I think that in this case, adding magical daggers with increased backstab multiplier is much more viable to request than changing base characteristics of all daggers.
What is the difference if you would change magical or base if it's only backstab for rogues?
There is absolutely no change in damage. The backstab modifier will keep the dagger on the same level of damage as the long sword when you backstab. When you attack normally it will still be weaker.
There is absolutely no difference if you have it on all daggers or just unique.
Well, strictly speaking it wouldn't be for rogues only. It would let anyone take advantage of the backstab bonus as long as they can hide or become invisible. That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, but it would change daggers from a 1gp item that is kind of on the weak side into an essential item for every thief/stalker/character with access to an Invisibility spell.
That said, if you want to mod it, the effect index is 263 in Near Infinity; add it to any or all daggers in the game with a power of 1, and that's the effect you're looking for.
I think that in this case, adding magical daggers with increased backstab multiplier is much more viable to request than changing base characteristics of all daggers.
It's also much less likely to break things.
I'd be all for adding some new daggers for a little variety, but it's highly unlikely that the base weapon will be altered (for the reasons I stated above).
The problem isn't going to get solved by doing this. Then all the rogues will pick that one dagger and the rest of the daggers in the game will still not be used (with the exception of dagger of venom).
Isn't the point to improve daggers and not create one super dagger for rogues so we still ignore all those daggers we find? Like the dagger +2 you can steal from the zombie, who actually uses that?
By the way @Dee, i appreciate your effort but if people want mod, they can go here (http://forum.baldursgate.com/categories/modding) for most people is "feature request" place where we trying upgrade game for all, not just us.
There's significant disagreement in this thread about whether rebalancing the base weapon is a good idea, which to me says this idea makes more sense as a mod (and since it's totally possible to do with mods, that's an acceptable solution).
As I see it, daggers don't need to be "upgraded"; I'd much rather see a greater variety in the daggers that are available.
For instance, you could have a dagger that adds a backstab bonus, a dagger that reduces the off-hand attack penalties, and a dagger that grants an additional attack per round, and that would make daggers a more appealing option because there would be more options for different characters.
But if you completely rebalance the way that daggers function in general, you have to look at all the places in the game where that might have an impact.
There's significant disagreement in this thread about whether rebalancing the base weapon is a good idea, which to me says this idea makes more sense as a mod (and since it's totally possible to do with mods, that's an acceptable solution).
As I see it, daggers don't need to be "upgraded"; I'd much rather see a greater variety in the daggers that are available.
For instance, you could have a dagger that adds a backstab bonus, a dagger that reduces the off-hand attack penalties, and a dagger that grants an additional attack per round, and that would make daggers a more appealing option because there would be more options for different characters.
But if you completely rebalance the way that daggers function in general, you have to look at all the places in the game where that might have an impact.
I might be understanding this completely wrong. But how does a greater variety of daggers help the already excisting ones?
A dagger that would reduce the off-hand penalty and a dagger with another APR would be great. But then the original daggers get even worse. Why would you ever use a dagger +2 when you have those around?
I don't see why people are against adding +1 backstab modifier to all daggers for rogues.
1.) It doesn't improve the daggers for everyone else.
2.) It puts daggers as a viable weapon for rogues, it's still not as good as other options but it's lore friendly and one step on the way.
3.) It's only improved when backstabbing so the rogue might change weapon for when he backstabs and when he fights normally. How isn't this a great thing? It makes you actually think about what weapon you should use instead of Hackmeister +13
4.) +1 Backstab modifier isn't even that good. It's a flavor thing that does help and improve the rogue. But backstabbing with a quarter staff is still most of the time better.
5.) Rebalancing the dagger to give it a initial +1 backstab modifier doesn't impact anything else in the game than the rogues. And there aren't any rogue NPC's in the game that are very efficient at backstabbing (Yoshimo perhaps) so it only affects the CHARNAME. Now the rogue is already quite a weak class in the game unless you multi/dual and this would only help to improve the pure rogue and rogue classes. The assassin doesn't get any worse by this as he will always have 1 modifier better than the rest.
In the original game the only time you might get backstabbed is in ToB ,so it doesn't change anything in difficulty. I'm having a hard time trying to remember any dangerous foe you face in the game with a dagger. And i'm almost positive that they don't backstab.
