Training backstab in the Bynn

[spicemustflow]

From what i understand, backstab isn't just slitting someone's throat from behind, it's any form or dirty trick or feint during combat, done in purpose of landing the finishing blow on the opponent. So, do you think that it should be acceptable if you try to do it while sparring every one in a while? I mean good warriors don't just pound on you like a drum, they use trick and maneuvers all the time, so I don't think backstabbing someone would be too inappropriate in training. I'm not even sure if it's considered inappropriate, but I think I remember someone said it. The only negative thing is that it screams: "I'm an assassin!!!" to everybody.

[manonfire]

Backstab is a dedicated attempt to kill your target and thus, doesn't faill under the sphere of 'combat training'.

While I agree that there ought to be another means to train it, there ain't.

[RogueGunslinger]

Go for it if you don't mind accidentally killing your sparring partners, or having your Sergeant beat the piss out of you.

I think backstab has one purpose only; to kill someone as quick and efficiently as possible. So 'training' backstab is rather silly when you think about it. Because the first time you get it right...

[Rarsh]

The 'massive damage' aspect of backstab is true even with a sparring weapon? That seems odd, considering it's only possible with a stabbing weapon. But the helpfile says 'backstab' is just a generic name for 'critical strike,' and of course you could train those, with light and blunted wooden weapons or whatever, without any overwhelming fear of killing someone. (At least not more than your extremely strong dwarf using a blunted axe.) And if you -did- kill a sparring partner, well ... shit happens.

Depends on the echo, I'd imagine, and the helpfile. 'Sap' says, "This skill entails sneaking up on an opponent and rapping them soundly on the head, with the intent of knocking them out." You absolutely can't sneak up on someone while you're fighting then, so I don't see how anyone could justify using 'sap' during sparring. (Despite the enigmatic 'It is possible to sap fighting victims' statement in the helpfile, which gets more confusing every time I read it.) But backstab reads differently to me.

And how would any other PC -know- you were using 'backstab'? Does an attempted critical strike look that different than what you normally do with your sparring daggers? Especially if it's possible to do during a regular spar?

[manonfire]

There's no point in attempting a backstab with a sparring weapon, so the code doesn't allow it.

[Rarsh]

I would prefer that you not completely undermine my argument with a fact, of all things.

That's just rude.

[X-D]

That and most PCs will consider it an attempt to kill and retaliate in kind. It is a good way to lose a PC.

[Fnord]

Sneak out and go hunting. Kill two birds with one... dagger.

[Malken]

Do like the rest of us and practice backstab on verrin hawks, please.

..this is meant as a joke..

[brytta.leofa]

... the code doesn't allow it.

Yup.  The common training daggers are not "stabbing" weapons.

[Synthesis]

They used to be stabbing weapons.

And there used to be not such a fuss about it.

Regarding damage, the damage could be minimized by a simple check that says "If (weaponflag=(sparring or training)) then (Damage=DamageRoll*0.1)" or something quite simple like that.  Further, I'm pretty sure that, when the training daggers -were- stabbing weapons, the damage tended to be fairly minimal.

Hell, I remember one guy (whose player was later made a Staff member) allowing his IC brother to backstab him with a training dagger for practice. 

How 'bout dem apples?

[Conspiracy Theory]

I once had a character in a rough sort of clan, with a particular tough-guy as a leader. He dictated that, when we had four or more members available, we'd have a group battle that was to as closely as possible resemble actual combat. That is, "no holds barred".

My character opened such fights with a sap attempt, and others commonly threw sparring knives or spears at one another. There were mid-fight rescues, guard and subdue attempts, retreat-and-repeat throwing, and everything else the code would allow us to do. Funnest sparring sessions I've ever been a part of.

And dangerous? Hell yeah. Really felt like I was playing Armageddon, honestly.

[jstorrie]

Backstabbing with a sparring weapon is conceptually silly because there's no way you could land a 'critical strike' with a fake weapon.

If you are in the Byn and getting your backstab skill up is really a big deal to you–
- get someone else in the Byn to train you in backstab
- use backstab when you're out on contracts
- log yourself training it alone and send in a request for a skill boost

But really, it's just one skill, man. If you can't find a way to train it in the role you're in, just don't train it. It's not going to ruin the game for you.

[psionic fungus]

I wouldn't do it.

That said, we just had a rather detailed discussion about how training backstab is ridiculous, and a variety of solutions were proposed...  Hopefully things will be different in 2.Arm.

[Angela Christine]

But really, it's just one skill, man. If you can't find a way to train it in the role you're in, just don't train it. It's not going to ruin the game for you.

The problem is that the branching system encourages practicing skills you don't need, just in case they are the key to getting a skill you would use all the time.


Suppose you want to play an intrepid explorer.  Now you know that the Climb skill would be very, very handy, but in general the best guild would be Ranger.  You believe that Rangers can branch Climb, so it's all good.  (For whatever reason, you can't get a subguild with Climb).  Unfortunately, you haven't memorized the skill trees and you have no idea which of skills you currently possess might eventually branch to Climb.  Archery?  Hunt?  Cooking?  Who knows, it is a mystery.  You can make do with using climbing ropes and other equipment to help you climb without the skill, but no matter how much climbing you do (nor how many times you fall on your head and knock yourself out) you will never develop the Climb skill until you master the branching skill.  Since you don't know which skill is important, you find yourself cooking up unending piles of tubers just in case Cooking is the secret to life.   

Mages have the same problem, in spades.  Most of the starting spells seem kind of lame, at least the power level a newbie mage can manage.  But since people are always complaining about mages being overpowered, you have to assume that something cool hides behind a lame starting spell.  So you are left casting spells you don't need, spells your character may have no conceivable use for, just to get past it.  Suppose you had a starting spell that turns things purple.  You don't even like purple!  But you've turned everything you own purple, hopes of getting past the purple spell.  You've even gone out and bought cheap crap, just so that you could turn it purple.  You pick up trash off the streets just so you can take it home and turn it purple.  Your temple is piled to the rafters with purple crap.  And once you branch whatever branches off of Purplize, you will never ever turn anything purple every again.  You don't even like purple.


Likewise, an Assassin who joins the Byn can get by without using Backstab much.  But what if something really awesome that a Bynner would use all the damned time branches off of Backstab?  Backstab is a defining skill for Assassins, so it seems reasonable that awesome things might branch off of it.  They only way to know for sure is to max out your Backstab and see what happens.


An intense drive to practice skills you don't need is an inherent flaw in the branching system.  That doesn't mean branching is a bad system, but it is imperfect.

[LittleLostThief]

There are three ways that I can EASILY think of right now to train your backstab up and none of them have anything to do with sparring.

Quit thinking of backstab as a spar worthy skill, and free your mind.

[Kevo]

Ask your superiors in there's anyone they need roughed up during practice.

Whoops, sorry skinny, didn't mean to get you in that long neck of yours.

