"THE ARMOURY: Tools of Your Trade" - Weapons/Equipment Discussion Thread

[Vae]

Imagine the girl with the dagger...the corruption would be complete...

THIEF IV: A Girl and her Dagger - a love story...comig soon

[Neb]

Originally Posted by Vae

THIEF IV: A Girl and her Dagger - a love story...comig soon

"Comig soon" is actually an anagram of "Cogs in moo". I have deduced that Thief 4 will be about an invasion of Mechanist cows. The girl can use her dagger all she likes, but a big heavy sword would at least slow the metallic bovine fiends down.

[Vae]

Yes, that's true, but would Daggirl allow herself to part from her precious dagger? No way, she loves that dagger...she'd be trying to pop holes in those puppies all night long.

[Hypevosa]

Originally Posted by jtr7

Hype', I was pointing out he has the dagger in his apartment, but we don't see it elsewhere, so it's incorrect to say "on him at all times". As someone pointed out long ago, he likely was spreading jam on his toast. But seriously, the blade needs to be a utility blade first and foremost, and a killing blade second.

Yes, I agree it isn't proof that he carries it all the time - it's impossible to have evidence for that. I did deduce it however for the reasons stated - mainly it gives all an advantage to being on his person and no disadvantage I can fathom, and it yields no advantage being strictly in a cupboard somewhere doing nothing.

I agree, the blade should serve as more of a utility than a core weapon. As a weapon, chainmail/scalemail really is the only thing that the dagger is great against in the hands of anyone (who at least knows to use it as a stabbing weapon), and it's only good as an all purpose to someone with extensive experience/training for other combat purposes.

Originally Posted by Platinumoxicity

I agree with all the other points in your post but I have a slight problem with the chain mail thing... again it's the gameplay vs. reality thing. Gameplay wins. Let's see...

Some of the guards wear chain mail. Chain mail is an armor that in a videogame would make an opponent tougher to beat in combat, right? The problem with your proposal that the dagger would be used to take down these opponent is kinda stupid because you'd be foolish to try to kill a heavily armored guard in combat using a dagger. You'll be killed. End of story. Dagger is not for combat. When you're facing a tough opponent you choose a powerful weapon or flee. No sane thief would go fencing with someone like that with a dagger. Better just run away. Health potions aren't that effective when the cuts are so deep and numerous that you bleed to death before the drink reaches your stomach. (If there is an intact stomach left that is )

I understand gameplay vs realism. First I'll ask if you support the idea that armor should do what it's supposed to do? Should a player need to be tactical in their combat approach of a guard? Should players need to observe the guard for unarmored areas?

If you don't like the idea of making combat more complex in this aspect, my point is moot for you. If you do, then think of it this way:

A dagger is lower damage than the sword, but the player who uses it to attack areas that are covered in chainmail will do more damage than attacking those same areas with a slash from the short sword. The player's combat is easier, if drawn out and gives them more risk of being hurt.

If that player decides to use the sword, and strikes unarmored areas and tries to hit any chainmailed areas with thrusts, they will end up doing more damage to the guard than a dagger would piercing chainmail.

The dagger is still not the best weapon so long as the player wields their tactics and sword well - it only offers slightly more mindless combat against guards to those who want it.

[Hypevosa]

Sword disadvantage - Hitting objects with it is more noisy

Physics = True
Gameplay disadvantage = False

Because the sword has more weight, it would generally make more noise when hitting something, but this would have no effect on gameplay, because you would never be hitting things with a dagger...negating any disadvantage for the sword.

You're forgetting that a good number of taffers hit walls or floors with the sword as a tactic to distract and circumvent a guard. There are certain situations where less noise is better.

For example, I'm sitting in a shadowy corner, there's one guard down the hall 10 feet away and another 20 feet away down the other. I want to make the closer guard move but keep the other guard where he is, because he'll close off the path I was going to use to circumvent the first guard if I attract him too. Using the dagger to make less noise to only attract the one guard would be advantageous.

There are 2 guards at a door. I want only one to be lured to me so I can blackjack him, so I tap the wall with my dagger since my sword would be loud enough to attract them both.

There are 5 guards all separated by 20 or so feet at different doors in a courtyard. I want to attract all of them at once to the center of the courtyard so I can gas arrow them. I power attack the center statue with my sword to attract them all, and rush to a dark corner of the courtyard to line up my shot as they all approach the statue. Ssssssssssss....

