Daggers- Will they ever be optimal?

[Nagog]

Question for the playground:

Is there any build out there in which fighting with a dagger is better than using a short sword or scimitar, or for melee/ranged combos, a war hammer? As far as I can see, Daggers are a sub-par pick of weapon in pretty much every way, unless you've got an amazing dagger with an amazing magical effect. If there isn't such a build, would allowing the following mechanic as a house rule be fitting?

Daggers: When wielding a dagger and nothing in your off hand, you may use the Two Weapon Fighting Style or other bonus action attacks as though you had 2 weapons, transferring the dagger to your off hand as a free action.

This would allow two weapon fighting to be used on Gish builds more easily, as well as give Daggers more reason to stick around after you can afford a short sword. Even Rogues could benefit from this, having one hand free to do things in combat but still gaining a bonus action attack to hopefully land a Sneak Attack. What sayest the Playground?

[Lunali]

Daggers are nice if you like the option of throwing them. From a non-mechanical standpoint, daggers are more likely to be allowed into a lot of places and are easier to conceal if they aren't.

[mythmonster2]

I think it's fine that daggers are suboptimal in straight up combat. Take a guy with a knife versus a guy with almost any other weapon, and my bet's probably on the second. The main advantage of daggers is that they're easy to obtain and hide. If you do want to make a combat feat for them, I think I'd focus on the sneakiness associated with the dagger; maybe giving you a bonus to damage if you're hidden or something like that.

[MrStabby]

Higher level monks don't care about the damage die so can use daggers with no loss. Daggers can also be thrown which is advantageous sometimes.

[FinnS]

Question for the playground:

Is there any build out there in which fighting with a dagger is better than using a short sword or scimitar, or for melee/ranged combos, a war hammer? As far as I can see, Daggers are a sub-par pick of weapon in pretty much every way, unless you've got an amazing dagger with an amazing magical effect. If there isn't such a build, would allowing the following mechanic as a house rule be fitting?

Daggers: When wielding a dagger and nothing in your off hand, you may use the Two Weapon Fighting Style or other bonus action attacks as though you had 2 weapons, transferring the dagger to your off hand as a free action.

This would allow two weapon fighting to be used on Gish builds more easily, as well as give Daggers more reason to stick around after you can afford a short sword. Even Rogues could benefit from this, having one hand free to do things in combat but still gaining a bonus action attack to hopefully land a Sneak Attack. What sayest the Playground?

Daggers are actually an unique weapon. They are the only melee Finesse weapon in the game with the Thrown property and from almost all the tables I have seen and majority of other DMs I've talked to, is the only exception to the rule that thrown melee weapons can't benefit from the Sharpshooter Feat.

[MaxWilson]

Question for the playground:

Is there any build out there in which fighting with a dagger is better than using a short sword or scimitar, or for melee/ranged combos, a war hammer? As far as I can see, Daggers are a sub-par pick of weapon in pretty much every way, unless you've got an amazing dagger with an amazing magical effect.

Rogues don't really care about the size of the base weapon die, and daggers are small and disposable and can be thrown. Daggers work fine for Rogues.

For similar reasons, a Defensive Duelist bowman would rather shoot two arrows and pull out a dagger as the end of his turn to defend himself, dropping it at the start of his next turn and then shooting more arrows, than do the same thing with a shortsword.

Daggers: they get the job done. Good enough.

[nickl_2000]

After level 5 it would be better for a Monk to use a Dagger than a shortsword. They are both piercing, both do 1d6 damage, both are monk weapons, but the dagger has the thrown property.

Still, it isn't as good as a spear as a piercing weapon until level 11. At which point, I would argue that the dagger is ever so slightly better due to the defensive duelist feat.

[Lavaeolus]

and from almost all the tables I have seen and majority of other DMs I've talked to, is the only exception to the rule that thrown melee weapons can't benefit from the Sharpshooter Feat.

I should note that, if daggers are getting extra benefits from Sharpshooter, this is strictly a house-rule. Dagger attacks are not attacks with a ranged weapon; they are ranged attacks with a thrown melee weapon, that can use Dexterity thanks to Finesse.

Now, that does mean they are ranged weapon attacks when thrown, in that they are weapon attacks that are ranged, and so the first two Sharpshooter benefits are applicable. But that applies to all Thrown weapons when being used for a ranged attack.

I am personally not aware of daggers getting special exemptions at any tables I've been to, but then, I don't play too often and when I have I don't think the question has come up.

[Zetakya]

Aside from what everyone else has said, it's the only finessable melee weapon available to Sorcerers, Warlocks and Wizards (without racial proficiencies), which matters a lot if you're DEX-built and intending to use Green Flame Blade or Booming Blade.

