Training backstab in the Bynn

[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.