[Maybe42or54]

Well, the problem I see with training backstab is that backstab is a skill to kill your opponent as quickly as possible. You can't practice stabbing them in their armor. You are -trying- to get where there is no armor. You want to get them in their armpit, neck, inner thigh, eyes, crotch, etc... By sparring with backstab, you are aiming for the places where people don't usually wear armor and since you are not very good at backstab, there is a good chance you are going to fuck up and kill someone. To use backstab, the majority of the time, your opponent shouldn't know that you are trying to stab him, or he wont let you get close. If you are trying to practice by hitting armor, then you should be training your piercing skill, not your backstab skill.

[Fnord]

Backstabbing with a sparring weapon is conceptually silly because there's no way you could land a 'critical strike' with a fake weapon.

Put a dull piece of bone or wood in the right person's hands and they will critical strike the shit out of you.

[brytta.leofa]

Put a dull piece of bone or wood in the right person's hands and they will critical strike the shit out of you.

Speaking of which... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yawara, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kubotan

"With the exception of the cane or walking stick...none of the martial arts weapons are legal for street carry and self-protection. These include the Yawara stick (a short piece of wood designed to reinforce a punch or an edge of fist strike, also used in Bo-Kibo fighting techniques to hook into the corner of a man's mouth, punching out his teeth and then ripping his cheek open to his ear). Often improperly called a Judo stick, the Yawara is more often taught to Jujitsu students.

...The Kubotan was an evolution of a previous system developed by Kubota called pen fighting. Seeking a simple self-defense method that could be used by average American Citizens with little training, Kubota built techniques around solidly constructed ballpoint pens."

[jstorrie]

But what if something really awesome that a Bynner would use all the damned time branches off of Backstab?

For the sake of clearing this up, I will verify right now that nothing that branches from backstab is so unlike backstab that a PC who never has cause to backstab would need it. For all of the people new to backstab-having guilds–you're not going to get bandagemaking or floristry or wagoncrafting out of it, or even something general-purposey like 'climb' or 'listen.' You'll get something you would expect to rationally come from training surprise critical strikes. This one is not a 'funny branch.' And if you feel you need something 'further down the branch tree' but will never, ever have reason to use or train its prerequisite, you could always make your case via request and ask to have some skills swapped around; it's not unheard of, if the reason is very good.

Ask your superiors in there's anyone they need roughed up during practice.

Whoops, sorry skinny, didn't mean to get you in that long neck of yours.

This is absolutely the sort of creativity that you should be aiming for if you've absolutely gotta train something specific. Novel but still rational reasons to apply a skill.

[Krath]

Backstabbing with a sparring weapon is conceptually silly because there's no way you could land a 'critical strike' with a fake weapon.

Put a dull piece of bone or wood in the right person's hands and they will critical strike the shit out of you.

I agree with this. My problem with Not being able to "practice" backstab is because it is realistic to train it. If any of you have had any martial arts
training with weapons at all you will know you practice with wooden weapons on each other. Why cant backstabbing with wooden/sparring
weapons just be perceived as a light blow against a critical pressure point, an artery, or any spot which will cause the maximum amount of pain? Both
parties, the assaulter and assaulted can learn, one being where to strike the other how to prevent it or stop full penetration in a real battle.

[flurry]

The problem is that the branching system encourages practicing skills you don't need, just in case they are the key to getting a skill you would use all the time.

Amen to this.  Not that I mind the system we have, but I know what you mean.  I had a very long lived guild_buglar, that never branched a particular skill (which would have been nice to have) because there were certain other skills that didn't make much sense to use.  I tried to come up with reasons to use one particular skill, but it felt lame. I guess I could have just requested it based on time played alone, but I didn't try.

[jstorrie]

I agree with this. My problem with Not being able to "practice" backstab is because it is realistic to train it. If any of you have had any martial arts
training with weapons at all you will know you practice with wooden weapons on each other. Why cant backstabbing with wooden/sparring
weapons just be perceived as a light blow against a critical pressure point, an artery, or any spot which will cause the maximum amount of pain?

Why can't you backstab someone that you're already in combat with? I think you'll find that the two questions have the same answer. The nature of backstabbing isn't just 'critical strikes.' It's 'surprise critical strikes from someone who you weren't in combat with.' If someone is waiting for you to backstab them in the middle of a sparring ring, well, you aren't really surprising them, are you? And if you do surprise them and jump them without consent, well, that's not really 'sparring', is it?

[some guy]

Even if sparring daggers were stabbing weapons, the damage they can codedly do would be far from instantly lethal. It takes maxed backstab and truly awesome weapons to consistently kill in one blow, so a sparring dagger would do much less damage upon a succesful backstab. If you aren't really good at backstab, I'd imagine the damage would be in the neighborhood of a vicious hit at most.

Is it realistic to practice backstab with a sparring weapon (if you could) during training? You could argue for and against. I could definitely see the validity of practicing your aim, your technique and how to strike the right spot. I think that's the biggest component of it too, because the last bit which consists of the act of shoving the blade into a victim really isn't the most important part, it sort of comes natural once you have everything else covered. Going by this common logic, you shouldn't be able to become very good at conventional fighting by sparring, either.

Do I want to see everyone maxing their backstab in the sparring ring? No, definitely not. On the other hand, the alternative that most opt for is to go out and backstab rats and squirrels, and I'm not too happy with that either. I would honestly rather know that I was killed by someone who trained for years in a mercenary unit than someone who spent years slaughtering rodents and insects.

[Krath]

I agree with this. My problem with Not being able to "practice" backstab is because it is realistic to train it. If any of you have had any martial arts
training with weapons at all you will know you practice with wooden weapons on each other. Why cant backstabbing with wooden/sparring
weapons just be perceived as a light blow against a critical pressure point, an artery, or any spot which will cause the maximum amount of pain?

Why can't you backstab someone that you're already in combat with? I think you'll find that the two questions have the same answer. The nature of backstabbing isn't just 'critical strikes.' It's 'surprise critical strikes from someone who you weren't in combat with.' If someone is waiting for you to backstab them in the middle of a sparring ring, well, you aren't really surprising them, are you? And if you do surprise them and jump them without consent, well, that's not really 'sparring', is it?

Ok, I can see where you are coming from, and it isnt necessarily always about surprise. If you constantly work on striking a certain vital point, when the time comes to use it against an opponent, you will be proficient in striking that specific area. IE, Choke holds, Submissions, The "button"(which all good fighters know about). I do not think training backstab in the Byn or in any clan is a problem so long as you rp practicing through emotes of targeting a specific area of the body, then after several emotes try a backsatb or two, aiming for that spot with a blunted weapon.  That is how martial artist do it in real life, and if you doubt that, go take any martial arts class and you will know that before you can go spar, you have to practice your form and aim and SHOW proper discipline and restraint before you get in the ring because you COULD hurt someone.

[Simple]

Maybe, yea. But I think the best is logging or doing it sensibly in battle. I don't wanna be the first one to kill someone...

[jstorrie]

Ok, I can see where you are coming from, and it isnt necessarily always about surprise. If you constantly work on striking a certain vital point, when the time comes to use it against an opponent, you will be proficient in striking that specific area. IE, Choke holds, Submissions, The "button"(which all good fighters know about).