This is something that should have been in the game to start with.
6.) If you add new daggers with APR and other stuff then it will end up in the hands of a fighter. Another APR isn't going to help a rogue as he already can get that from Belm and you won't be that good in close combat anyway until very high level. The bonus to backstab is something that the rogue can enjoy from level 1 to 40.
I'm sorry but i can't see any negative things comming from changing the default daggers.
The only problem i can see is that you would only benefit from the bonus if you wield it in your main hand.
I agree with Dee. I, for example, pick proficiencies based on good magical weapons in game, not their base characteristics.
So you're supposed to pick weapons based on your meta knowledge of the game. You aren't supposed to think "I'm going to play a rogue, and he will use a dagger and club!" . You're going to think "Naah can't do daggers, but there is a great long sword +2!"
RRB managed to pull off a PnP accurate Short Sword of backstabbing, some how. It's functionally a +2 short sword, unless wielded by a non-swashbuckler thief, in which case it becomes +5 and increases BS multiplier by +1.
(I'd love to see purifier and Carsomyr get proper treatment as well. Strip them down and have them function as +2 bastard sword or +2 two-handed sword when used by non-paladins (changing the usage restrictions to normal for that type of weapon), and add in the Holy Sword effect (Paladin only, excluding Fallen and Blackguard) :+5 hit/damage, Dispels on hit, set to 50% magic resistance, 100% immunity to all spells cast by evil beings with fewer HD then the paladin (And yes, this is really what all holy swords are supposed to give). +10 extra damage vs Chaotic evil for Avenger, +10 extra damage vs Undead and +2 effective turning level for Purifier.
Adding a backstab bonus does more than add 1d4 damage to sneak attacks; it adds 1d4, plus the enchantment bonus, plus the character's strength bonus, plus any other bonuses from spells, specialization, etc. A level 1 Half-Orc Stalker, for example, with a 19 Strength, has +7 damage from Strength and +2 from specialization, meaning a total of 1d4+9 damage; a +1 backstab bonus for him means instead of dealing 2d4+18, he deals 3d4+27. That's not a minor consideration; and even with non-half-orc thieves, a +2 dagger is going to get 1d4+2 extra damage, a +5 dagger is going to get 1d4+5, and a +3 dagger that deals damage as a shortsword is going to get 1d6+3.
The backstab bonus also affects more than just thieves; any character with access to invisibility or any kind of stealth ability is going to be able to make use of it.
Is it balanced? Maybe, maybe not. But it's something that you have to consider carefully, which is why I suggest making it a mod instead. Feel free to keep discussing it; but one of the most common arguments I see in these threads is "maybe make it optional"--which is exactly what mods are for.
RRB managed to pull off a PnP accurate Short Sword of backstabbing, some how. It's functionally a +2 short sword, unless wielded by a non-swashbuckler thief, in which case it becomes +5 and increases BS multiplier by +1.
(I'd love to see purifier and Carsomyr get proper treatment as well. Strip them down and have them function as +2 bastard sword or +2 two-handed sword when used by non-paladins (changing the usage restrictions to normal for that type of weapon), and add in the Holy Sword effect (Paladin only, excluding Fallen and Blackguard) :+5 hit/damage, Dispels on hit, set to 50% magic resistance, 100% immunity to all spells cast by evil beings with fewer HD then the paladin (And yes, this is really what all holy swords are supposed to give). +10 extra damage vs Chaotic evil for Avenger, +10 extra damage vs Undead and +2 effective turning level for Purifier.
I agree with you and use RRB myself. It's a great idea especially with the paladin weapons.
But this doesn't change the problem. Now it would just be "All daggers are bad except *Insert name*"
The problem isn't in the magical weapons, it's in the basics of the dagger. The only really good dagger that isn't a throwing weapon is good because it has that high poison damage on it which is insane to start with. And the ONLY reason throwing daggers are good is because of the 2D4 damage.
So if they can change throwing daggers to 2D4 damage and it isn't a problem.
How would changing normal daggers to having +1 Backstab modifier become a problem?
@SionIV: Well that's how it works for me. As for the problem of upgrading all daggers, the way backstab bonus works, is for *all* characters that can go invisible. So unless you'd make daggers thief-only weapons, fighter/mages would get a free multiplier. And that's just and example of things that have to be kept in mind when making change such as this.