There are situations where more and less noise are required to get the job done. There is gameplay implication here.

Quote:
Dagger advantage - Discreet. There is no gain in visibility when drawn.
Physics = True
Gameplay advantage = False

Again, they won't see you anyway when you're backstabbing them, and if you're facing off, it doesn't matter...negating any advantage of the dagger.

I sneak up and draw my shortsword, slightly increasing my light gem, charge for the power attack and... "HEY JOHNSON SOME TAFFER'S BEHIND YA!", he becomes aware, turns around and my backstab is negated.

Well crap, he may not have seen me, but that increase to my light gem made his friend instantly see me and know what was going on. Maybe if I used the dagger my gem wouldn't have increased so much, and he would have only been suspicious instead of alerted. It doesn't even matter that I lost the backstab, someone saw me during my attempt for the increase in the light gem.

This does have an implication in gameplay.

Dagger disadvantage - Very short reach
Physics = True
Gameplay disadvantage = True

This can also be an advantage if it needs to be drawn where your lack of space/mobility means drawing a sword is impossible like in tightly spaced air shafts, or when our arms are strapped to our sides with vines or webbing.

Dagger disadvantage - No power attack
Physics = True
Gameplay disadvantage = True

I don't think power attack is a matter of physics XD

[embellishment]There is no need for the dagger, when there is the sword in the game. At first, there may appear to be a prominent use for the dagger, but after careful examination, the dagger pales in comparison as a weapon and tool.[/embellishment]

[convenient oversight]Beyond the technical and gameplay comparison, there is the integrity of Garrett's story and character to keep in mind.[/convenient oversight] He was trained with the short sword as a Keeper, and this distinguishes him from the other common street thugs carrying around daggers.

You still refuse to give the dagger credit where it's due, there are many situations where it's a better tool than a shortsword (in game and in real life), and a few where it's even a better choice as a weapon (only one really applying to Garrett due to his lack of experience).

I also like how you conveniently forget to mention how the TDS dagger is now part of the thief universe and dogma... whether we like it or not. It's very hypocritical talking about continuity and integrity, when, if they don't include the dagger at all in T4, it'll be the same exact thing that happened to the sword from TMA to TDS. They just ripped the sword from our hands from TMA to TDS, with no good explanation as to why.It messed not only with our gameplay, but with the integrity of the thief story. Now, you're proposing that we do the same exact thing to the people who played TDS and will play T4.

[Asadar]

I think it is a endless debate that took place between sword and dagger...

"The most difficult question after: Does God really exist? => Does Garret has a dagger in T4?"

[Platinumoxicity]

Originally Posted by Hypevosa

The dagger is still not the best weapon so long as the player wields their tactics and sword well - it only offers slightly more mindless combat against guards to those who want it.

I'm not sure if you meant to say it in that way because I know your stance on this.

If you meant to say that the dagger offers slightly more mindless combat against guards - I agree. You'd be just plain stupid to try to kill someone like that with a small blade. You're a thief, and your primary goal is to go unnoticed. Even if you kill a well armored guard with a dagger, so what? No one's going to pat you in the back for achieving the improbable in a scenario that shouldn't happen in the first place. In fact I think Garrett would punch you in the face for trying to get him killed by not fleeing when you clearly should.

If you meant the opposite, I disagree.

Originally Posted by Hypevosa

I sneak up and draw my shortsword, slightly increasing my light gem, charge for the power attack and... "HEY JOHNSON SOME TAFFER'S BEHIND YA!", he becomes aware, turns around and my backstab is negated.

Anyone who does this doesn't know anything about covert tactics. You don't clobber a guy sitting next to another. You don't snipe a guard when another is looking at him. Back to school with anyone who does that.

[Vae]

Originally Posted by Hypevosa

You're forgetting that a good number of taffers hit walls or floors with the sword as a tactic to distract and circumvent a guard. There are certain situations where less noise is better.

For example, I'm sitting in a shadowy corner, there's one guard down the hall 10 feet away and another 20 feet away down the other. I want to make the closer guard move but keep the other guard where he is, because he'll close off the path I was going to use to circumvent the first guard if I attract him too. Using the dagger to make less noise to only attract the one guard would be advantageous.

There are 2 guards at a door. I want only one to be lured to me so I can blackjack him, so I tap the wall with my dagger since my sword would be loud enough to attract them both.