You train choke holds and submissions by training the 'subdue' skill, which has very little to do with backstabbing.

If you want to do a session of identifying and aiming for pressure points, that's cool, but
a) why does your PC have any idea about pressure points?
2) tapping people on their pressure points is still not backstabbing them, though it might be appropriate to log a lot of it and request a skill bump that way.

[Krath]

Ok, I can see where you are coming from, and it isnt necessarily always about surprise. If you constantly work on striking a certain vital point, when the time comes to use it against an opponent, you will be proficient in striking that specific area. IE, Choke holds, Submissions, The "button"(which all good fighters know about).

You train choke holds and submissions by training the 'subdue' skill, which has very little to do with backstabbing.

If you want to do a session of identifying and aiming for pressure points, that's cool, but
a) why does your PC have any idea about pressure points?
2) tapping people on their pressure points is still not backstabbing them, though it might be appropriate to log a lot of it and request a skill bump that way.

That is what I said -IE- choke holds, submission, the button. And why does your pc know about pressure points, because you can get backstabbed on your body in more places that are non-fatal, than those that are, that is why you need to tap or practice striking that area without maximum force. And Critical strike doesnt just mean a hard hit, it means an aim shot at a "soft" or "tender" Location. How are you going to know what areas are soft and tender to get a critical strike without training?

this may come of cocky and arrogant but it isnt meant to, but have you ever taken any kind of martial arts training and learned to use weapons in such? The training is exactly as the above, as is with the Navy seals on hand to hand combat( I know this because my brother is one).

[jstorrie]

I maintain that that sort of training would not be, in Zalanthas, training of the backstab skill. It'd be training weapons skills, parry, subdue, etc.

[psionic fungus]

Which is why I suggest getting rid of the skill altogether.

Critical Strike + Called Shot +Bonus from Initiative + Bonus from Being Hidden =

One bad-ass, realistically TRAINABLE "backstab" that we can describe however we want, via command emoting.

This only applies to 2.Arm, of course.  For now... We suffer.

[some guy]

I dislike that the backstab skill is completely unrelated to your sneak, hide and piercing weapon skills. Make these skills a coded part of backstab and you could become decent (not great) at it through sparring and practice, which I consider realistic. The rest would come from "studying anatomy" (backstab tregil, backstab rat, backstab child) as is already the case.

[jstorrie]

Which is why I suggest getting rid of the skill altogether.

Critical Strike + Called Shot +Bonus from Initiative + Bonus from Being Hidden =

Why wouldn't a combatant always be going for critical strikes? And why wouldn't a combatant always be aiming for the best possible 'called shots'? I don't see how either of those work as viable skills.

[brytta.leofa]

Which is why I suggest getting rid of the skill altogether.

Critical Strike + Called Shot +Bonus from Initiative + Bonus from Being Hidden =

Why wouldn't a combatant always be going for critical strikes? And why wouldn't a combatant always be aiming for the best possible 'called shots'? I don't see how either of those work as viable skills.

A high chance of missing or opening yourself up to extra attacks?  Stamina loss?  "Disarm" and "bash," for instance, are pretty well balanced against this; they're not something you would use in a real fight unless you are confident of your ability.

I would imagine that the average combatant should want to stick with "hit amos" rather than trying fancy maneuvers.  But if a highly skilled warrior wants to open a fight with "hit amos neck", he's got a chance of ending it right there.  (Even more so a rogue class who can open the fight from concealment.)

Honestly, I most like this for use against subdued opponents.

[psionic fungus]

Why wouldn't a combatant always be going for critical strikes? And why wouldn't a combatant always be aiming for the best possible 'called shots'? I don't see how either of those work as viable skills.

If you read the more elaborate idea proposals for Critical Strikes and Called Shots (elsewhere, in the Reborn forum) you will see that they are intended to be used during combat, and by all combat classes (with differing degrees and areas of effectiveness).

Critical Strike would probably be a primarily passive skill, but also used to determine the effectiveness of Called Shots.

Called Shots, while it probably doesn't have to be its own skill, would have to be balanced so that they are not used exclusively, perhaps being a slightly slower than average attack.  Called shots could be used on parts of the body other than fatal ones, to disarm, disfigure, hamstring, or whatever else.

[Mood]

Code Select Expand

>sneak
You slow down, and start moving carefully.

>draw sword
You unsling a small, obsidian-edged sword from your back.

>hemote grips ~sword tightly, moving behind ~amos and crouching down.
You grip your small, obsidian-edged sword tightly, moving behind the tall, muscular man and crouching down.

>hit amos legs (with a snarl) [drawing it viscously across the backs of his knees]
With a snarl, you hit the tall, muscular man in the legs with your small, obsidian-edged sword, drawing it viscously across the backs of his knees.

The tall, muscular man cries out, falling down!

Do want.

[jstorrie]

Why wouldn't a combatant always be going for critical strikes? And why wouldn't a combatant always be aiming for the best possible 'called shots'? I don't see how either of those work as viable skills.

If you read the more elaborate idea proposals for Critical Strikes and Called Shots (elsewhere, in the Reborn forum) you will see that they are intended to be used during combat, and by all combat classes (with differing degrees and areas of effectiveness).

Critical Strike would probably be a primarily passive skill, but also used to determine the effectiveness of Called Shots.

Called Shots, while it probably doesn't have to be its own skill, would have to be balanced so that they are not used exclusively, perhaps being a slightly slower than average attack.  Called shots could be used on parts of the body other than fatal ones, to disarm, disfigure, hamstring, or whatever else.

Right. But why would any fighter-type not be focusing on getting critical strikes or landing called shots? I don't see why assassin-types would be better at this than straight fighter-types. Or are you suggesting that non-stealthy warriors don't aim for vulnerable areas, and keep slashing the body like robots?

I know quite a few games give skills like this to the 'assassin' or 'finesse' fighting classes, but quite a few games give fighters a 'taunt' ability, too, and that doesn't mean we should have taunt. I don't understand the reason for having skills like the ones you've proposed.

[brytta.leofa]

I'm not speaking for psionic fungus here and may be perverting his ideas.

Right. But why would any fighter-type not be focusing on getting critical strikes or landing called shots?

They should focus on that, within their abilities.  They won't try fancy work against a more skilled opponent because the risk is too great:
You attempt to stab the tall, muscular man in the throat, but he parries your awkward blow and lunges past your guard.
The tall, muscular man bludgeons you very hard on the head...you reel from the blow!

(Why don't warriors currently try to disarm / bash / kick on every round with every opponent?  It's tiring and sometimes dangerous.)

Right. But why would any fighter-type not be focusing on getting critical strikes or landing called shots?
I don't see why assassin-types would be better at this than straight fighter-types. Or are you suggesting that non-stealthy warriors don't aim for vulnerable areas, and keep slashing the body like robots?

Warriors should be better at this, like all standard weapon skills, once the fight is engaged.  Rogues should have a tremendous bonus for a surprise attack, something that warriors can't do.  The rogue either beats the warrior quickly or loses, just like today.

