a bunch of checks to conceal a dagger to kill the baron, When they could have done the same damage by punching him in the face.

So I've proposed to either Move the daggers dice to 1D6 or 2D4 , What are your thoughts?

I'm even more angry that you can kill someone with an ordinary whip just as quickly as with a dagger or your fist....

this falls into the "it needs to be simple to be a game" terrain. trained fists and skilled daggers both do damage but they do different types of damage. a fist to the arm or a dagger to the shoulder isn't going to really harm someone, but the latter could lead to a person bleeding to death if they don't get help. a fist to the temple, nose, or throat can be deadly...a dagger to the chest could miss anything vital and prove ultimately harmless.

also, you, as the DM, are completely justified in ruling that a fist cannot kill someone as easily as a dagger which fixes the problem...

DC

 

[Roger]

I think I might be inclined to model political assassination as a big skill challenge anyway.



Cheers,
Roger

 

[fuzzlewump]

Ever play final fantasy tactics? In battle, everyone was very resilient, taking multiple sword wounds, magic blasts, etc, just like in your typical D&D fight. However, in the cut scenes, murders would be one fell stroke, and a 'battle' cut scene generally was no longer than a few seconds as I recall. But, murders never happened with fists, that was just for beatings. If you want to play this scene out as a combat using 4E rules then yeah, smuggling in a dagger might not have been really worth the risk. If it's more of a cutscene, then daggers are definitely an aid. Sometimes as a DM you have to stand up to the rules in order to better your game. If the rules are shoving you and your group around to the detriment of your satisfaction with the game (your players are mad) then you should rethink your angle.

 

[cmbarona]

Is the dagger a plot device or a mechanical advantage? The dagger is already balanced as a mechanical benefit in the current combat system. The proficiency bonus alone ups its damage potential in combat (others can do the damage per round math if they would like).

But it sounds like the issue is its use as a plot device. If the goal is to kill the Baron, what role will he play? If they get into combat with the Baron and/or his guards, then the dagger is balanced for its role. If, however, the goal is to get to the Baron, so that one can deliver a fatal blow, then the dagger is a plot device, and its damage potential is irrelevant.

By the way, you can do fatal damage with your fists. You might have to open them, though. It's called strangulation or neck-snapping. Be creative here, people. The narrative is yours in 4e. Combat is about more than just swinging things at each other.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Flat out upping dagger damage simply won't work mechanically in 4e. In the hands of a rogue the dagger is actually THE deadliest weapon a rogue can use, even more deadly than a rapier (double swords possibly notwithstanding, but that's another whole discussion). Upping the dagger to d6 or 2d4 will simply make rogues unbalanced in combat for sure, at least without other significant mechanical changes to the game.

I have to agree with the plot device thing. Remember, melee combat rules are really designed to work in melee combat, not to model stabbing someone in the back in the middle of dinner. I agree with other posters that something like that is much better modeled as a skill challenge. If you do want to use the combat rules for it, then make the Baron a minion, if you successfully stab him, then he just plain dies.

If the goal is to have a duel with the guy in some fashion, then in the hands of a rogue the dagger will work fine. In fact it is already mechanically the rogue's best choice of weapon for that in general.

 

[Turtlejay]

If it is that much of a bug to you, what about downgrading unarmed damage to 1d3 or just plain str mod?

Jay