There are 5 guards all separated by 20 or so feet at different doors in a courtyard. I want to attract all of them at once to the center of the courtyard so I can gas arrow them. I power attack the center statue with my sword to attract them all, and rush to a dark corner of the courtyard to line up my shot as they all approach the statue. Ssssssssssss....

There are situations where more and less noise are required to get the job done. There is gameplay implication here.

Not really...because even though the dagger makes a little less noise than the sword in real life, the devs probably wouldn't even bother to make it any different in the game...but even if they did, there are already many other ways to make and control noise (jumping, sword, arrows, noise arrows, throwing things, using proximity, using different surfaces to create a louder or softer sound with the same object, etc.) that the dagger provides nothing new or useful in this regard anyway...it is redundant at best, adding no real value to the game.

I sneak up and draw my shortsword, slightly increasing my light gem, charge for the power attack and... "HEY JOHNSON SOME TAFFER'S BEHIND YA!", he becomes aware, turns around and my backstab is negated.

Well crap, he may not have seen me, but that increase to my light gem made his friend instantly see me and know what was going on. Maybe if I used the dagger my gem wouldn't have increased so much, and he would have only been suspicious instead of alerted. It doesn't even matter that I lost the backstab, someone saw me during my attempt for the increase in the light gem.

This does have an implication in gameplay.

No it doesn't...because any guard that close to the one you'd be backstabbing would hear the blood curdling scream anyway...completely negating any advantage of the dagger. Plus, this is poor tactical decision making by the player, and I can't believe you would suggest that such an approach be rewarded somehow in a THIEF game. If the devs actually allowed this in T4, the game would be corrupt.

This can also be an advantage if it needs to be drawn where your lack of space/mobility means drawing a sword is impossible like in tightly spaced air shafts, or when our arms are strapped to our sides with vines or webbing.

You're just thinking about it in real life. In a THIEF game, there would never be a need for any of this...just like in the previous games, Garrett just muscled out of the vines and webs.

No need = no value = no dagger

You still refuse to give the dagger credit where it's due, there are many situations where it's a better tool than a shortsword (in game and in real life), and a few where it's even a better choice as a weapon (only one really applying to Garrett due to his lack of experience).

In a THIEF game, the sword outclasses the dagger both as weapon and tool...your blind love for the dagger keeps you in denial of this, even though the analysis is clear.

I also like how you conveniently forget to mention how the TDS dagger is now part of the thief universe and dogma... whether we like it or not. It's very hypocritical talking about continuity and integrity, when, if they don't include the dagger at all in T4, it'll be the same exact thing that happened to the sword from TMA to TDS. They just ripped the sword from our hands from TMA to TDS, with no good explanation as to why.It messed not only with our gameplay, but with the integrity of the thief story. Now, you're proposing that we do the same exact thing to the people who played TDS and will play T4.

Why would you want to support a corruption and not undo it? Do you want climbing gloves instead of rope arrows in T4, just because they were in TDS? Should there be no swimming as well?

The dagger is part of the THIEF universe whether Garrett uses one or not. Garrett has no more relationship to it then a loaf of bread. It is not connected to story in any way, unlike the sword, which is true to his character and Keeper training. The dagger was simply a corruption of the sword, and should be undone. I'm sure the devs realize this, and are acting accordingly...

[Asadar]

* Yawn *

... never tired of discussing the same subject? It is a "yes" "no" discussion which will not end.

[Hypevosa]

Originally Posted by Platinumoxicity

I'm not sure if you meant to say it in that way because I know your stance on this.

If you meant to say that the dagger offers slightly more mindless combat against guards - I agree. You'd be just plain stupid to try to kill someone like that with a small blade. You're a thief, and your primary goal is to go unnoticed. Even if you kill a well armored guard with a dagger, so what? No one's going to pat you in the back for achieving the improbable in a scenario that shouldn't happen in the first place. In fact I think Garrett would punch you in the face for trying to get him killed by not fleeing when you clearly should.

If you meant the opposite, I disagree.

Anyone who does this doesn't know anything about covert tactics. You don't clobber a guy sitting next to another. You don't snipe a guard when another is looking at him. Back to school with anyone who does that.

I may not want slightly more mindless combat ever, but if someone does... meh. It hurts their supplies in the end since they'll need healing potions (and you never know if there's actually enough in a mission), and he still gets to have the kind of fun he wants. I'd rather block and shift stance, and cut the man where he's unarmored if I'm going to bother fighting.