[jstorrie]

Rogues should have a tremendous bonus for a surprise attack...

Yes, I understand that you are asserting it SHOULD be that way. I am trying to ask WHY.

[Mood]

Rogues should have a tremendous bonus for a surprise attack...

Yes, I understand that you are asserting it SHOULD be that way. I am trying to ask WHY.

Because your victim has their guard down?

[jstorrie]

Why should only rogues get a bonus for attacking someone who has their guard down?

[Maybe42or54]

Because warriors get the advantage all other times?

[jstorrie]

Class balance is not a design concern for Armageddon.

[psionic fungus]

I never said that there shouldn't be an initiative bonus for warriors.  There should.  If you attack someone first, you should get a bonus.  If they are unarmed you should get an additional bonus.  If they're watching you and have weapons out, the initiative bonus should be negated.

I also think that "approach" code should be utilized, so that you have to have "approached" someone to engage them in combat.  Stealthy classes would get the advantage of being able to get into range unnoticed.

Since they can not hide, straight warriors would never get the -additional- bonuses that being hidden imbues.  Part of this bonus could directly apply to critical strikes, since being hidden before making your attack should give you additional opportunity to wait for the appropriate time...

You assume that these skills would or should not apply to warriors and rangers, but I believe they should... Just in different ways. For example, Rangers could get critical strikes on animals, Rogues on humanoids, and Warriors both (but at a 66% cap).

[Mood]

Why should only rogues get a bonus for attacking someone who has their guard down?

They should.

[brytta.leofa]

Since they can not hide, straight warriors would never get the -additional- bonuses that being hidden imbues.  Part of this bonus could directly apply to critical strikes, since being hidden before making your attack should give you additional opportunity to wait for the appropriate time...

Yeah, that's what I meant to say about roguish guilds getting "surprise" bonuses.  Not for starting the fight, but for Stealthily Approaching Their Targets.  I agree that rogues probably shouldn't get a bonus for something that's more warriorish than rogueish (simply starting a fight, with no hide/sneak involved).

Class balance is not a design concern for Armageddon.

It is in the sense that each class has interesting--and at least vaguely logical--limitations.  Some classes are inherently more powerful, but every class seems to have something to be afraid of.

[Mood]

I agree that rogues probably shouldn't get a bonus for something that's more warriorish than rogueish (simply starting a fight, with no hide/sneak involved).

I don't, really. Rogues win with quick, dirty fighting.  They should get at least as big a bonus as warriors, if not more.

[a strange shadow]

I agree that rogues probably shouldn't get a bonus for something that's more warriorish than rogueish (simply starting a fight, with no hide/sneak involved).

I don't, really. Rogues win with quick, dirty fighting.  They should get at least as big a bonus as warriors, if not more.

/agree

Their weakness is the lack of defense for prolonged encounters.

[some guy]

Balance doesn't have to be of the WoW kind where each class is meant to be able to compete with the next on an even playing field. The Armageddon balance is that each guild is valuable in its own right and has the means to achieve certain things, at least in theory. When that balance is removed, you can clearly see the impact it has on the game, with an absence of such characters. Some of the most prominent examples are pickpockets, accomplished assassins who actually work as hired hitmen and not Kadius Hunter With High Backstab, and city-elves. This is not because these types of characters aren't as good at fighting as a warrior, or because they can't make money as fast as a merchant, but because they pose some obstacles that are too great for most players to bother playing them. These obstacles are often of an OOC nature, such as the crime code's more unrealistic aspects, or the insane difficulty of practicing backstab in a realistic manner.

[jstorrie]

I don't, really. Rogues win with quick, dirty fighting.  They should get at least as big a bonus as warriors, if not more.

I don't know how well you're going to prove your point if your only argument in favour of this is 'just because,' Mood.

[LittleLostThief]

You get an immediate, automatic attack when you start combat.  For a lot of races, or anyone with low agility, that is a pretty big bonus in and of itself.  If combat goes quickly, that might be the only attack your half-giant sees the whole encounter.

[Shiroi Tsuki]

Why should only rogues get a bonus for attacking someone who has their guard down?

If someone doesn't see me coming at them with my really long, curved Gutting Knife of Doooom, I am going to have a lot easier time of disemboweling them, compared with if they see me walking toward them with my really long, curved Gutting Knife of Doooom, and decide it's probably going to be a good idea to go on the defensive.

If you're walking down a Zalanthan street and you see someone wandering around with a knife out, you're probably going to watch them and be at least a little more able to deal with a possible attack than if someone has suddenly poked a knife in your kidneys and you didn't see them coming.  Or if you were wandering through a crowd in the market and didn't notice Amos had a knife under his cloak, you might be a little less able to defend against look! Amos's knife suddenly buried to the hilt in your stomach, rather than if you saw Amos walking through the market, knife out, with murder glinting in his eyes.

You should get a bonus when you're sneaky.  Not just a 'surprise I'm attacking you now' bonus - anyone who gets a first attack on someone who isn't overtly 'watch'ing them should get a surprise bonus.  But a 'oh you so didn't see that coming AT ALL' bonus, only possible when attacking from concealment.

[LittleLostThief]

If you are sneaking around and want to surprise, wait until your potential opponent doesn't have their weapons out.  They won't see you coming, and you'll get at least one attack on them while they are unarmed.  More if they are slow typers or freeze up when death is imminent, like me.  Attacking an unarmed opponent gives you huge bonuses.

[psionic fungus]

LLT... Why should only sneaking folks get a bonus to attacking the unarmed?

In my opinion, that is a bonus that -everyone- should get.

However, there should be an -additional- bonus for attacking from a "hidden" status.  Being "hidden" and "sneaking" represents a much more effective means of getting into the striking position you desire before alerting the victim to your attack.

[Krath]

Look, we will have our answer here soon.

http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,29943.msg328956.html#msg328956

[jstorrie]

Why should only rogues get a bonus for attacking someone who has their guard down?

If someone doesn't see me coming at them with my really long, curved Gutting Knife of Doooom, I am going to have a lot easier time of disemboweling them, compared with if they see me walking toward them with my really long, curved Gutting Knife of Doooom, and decide it's probably going to be a good idea to go on the defensive.

Again, why should ONLY rogues get a bonus for attacking someone who has their guard down? What about a stealthy ranger, or an invisible caster, or someone who's managed to get hidden via subguild stealth or some other means?

[Simple]

Because that's their guild, assassin. Otherwise they'd be a sneaky character with no defining skill. Other guilds get their defining skills.

[jstorrie]

If there was a defining skill which is all about doing the most damage with a surprise strike to an opponent who had their guard down, what would we call it and how would we handle it?

I bet we would probably handle it exactly like we currently do. With a backstab skill.

So I'm not exactly sure what the problem is, then. And to bring this all the way back to the question of the OP: by a lengthy argumentative circle we've described backstab as 'the skill with which you deliver a surprise critical strike to someone who has their guard down,' which is pretty close to exactly what's in the help file on it. Being in a training session necessarily implies that the strike would not be a surprise and that the opponent would not have their guard down. So: no backstabbing in sparring.