And for the record, I'm in favor of making daggers attractive for thieves. I'm just pointing out that the best way to do it through official feature request, is to make the request as much feasible as possible. Changing all daggers is not.
Adding a backstab bonus does more than add 1d4 damage to sneak attacks; it adds 1d4, plus the enchantment bonus, plus the character's strength bonus, plus any other bonuses from spells, specialization, etc. A level 1 Half-Orc Stalker, for example, with a 19 Strength, has +7 damage from Strength and +2 from specialization, meaning a total of 1d4+9 damage; a +1 backstab bonus for him means instead of dealing 2d4+18, he deals 3d4+27. That's not a minor consideration; and even with non-half-orc thieves, a +2 dagger is going to get 1d4+2 extra damage, a +5 dagger is going to get 1d4+5, and a +3 dagger that deals damage as a shortsword is going to get 1d6+3.
The backstab bonus also affects more than just thieves; any character with access to invisibility or any kind of stealth ability is going to be able to make use of it.
Is it balanced? Maybe, maybe not. But it's something that you have to consider carefully, which is why I suggest making it a mod instead. Feel free to keep discussing it; but one of the most common arguments I see in these threads is "maybe make it optional"--which is exactly what mods are for.
Then change all daggers in the game to give an additional Thac0 like the flails give +1 damage. And create a whole new type of dagger that can only be used by thiefs and give an additional +1 Backstab modifier. Like the dagger you have to plant in government district.
Giving all daggers +1 Thac0 would help with landing the backstab, and it would help out mages and other classes that are limited to weapon selection. It would also be a reason to use a dagger instead of another weapon.
Well, what about giving all thieves natural bonus +1 to THAC0 and +1 to DMG if using dagger? It isn´t OP and it is reasonable bacause dagger is thief characteristic weapon.
We're rebalancing the dagger and by doing this improving the rogue, and the low level wizard. There is no reason for a rogue to use dagger at all, and there is no reason for a mage to use one either. So by improving all daggers with +1 Thac0 you give them a reason to pick the dagger instead of other weapons.
And i didn't know about how difficult the backstab would be to change, so thank you for explaining.
[Edited] : Last time i checked it was ((Base damage + Proficiency bonus + item bonus, bard song etc) x backstabbing multiplyer + strength bonus ) x critical hit + additional weapon damage.
So it would be 3d4 + 6 (Weapon specialization) + 7 (Str)? = 3d4 + 13. So the half orc wouldn't get anything out of having high STR at all. The only bonus he would get from the extra backstab modifier is +2 damage from weapon specialization. Or i might have got this wrong?
I genuinely don't get the issue here. Everybody keeps saying that daggers are weak as they are. I have been through this game multiple times and not once have I ever thought this. My damage with a dagger (and back stab damage) has been more than enough to see me through to the end of ToB.
Let's look at the positives:
1) Usable by almost every class. 2) Can come in thrown or melee format. Strength bonus added to thrown is incredible. 3) Some of the most powerful variety of weapons are in fact daggers (Longtooth which is a +2 dagger that gives damage like a short sword, Dagger of Venom - Ultimate weapon) 4) Is one of the quickest weapons in the game (speed factor of 0?) - allowing you to get that all important first back stab off quicker.
Negatives:
1) Base damage 1d4 (if this is a problem use Longtooth?)
I have also heard talk of axes on here. Can all classes use axes? aren't they heavy? Who in their right mind plays a fighter with 5* in daggers?
Now let us look at daggers in BG:EE:
Dagger:
+1 (Candlekeep) +2 (Can't remember where) Longtooth (Baldur's Gate - pretty much a short sword with dagger speed and prof tag) Dagger of Venom (Beregost) Wolfbane (correct name? +4 against lycan's and one of the only weapons that can kill them) Throwing daggers (add strength bonus and are an absolute beast when poisoned)
And you must bear in mind that at about this point most will have taken a point in shortswords or otherwise. I always do for Shortsword +3 backstabby. I tend to switch it up between this and Venom depending on whether or not I have been caught.
Daggers are an incredible weapon and not in the slightest underpowered. They will never deal the damage of a two handed sword in melee but who would go two to two with just a dagger in hand?