Also, they can and should be reflavoured as Shuriken for Monks :)

[Nagog]

I think it's fine that daggers are suboptimal in straight up combat. Take a guy with a knife versus a guy with almost any other weapon, and my bet's probably on the second. The main advantage of daggers is that they're easy to obtain and hide. If you do want to make a combat feat for them, I think I'd focus on the sneakiness associated with the dagger; maybe giving you a bonus to damage if you're hidden or something like that.

I'd disagree that knives/daggers are less optimal irl than other weapons (excluding guns obv). Knives are still standard equipment for modern day soldiers, and when you get in close quarters combat, you want something like a knife that's quick and doesn't take a lot of space to swing. Something that reflects that and the versatility of the weapon should be reflected. Mechanically, a closer application would be only daggers can be used to attack somebody you're grappling, but in the style of Jeremy Crawford, it's better to give than take away.


Aside from what everyone else has said, it's the only finessable melee weapon available to Sorcerers, Warlocks and Wizards (without racial proficiencies), which matters a lot if you're DEX-built and intending to use Green Flame Blade or Booming Blade.

Also, they can and should be reflavoured as Shuriken for Monks :)

I'd reflavor darts as shuriken more than Daggers. Ranged attacks are the same, but attacking in melee with a shuriken is just as likely to hurt you as it is to hurt the enemy.

[FinnS]

I should note that, if daggers are getting extra benefits from Sharpshooter, this is strictly a house-rule. Dagger attacks are not attacks with a ranged weapon; they are ranged attacks with a thrown melee weapon, that can use Dexterity thanks to Finesse.

Now, that does mean they are ranged weapon attacks when thrown, in that they are weapon attacks that are ranged, and so the first two Sharpshooter benefits are applicable. But that applies to all Thrown weapons when being used for a ranged attack.

I am personally not aware of daggers getting special exemptions at any tables I've been to, but then, I don't play too often and when I have I don't think the question has come up.

Well the argument generally is that all thrown weapons use STR for attack rolls and therefore why Sharpshooter, a clearly Dex based Feat, can't apply to them. Daggers being finesse absolves them of that argument.
Then, if you really start thinking about it as a DM and how it would impact the game you realise it's still just a 1d4 weapon, it's still just 60' range and most important of all, you only have one "Draw" per turn. You can get 2 by picking up the Dual Wielder Feat but that is your restriction forever more. I mean most people don't even realise that if a dual wielder without the DW Feat rolls initiative without at least one of his weapons already out, he can not pull out/draw his second weapon that turn. (Should also be noted for those paying attention that the same also applies to a sword and board user who doesn't already have his weapon or shield out already.)

Simply think of it this way...you can throw as many daggers as you want in a turn up to your full normal attacks plus a bonus but you only have one reload, 2 with DW Feat. That's it forever more absent of finding a magical Dagger with the returning property.

So at most, WITH the DW Feat, starting your turn with both weapons already drawn, you could throw up to 3 daggers and end your turn with a dagger in your main hand with an empty off-hand or throw 4 daggers (level 11 Fighter for example using 3 attacks and his bonus) but be completely unarmed until your next turn.
How all this interacts with other abilities, spells ect is on a case by case basis. Hasted for example, I would rule the extra attack comes with another "draw" but something like Horde Breaker from the Ranger would obviously not get another draw as it clearly states the free attack must be made with the same weapon unless that weapon had the Returning property, then I would allow it.

Bottomline, any DM worth their salt that thinks about it for more than 5 seconds should realise that allowing it doesn't even come remotely close to breaking the game especially considering anyone trying to do all this is pretty much Required to pick up Two Feats that they can never get the full benefits of both at the same time and you have no way of removing the disadvantage of using a ranged weapon while in melee.

[HappyDaze]

Question for the playground:

Is there any build out there in which fighting with a dagger is better than using a short sword or scimitar, or for melee/ranged combos, a war hammer?

Warhammer? Do you mean spear?

[Luccan]

Question for the playground:

Is there any build out there in which fighting with a dagger is better than using a short sword or scimitar, or for melee/ranged combos, a war hammer? As far as I can see, Daggers are a sub-par pick of weapon in pretty much every way, unless you've got an amazing dagger with an amazing magical effect. If there isn't such a build, would allowing the following mechanic as a house rule be fitting?

Daggers: When wielding a dagger and nothing in your off hand, you may use the Two Weapon Fighting Style or other bonus action attacks as though you had 2 weapons, transferring the dagger to your off hand as a free action.

This would allow two weapon fighting to be used on Gish builds more easily, as well as give Daggers more reason to stick around after you can afford a short sword. Even Rogues could benefit from this, having one hand free to do things in combat but still gaining a bonus action attack to hopefully land a Sneak Attack. What sayest the Playground?

Were Throwing a better option, they'd have the advantage of being Thrown with Dex. This could make them ideal for a Finesse based TWF who wanted to occasionally hit an enemy from afar.