What could go a long way towards clearing this mess up would be a refining of how the skill actually works–most of us seem to agree that it should be a skill, and a singular skill, which is a defining skill for sneaky combatants. I don't want to derail myself too badly, but I think the best way to handle this would be to first rename it to something more accurate, like 'ambush' or 'sneak attack.' Then make it a skill that is passively invoked whenever a PC attacks another PC who is not in combat and is not watching the aggressor, with bonuses for stealth (maybe a check to see if the defender can see the aggressor), appropriate weapon choice, and other relevant modifiers. Implement a 'spar' command which specifically initiates sparring matches and which disallows sneak attacks so that PCs with decent 'ambush' skill do not obliterate their buddies in the Byn by accident. Collapse the 'sap' command into the 'ambush' command by just making sapping a matter of turning mercy on and using an appropriate less-lethal weapon. And then maybe make the hit/damage bonuses from an 'ambush' keep going until the defender starts swinging back–making agility more valuable to an ambusher, and making one-hit-kills less common though the series of 'ambush' attacks may still be as lethal as the classic one super-backstab. Invoke the 'ambush' skill in ranged combat somehow, too, to give an advantage to firing from stealth. Finally, give varying degrees of 'ambush' caps to different classes: lots of it to single-classed assassins, a bit of it to huntery-ranger-types (sneaking up on a tembo and ambushing it with a spear? cool!) or dirty-fighter-types or pick-pockets or whatever.

[Krath]

Take from the HELP files:

Skill Backstab     (Combat)

This skill is a generic term for 'critical strikes' against an opponent. The victim of a backstab is not necessarily 'stabbed in the back'-- the attack could be from any direction. If your character successfully backstabs someone, the target has been 'hit in a vital location,' and will be badly injured, the severity of the injury depending on your character's backstab skill level.

See the target has been hit in a vital location, so then, is it the immortals stance that it is ok to practice it, so long as you are working on hitting vital spots, then trying it with a blunted weapon? I fail to see how practicing this skill can be abusive. Jstorrie, explain to me why practicing hitting vital spots is just training your weapon skill, etc as you said in a previous posts, and not sufficient to train backstab with if the help files document it as a critical strike to a vital point.

[jstorrie]

I would argue that the help file is incomplete and somewhat inaccurate. You need to take into account three in-play realities: first, that it is difficult to backstab someone who is already in combat (this, at least, is already included in the helpfile); second, that while you don't need to be hidden to backstab, it's much more effective to do so; and third, that you can't backstab someone who is already in combat with you.

These realities make it pretty clear that backstab is not just about 'critical strikes' but that it is about 'surprise critical strikes.' Capitalizing on an unaware opponent.

Or conversely, as we just saw with all of the argumentative hoops we jumped through, making backstab just a matter of 'anatomical knowledge' and 'pressure points' is not appropriate because these are things that non-stealthy warriors would also learn. Martial artists and soldiers both train in causing harm to the most vulnerable parts of the body as quickly as possible; vital spots aren't merely the realm of the ninja sneak. The critical difference, again, is that assassins strike from a position of surprise. And we knows this because, as I mentioned, in-game assassins must strike from a position of surprise in order to actually activate the backstab skill.

If an important component of the backstab skill is surprise then it can't reasonably be trained with a sparring partner who you're not surprising. And if you're surprising them, you're not sparring them. An important component of the backstab skill is surprise. Ipso, facto, whatevero.

[X-D]

I am going to add a couple things more in train with the OP's question.

First, the backstab skill is best kept under wraps. If somebody knows you have it, they also know you cannot do it in combat or laying on your back etc and will try to take advantage of that fact. IE, they will not give you a chance to use it.

Next, in a sparring match, most PCs consider it a friendly, if bruising event. "backstab" by message and usage is NOT friendly. It is a sneaky underhanded method to kill somebody quickly and you can expect MANY PCs to think of it that way.

In short, it is a bad idea.

[Simple]

Well one way I thought about training backstab, was while using sneak and hide, arriving into the sparring hall, while one person is practicing guarding their merchant or whatever, however, I still don't agree with actually connecting with the person.

If you could sneak past, emote backstabbing but not following through.

Maybe if you went through all that, it would be okay to do it with sparring weapons.

As opposed to a fella standing in front of you saying "Your turn"

[jstorrie]

That seems kind of unreasonable given that they could just watch you. Or are they building secret trap doors into the Byn sparring halls these days?

I mean, come on. Where are you going to hide IN A GYM? Are you sneaking outside, climbing up the wall, and Solid-Snakeing your clannies through a hole in the ceiling?

[Simple]

There are a few rooms in the hall. I've done it. Walked out, hidden and sneaked back in, and then come out of nowhere with normal attacks, in sparring.

Although, I've never trained backstab there. I think you could teach it though, but that should be loggable too, you're still training.

[jstorrie]

That you can codedly do it doesn't necessarily mean it makes sense.

Anyway, teaching backstab certainly makes perfect sense. So does going through routines, logging them, and requesting skill boosts based on that. I'm not arguing against any of that–I'm arguing that backstab is inappropriate in sparring for very basic conceptual reasons.

[Krath]

I would argue that the help file is incomplete and somewhat inaccurate.

This is where we have our differences. I asked on the ask the staff what is backstab and they said the help file handles it all. Meaning take it for surface or face value, especially if it comes from the boss, Vanth. You are arguing based on if the help file is inaccurate and I am not, we can agree to disagree.

[jstorrie]

I have great respect for the staff, Krath, but there is incontrovertible, in-game evidence here. Disagree with the facts if you want, but they're there.

[psionic fungus]

Sorry to derail further, but I would like to ask Jstorrie why my responses to his questions about Critical Strikes and Called Shots were ignored.

What about a stealthy ranger, or an invisible caster, or someone who's managed to get hidden via subguild stealth or some other means?

As I mentioned before, these characters should get bonuses as well.  An assassin would have the unique (mostly... warrior/rogues and such might be somewhat equivalent) ability to master both Critical Strikes and the stealth skills necessary to get the maximum possible bonuses from ambush situations.

If there was a defining skill which is all about doing the most damage with a surprise strike to an opponent who had their guard down, what would we call it and how would we handle it?

The point is not to have a "defining" skill that accomplishes this feat and must be unrealistically trained, but to replace this with a system that allows an assassin to both train and utilize their talents appropriately.

Besides, I don't think the ability to backstab should be a defining skill.  It is the combination of using critical strikes, ambushing (including breaking into buildings), poisoning, and trapping that makes the assassin unique.  It is not any one of these things, but all of them together... Right?

I bet we would probably handle it exactly like we currently do. With a backstab skill.

There are a number of problems with the way it is handled currently, IMO...

But this isn't really the place to discuss them.