I am all for more variety in ALL weapons - not just daggers. Dagger's certainly do not need to be changed though.
I genuinely don't get the issue here. Everybody keeps saying that daggers are weak as they are. I have been through this game multiple times and not once have I ever thought this. My damage with a dagger (and back stab damage) has been more than enough to see me through to the end of ToB.
Let's look at the positives:
1) Usable by almost every class. 2) Can come in thrown or melee format. Strength bonus added to thrown is incredible. 3) Some of the most powerful variety of weapons are in fact daggers (Longtooth which is a +2 dagger that gives damage like a short sword, Dagger of Venom - Ultimate weapon) 4) Is one of the quickest weapons in the game (speed factor of 0?) - allowing you to get that all important first back stab off quicker.
Negatives:
1) Base damage 1d4 (if this is a problem use Longtooth?)
I have also heard talk of axes on here. Can all classes use axes? aren't they heavy? Who in their right mind plays a fighter with 5* in daggers?
Now let us look at variety of weapons in BG:EE in comparison to the dagger:
Dagger:
+1 (Candlekeep) +2 (Can't remember where) Longtooth (Baldur's Gate - pretty much a short sword with dagger speed and prof tag) Dagger of Venom (Beregost) Wolfbane (correct name? +4 against lycan's and one of the only weapons that can kill them) Throwing daggers (add strength bonus and are an absolute beast when poisoned)
And you must bear in mind that at about this point most will have taken a point in shortswords or otherwise. I always do for Shortsword +3 backstabby. I tend to switch it up between this and Venom depending on whether or not I have been caught.
Daggers are an incredible weapon and not in the slightest underpowered. They will never deal the damage of a two handed sword in melee but who would go two to two with just a dagger in hand?
I am all for more variety in ALL weapons - not just daggers. Dagger's certainly do not need to be changed though.
1.) Yes 2.) Yes 3.) No
The only dagger in the game that is powerful is the dagger of venom. And the only reason the dagger of venom is powerful is because of the poison and how it stacks. The dagger of venom is incredible powerful on the edge of being too good. All other daggers including the longtooth are worse than using a longsword. Everyone that can use a dagger can use a longsword aswell, with the exception of the wizard which doesn't need a weapon to work well.
The reason you say longtooth is good because it's got the same damage as a short sword. This isn't saying the dagger is good, it's saying the shortsword is much better than the dagger.
There are no good daggers in the game except the dagger of venom and the throwing daggers in BG2.
4.) The speed is the least useful attribute when you backstab. You can remove the speed factor by putting yourself in a position where you backstab first anyway.
5.) Let's see what weapons got better backstab than the dagger.
Clubs Longswords Quarter staffs Short swords Scimitar Katana
Would you look at that. Every single weapon the rogue can use is better to backstab with than the dagger. So imagine crawling down in the alley going for the kill. What should you do? slit his throat with a dagger? Nooo club him in the face with a wooden stick! That'll do it!
Daggers are worse than every single weapon in the game, the only exception is dagger of venom and that is because of the poison.
[Edited] : The staff of striking has a weapon speed of 1. It doesn't only have this, it also has....
1d6 + 9(!) damage +3 Thac0
So not only is it as fast as the dagger, it also has much more damage than the dagger and you can get it in BG1. Sure you have to recharge it but it doesn't cost that much, and quarter staff +3 is also speed factor 1 with 1d6 + 3 damage, so it's also better.
The dagger +2 is in the area you get up to when you have done nashkel mine. It's a rouge you talk to that give it to you, he stole it from a zombie in a tomb near by.
It may be obvious, but probably worth repeating : Baldurs Gate is based on the 2ED P&P Dungeons and Dragons roleplaying game. I think its best to follow these rules as far as possible, and under these rules daggers do 1D4 damage. If we start making an exception and rebalancing daggers, then where will it stop?
One of the things I like about the P&P game is it doesn't get too bogged down in the rules - roleplaying is the focus of the game rather than dice rolling. In most of the P&P games I've played, the player is discouraged from min-maxing their character too much. A certain amount is good because it shows the player has an interest, but too much takes away from the gaming experience.
