Wrapping backstab and shield size commentary

Peace420 · Post by **Peace420** » Thu Aug 26, 2004 9:25 am

You are retarded!

Post by Ug » Thu Aug 26, 2004 9:38 am

But we still like you.

Don't we?

Todd · Post by **Todd** » Sat Aug 28, 2004 1:56 pm

Didnt read the other 2 pages, but let me say two things. 1) Face to face combat, wrapping around a shield. Makes sense to me. Cant go through, go around. 2) Backstab. A viable, leathal, and effective way for someone to attack vitals of those unaware. UNAWARE!
Ok I'm adding a third thing, if you come running at me, leap over my shield, wrap your arm around my shoulder, and skip your weapon off my shoulderblade., not only have you missed my 'vitals' you most likely only succeded in flatblading my armor. A papercut, and lemon juice would probly be nastier.
Inclose, wrapping a backstab = stoopid.

~fin~

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:41 pm

Again, pc's may only be able to touch your shoulder blade but, this is a simulated attack. Same as a regular hit. If we want more realism, then we can start allowing shield bashing and full swings too. Heck, look at disarm. I don't see anyone bitching that no one is getting their hand hit hard enough to break it. Simulated combat isn't always going to be real. Thus roleplaying... woah.

Donovan Thynedar · Post by **Donovan Thynedar** » Sat Aug 28, 2004 7:05 pm

I've always viewed in-game mechanics and roleplaying to be complementary to each other, at least in an ideal setting. While this is certainly not an ideal setting, it seems to me that the rogue backstab ability would be played as the rogue studying an opponent, then making an unnoticed attack to a vital and unprotected area of the back.

Translating that to the in-game scenario, I would say that if the attacker is detected, then it does not do backstab damage. Keep the count at 5, but allow the mechanics to portray the story. Wrapping for a backstab or backstabbing someone who sees it coming seems to go against the flavor of the ability and the world.

Not being a rogue or a GM, I suppose I have less to lose/gain from the ruling on this matter, but I guess I'm stating a preference for rules that complement the setting and genre in which we're playing. Perhaps both story and mechanical descriptions of abilities in the rulebook would help establish the "spirit" of the ability, and thus lead to fewer arguements over its interpretation.

Anyway, that's my take - no filters necessary. Play on!

Peace420 · Post by **Peace420** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 9:58 am

Donovan Thynedar wrote: Translating that to the in-game scenario, I would say that if the attacker is detected, then it does not do backstab damage. Keep the count at 5, but allow the mechanics to portray the story. Wrapping for a backstab or backstabbing someone who sees it coming seems to go against the flavor of the ability and the world.

Too subjective, there will be the "I saw you" "No you didn't" argument. In a perfect world I'd like to see something similiar but in the real world it'll only create arguing and give chea... err... over imaginative players an out for every backstab they should take.

Donovan Thynedar · Post by **Donovan Thynedar** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 10:44 am

There is going to be an amount of subjectivity in any setting, so the question is where do we place the responsibility for that subjectivity? We rely on people to make responsible decisions all the time, such as keeping an accurate count for a skill or keeping a reasonable approximation of their life and armor points - and both of those are subject to the judgement of the player. If we try to design rules that are invulnerable to dishonesty, then we may as well have digital skill clocks and start wearing electronic sensors to register hits.

Back to my original point, it is the responsibility of all players to conduct themselves in a reasonable and honest manner on the battlefield. Last event, Todd winged a 30 magic boom at me while we were in the initial stages of the siege battle. It either hit the ground directly in front of my foot or hit my foot, I honestly was unsure. In deciding whether or not to take the hit, I considered the story scenario, and thought that a massive energy ball would have been more likely to hit the ground then squeak through the narrow gap between my sheild and the ground. I didn't take the hit, and felt fine with my decision. Was it subjective, you bet. If Todd had clipped me in the shoudler instead of the foot, would I have been lying ten feet back, smoking from the impact? You bet. Responsible subjectivity is key to a live action game.

In regards to backstab, I'd say that the burden of subjectivity falls on both parties. The rogue should play with the knowledge that suprise is a necessary part of his ability, and the target should judge honestly whether they realized the attack was coming. From what I've seen, noticing the rogue the instant before the hit would not be adequate to prevent the backstab damage. In return, however, if the rogue can tell their target is actively defending against them, then they should not call the backstab damage. Placing a burden of trust on the rogues not to call for backstab damage when it is not applicable allows for the other players and NPC's to default to a "when in doubt, take the hit" kind of philosophy.