If you were to buff throwing in some regard (such as, draw a thrown weapon like ammo for multiple attacks), I think you'd find it niche but more useful.

Edit: Arguably, might still be decent for melee rogues.

[MaxWilson]

Well the argument generally is that all thrown weapons use STR for attack rolls and therefore why Sharpshooter, a clearly Dex based Feat, can't apply to them. Daggers being finesse absolves them of that argument.

You're overlooking Darts, a ranged weapon with both Thrown and Finesse. Darts are the only weapon which can benefit simultaneously from Archery style's +2 to hit, Sharpshooter's -5/+10, and a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength's +9 to hit and damage. (Daggers don't benefit from Archery style.)

Or you can use darts with Dex, of course.

[FinnS]

You're overlooking Darts, a ranged weapon with both Thrown and Finesse. Darts are the only weapon which can benefit simultaneously from Archery style's +2 to hit, Sharpshooter's -5/+10, and a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength's +9 to hit and damage. (Daggers don't benefit from Archery style.)

Or you can use darts with Dex, of course.

See...but there's 2 arguments to be made here.
First, going by my previously established criteria for allowing Daggers to be used with Sharpshooter in the first place I would disallow any ranged weapon using STR to benefit from Sharpshooter. (And honestly even without allowing Daggers to be used with Sharpshooter I would STILL disallow any STR based Sharpshooter shenanigans, sorry.)
Second, by the that same criteria I would allow the Archery Style to also apply to thrown Daggers because I also realise that unless they're a level 10 Fighter Champion, they will have to make a choice of either taking the Archery Style that will only be a benefit when they throw a Dagger or being able to apply the Ability mod to the damage of their off-hand all the time by choosing the Two-Weapon Fighting Style.

And once again, after establishing the issues I posted previously that restrict the rate of fire you can get throwing Daggers, allowing the Archery Style to apply is not a big deal at all.

As far as the Darts go, having the Finesse property on them has always been an absolute mystery to me. Being listed as a straight up ranged weapon already means that it's a DEX based weapon and having the Thrown property doesn't and shouldn't change that. All adding the Finesse property did was add confusion for no reason.

[LordCdrMilitant]

I'd disagree that knives/daggers are less optimal irl than other weapons (excluding guns obv). Knives are still standard equipment for modern day soldiers, and when you get in close quarters combat, you want something like a knife that's quick and doesn't take a lot of space to swing. Something that reflects that and the versatility of the weapon should be reflected. Mechanically, a closer application would be only daggers can be used to attack somebody you're grappling, but in the style of Jeremy Crawford, it's better to give than take away.


All things considered, it is my understanding that daggers are issued over swords because they're not going to take up a lot of space in your kit [as opposed to jangling at your hip for the march, or being hung on your backpack where you couldn't get it when you need it, etc.] and are lighter [not that swords are heavy], not because it's more effective than a sword in close quarters combat or anything like that. In theory, it's going to be used to make the end of your gun pointy when not being used to do a variety of things unrelated to killing people anyway, so even if it was faster to swing or something it wouldn't be relevant. It also has a lot of utility unrelated to making people dead, which a sword doesn't.

Also, I have a hard time imagining that a knife is actually relevantly faster to swing or can be used in smaller enough spaces than a short sword to be a primary weapon for a melee combatant.


On the other hand, knives are common, easily concealable, and trivially carried as a secondary weapon if you find yourself in need of it, so I would say that in D&D, that's it's purpose. It's literally a back-up weapon, and also for use when, you know, the town guard won't let you bring your greatsword and heavy crossbow in to see the mayor.

[Frozenstep]

One good feat would be all it really needs, but I think it would be best if it had some sort of utility rather then giving the weapon just combat power to match the others. I took a stab at it sometime back, the main ideas were being able to make one attack with a dagger as a bonus action after succeeding on a grapple or while grappling or being grappled/restrained by an enemy, to represent the utility of a shorter weapon when you don't have much room to work with. Other ideas included not having disadvantage on attacks while restrained/prone with a dagger, and applying poison to the dagger as a bonus action (though that steps on thief rogue's toes).

[Amechra]

After level 5 it would be better for a Monk to use a Dagger than a shortsword. They are both piercing, both do 1d6 damage, both are monk weapons, but the dagger has the thrown property.

Still, it isn't as good as a spear as a piercing weapon until level 11. At which point, I would argue that the dagger is ever so slightly better due to the defensive duelist feat.

I played a knife-fighter Monk who used daggers for all of her "main" attacks. It worked much better than you'd think - it's easier to conceal a dagger than it is to conceal a spear, and it nicely solves the whole "magic weapons can be hard to get" thing that Monks can run into.

I mean, we were also playing from 5th to 14th, so...