Well in IRL you'd know that guard could see you no matter the distance if he could see his friend. In our game, this isn't the case, and while you may know he is there, you may assume he is far enough away that he can't see you with your degree of light filled gem. It could also just be that the guard moved there from somewhere else, and you didn't anticipate it. The illustration was meant to imply a good distance between Garrett and victim, and the interfering guard, such that the slight increase in visibility would matter. "He won't see you if you're backstabbing him" may be true, but that doesn't mean someone else won't - and that light shade could mean the difference.

Originally Posted by Vae

Not really...because even though the dagger makes a little less noise than the sword in real life, [Implying Lazy Devs]the devs probably wouldn't even bother to make it any different in the game[/Implying Lazy Devs]... [Giving Credit to everything but the kitchen sink as being better than the dagger]but even if they did, there are already many other ways to make and control noise (jumping, sword, arrows, noise arrows, throwing things, using proximity, using different surfaces to create a louder or softer sound with the same object, etc.) that the dagger provides nothing new or useful in this regard anyway...it is redundant at best, adding no real value to the game.[/Giving Credit to everything but the kitchen sink as being better than the dagger]

Yes because EM should be lazy and not bother to make a second sound file with a different distance parameter.

And of course, because jumping on any surface that makes enough noise for a guard to hear will not be just as loud as bashing a sword against it, or shooting an arrow into it or a wall. Of course the noise arrow will suddenly have a finite predictable range of effect instead of attracting every guard in 100 feet that hasn't gone completely deaf. Who am I to presume the devs won't always make sure that I have a coffee table right next to me with full china that I can throw at whatever direction I want the guard to go in. I can always use proximity, because if I want to attract that one guard, chances are, I will have the 50 feet of otherwise guardless space to back up so jumping on the tile floor will only grab his attention and not his buddy's, and the devs will be sure to place tile, metal, grass, carpet, moss, and wood all in the same area so I can choose well which surface I should shoot an arrow into to make just enough noise to distract the guard.

I can find no reason I would ever want to have a tool on my person that was capable of making a smaller noise than I otherwise am able to make so I can only attract wanted attention. It's stupid, and anyone who thinks it would be remotely useful is stupid.

No it doesn't...because any guard that close to the one you'd be backstabbing would hear the blood curdling scream anyway...completely negating any advantage of the dagger. Plus, this is poor tactical decision making by the player, and I can't believe you would suggest that such an approach be rewarded somehow in a THIEF game. If the devs actually allowed this in T4, the game would be corrupt.

Yes, the fact that the guard knows his friend is dead from the blood curdling scream surely means that he can both see and track me in the darkness.

I'm not suggesting they get off scott free, I'm sure that after the guard has rushed over and found his friend to actually be dead, he'll go alert others, push a shiney button maybe that brings even more people out of the wood work, and all the fun stuff.

But of course, we should never even consider that a player may just adopt an kill and hide technique, just as none will ever pick off guards from a distance with a bow, just as the old games never allowed killing of any sort ever, this one will hold the same standard.

You're just thinking about it in real life. In a THIEF game, there would never be a need for any of this...just like in the previous games, Garrett just muscled out of the vines and webs.

No need = no value = no dagger

In a THIEF game, the sword outclasses the dagger both as weapon and tool...your blind love for the dagger keeps you in denial of this, even though the analysis is clear.

Why would you want to support a corruption and not undo it? Do you want climbing gloves instead of rope arrows in T4, just because they were in TDS? Should there be no swimming as well?

The dagger is part of the THIEF universe whether Garrett uses one or not. Garrett has no more relationship to it then a loaf of bread. It is not connected to story in any way, unlike the sword, which is true to his character and Keeper training. The dagger was simply a corruption of the sword, and should be undone. I'm sure the devs realize this, and are acting accordingly...

So that means you lied in your previous posts and GOD FORBID, embellished the sword's capabilities when you said that it was useful for getting out of sticky webs and vines that were constricting you? It was really just Garrett flexing and wriggling his way out? Surely you jest?

In a THIEF game, all that is required of the melee weapon is that it be utilized as a tool as well, and it doesn't matter if it's sharp, 3 feet long, a quarter inch thick, and 2 inches wide, or if it's sharp, 6 inches long, 1 inch wide, and 3/16ths inches thick. In a THIEF game, all that matters is that the combat has more depth with the weapon than holding an attack button and dancing in circles while drinking instant health potions.