There are number of roleplaying reasons why you might want to use a dagger over, say, a long sword. For example a dagger is much easier to carry and conceal, and probably acceptable in many social situations where a large sword wouldn't be. It's quicker to strike, more maneuverable and very effective at extremely close range.
I remember one low magic campaign where my character found a +4 warhammer. +4!!! In a campaign where a +1 weapon was a rarity. +4!!!! Needless to say I started using it, even tho I wasn't proficient (yet!) with it and didn't think warhammers were that great. +4!!!!!
Admittedly a lot of this roleplaying potential gets lost in a computer game, but I still think it's better to stick to the P&P rules as far as possible.
@SionIV - Well yes, those weapons will have a better back stab because they deal more damage. Just like in real life. If you stab/slash at somebody in the back with a longsword, it will do much more damage than a knife.
But since when do we need that much damage? On many forums for as long as I can remember, people have thrown about back stab damage - especially when using the staff of striking - to say which are better for rogues to use.
I will say it again - Never once in any of my playthroughs have I ever *needed* that much damage with a backstab to take someone out. A dagger was perfectly fine for me to use all the way to the end of ToB. Any more damage and you have overkill - often to an extreme.
The other point I had, was that daggers are versatile. Most classes can use them. They can be ranged and some even have more damage than a standard dagger. +1 proficiency point as a thief gets you a ranged weapon, a melee weapon and a weapon that acts like a short sword. proficiency points aren't easy to come by as a thief.
The dagger is not supposed to be the most powerful weapon around. It is supposed to be quick, versatile, and easily concealed. There is not a single fact in PnP or real life which indicate a dagger is actually better at backstabbing than say.. a short sword. Thieves use them because thieves are not supposed to be great warriors. They use them because they are easy to use and easily concealed.
Doesn't piercing damage work better than slashing in most cases also?
Comments
Long sword : 1d8
Dagger : 1d4
Long sword : 1d8
Dagger : 1d4 / +1 backstab modifier
Long sword +1 : 1d8 + 1
Dagger +1 : 1d4 + 1 / +1 backstab modifier.
There is absolutely no change in damage. The backstab modifier will keep the dagger on the same level of damage as the long sword when you backstab. When you attack normally it will still be weaker.
There is absolutely no difference if you have it on all daggers or just unique.
That said, if you want to mod it, the effect index is 263 in Near Infinity; add it to any or all daggers in the game with a power of 1, and that's the effect you're looking for.
Isn't the point to improve daggers and not create one super dagger for rogues so we still ignore all those daggers we find? Like the dagger +2 you can steal from the zombie, who actually uses that?
( same for throwing daggers )
Size - Damage
Small - 1d3
Medium - 1d4
Large - 1d6
Huge - 1d8
Gargantuan - 2d6
Colossal - 3d6
As I see it, daggers don't need to be "upgraded"; I'd much rather see a greater variety in the daggers that are available.
For instance, you could have a dagger that adds a backstab bonus, a dagger that reduces the off-hand attack penalties, and a dagger that grants an additional attack per round, and that would make daggers a more appealing option because there would be more options for different characters.
But if you completely rebalance the way that daggers function in general, you have to look at all the places in the game where that might have an impact.
A dagger that would reduce the off-hand penalty and a dagger with another APR would be great. But then the original daggers get even worse. Why would you ever use a dagger +2 when you have those around?
I don't see why people are against adding +1 backstab modifier to all daggers for rogues.
1.) It doesn't improve the daggers for everyone else.
2.) It puts daggers as a viable weapon for rogues, it's still not as good as other options but it's lore friendly and one step on the way.
3.) It's only improved when backstabbing so the rogue might change weapon for when he backstabs and when he fights normally. How isn't this a great thing? It makes you actually think about what weapon you should use instead of Hackmeister +13
4.) +1 Backstab modifier isn't even that good. It's a flavor thing that does help and improve the rogue. But backstabbing with a quarter staff is still most of the time better.
5.) Rebalancing the dagger to give it a initial +1 backstab modifier doesn't impact anything else in the game than the rogues. And there aren't any rogue NPC's in the game that are very efficient at backstabbing (Yoshimo perhaps) so it only affects the CHARNAME. Now the rogue is already quite a weak class in the game unless you multi/dual and this would only help to improve the pure rogue and rogue classes. The assassin doesn't get any worse by this as he will always have 1 modifier better than the rest.
