Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MyISPHatesENWorld" data-source="post: 4230934" data-attributes="member: 65684">Meh, anytime you have someone that provides you with a combat advantage, you should be able to apply sneak attack. If you can hit them in combat in the first place, you can hit them harder and more accurately when they're at a disadvantage. If you can sneak attack a dragon at all with a dagger, or use a dagger effectively against people who are using superior weapons in combat, limiting sneak attack to certain weapons isn't because of realism, it's just arbitrary. If there is a balance issue resulting from a desire to make fighting with a dagger work, then you do something with the math to make it fit and say, &quot;Hey it's a balance issue, so you do less sneak attack damage with higher base damage weapons.&quot;All the arguments about history and comparing the DND greatsword to historical greatswords&nbsp;&nbsp; (while neglecting the fact that the DND falchion is specifically not a historical falchion) or weapon length/space and crap aren't used except when someone doesn't like something, but wants to make it seem like there is an actual reason that their personal preference should be hardcoded into the rules to limit the options of others. It's the same when someone doesn't like two-weapon fighting or multiclassing. Real world examples and concepts that are ignored through the entire DND system or are already accounted for in another way by the system suddenly become important in regard to sneak attack, two-weapon fighting or whatever.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MyISPHatesENWorld, post: 4230934, member: 65684"] Meh, anytime you have someone that provides you with a combat advantage, you should be able to apply sneak attack. If you can hit them in combat in the first place, you can hit them harder and more accurately when they're at a disadvantage. If you can sneak attack a dragon at all with a dagger, or use a dagger effectively against people who are using superior weapons in combat, limiting sneak attack to certain weapons isn't because of realism, it's just arbitrary. If there is a balance issue resulting from a desire to make fighting with a dagger work, then you do something with the math to make it fit and say, "Hey it's a balance issue, so you do less sneak attack damage with higher base damage weapons." All the arguments about history and comparing the DND greatsword to historical greatswords (while neglecting the fact that the DND falchion is specifically not a historical falchion) or weapon length/space and crap aren't used except when someone doesn't like something, but wants to make it seem like there is an actual reason that their personal preference should be hardcoded into the rules to limit the options of others. It's the same when someone doesn't like two-weapon fighting or multiclassing. Real world examples and concepts that are ignored through the entire DND system or are already accounted for in another way by the system suddenly become important in regard to sneak attack, two-weapon fighting or whatever. [/QUOTE]

Verification