[MaxWilson]

See...but there's 2 arguments to be made here.
First, going by my previously established criteria for allowing Daggers to be used with Sharpshooter in the first place I would disallow any ranged weapon using STR to benefit from Sharpshooter. (And honestly even without allowing Daggers to be used with Sharpshooter I would STILL disallow any STR based Sharpshooter shenanigans, sorry.)

Sorry, didn't realize you were discussing your personal rulings. I was just pointing out that darts are by RAW Ranged, Thrown and Finesse, which explicitly lets you use Str instead of Dex even though it's a ranged attack. I don't really follow your logic for disallowing that when you DM but I'm not trying to tell you that you can't.



As far as the Darts go, having the Finesse property on them has always been an absolute mystery to me. Being listed as a straight up ranged weapon already means that it's a DEX based weapon and having the Thrown property doesn't and shouldn't change that. All adding the Finesse property did was add confusion for no reason.

It's because Finesse lets you choose between Str and Dex. Without Finesse, using Str with darts would be illegal.

[Luccan]

I played a knife-fighter Monk who used daggers for all of her "main" attacks. It worked much better than you'd think - it's easier to conceal a dagger than it is to conceal a spear, and it nicely solves the whole "magic weapons can be hard to get" thing that Monks can run into.

I mean, we were also playing from 5th to 14th, so...

This is worth pointing out, even if it isn't a combat advantage. Daggers, darts, and slings are all pretty easy to hide compared to every other weapon in the game. For intrigue purposes, they're ideal if you aren't a monk, bladelock, or eldritch knight.

[Zetakya]

I'd reflavor darts as shuriken more than Daggers. Ranged attacks are the same, but attacking in melee with a shuriken is just as likely to hurt you as it is to hurt the enemy.

Despite the fact that Monks are proficient with them, and get 10 of them as default starter equipment, Darts are not actually Monk Weapons as defined by the Martial Arts class ability.

[FinnS]

Sorry, didn't realize you were discussing your personal rulings. I was just pointing out that darts are by RAW Ranged, Thrown and Finesse, which explicitly lets you use Str instead of Dex even though it's a ranged attack. I don't really follow your logic for disallowing that when you DM but I'm not trying to tell you that you can't.

I didn't say you couldn't use Darts with STR. I see the logic in allowing it and I guess that adding the Finesse property is there for basically a reverse finesse so you can add STR to them but as far as being able to use Sharpshooter with them when using STR to throw them, I would rule against it. Sharpshooter is a DEX based attack Feat period IMO.

And we were talking about my personal rulings in way or at least being outside of pure RAW as we were discussing the throwing of daggers and whether SS would or should apply.

[Lavaeolus]

Despite the fact that Monks are proficient with them, and get 10 of them as default starter equipment, Darts are not actually Monk Weapons as defined by the Martial Arts class ability.

That's a good catch. Among the restrictions for what a Monk weapon is, one is that they have to be a melee weapon. Which I guess makes sense within the 5e Monk's design -- it's very much a melee class -- but it's a little ironic that what makes darts closer to shurikens is what disqualifies them from the class.

A Kensei Monk can get around this, of course, although they probably have better choices.

[Teaguethebean]

They make a fine weapon for a whispers bard. They don't require you close to melee nor do you need to stay at a range. Additionally it gives you two chances to land psychic blades. Really that is my only example of a good use though.

[Misterwhisper]

You're overlooking Darts, a ranged weapon with both Thrown and Finesse. Darts are the only weapon which can benefit simultaneously from Archery style's +2 to hit, Sharpshooter's -5/+10, and a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength's +9 to hit and damage. (Daggers don't benefit from Archery style.)

Or you can use darts with Dex, of course.

Also dueling and TWF.

As a goof I built a dual wielded who used darts:

Vhuman for dual wielder
Fighter 1 for TWF
Ranger 2 for Archery
More fighter, champion taking

Start with 1 dart in hand, throw dart with dueling and archery
Draw second dart in off hand and throw it, same bonuses because you are only holding 1 weapon
Draw second another dart and repeat next round.

Not optimal but fun.

No throwing build will ever really work until returning weapon as a normal enchantment instead artificer only.

[Tanarii]

Also dueling and TWF.

Dueling and TWF only works with melee weapons. Whether thrown or in melee. Or was that your point?

[Zetakya]

That's a good catch. Among the restrictions for what a Monk weapon is, one is that they have to be a melee weapon. Which I guess makes sense within the 5e Monk's design -- it's very much a melee class -- but it's a little ironic that what makes darts closer to shurikens is what disqualifies them from the class.

A Kensei Monk can get around this, of course, although they probably have better choices.

To be honest I think it's a mistake and the word melee shouldn't be in the definition of Monk Weapons (which would make Darts and Slings Monk Weapons, but not Light Crossbows or Shortbows because those are Two Handed).