I don't want to derail myself too badly, but I think the best way to handle this would be to first rename it to something more accurate, like 'ambush' or 'sneak attack.' Then make it a skill that is passively invoked whenever a PC attacks another PC who is not in combat and is not watching the aggressor, with bonuses for stealth (maybe a check to see if the defender can see the aggressor), appropriate weapon choice, and other relevant modifiers. Implement a 'spar' command which specifically initiates sparring matches and which disallows sneak attacks so that PCs with decent 'ambush' skill do not obliterate their buddies in the Byn by accident. Collapse the 'sap' command into the 'ambush' command by just making sapping a matter of turning mercy on and using an appropriate less-lethal weapon. And then maybe make the hit/damage bonuses from an 'ambush' keep going until the defender starts swinging back–making agility more valuable to an ambusher, and making one-hit-kills less common though the series of 'ambush' attacks may still be as lethal as the classic one super-backstab. Invoke the 'ambush' skill in ranged combat somehow, too, to give an advantage to firing from stealth. Finally, give varying degrees of 'ambush' caps to different classes: lots of it to single-classed assassins, a bit of it to huntery-ranger-types (sneaking up on a tembo and ambushing it with a spear? cool!) or dirty-fighter-types or pick-pockets or whatever.

Here... You're starting to get at what I'm talking about!

The question to me is this, why have a seperate command like "ambush" at all?  If you are hidden/sneaking why not just have any attack serve as an "ambush"?  I think the combination of the skills hide and sneak, whether in the city or the wilderness, are enough to determine if an ambush is effective.  I see very little reason for more commands and more skills.

If you have a critical strike skill that is used with called shots then you have a path towards feasible sparring practice.  If we can use existing skills and commands to create an intuitive system for ambushing that still gives assassins (and similar characters) the maximum benefits, why not do so?

[Kalden]

Did you even bother to read the helpfile, jstorrie?

Your character does not necessarily need to be hidden for him/her to
attempt a backstab.

And we knows this because, as I mentioned, in-game assassins must strike from a position of surprise in order to actually activate the backstab skill.

Yeah, you don't have to be hidden to use backstab.

As for hiding in the Byn sparring halls, let's consider two things:

1) These halls are -very- crowded during sparring times.

2) These gyms have shadows from walls (and, if they are buildings, from the fact that they are torch or lantern-lit). That's all one needs in Armageddon. Plus, if a room isn't flagged nohide, then it's not "twinkish" to hide in it. Similarly, it's not twinkish to try and hide in front of people, although there's a line -- we have a watch skill now.

[jstorrie]

The question to me is this, why have a seperate command like "ambush" at all?  If you are hidden/sneaking why not just have any attack serve as an "ambush"?  I think the combination of the skills hide and sneak, whether in the city or the wilderness, are enough to determine if an ambush is effective.  I see very little reason for more commands and more skills.

If you have a critical strike skill that is used with called shots then you have a path towards feasible sparring practice.  If we can use existing skills and commands to create an intuitive system for ambushing that still gives assassins (and similar characters) the maximum benefits, why not do so?

Hey pf–sorry if I was oblique about answering your questions, but I was trying to address them. I don't think it's reasonable to have a 'critical strikes' or 'called shots' skill because these are things every melee combatant would train. And as such they're best handled by things that every melee combatant gets: base offense and weapon skills. The 'assassin difference' is the ability to capitalize on an unaware opponent–best represented by a skill that is about, and only about, getting the jump on unaware opponents. The backstab skill, in other words. Or this 'ambush' skill, which I feel would be simpler and more appropriate. It wouldn't have to be a command at all, just a passive skill that is checked whenever a PC initiates a combat as the aggressor, which is then given bonuses or penalties based on stealth status, weapon types, etc.

And we knows this because, as I mentioned, in-game assassins must strike from a position of surprise in order to actually activate the backstab skill.

Did you even bother to read the helpfile, jstorrie?

Uh, yes, I did. Don't flame. If you think I mean 'hidden status' by 'position of surprise' you are misinterpreting my posts. You still must strike from a position of surprise to use the backstab skill because you have to initiate combat with it. You can't get into combat with someone and then backstab them. You have to be the aggressor. You don't necessarily have to be hidden (though it helps to be, and this is a very important indicator of what '>backstab man' actually means) but you do have to be the aggressor. Backstab as currently implented is all about getting the jump on your opponent, which is why it is easier to backstab someone while hidden and impossible to backstab someone who is already in combat with you.

[jstorrie]

As for hiding in the Byn sparring halls, let's consider two things:

1) These halls are -very- crowded during sparring times.

2) These gyms have shadows from walls (and, if they are buildings, from the fact that they are torch or lantern-lit). That's all one needs in Armageddon. Plus, if a room isn't flagged nohide, then it's not "twinkish" to hide in it. Similarly, it's not twinkish to try and hide in front of people, although there's a line -- we have a watch skill now.

As for hiding in the Byn sparring halls in the middle of a training exercise with another Bynner, which is the specific case we are discussing, let us consider one thing: the people you are training with are watching you. They are watching you because you are in a training exercise with them and are waiting for you to try to attack them. I am not in any way arguing that you simply cannot hide in a Byn sparring hall.

[Kalden]

Ah, yeah, I guess that's what I get for jumping into the middle of a thread and not reading carefully. Sorry. 

[psionic fungus]

Hey pf–sorry if I was oblique about answering your questions, but I was trying to address them.

Jstorrie... You seem to have some misconceptions about what my proposal has been.  Do you understand what the Critical Strike/Called Shot proposal entails?  Read what I have said about it in this thread again, and if that doesn't clear things up please go read about it in the Reborn forum.

I don't think it's reasonable to have a 'critical strikes' or 'called shots' skill because these are things every melee combatant would train.

The proposal addresses this in very specific terms.   Every melee combatant would train these skills and obtain bonuses from them... Those bonuses would be different based on class and use.

And as such they're best handled by things that every melee combatant gets: base offense and weapon skills.

I highly disagree.  I think that attempting to land a strike in a specific area (Called Shot) is very different than base offense (trying to hit someone wherever they are open).  Critical Strike represents a knowledge of anatomy and fighting that allows someone to not just hit the arm but to hit the part of the arm that would do the most damage.

The 'assassin difference' is the ability to capitalize on an unaware opponent

I'm just going to repeat myself (with emphasis):

It is the combination of using critical strikes, ambushing (including breaking into buildings), poisoning, and trapping that makes the assassin unique.  It is not any one of these things, but all of them together... Right?

–best represented by a skill that is about, and only about, getting the jump on unaware opponents.

I completely disagree.  If you are stealthy enough to sneak/hide/steal you are stealthy enough to stab someone without them noticing you approach.  There is really little reason to utilize a separate skill for this.

If there were any additional command in this situation, I would like to see "approach" utilized.  It would give the stealthy attacker a definite advantage, as anyone who has visibly 'approached' you should probably get a lowered bonus to their attack initiative.

The backstab skill, in other words. Or this 'ambush' skill, which I feel would be simpler and more appropriate.

How is this fundamentally different from sneak/hide?

