Ew, that'll leave some nasty scars... [WEAPON]

[Proven_Paradox]

Barbed Dart
Exotic ranged (thrown) weapon
Cost: 2 gp
Damage (Small): 1d3
Damage (Medium): 1d4
Critical: 18-20/x2
Range Increments: 30 ft.
Weight: .5 lb.
Damage type: Piercing


This vicious looking piece of metal has many barbs jutting out of its side and comes to wicked looking point.

When a target takes damage from a barbed dart, the projectile embeds itself in deep in the target's flesh, or whatever passes for flesh for that particular target. Removing the dart is a painful process that requires a move action. When the dart is removed by any means, it deals 1d3 slashing damage to the creature it was embedded in.


So, this is just something I've been tossing around in my head for a little while for a rogue character I use. With these weapons, the returning quality becomes particularly nasty, and one of these with silence cast on it could be particularly problematic for spellcasters.

I was also contemplating making these things cause bleeding wounds (1 damage per round) instead of dealing extra damage...

What do you think?

[Fizban]

I'd use the same mechanic for lodging weapons in people used for some other weapons: the target must make a reflex save DC 10+damage dealt to stop the weapon from being stuck, if stuck it requires a full-round action to remove and deals the same damage it dealt going in. A DC 15 heal check can get it out without harming the creature further.

[Saithis Bladewing]

1d3 to pull it out is an awful lot. Remember, that's potentially most of the HP of a 1st level commoner.

[SpartacusThe2nd]

u know it's barbed thing pulling its out of your flesh, it's sure be a painful process.

This weapon is cool I'd use it for my rogues characters.

[Zeta Kai]

Remember that "painful" does not equal "damaging" in some cases. I think that this may be one of those cases. Perhaps you could make the removal process deal subdual damage (Small 1d4/Medium 1d6/Large 1d8), either from pain or blood loss. That would mean that, in some circumstances, removing one of these darts is so painful that it would render a 1st level commoner unconcious from the sheer agony.

Now there's a weapon with flavor.

[Fizban]

Well, let's compare it to the harpoon in frostburn. The harpoon has 1d10 damage, range 30', the lodging property I described above, and if it sticks the target moves at 1/2 normal speed while the attacker can limit their range of movement with the trailing rope.

His barbed dart keeps it's original range but has no increased damage, and no extra effects besides damage upon removal. Since I think that it automatically sticking every time is a bit much, I'd make it work like the harpoon, and up the damage to 1d6. I'd probably also make it slow the opponent, as most things wont move fast with a spiky piece of metal stuck in them.

[Icewalker]

Yeah, if it doesn't cause some disadvantage like slowing while in the opponent, and it deals damage to take it out, then it is to their advantage to just leave several very pointy hunks of metal sticking out of their chest, which sounds a bit odd.

[Proven_Paradox]

1d3 to pull it out is an awful lot. Remember, that's potentially most of the HP of a 1st level commoner.

So is 1d4, the dart's base damage. The idea of a person dropping from a single dart (unless it hits an important part, which I think would be a critical hit) is equally absurd, I think. Yet DnD still says it happens.


Remember that "painful" does not equal "damaging" in some cases. I think that this may be one of those cases. Perhaps you could make the removal process deal subdual damage (Small 1d4/Medium 1d6/Large 1d8), either from pain or blood loss. That would mean that, in some circumstances, removing one of these darts is so painful that it would render a 1st level commoner unconcious from the sheer agony.

Painful doesn't mean damaging, yes. But, tearing of flesh and organs certainly is, and that's what I'm going for here. The barbs are going to rip just as much coming out as they did going in.


Well, let's compare it to the harpoon in frostburn. The harpoon has 1d10 damage, range 30', the lodging property I described above, and if it sticks the target moves at 1/2 normal speed while the attacker can limit their range of movement with the trailing rope.

His barbed dart keeps it's original range but has no increased damage, and no extra effects besides damage upon removal. Since I think that it automatically sticking every time is a bit much, I'd make it work like the harpoon, and up the damage to 1d6. I'd probably also make it slow the opponent, as most things wont move fast with a spiky piece of metal stuck in them.

I don't have that book. I approached this with the idea of taking a dart and making it worth sinking a feat in EWP, and I've never seen the stats for a harpoon before.

This weapon will never stick in anything with any kind of damage reduction worth mentioning (unless it's made of whatever material negates said damage reduction, naturally) and with the way the weapon is designed, I don't see how it could NOT stick in something that it actually damages. I don't see how a reflex save makes sense.

I also don't see how moving slower would make sense unless it hits the legs.

Also, don't forget that critical range. A keen barbed dart would get a lot of critical hits.


Yeah, if it doesn't cause some disadvantage like slowing while in the opponent, and it deals damage to take it out, then it is to their advantage to just leave several very pointy hunks of metal sticking out of their chest, which sounds a bit odd.I don't think it sounds that odd when you consider that the process of removing said hunks of metal would also involve removing hunks of thier chest.