There's a tiny mechanical benefit that Darts and Slings are lighter and easier to carry than Daggers, and a Sling gives you a longer ranged option for dealing Bludgeoning damage (but when was the last time you saw weapon damage type be a serious metric for selecting attacks on?).

But they're just so flavourful for Monk that I think it's an oversight.

Re: Kensai. In theory because the damage die is irrelevant to Monk Weapons you want to have a selection of different weapon damage types at range and in melee. But as above, weapon damage type is rarely a consideration.

[Monsterpoodle]

Daggers are nice if you like the option of throwing them. From a non-mechanical standpoint, daggers are more likely to be allowed into a lot of places and are easier to conceal if they aren't.

Yup, exactly this. Are daggers a finesse weapon? If so then they are ideal for high dex characters. Also, a thief with quickdraw (with a tolerant GM) should be able to get a sneak attack including a ranged attack within 30ft. Sneak attack makes weapon damage almost irrelevant. 1d4 vs 1d6 or 1d8 is only really an issue at low levels.

2 wrapon fighting also makes daggers very cool. I Daggers also means you can focus on 1 weapon and you are improving a short-ranged ranged weapon and a melee weapon that is concealable and usable by every class.

[Monsterpoodle]

I also think daggers are the only weapon that can be used while grappling IIRC. Getting in close to someone, especially fighters with medium or larger weapons, grappling and shanking the hwck out of them seems like a pretty voable tactic.

[ad_hoc]

Daggers are a great thrown weapon for a Strength Rogue.

[Lavaeolus]

I also think daggers are the only weapon that can be used while grappling IIRC. Getting in close to someone, especially fighters with medium or larger weapons, grappling and shanking the hwck out of them seems like a pretty voable tactic.

I can understand this reasoning, but RAW grappling solely takes out one free hand and being grappled solely reduces your speed to 0. In that sense, 5e grappling is quite lightweight compared to what it might be in other editions or systems. There is another condition, Restrained, that forces more disadvantages, but to impose it with grappling requires the Grappler feat -- and imposes the Restrained condition on yourself as you pin them.

Think of grappling as just holding someone in place with a hand. In real life that would probably be quite fiddly, but as-written you can attack with any one-handed weapon and I think that's penalty enough. After all, grappling does tend to make you an enemy's prime target.

Do note that someone with a shield is much more limited! My usual understanding is that doffing a shield takes an action, since it's armour. So you'd likely have to use your weapon hand.

You can also hypothetically grapple two people at once, assuming you have two hands; this would certainly make you weaponless, but you could still do unarmed strikes by headbutting or kicking people.

[JackPhoenix]

Well the argument generally is that all thrown weapons use STR for attack rolls and therefore why Sharpshooter, a clearly Dex based Feat, can't apply to them. Daggers being finesse absolves them of that argument.

Sharpshooter isn't "Dex based feat". It doesn't care what ability score you're using to make your attacks, it works equally with Str (for darts), Dex (for most ranged weapons), Int (with Battlesmith Artificers), Wis (Magic Stone from a sling... though that's not entirely true: unlike thrown weapons, only 3rd point of SS works in that case, as it is a ranged spell attack with a weapon) or Cha (Hexblades).

[Willie the Duck]

I'd disagree that knives/daggers are less optimal irl than other weapons (excluding guns obv). Knives are still standard equipment for modern day soldiers, and when you get in close quarters combat, you want something like a knife that's quick and doesn't take a lot of space to swing. Something that reflects that and the versatility of the weapon should be reflected.

Knives are equipment for modern day soldiers. Not weapons specifically, but equipment. Knives (and hatchets, and machetes) have everyday uses for that 99% of being a soldier spent not fighting an enemy. The space to use factor is real, but just highlights that all weapons have optimal situations. It should be noted, however, that the dominant melee weapon of soldiers in the roughly modern era that has seen significant actual combat use is the bayonet, specifically because in the exception of tunnel fighting or the like, reach is a really nice thing to have.

None of this really matters for the game. There are lots of winners and losers on the weapon chart. Thrown weapons in general seem to be the unloved stepchild of the edition. Daggers at least have some nice magic item versions to stay in the limelight.

[FinnS]

Sharpshooter isn't "Dex based feat". It doesn't care what ability score you're using to make your attacks, it works equally with Str (for darts), Dex (for most ranged weapons), Int (with Battlesmith Artificers), Wis (Magic Stone from a sling... though that's not entirely true: unlike thrown weapons, only 3rd point of SS works in that case, as it is a ranged spell attack with a weapon) or Cha (Hexblades).

In all honestly, I would pretty much just allow all of it, both the Archery Style and Sharpshooter to work with any ranged weapon or weapon with the thrown property.
As I stated previously, it wouldn't break anything due to the "reloading/drawing" restrictions.