In TDP and TMA these requirements were met, and that's why they set the standard. TDS failed, not because of the item in question, but because it lacked these 2 points. If they had given us a quarterstaff in TDS, and we had been able to use it to the same effect as the sword, with a deeper combat system than spam attack and drink potions, and it had a dozen uses as a tool when you played through the game... TDS would have been more of a THIEF game for it.

I may not have liked the dagger's introduction as my primary arm in TDS, but, having lost the sword from the previous games I know what it feels like to go WTF!? WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS?! And I'm not going to be a hypocrite and wish the same thing upon anyone who played TDS and wants the dagger to have a return for T4. I may not have liked the corruption, but just because TDS is a chapter of the Thief story that has a coffee stain on the pages doesn't mean that it's not part of the story, and the dagger has come with it like it or not.

If we need an explanation for why the sword wasn't there, then let's say civilians were temporarily being restricted and not allowed to carry swords due to the plague and not wanting more cadavers breeding and spewing it everywhere. I don't care if it's not an amazing one, but picking up the dagger for a bit so guards aren't automatically confronting/arresting you when you walk out of your apartment building doesn't sound like an unwise action. Less attention is better.

Let's hope the ban was lifted for T4 and we get our sword back, but I also hope that we keep the dagger somewhere on us, because there's no reason to not have a useful tool on your belt, and an extra ace up your sleeve.

[Yaphy]

Why not change the way Garrett uses the dagger. He does have a free hand when he has the dagger equiped and the dagger is a short weapon so it's very flexible even at close range. If Garrett has the surprize on his side (which he has when he sneaks up behind) he could easly just hold his hand over the victims mouth and slice his throat with the dagger. There shouldn't be a long animation for it. Garrett doesn't do it for style point so he grabs the victims and kills him at the same moment without warning or any delays. This should just take about a second from when you start the "backstab" to when it's done. SInce Garrett still holds the victim uppright you could deside if you want to lift him up directly by clicking again under the second when the victims gets killed.
This is not completly silent because the victim will still scream altough it's not right out. It will be covered in his hand.

[The Atrophy]

Originally Posted by Vae

In a THIEF game, this does not provide any real disadvantage, because the only time Garrett needs to draw a blade is when he is about to backstab (which he is not seen anyway), and when facing off with an opponent (which he is clearly seen)...negating any disadvantage.

Your right, the majority of players would only bring out a weapon for use then put it back immediately. I did not think of it it like that.

Originally Posted by Vae

Because the sword has more weight, it would generally make more noise when hitting something, but this would have no effect on gameplay, because you would never be hitting things with a dagger...negating any disadvantage for the sword.

In this instance I was comparing what was already done with both weapons in previous games. In TDP and TMA, hitting say, a box made a decent amount of noise that could draw guards in the vicinity. In TDS, using the dagger for the same purpose made almost no noise at all. I think saying people would NEVER hit things with the dagger isn't entirely true. It TDS you could use the dagger to break boxes where vents were hidden behind for instance. But honestly, I do mostly agree with you. It seemed pretty strange to me that Garrett could destroy a huge wooden crate by hitting it with this tiny dagger 5 times.

Originally Posted by Vae

Garrett is trained to wear a short sword properly, you would never hear the sword or dagger making any noise in this regard...again, negating any disadvantage the sword may have.

I agree with what your saying, and it wouldn't make sense for Garrett to be perfectly quiet then start making noise LATER in his life (assuming T4 is not a prequel) I proposed that in the instance that there was a dagger/sword choice, because it seemed like the sword would have been a more obvious choice without it


I'll admit it Vae, you ed my argument up.

[Vae]

At your service...

Thanks for having an open mind, and not letting your ego get in the way...after all, isn't that why we're all here, to determine what would actually be best for THIEF IV, rather than trying to rationalize an attachment to a personal desire?

Your clarity has been noted...

[Nate]

IF the devs introduce guards that have armor/helms, then the dagger possibly becomes a neat weapon that can be used to deliver stealth back-stab one hit kills (since the armor lessens the swords penetration power, and the helmet stops the blackjack).

I would really enjoy this, as long as you have to purchase what weapon you want during the equipment purchase screen.......I mean, if you end up carrying both a dagger and a short sword automatically/free = not much point!

That said, IF the devs DON'T introduce guards with armor and helms, then the dagger really doesn't have a point in Thief 4!