In the original game the only time you might get backstabbed is in ToB ,so it doesn't change anything in difficulty. I'm having a hard time trying to remember any dangerous foe you face in the game with a dagger. And i'm almost positive that they don't backstab.
This is something that should have been in the game to start with.
6.) If you add new daggers with APR and other stuff then it will end up in the hands of a fighter. Another APR isn't going to help a rogue as he already can get that from Belm and you won't be that good in close combat anyway until very high level. The bonus to backstab is something that the rogue can enjoy from level 1 to 40.
I'm sorry but i can't see any negative things comming from changing the default daggers.
The only problem i can see is that you would only benefit from the bonus if you wield it in your main hand.
Also, as was already mentioned, it is unlikely for base characteristics to change.
(I'd love to see purifier and Carsomyr get proper treatment as well. Strip them down and have them function as +2 bastard sword or +2 two-handed sword when used by non-paladins (changing the usage restrictions to normal for that type of weapon), and add in the Holy Sword effect (Paladin only, excluding Fallen and Blackguard) :+5 hit/damage, Dispels on hit, set to 50% magic resistance, 100% immunity to all spells cast by evil beings with fewer HD then the paladin (And yes, this is really what all holy swords are supposed to give). +10 extra damage vs Chaotic evil for Avenger, +10 extra damage vs Undead and +2 effective turning level for Purifier.
The backstab bonus also affects more than just thieves; any character with access to invisibility or any kind of stealth ability is going to be able to make use of it.
Is it balanced? Maybe, maybe not. But it's something that you have to consider carefully, which is why I suggest making it a mod instead. Feel free to keep discussing it; but one of the most common arguments I see in these threads is "maybe make it optional"--which is exactly what mods are for.
But this doesn't change the problem. Now it would just be "All daggers are bad except *Insert name*"
The problem isn't in the magical weapons, it's in the basics of the dagger. The only really good dagger that isn't a throwing weapon is good because it has that high poison damage on it which is insane to start with. And the ONLY reason throwing daggers are good is because of the 2D4 damage.
So if they can change throwing daggers to 2D4 damage and it isn't a problem.
How would changing normal daggers to having +1 Backstab modifier become a problem?
edit: Ninja'd by Dee.
Giving all daggers +1 Thac0 would help with landing the backstab, and it would help out mages and other classes that are limited to weapon selection. It would also be a reason to use a dagger instead of another weapon.
Daggers are small and fast, that way are great on cuting throats.
It isn´t OP and it is reasonable bacause dagger is thief characteristic weapon.
And i didn't know about how difficult the backstab would be to change, so thank you for explaining.
[Edited] : Last time i checked it was ((Base damage + Proficiency bonus + item bonus, bard song etc) x backstabbing multiplyer + strength bonus ) x critical hit + additional weapon damage.
So it would be 3d4 + 6 (Weapon specialization) + 7 (Str)? = 3d4 + 13. So the half orc wouldn't get anything out of having high STR at all. The only bonus he would get from the extra backstab modifier is +2 damage from weapon specialization. Or i might have got this wrong?
Let's look at the positives:
1) Usable by almost every class.
2) Can come in thrown or melee format. Strength bonus added to thrown is incredible.
3) Some of the most powerful variety of weapons are in fact daggers (Longtooth which is a +2 dagger that gives damage like a short sword, Dagger of Venom - Ultimate weapon)
4) Is one of the quickest weapons in the game (speed factor of 0?) - allowing you to get that all important first back stab off quicker.
Negatives:
1) Base damage 1d4 (if this is a problem use Longtooth?)
I have also heard talk of axes on here. Can all classes use axes? aren't they heavy? Who in their right mind plays a fighter with 5* in daggers?
Now let us look at daggers in BG:EE:
Dagger:
+1 (Candlekeep)
+2 (Can't remember where)
Longtooth (Baldur's Gate - pretty much a short sword with dagger speed and prof tag)
Dagger of Venom (Beregost)
Wolfbane (correct name? +4 against lycan's and one of the only weapons that can kill them)
Throwing daggers (add strength bonus and are an absolute beast when poisoned)
And you must bear in mind that at about this point most will have taken a point in shortswords or otherwise. I always do for Shortsword +3 backstabby. I tend to switch it up between this and Venom depending on whether or not I have been caught.