Even a level 11 Champion Fighter with SS, TWF, Archery style and Dual Wield Style would at most be able to throw 4 darts or daggers in a round they started with the darts or daggers already drawn. They would not benefit from the TWF +1AC for the rest of that round and would only be able to draw 2 and throw 2 darts or daggers the next turn as well, once again forgoing the TWF +1AC.

It just means that with all of this, the Magical Returning property becomes much more powerful and valuable meaning the DM will have to be extra careful about handing such weapons out.

[HPisBS]

...
Daggers at least have some nice magic item versions to stay in the limelight.

Yep, the Dagger of Guitar Solos keeps that limelight squarely on you, where it belongs.

[king_steve]

Returning Weapon Infusion

Item: A simple or martial weapon with the thrown property

This magic weapon grants a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls made with it, and it returns to the wielder’s hand immediately after it is used to make a ranged attack.


With an artificer in your party, you should be able to throw your dagger as many times as you can attack and use two weapon fighting with your bonus action.

It might make for an interesting, if unconventional build.

[Man_Over_Game]

I've always liked the idea of a dagger-throwing specialist Scout Rogue.

Throw your second weapon only when you miss, keep your BA while still moving out of harm's way.

The important part about the build is that it requires no feats. You can spend your first two ASIs on maxing out your Dex before investing into Crossbow Expert.

[Lavaeolus]

With an artificer in your party, you should be able to throw your dagger as many times as you can attack and use two weapon fighting with your bonus action.

It might make for an interesting, if unconventional build.

It's definitely something I want to try: a dagger-throwing performer. I've so far yet to decide whether to go full Rogue, lean heavily into Fighter for Extra Attack, or try to mix in some Swords Bard somewhere. The fact that an Artificer 2 dip is semi-required if you don't have a co-operative party member means something's gotta give.

Just be aware that:

Two-weapon fighting requires using two different weapons. You can't just use the same dagger repeatedly.
You can only give one dagger the Returning Weapon infusion, as Artificers can only imbue an infusion into one weapon.

I kind of want to do two daggers in each hand anyway just for the knife-juggler aesthetic, though dagger+shield or dagger+rapier is probably the way to go. Rogue synergises better with the low damage dice thanks to Sneak Attack, Fighter is more likely to let me throw dozens of daggers every which way each turn. Decisions, decisions.

...Well, not dozens, but, like, at least two, man.

[Monsterpoodle]

Halfling rogue 2 dagger expert has got to be pretty effective. 1 point lower damage but made up for by weapon finesse and the higher dexterity.

[Jerrykhor]

I feel that daggers should have a built in increase crit, like champions 19-20 critical hit.

[col_impact]

Sharpshooter and Shadow Blade. Yummy. Returnable knives that can be boosted by archery, dueling, sharpshooter, etc. Fighter dipping 3 levels in War Mage is solid.

[nickl_2000]

Halfling rogue 2 dagger expert has got to be pretty effective. 1 point lower damage but made up for by weapon finesse and the higher dexterity.

How is dagger/dagger superior than shortsword/dagger in this build?


Honestly, if you want a dagger build there really needs to be some sort of weapon specialization feat or a fighting style given to daggers. For a home table it likely wouldn't be all that hard to do.

[MaxWilson]

In all honestly, I would pretty much just allow all of it, both the Archery Style and Sharpshooter to work with any ranged weapon or weapon with the thrown property.
As I stated previously, it wouldn't break anything due to the "reloading/drawing" restrictions.

I'd do the opposite: run Sharpshootery and Archery by vanilla RAW, but say that any object manipulation you've practiced repeatedly as part of an action counts as party of the action instead of a separate object manipulation.

Draw ammunition as part of an Attack? Sure. (RAW.)
Open a spell component pouch, take out a newts's eye, cast a spell, put it back afterward? Okay. (RAW.)
Draw and throw four daggers in one turn with Action Surge: Attack? Go for it. (Not RAW but my ruling, for consistency and game balance.)

Nothing improves if you insist on RAW here. Everything just gets less logical.

[MrStabby]

I feel that daggers should have a built in increase crit, like champions 19-20 critical hit.

I just now see a game full of dagger wielding paladins!

[Nagog]

It's definitely something I want to try: a dagger-throwing performer. I've so far yet to decide whether to go full Rogue, lean heavily into Fighter for Extra Attack, or try to mix in some Swords Bard somewhere. The fact that an Artificer 2 dip is semi-required if you don't have a co-operative party member means something's gotta give.

Just be aware that:

Two-weapon fighting requires using two different weapons. You can't just use the same dagger repeatedly.
You can only give one dagger the Returning Weapon infusion, as Artificers can only imbue an infusion into one weapon.

I kind of want to do two daggers in each hand anyway just for the knife-juggler aesthetic, though dagger+shield or dagger+rapier is probably the way to go. Rogue synergises better with the low damage dice thanks to Sneak Attack, Fighter is more likely to let me throw dozens of daggers every which way each turn. Decisions, decisions.