Personally, I hope to see armor play a part in this game, and the dagger being a purchasable weapon to deal with such armored/helmed opponents.

[The Atrophy]

Originally Posted by Vae

At your service...

Thanks for having an open mind, and not letting your ego get in the way...after all, isn't that why we're all here, to determine what would actually be best for THIEF IV, rather than trying to rationalize an attachment to a personal desire?

Your clarity has been noted...

No problem, your argument was legit. Even if I wanted to try and argue against it I would have sounded stupid. I'm not really one for trying to continue uselessly debating when I know I've been proven wrong

[Asadar]

Originally Posted by The Atrophy

No problem, your argument was legit. Even if I wanted to try and argue against it I would have sounded stupid. I'm not really one for trying to continue uselessly debating when I know I've been proven wrong

...what a wonderful forum!

And about Nate post: I like the idea to introduce armors and helms, with different weaknesses. I already think about, and there are some points to explore. For exemple :

- Militia Armor : coat of mail, hat, leather jerkin. Easy to see through the sword / dagger or bow.
- Militia Officers Armor : same thing, but with a breastplate of steel instead of the jerkin. The plastron slightly impede the blades, it is better to slay his victim. At the bow, neck and head are the weak points to target.
- Hammerite Armor: coat of mail, tabards, gorget and sometimes a helmet. The gorget protects the throat ... It is therefore better to aim the back.
- Higher Hammerite Brother Armor: same thing with a breastplate and shoulder pads above the tabard. With a helmet is an enemy very difficult to remove silently by standard means. It is better to use special arrows or mines to do to overcome, or simply avoid it.

That is just ideas and suggestions, nothing more.

[Voodoo]

Originally Posted by Platinumoxicity

I feel like feeding the trolls today so excuse me everybody...



"Your insane and dont." -I'm not sure that "dont" is even an actual noun. It sounds like a prehistoric bird that's gone extinct or something. But no, I'm in possession of neither "an insane" nor "a dont." You are incorrect even though it's an incomplete sentence.

"Be cussing god." -I need to inform you that you have no authority allowing or disallowing me from doing anything, including "Being cussing god."

"I ain't feeling dat." -I have no say on this one but I do admit that I'm curious about this "dat" you're speaking of. Is it like "I'm feeling ill"? -as in an adjective? Depending on the context I'd say that I'm either glad or sorry about you feeling "dat".

This is a joke and so was the thing I was responding to. Presumably.

Its a lil bit o slang mayne ya want sum more ya got a problem wit da way ima talking to you or summin GROW UP.

[Platinumoxicity]

Originally Posted by Voodoo

GROW UP.

Ya go ahead and fetch yo' glasses niga. And read the fine print on mah post.


Let's end the discussion about the sword and the dagger with this:

Dagger: No stealth penalty, silent assassination ability, limited combat ability.
Sword: Constant stealth penalty (even when in the possession of Garrett who can normally carry a sword without it compromising his stealth) no silent assassination ability, but useful in combat.
Neither: No stealth penalty, no burden on your conscience.

Is everyone happy now? And by "everyone" I mean the dagger enthusiasts.

[Nate]

Platinumoxicity's above post hits it on the spot!

Dagger = ability to silent kill, no stealth penalty

Short Sword = no silent kill, constant stealth penalty, but good melee weapon

Neither = no penalty, no crying

PERFECT!!!! (and simple)

[DJ Riff]

No silent kill EVER, please. Except undead.

[Asadar]

Why so?

[Nate]

Because DJ Riff doesn't want players to be able to do silent kills......except undead for some reason.

Well, that about sums up his argument.

Just so the DEVs know, I like the idea of the dagger being able to silent kill opponents....and I think there are others.

[The Atrophy]

Originally Posted by Nate

Because DJ Riff doesn't want players to be able to do silent kills......except undead for some reason.

Well, that about sums up his argument.

Just so the DEVs know, I like the idea of the dagger being able to silent kill opponents....and I think there are others.

I think he's saying that because allowing silent kills would promote using violence instead of just blackjacking them or sneaking by. It would take away the risk of others hearing the scream and would become super easy to stealth kill everyone.

[Namdrol]

Just so the DEVs know, I hate the idea of the dagger being able to silent kill opponents....and I know there are others.

[The Atrophy]

There sure are. Unless the puddle of blood were to be HUGE there wouldn't be much difference between it and the Blackjack, and tons of people would use it all the time.