Daggers are an incredible weapon and not in the slightest underpowered. They will never deal the damage of a two handed sword in melee but who would go two to two with just a dagger in hand?
I am all for more variety in ALL weapons - not just daggers. Dagger's certainly do not need to be changed though.
2.) Yes
3.) No
The only dagger in the game that is powerful is the dagger of venom. And the only reason the dagger of venom is powerful is because of the poison and how it stacks. The dagger of venom is incredible powerful on the edge of being too good. All other daggers including the longtooth are worse than using a longsword. Everyone that can use a dagger can use a longsword aswell, with the exception of the wizard which doesn't need a weapon to work well.
The reason you say longtooth is good because it's got the same damage as a short sword. This isn't saying the dagger is good, it's saying the shortsword is much better than the dagger.
There are no good daggers in the game except the dagger of venom and the throwing daggers in BG2.
4.) The speed is the least useful attribute when you backstab. You can remove the speed factor by putting yourself in a position where you backstab first anyway.
5.) Let's see what weapons got better backstab than the dagger.
Clubs
Longswords
Quarter staffs
Short swords
Scimitar
Katana
Would you look at that. Every single weapon the rogue can use is better to backstab with than the dagger. So imagine crawling down in the alley going for the kill. What should you do? slit his throat with a dagger? Nooo club him in the face with a wooden stick! That'll do it!
Daggers are worse than every single weapon in the game, the only exception is dagger of venom and that is because of the poison.
[Edited] : The staff of striking has a weapon speed of 1. It doesn't only have this, it also has....
1d6 + 9(!) damage
+3 Thac0
So not only is it as fast as the dagger, it also has much more damage than the dagger and you can get it in BG1. Sure you have to recharge it but it doesn't cost that much, and quarter staff +3 is also speed factor 1 with 1d6 + 3 damage, so it's also better.
The dagger +2 is in the area you get up to when you have done nashkel mine. It's a rouge you talk to that give it to you, he stole it from a zombie in a tomb near by.
To me, this is all working as intended.
One of the things I like about the P&P game is it doesn't get too bogged down in the rules - roleplaying is the focus of the game rather than dice rolling. In most of the P&P games I've played, the player is discouraged from min-maxing their character too much. A certain amount is good because it shows the player has an interest, but too much takes away from the gaming experience.
There are number of roleplaying reasons why you might want to use a dagger over, say, a long sword. For example a dagger is much easier to carry and conceal, and probably acceptable in many social situations where a large sword wouldn't be. It's quicker to strike, more maneuverable and very effective at extremely close range.
I remember one low magic campaign where my character found a +4 warhammer. +4!!! In a campaign where a +1 weapon was a rarity. +4!!!! Needless to say I started using it, even tho I wasn't proficient (yet!) with it and didn't think warhammers were that great. +4!!!!!
Admittedly a lot of this roleplaying potential gets lost in a computer game, but I still think it's better to stick to the P&P rules as far as possible.
But since when do we need that much damage? On many forums for as long as I can remember, people have thrown about back stab damage - especially when using the staff of striking - to say which are better for rogues to use.
I will say it again - Never once in any of my playthroughs have I ever *needed* that much damage with a backstab to take someone out. A dagger was perfectly fine for me to use all the way to the end of ToB. Any more damage and you have overkill - often to an extreme.
The other point I had, was that daggers are versatile. Most classes can use them. They can be ranged and some even have more damage than a standard dagger. +1 proficiency point as a thief gets you a ranged weapon, a melee weapon and a weapon that acts like a short sword. proficiency points aren't easy to come by as a thief.
The dagger is not supposed to be the most powerful weapon around. It is supposed to be quick, versatile, and easily concealed. There is not a single fact in PnP or real life which indicate a dagger is actually better at backstabbing than say.. a short sword. Thieves use them because thieves are not supposed to be great warriors. They use them because they are easy to use and easily concealed.
Doesn't piercing damage work better than slashing in most cases also?
Acording 2ED P&P Dungeons and Dragons roleplaying game also exist non magical daggers, what do 3d6 damage. Will you be more happy with that?