Also, I have these in mind specifically tailored to the charcter I'm talking about, and I have a few strategies in mind to make it a major problem to just leave it. I believe I mentioned having one of these darts silenced, for example. And also, don't forget returning: that would cause the extra damage to be dealt automatically. I was careful to word things to that effect.


So, some things I'm considering...

A heal check (DC 10 + damage dealt) to remove the dart without causing the extra damage sounds reasonable to me.

Having it cause a bleeding wound upon removal rather than extra damage.

Properties such as flaming or acidic continue to deal damage while it's lodged in. I thought this might be a bit overpowering, though... But it'd make sense.

[Icewalker]

I'm not saying it soudns unreasonable to take damage when removed, I was just thinking that even non-magical ones should cause some problem when remaining lodged in someone, because otherwise it is entirely to their advantage to fight with the barbs still in them as opposed to removing them.

[Zeta Kai]

I would have to agree with Fizban & Icewalker. Having an object lodged in your body prevents running at anything close to full speed, almost regardless of the object's location in one's body. Even a tiny (or in D&D parlance, Fine) bullet will disable a person if shor in the arm. Pain alone can be the debilitating factor.

I've had a foreign object stuck in my back, near the shoulder (long story), & the inability to use any of the the muscles in that area slowed me a crawl. I couldn't have run if my life depended on it. Not life threatening, not a deep scarring wound, but still nearly-incapacitating.

[Fizban]

I'm pretty sure being lodged in someone is enough to stop a lodged weapon from returning as well. It's reasonable to assume that if you've got something stuck in you, it now counts as being in your possession, meaning it wouldn't return to the thrower and flaming/frost etc won't cause extra damage. If you want a weapon that does those things, it should probably be a specialized magic weapon.

I'm not saying your stats are bad, but when there's an established method it makes sense to use it.

[TheDon]

I'm not saying it soudns unreasonable to take damage when removed, I was just thinking that even non-magical ones should cause some problem when remaining lodged in someone, because otherwise it is entirely to their advantage to fight with the barbs still in them as opposed to removing them.


it IS in their advantage to fight with the barbs still in them, take arrows for exemple, there's a reason that when fighting they'd leave the arrow head in and just break the shaft.

[Proven_Paradox]

I think halving walking speed is still a bit much. I'll concede the slowing things down point, but I think half is just too much, especially if I'm throwing several of these. Perhaps just have it decrease movement speed by five feet?

Also, Fizban, I see nothing in Returning's description that states that the dart wouldn't come back. It simply states that it goes back to where it was thrown from, regardless of its position or who possesses it when it returns. I see your point about flaming/freezing, but I think the returning part still works.

[Icewalker]

However I also believe returning may mean like teleporting, so it wouldn't pull out, although I'm not positive on that.

The point of leaving them in is that it shouldn't be to their advantage. It causes massive amounts of pain to attempt to do anything with a spike of metal stuck into some parts of your body, or so I would assume due to Zeta Kai's comment.

I've had a foreign object stuck in my back, near the shoulder (long story), & the inability to use any of the the muscles in that area slowed me a crawl. I couldn't have run if my life depended on it.
(Emphasis added)

Seems like it would cause some issues to me, but Zeta seems to be the one to know about it (maybe he had it in an unfortunate location that hit muscle, or something, I wouldn't know)

[Fizban]

Returning require the weapon to fly back through the air to the thrower. There was an example somewhere in a wizard's article or the FAQ with examples on it. There is a psionic teleporting version that costs the same but teleports, gets past some barriers but requires astral travel.

Weather or not returning will pull it out depends on the DM's ruling, though if it requires an action to remove it, then it's stuck pretty good. I once again bring up the precedents set by the harpoon (and other weapons in other books using the same mechanic), which requires a full round action.

Not to be rude, but it seems like you're trying to milk it for more than it should be worth. Sure, returning makes the weapon fly back, but since there's no effective strength listed, then logically it can't apply enough force to get past an obstruction. I has just enough strength to get itself in the air and back to the thrower, not enough to yank itself out of someone with enough force to deal damage, and returning is definitely not meant to give extra attacks, otherwise it would be dancing or it would return the same turn you threw it. I understand if you designed the characer with the returning trick in mind, but in that case I think you should make a new ability that will encompass what you need.

On a different note, I just realized something: by the wording of the harpoon and similar, if you power attack or sneak attack, removing the weapon will deal the same amount of PA or SA over again. Now add someone/thing to yank it back out again, or just grapple and do it yourself. Not very fast, but stylish.

[Proven_Paradox]

Sure, returning makes the weapon fly back, but since there's no effective strength listed, then logically it can't apply enough force to get past an obstruction.

It's logical to conclude something when no information is given on the subject? There's a leap there I'm not making with you, sir. I think this would be a DM decision, as you stated before that. The way I see it, a returning weapon does what it needs to do to get back to the spot it was thrown from, and that means it may well use quite a bit of force if it needs to. There was an arrow in Complete Divine that comes to mind, I think, though I don't have access to the book right now.