It wouldn't have to be a command at all, just a passive skill that is checked whenever a PC initiates a combat as the aggressor, which is then given bonuses or penalties based on stealth status, weapon types, etc.

Why does it have to be a skill?

Why can't your weapon skills, stealth skills, and combat skills be utilized together to determine the outcome of ambush situations?

Doesn't having a separate skill require that skill to be separately trained, using the same unrealistic and tedious methods that are being discussed in this thread (and others)?

[Rindan]

The short answer to the original question is that we have a really lame backstab skill.  The only ways to train it demand that you do something silly, be a psychopath, or rely on staff skill boosts via logs.  Think of how a ninja or a byzantine assassin might train to be an assassin... and don't go do that.  Instead, imagine how you might train to be an assassin in say Everquest.  Yeah, that is right, go out wolf hunting or go slaughter the NPCs in town.  If you want to be an assassin with backstab, expect to attempt to murder a few hundred poor innocent creatures before you find yourself able to backstab with the best of them.

My advice?  Either swallow the hack and slash lameness of killing scrabs and 'rinth beggars or don't use the backstab skill.  That, and hope that 2.Arm puts in assassin skills that don't demand I dredge up a good old fashion hack and slash mentality where you kill NPC for exp and l00t.

[LittleLostThief]

I was just saying that everyone DOES get a bonus to attacking unarmed opponents.  In places of relative civilization, it is uncouth or even illegal to walk around brandishing your weapons.

If Amos the warrior runs up to you on the street with his weapons raised, what do you do?  Immediately draw your own to deny him a huge bonus against you.

If you can't see Amos the (insert sneaky guild here) move up to you on the street, you don't immediately have that opportunity to deny him that bonus.  At least for an attack or two.

[Maybe42or54]

The one thing I think the helpfile is not stating correctly is that it gives the impression that backstab is just a critical strike.
Yes, it is a critical strike. Yes, it is a called shot, but it is both at the same time performed on an unsuspecting target.

Warriors have their own form of critical strikes, but it isn't a called shot(Read* You didn't call it). That is why they'll bludgeon
the shit out of of my head. Pierce my neck. Etc.. I've been one hit ko'ed before. I've been killed, from full health, in three
hits. This is performed on a suspecting target, or an unsuspecting  target. It works great both ways.

Rangers have their own form of called shot. It is called archery. I've almost been killed a few times like this. The same applies
for this. It can be performed on a suspecting target, but it has a greater chance on an unsuspecting target.


The problem with actively trying to "train" backstab in a bynn sparring room is that you aren't training correctly. If I am the guard, I am actively looking for you and I know, for a fact, you are there. You, the assassin, are sneaking up on a target that knows you are there. Defeating the purpose. When you do sneak up on me, I recognize you, and you are missing the point. I think it would be a great time if you are being taught, but it wont work very well if you are trying to teach yourself this way.

[Simple]

OK. I do understand about the Byn hall, but there is more to backstab than surprise and stealth.
There must be a way of training hitting certain points.
Opponent stands still with pads on the spine, jugular, trachea, and you train your accuracy. So you know when you've hit the vital spot. You can have all the surprise in the known world, but if you don't know the angle your blade has to enter, the strike is useless.

We can suspend disbelief, as we have to in this world, to imagine we are doing this in the sparring hall.

I'm new to these arguments, so shoot me down if I'm wrong. Emote ducks under ~shield

[Maybe42or54]

OK. I do understand about the Byn hall, but there is more to backstab than surprise and stealth.
There must be a way of training hitting certain points.
Opponent stands still with pads on the spine, jugular, trachea, and you train your accuracy. So you know when you've hit the vital spot. You can have all the surprise in the known world, but if you don't know the angle your blade has to enter, the strike is useless.

We can suspend disbelief, as we have to in this world, to imagine we are doing this in the sparring hall.

I'm new to these arguments, so shoot me down if I'm wrong. Emote ducks under ~shield

That situation should be logged and submitted to the staff. You are learning backstab, not training backstab there.

[Simple]

I think teaching would be educating someone on these vital areas, the anatomy of the body, why they are critical areas, angles of impact.

Actually practicing on a dummy or a person with pads is training, you're practicing techniques.

You shouldn't have to murder people to learn a new skill.

[Qzzrbl]

You shouldn't have to murder people to learn a new skill.

So.... I didn't have to slaughter everyone in that orphanage to learn leatherworking?

I'm so sad now....   

[psionic fungus]

I just don't think the primary, and possibly only realistic, way to train a skill should be to send in logs to the staff and increase their workload.

The one thing I think the helpfile is not stating correctly is that it gives the impression that backstab is just a critical strike. Yes, it is a critical strike. Yes, it is a called shot, but it is both at the same time performed on an unsuspecting target.

Exactly... So why have a separate skill for the ambush when it is merely a combination of other abilities?

Warriors have their own form of critical strikes, but it isn't a called shot(Read* You didn't call it). That is why they'll bludgeon the shit out of of my head. Pierce my neck. Etc.. I've been one hit ko'ed before. I've been killed, from full health, in three hits. This is performed on a suspecting target, or an unsuspecting  target. It works great both ways.

Wouldn't it be nice to be able to make a Called Shot (and modify your to-hit) and have an increased chance to make a Critical Strike (modified to-dam) if you succeed?

Rangers have their own form of called shot. It is called archery. I've almost been killed a few times like this. The same applies for this. It can be performed on a suspecting target, but it has a greater chance on an unsuspecting target.

Archery is not a Called Shot.  Shooting someone specifically in the leg, arm, or neck (depending on desired effect) is a Called Shot.

While combat may currently incorporate a vague "Critical Strike" type of damage bonus at time, it is not the same as having a separate skill to determine the amount of extra damage done when hitting a specific area (which would get a bonus with Called Shots).

The problem with actively trying to "train" backstab in a bynn sparring room is that you aren't training correctly. If I am the guard, I am actively looking for you and I know, for a fact, you are there. You, the assassin, are sneaking up on a target that knows you are there. Defeating the purpose. When you do sneak up on me, I recognize you, and you are missing the point. I think it would be a great time if you are being taught, but it wont work very well if you are trying to teach yourself this way.

I somewhat disagree.  With permission of a Sergeant or other instructor, a stealth assassin could certainly try a flanking maneuver on peers who were already sparring. [My cat sent the post at this point...]  You could certainly train Critical Strikes and Called Shots in sparring.  Flanking and ambushing are a bit more difficult to train, but they could still be incorporated into exercises...

It just doesn't make sense to start your average spar with a "backstab".

[Maybe42or54]

I agree with your situation, PF. I didn't agree with someone guarding and protecting against an assassin they know is coming. I always thought backstab should be a combo of Hide/sneak/stabbing weapons skill. Sounds more fun and less like I have to spam kill everything.

Simple, I agree, if you were using the pads and critical points to learn the move by thinking about it, vice practicing it.

The problem I see with having called shots is that it will go away from combat skill to who is less affected by lag, paying more attention, who knows all the commands. Like kick is now. I just don't want to see it.