...Well, not dozens, but, like, at least two, man.

Depending on your DM, I'd see if you can actually juggle like 3 knives in combat, making a performance roll each round to maintain it, or using performance like concentration. Failing would mean taking one of the dagger's damage as it fell, and you'd no longer have 3 drawn daggers at a time.


I feel that daggers should have a built in increase crit, like champions 19-20 critical hit.


I just now see a game full of dagger wielding paladins!

Pathfinder has weapons like that. I can't speak to their use and abuse, but they did. Granted Pathfinder RAW also had a critical roll be a "critical threat" and rolling again to confirm it. Basically rolling a critical hit allowed a second attack, but with one swing. Honestly it was kinda lame overall. But it did help balance builds that, with the right stuff, could crit on a 15-20.
Pathfinder is whack yo.

[nickl_2000]

Pathfinder has weapons like that. I can't speak to their use and abuse, but they did. Granted Pathfinder RAW also had a critical roll be a "critical threat" and rolling again to confirm it. Basically rolling a critical hit allowed a second attack, but with one swing. Honestly it was kinda lame overall. But it did help balance builds that, with the right stuff, could crit on a 15-20.
Pathfinder is whack yo.

Don't blame this one on Pathfinder. This existed in D&D 3.0 and 3.5 as well.

[Willie the Duck]

I feel that daggers should have a built in increase crit, like champions 19-20 critical hit.

Pathfinder is whack yo.

Don't blame this one on Pathfinder. This existed in D&D 3.0 and 3.5 as well.

Regardless, I am curious. Jerrykhor, why specifically do you think that this is the appropriate boost for daggers, and/or why specifically should daggers get this special ability?

[nickl_2000]

Regardless, I am curious. Jerrykhor, why specifically do you think that this is the appropriate boost for daggers, and/or why specifically should daggers get this special ability?

I don't think they should personally. They do exactly the damage they should. They are the most versatial of all weapons in D&D.

[Willie the Duck]

I don't think they should personally. They do exactly the damage they should. They are the most versatial of all weapons in D&D.

Um, okay?
I'm really not even jumping on the 'do daggers need a boost?' question, I just want to know why this change in particular is what this individual-that-does-think-they-need-a-boost considers the correct response.

[stoutstien]

Daggers are already a tad to good IMO. Having so many weapon properties on a fairly cheap, obtainable, and concealable weapon makes it one of the best weapons as of now.
Not to mention the damage die of the weapon is a small impact of overall damage dealt.

[Lavaeolus]

I feel that daggers should have a built in increase crit, like champions 19-20 critical hit.

While I don't believe critting on 19-20 will break things overmuch, I would caution against letting it stack with Champion's features or any other crit-range increases.

In 5e advantage can be relatively easy to obtain, and there are features that boost it further. Elven Accuracy essentially upgrades it to triple advantage on most attack rolls (DEX, INT, WIS, CHA), and every race can take advantage of Lucky. Someone with an increased crit range of 17-20 could, played smartly, be getting out a lot of crits.

Now, 5e usually makes it pretty clear that you can't be stacking any of this stuff so I assume that'd equally go for daggers, but I felt it was worth pointing out. Increased crit ranges can be more powerful in 5e's design than in 3e/3.5e and Pathfinder, which is why they're more limited.

[MaxWilson]

Not to mention the damage die of the weapon is a small impact of overall damage dealt.

Which BTW is what makes high-level monks kind of disappointing--many of them have very little offensive growth past level 6 except increasing the size of their damage dice. They definitely get much harder to kill, but a 16th level monk still hits about as hard as she was hitting at level 6: three or four attacks for about 8-10 points of damage per hit.

[stoutstien]

Which BTW is what makes high-level monks kind of disappointing--many of them have very little offensive growth past level 6 except increasing the size of their damage dice. They definitely get much harder to kill, but a 16th level monk still hits about as hard as she was hitting at level 6: three or four attacks for about 8-10 points of damage per hit.
Agreed. Monks could have used a static boost somewhere but I see why they didn't want to step on barbarians toes.
I've played around with keeping it at a D4 and adding more dice as they level up closer to sneak attack.

[JackPhoenix]

Don't blame this one on Pathfinder. This existed in D&D 3.0 and 3.5 as well.

Notable difference between 3.x and 5e is that the former did not multiply any extra die beyond base weapon/spell damage on critical hits, making flat bonuses more valuable for crit-fishers than stuff like Sneak Attack. You also don't roll twice, you flat out double (or triple, quadraple....) whatever you've rolled (minus the extra dice).

[BoxANT]

I have a soft spot for daggers, and use some house rules.

