Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kobold Boots" data-source="post: 7384911" data-attributes="member: 92239">Entirely fair.&nbsp; Here's my reply to sword v. dagger&nbsp; Sword has more reach than the dagger.&nbsp; The key to getting over on a sword wielder when you're the dagger wielder is to get inside the swing and be where the sword isn't.&nbsp; Example.&nbsp; If I'm going up against a guy with a sword and they're swinging down from their right hand side to their left.&nbsp; My goal is to actually walk into/under the swing arc before the blade gets there and end up behind the swordsman.At that point his momentum exposes his back and I have a good place to put the dagger, right between the shoulder blades.&nbsp; If I want to get fancy, I grab the top of his head and slit his neck.&nbsp; (As I'm typing this I realize it's Easter - my apologies.&nbsp; Kind of grim)It's counter-intuitive but those are the things that weapon training teaches.&nbsp; No weapon is less deadly than any other, but every person has a varying degree of training with the weapon, reducing or increasing its deadliness.&nbsp; Of course, reach and range are important, but if you're in close quarters most times, training can offset the advantage if both people are not equally trained.&nbsp; Now before this gets out of hand, at some point this logic breaks down.&nbsp; I'm not going to try to compare something across tech levels like sniper rifle v. dagger because assuming both targets know of the other, it's pretty clearly over for the melee weapon.&nbsp; However, it's pretty clear that a great axe and a dagger can both kill someone, but one is better suited for assassination (dagger) and one is better for cleaving down a shield (axe).&nbsp; There should be some way to reflect that.That said, the properties were part of 1e for better or worse.&nbsp; Only thing I'm suggesting that's new is the single base damage die.Thanks,KB</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kobold Boots, post: 7384911, member: 92239"] Entirely fair. Here's my reply to sword v. dagger Sword has more reach than the dagger. The key to getting over on a sword wielder when you're the dagger wielder is to get inside the swing and be where the sword isn't. Example. If I'm going up against a guy with a sword and they're swinging down from their right hand side to their left. My goal is to actually walk into/under the swing arc before the blade gets there and end up behind the swordsman. At that point his momentum exposes his back and I have a good place to put the dagger, right between the shoulder blades. If I want to get fancy, I grab the top of his head and slit his neck. (As I'm typing this I realize it's Easter - my apologies. Kind of grim) It's counter-intuitive but those are the things that weapon training teaches. No weapon is less deadly than any other, but every person has a varying degree of training with the weapon, reducing or increasing its deadliness. Of course, reach and range are important, but if you're in close quarters most times, training can offset the advantage if both people are not equally trained. Now before this gets out of hand, at some point this logic breaks down. I'm not going to try to compare something across tech levels like sniper rifle v. dagger because assuming both targets know of the other, it's pretty clearly over for the melee weapon. However, it's pretty clear that a great axe and a dagger can both kill someone, but one is better suited for assassination (dagger) and one is better for cleaving down a shield (axe). There should be some way to reflect that. That said, the properties were part of 1e for better or worse. Only thing I'm suggesting that's new is the single base damage die. Thanks, KB [/QUOTE]

Verification