[psionic fungus]

The problem I see with having called shots is that it will go away from combat skill to who is less affected by lag, paying more attention, who knows all the commands. Like kick is now. I just don't want to see it.

Predictably, I disagree.

I think it would be fairly easy to balance "Called Shots" with ordinary (passive) combat skills.  Personally, I would like to see attacks limited to one per 'round' of combat. Whether this is a "kick" (or "strike" as I would like to see implemented), a normal attack, a "disarm" attempt, or a "called shot"... A single active or passive attack per combat round (excluding the second attack of dual-wield).  The frequency of combat rounds is something that could depend on an agility (or speed) stat, and perhaps combat skills (offense?) as well, but I digress.

If a "Called Shot" lengthens the delay until your next round of combat and, if failed, opens your defenses to attack, I think it could certainly be balanced so that combat skills determine the outcome more than a player's meta-gaming skills.  "Critical Strikes" would also still be utilized in ordinary combat, albeit in a more passive manner (initiating a "Called Shot" would also attempt a "Critical Strike", in the system as I envision it). It may even be possible to balance with "Called Shots" utilizing the "Critical Strike" skill.

Long story short, the perceived problem is not a problem if 2.Arm combat functions the way I would like to see it.

[Maybe42or54]

I personally like the idea of backstab, I'd prefer it to be called shank, or just stab. I would also like backstab to be a mixture of stabbing weapons/hide/sneak. With a 20% decrease to skill when you don't hide or sneak.

Besides that, you aren't really doing anything all that special besides just trying to get a critical strike on the first go.

I am repeating myself. That is all I have to add to the conversation and I am done now.

[Krath]

What PF said.

[psionic fungus]

Shank?  Stab?  No, no... There is no need for any command other than "hit".

For some examples please check out these threads:

Combat System

Hunting vs. Fighting

The Health System for Arm 2

Fighting Styles, Anyone?

Weapon Skills

[jstorrie]

Shank?  Stab?  No, no... There is no need for any command other than "hit".

I agree. 'called shot' and 'critical strike' are among the commands that are not needed.

[psionic fungus]

I don't understand what you are saying.

"Called Shots" and "Critical Strikes" were never intended to have separate commands.  They are skills utilized by various classes in various ways during combat situations.  They must be coded skills, however they do not require -new- commands to utilize.

Were you agreeing with this, or just saying the abilities were altogether unneeded (without giving any argument or reason)?

[Krath]

Ok another question on why you cant train backstab. Your argument Jstorrie is that it is a suprise critical strike correct? If that is incorrect then the previous post you made contradicts what you are saying. If you can land a critical strike on a pc that is expecting it, and inflict the maximum amount of pain or damage, then you should be able to suprise an opponent with your critical strike with more accuracy than you normally would if you were training. As far as you saying your not sneaking or hiding or suprising the pc, the help file, which Vanth sent me to, on the ask the staff forum, to explain the backstab skill, says nothing about needing to sneak up on a pc or be hidden. The only difference between your idea of a "surprise critical strike" and a sneak/hidden one is that the opponent does not know. Where does it say that you have to be hidden, or that it has to be a surprise attack? It does not, anywhere. The only added notes to the help file are:

    Notes:
    It is possible, though difficult, to backstab fighting victims.

    You must always use a 'stabbing' weapon, which is a subset of the
    'piercing' category.

    Backstab is an excellent method of attack if one's presence ought to be
    unnoticed by soldiers of city-states. (Of course, any ensuing fight can
    attract attention.)

You are basing your argument on what players perceive the backstab skill as it is suppose to be, not the staffs, who, go directly by the help documentation.
Here is the link:
http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,29943.0.html

[jstorrie]

Ok another question on why you cant train backstab. Your argument Jstorrie is that it is a suprise critical strike correct? If that is incorrect then the previous post you made contradicts what you are saying.

Uh, as I just explained a few posts up,

If you think I mean 'hidden status' by 'position of surprise' you are misinterpreting my posts.

Where does it say that you have to be hidden...

The help file does not say that you have to be hidden, nor do I. The help file and I both specifically say that you don't have to be hidden.

...or that it has to be a surprise attack?

The help file does not say that it has to be a surprise attack, but in-play evidence does. You can't backstab someone you are already in combat with.

I wouldn't swing that Ask-the-Staff post around like some kind of rhetorical hammer +5. You asked a very leading question and received a very curt response. If you want to get nitpicky about things like this, I would suggest that nowhere in Vanth's post does Vanth say the staff consider the help documentation to be the final arbiter for game concepts, either–so you've misconstrued both my argument and now Vanth's.

I'm going to bow out of this thread since I believe I've already presented my position fine enough and the OP's question was certainly answered ages ago. For the final recap–
• Surprise seems to be a necessary part of backstab, so training against people who are aware seems nonsensical.
• I feel that a single passive skill which is invoked whenever you attack someone who is unaware/flat-footed would be less problematic than our current backstab system.

[Kalden]

A contrary example: you can backstab people who are watching you, I believe.

[psionic fungus]

The help file does not say that it has to be a surprise attack, but in-play evidence does.

This is not entirely true, however.

You can't backstab someone you are already in combat with.

You can "disengage" and "backstab" to attempt flanking maneuvers...

It's rather difficult to flank someone who is actively fighting -you-, of course.

[Lenny Poppo]

But really, it's just one skill, man. If you can't find a way to train it in the role you're in, just don't train it. It's not going to ruin the game for you.

The problem is that the branching system encourages practicing skills you don't need, just in case they are the key to getting a skill you would use all the time.


Suppose you want to play an intrepid explorer.  Now you know that the Climb skill would be very, very handy, but in general the best guild would be Ranger.  You believe that Rangers can branch Climb, so it's all good.  (For whatever reason, you can't get a subguild with Climb).  Unfortunately, you haven't memorized the skill trees and you have no idea which of skills you currently possess might eventually branch to Climb.  Archery?  Hunt?  Cooking?  Who knows, it is a mystery.  You can make do with using climbing ropes and other equipment to help you climb without the skill, but no matter how much climbing you do (nor how many times you fall on your head and knock yourself out) you will never develop the Climb skill until you master the branching skill.  Since you don't know which skill is important, you find yourself cooking up unending piles of tubers just in case Cooking is the secret to life.   

Mages have the same problem, in spades.  Most of the starting spells seem kind of lame, at least the power level a newbie mage can manage.  But since people are always complaining about mages being overpowered, you have to assume that something cool hides behind a lame starting spell.  So you are left casting spells you don't need, spells your character may have no conceivable use for, just to get past it.  Suppose you had a starting spell that turns things purple.  You don't even like purple!  But you've turned everything you own purple, hopes of getting past the purple spell.  You've even gone out and bought cheap crap, just so that you could turn it purple.  You pick up trash off the streets just so you can take it home and turn it purple.  Your temple is piled to the rafters with purple crap.  And once you branch whatever branches off of Purplize, you will never ever turn anything purple every again.  You don't even like purple.

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

best post ever - and it's all true