1. Two daggers can be drawn as your free interaction

2. Daggers can be used in both hands and the player can still grapple

3. One vial of poison can be applied to two daggets

Nothing too powerful imo, but flavorful.

[ad_hoc]

Has anyone touched on the #1 reason why using a dagger would be the best choice?

There are a lot of magic daggers out there.

[DeTess]

I generally get at least one dagger for most characters I make, but that's because, as pointed out earlier in the thread, daggers are equipment with a myriad of functions besides stabbing the enemy. They could make for an interesting gimmick, and if nothing else, might function as a back-up emergency ranged weapon, but they're rarely optimal in a straight-up fight.

[OldTrees1]

Daggers are optimal for Rogues. Why look elsewhere?

Daggers are short. They can be used in cramped situations.

Daggers are innocuous. Knives are quite the ubiquitous tool.

[greenstone]

I think it's fine that daggers are suboptimal in straight up combat.
Agreed. They might be suboptimal for the Combat pillar but can be very usueful in the Social pillar.

[Jerrykhor]

Regardless, I am curious. Jerrykhor, why specifically do you think that this is the appropriate boost for daggers, and/or why specifically should daggers get this special ability?

We know daggers do less damage and is not effective in direct combat. But they do less damage because we assume they didn't hit the vital parts of the body. That's where the crit comes in. Daggers are good when aimed at small openings or gaps in the armour, visor or joints.

Mechanically, if a Rogue wanted to fish for crits for that big Snek Attack, they can opt for a dagger, which is often regarded as the Rogue's signature weapon.

[Teaguethebean]

We know daggers do less damage and is not effective in direct combat. But they do less damage because we assume they didn't hit the vital parts of the body. That's where the crit comes in. Daggers are good when aimed at small openings or gaps in the armour, visor or joints.

Mechanically, if a Rogue wanted to fish for crits for that big Snek Attack, they can opt for a dagger, which is often regarded as the Rogue's signature weapon.

though this makes them a clear pick for a paladin at higher levels. Mechanically you have made them better then a longsword for a paladin, which feels wrong.

[Willie the Duck]

We know daggers do less damage and is not effective in direct combat. But they do less damage because we assume they didn't hit the vital parts of the body. That's where the crit comes in. Daggers are good when aimed at small openings or gaps in the armour, visor or joints.

Mechanically, if a Rogue wanted to fish for crits for that big Snek Attack, they can opt for a dagger, which is often regarded as the Rogue's signature weapon.

Okay, so it is specifically to balance the dagger and give it a specific role, rather than some inherent quality of daggers which are 'crit enabling' or the like. Got it. I was wondering because 3rd edition had various crit enhancements (swords had higher chance of criting, with curved swords giving up basic damage to be even moreso; axes had higher damage-on-crit, with picks giving up basic damage to be even moreso) and there appeared to be some kind of attempt at IRL logic to it. IRL daggers (rondel daggers in particular) were often used in the manner you're describing, although it's not clear to me that they would have a specific advantage in doing so compared to, say, a short sword or rather it was just the sidearm you would have if your primary weapon was the thing that got you into position to be grappling a fully armored knight.

Regardless, I agree that this is a decent argument -- well in excess of some of the logics D&D weapons have used (3e whips and flails would be good at disarming because... they can wrap around things I guess?). I'm more interested in what the says/does.

What it says is that the primary iconic opponent of the bearer of a 'Rogue's signature weapon' would be a fully armored knight, whom said rogue should wrestle with while attempting to get a dagger through their eye-slit. Certainly something you'd want to be able to do (if pressed) if you were that rogue, but hardly what I'd call their iconic story role.

What it does is, as Teaguethebean points out, is make it the iconic dexadin weapon (who might be a little more prone to wrestle knights, but this rule makes them likely use it as a primary weapon, and also to fight dragons with daggers).

What it also does (mechanically) is make elven or half-elven rogues with elven accuracy and some form of advantage-guarantee (Arcane Trickster with a familiar, 3 level dip in Samurai, dip into warlock for darkness/Devil's Sight) go-to rogue builds.

So, regardless of whether daggers need boosting in the first place, I'm not really sold on this fix being the one I'd go to. It seems to have some weird incentivization structures that don't really support its use amongst the iconic base we might want to use them (straight up normal rogues of any race).

[Zetakya]

The first page of this thread is full of uses for Daggers. I don't see the need for more.

[Laserlight]

"Will they ever be optimal" for what?

They're pretty optimal for picking one up off the table, pickpocketing one out of the guard's belt, hiding it in my sleeve or boot, having the option to throw it or melee with it, and being able to carry it legally in places where wargear is not allowed.

If you want them optimized as your main battlefield weapon, why do you think they ought to be able compete with a polearm or two handed sword in addition to the other advantages they have? If you make a dagger just as good as a greatsword, do I get to carry my greatsword into court, or hold it against my forearm so no one sees it?