Why are some weapons unlinked when others are loved?
I'm just looking for input on something I've often wondered about. Why are some weapons loved while others of equal damage are adored and constantly recommended?
It seems like common thinking is that daggers, a 1d4 weapon, aren't looked at as really viable, but the same players wouldn't blink an eye at speccing a war hammer. Flails are considered amazing but shortswords are an almost completely asset upon option. I know in both of those examples there is a +1 on the blunts, but that's pretty statistically insignificant, it would seem.
Many seemingly equal weapons like spears get the same thinking.
Not baiting or looking to cause flames, I really don't understand the thinking.
Edit: is it simply end-game potential?
It seems like common thinking is that daggers, a 1d4 weapon, aren't looked at as really viable, but the same players wouldn't blink an eye at speccing a war hammer. Flails are considered amazing but shortswords are an almost completely asset upon option. I know in both of those examples there is a +1 on the blunts, but that's pretty statistically insignificant, it would seem.
Many seemingly equal weapons like spears get the same thinking.
Not baiting or looking to cause flames, I really don't understand the thinking.
Edit: is it simply end-game potential?
0
Comments
Warhammers in BG1 can nab Ashideena early, which is an excellent weapon.
Imo, most people underrate the Dagger of Venom vs Varscona, but admittedly the Staff of Striking is a powerhouse. Ultimately though, many people look very much at the latter available weapons as more significant, and pip accordingly.
Spears, daggers and short swords are piercing and a handful of enemies have a resistance to them. Think clay golems.
Then there is the selection of magical ones available. Flail of Ages +3 is available very early in the game and can carry a warrior to then end. There are some nice Spears in the game, however, many of these you get late in the game and running around with Unicorm or Halcyon till then seems like a wasted potential especially when you have other 2 handed weapons of +3 variable available like Lilarcor and Dragon's Bane.
Then there is the perception that short swords and daggers are rogue and mage weapons. Anytime i pick up a magical short sword it automatically goes into my thieves inventory.
Many NPCs also use short swords. Being able to equip everyone in your party with the best gear may have you looking at other options when you are creating a character.
A lot of armors and enemies simply have a higher armor class against piercing weapons (and some as mentioned before are even immune). Even a lowly skeleton has damage reduction against piercing damage, which means a club or hammer will hurt it much much more.
I'm having this problem with Jah. There are no "good" weapons for her in BG1 really. Eventually, late game, she could have a +2 scimitar, but there's a lot of game between start and that sword.
Quarterstaff +3, one of Drizzt's scimitars, dagger of venom, quarterstaff +2, scimitar+2, club+2, spear +2, etc.
She doesn't start with proficiency in some of these but they are all good weapons. Some were also added by bgee so they may not be applicable.
No biggie, imho, merely correcting an oversight because there just ain't no love when you encounter an early Vampire Wolf and the only Magical Weapon in play is Varscona or Ashideena.
Plus I'm pretty sure she could use daggers (under the small sword proficiency), including the dagger of venom and dagger +2 longtooth (which hits as a 1d6 weapon). While these aren't blunt weapons they certainly are pretty valid weapons for her to use (and for any enemy that needed a magical blunt weapon, like a mustard jelly, you could get the quarterstaff +1 early on).