Will conflicts arise? Certainly, but I would hope that as adults playing an adult game we can settle them without degrading into bickering five year olds. I would certainly hope that no one's ego is so fragile that the end result of a backstab would hurt their feelings significantly. There is no perfect system, and there are no perfect players, but generally people will do what is expected of them within the confines of a situation. I expect honesty and maturity from the people in this game, and I suspect that others do as well.

Someone pathetic enough to cheat at a roleplaying game is going to do so regardless of the rules. Trying to cut out a cheater's wiggle room is fine, but I would be against sacrificing elements of the story in order to do so.

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 12:27 pm

No where in the skill does the rogue's backstab say he/she needs any level of surprise. Sure, it looks cool for roleplaying, but roleplaying and rules are seperate entities.

Under this same concept, I should be acting completely defensive and trying to block everything when using defensive matrix or just all out attacking while using rage. Sorry, but I have no intention of doing that, nor do I think we need rules to tell people how to act. Wrap around / diving backstab isn't what is intended but it's a pretty minor thing for such a massive rule change.

Peace420 · Post by **Peace420** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 12:41 pm

If you see them hit them, I know I keep coming back to this but really it's not that hard, if you hit them or if you make them block they lose the charge. Adding other conditions will only complicate and muddy a pretty simple easy system.

Reinventing the wheel, something like coming up with a new system from scratch.

Post by **GM_Chris** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 2:18 pm

Like I said perhaps the time just needs increased before a person may call backstab

Then I think I will be less against flying attacks.

Chris

Todd · Post by **Todd** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 5:02 pm

*This statement is meant to be made personally by me as a seperate entity completely removed from the Final Haven Staff. It is my personal opinion and should be taken as so.*
I dont care if we change the count to 5 minutes, jumping over me to wrap my back is still idiotic. The timing is ok, the damage is fine, I dont think we need extra rules to prevent cheeseweasles from lame behavior.

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 8:07 pm

I think people need to not aim for my back when they know I'm using defensive matrix too, but that ain't gonna happen either (since it falls under the same ruling). Hey as long as we count the damage whether we like it or not, who cares?

Plus, defenisve matrix requiring someone to be behind you makes mass combat stupid. One group of warriors with some artillery would mow down the town.

Nelkie · Post by **Nelkie** » Tue Aug 31, 2004 7:10 am

I'm confused, have people been jumping over shields, wrapping around to do a backstab when they are standing infront of people, etc...

I'm not aware of any of the other stuff happenig in game, so why talk about it?

I believe the only bitch on this entire post is run by's. Aka, I run at you from the front, move around around your sword , and as I run past you swing my sword to nick you in the back. I believe that is the problem. By the way it is very hard to make this type of attack work, and most of the time the thief misses or gets hit.

Now is there a problem if a thief comes running from the side or back and does the same thing? Is the problem where the attack orginates from? I can see a thief should not intatate an attack from the front when the person is looking directly at them, but if a thief is running up behind the person or from the side, and the person turns, and theif hits the back, than the back stab should count. It is a very fine line, that will be blurred or broken, but as a note in the backstab discription, have it that a backstab should not be inated as frontal attack, but should be intated from the side or back of a person. Aka, do not run straight at a person, dodge their weapon, and run past them hitting there back with a backstab. But change nothing else in the skill. I say lets play test these issues during the downtime, and see if it is truely a problem and how to best write a slight modifcation to the skill if nessecary.

Now I have charged a backstab when I'm in front of a person, They start fighting another person. I run in a big arc and at the last monent cut it sharp to run right behind the person to hit them in the back with a backstab. I started in the front, but on the line of attack is from the back/side. The person can probaly see me coming, but becasue they are busy with another person, I can get behind them and do a backstab. Is this a problem?

Is the problem when a thief is facing off against another person, one on one, and the thief charges a backstab, does the running attack, and scores a hit? I can see this being chessy becaue the person knows it coming. The atack is all based on pesonal ability at that time. I'm guilty of it, but when facing a big fighter, you use any advantage to stay alive. i tried this tactic many times when I was facing the dwarf, but i only got to work once when the dwarf slipped and feel down. Everyother time, the dwarf hit my shield, or i missed. It is not easy to do, and most of the time it does not work.

I'm truely trying to understand what the true problem is.