Stab vs. pierce

[Tamarin]

In terms of regular combat, does stab = pierce, skillwise?

[mansa]

Yes.

[Ueda]

When you analyze a weapon I've seen it say " Stabbing Weapon" Ummm I don't want to say anything else though, cause its probably to IC

[Tamarin]

Nevermind...I sifted carefully through the helpfiles and figured out where it applies.

[Stroker]

If you would, post a link to that. I want to know where it applies as well.

[Tamarin]

From HELP BACKSTAB

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.

Syntax:
   backstab <target>

   Example:
   > backstab raider

   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.)

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

[Stroker]

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.)

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

Is that being enforced? To me it means you can sap or backstab someone and if you are successful in either killing them in one hit or koing them, then you do not get branded as wanted. Now, am I correct in my assumption or what? Because lately, it doesn't seem like it's the case.

I think I have been very good up to now.

[Tlaloc]

Try it, and find out.

[EvilRoeSlade]

I am pretty sure that it is enforced, but just not in every circumstance.

[Angela Christine]

I assume it would work semi-logically.  A long fight is more likely to attract attention than a short scuffle, but even a short scuffle still has a chance of being noticed, reported and acted upon by lawmen.  Like any other crime, choosing your time and place wisely may help you get away with it.

AC

[Flaming Ocotillo]

Seeing as non-militia NPCs can sap people in lawful rooms and get away with it, I imagine anyone who can knock someone out in one hit will avoid being criminal flagged.

As for backstab, I dunno. I've never seen someone die to one backstab in a lawful area.

One thing I'm sure of, is once you have the answer, it will stay consistent. There isn't a "sometimes" chance of commands being flagged as criminal. Either they're always flagged or never flagged in lawful rooms.

[Stroker]

As not give anything away, a sap was performed in a lawful area, it was successful and the person was swiftly sent into a deep unsconsciousness, and yet the attacker was arrested and hurled into the deepest recesses of a vicious gulag.

That event prompted me to propose the previous question.

[spawnloser]

Um...militia are above the laws and can attack in lawful areas by nature of their position.

[Stroker]

I realize this .... and I think most likely everyone else does too ....

[spawnloser]

I was just adding this in response to what Flaming Ocotillo wrote.  It doesn't matter if militia can sap in public...that should be no indicator as to whether a non-militia character can or can not.

[Stroker]

Seeing as non-militia NPCs can sap people in lawful rooms and get away with it, I imagine anyone who can knock someone out in one hit will avoid being criminal flagged.

Am I blind or does that say non-militia npc ..... if so, shame on you Spawnloser.

[spawnloser]

*blink* Er...okay, you're not blind.  I just woke up.  That's my excuse.

[Flaming Ocotillo]

As not give anything away, a sap was performed in a lawful area, it was successful and the person was swiftly sent into a deep unsconsciousness, and yet the attacker was arrested and hurled into the deepest recesses of a vicious gulag.

That event prompted me to propose the previous question.

Well there ya go. If you've seen it, then I'd take that as a good indication that PCs get criminal flagged no matter what the case in a lawful area. I should have known better than to assume that any degree of realism or equality applies to NPCs when compared to the limitations of PCs. Shame on me. That's the last time I make a fool of myself by considering watching NPC actions as "finding out IC".

It's a good reminder that you've got to think in OOC terms when finding things out IC, or you might not _really_ find out IC if you don't weigh in a couple of OOC variables. Um... thinking on that statement, it doesn't even make any sense. Maybe the term "find out IC" shouldn't be applied to something which is based completely on OOC functionality! Yes, I think that's it. I believe I'm going to coin the term, "find out OOC".

In conclusion.. find out OOC.

The end. I've always wanted to do that. Pull a one-liner and offer no helpful or credible suggestions.

Find out OOC.



Oh yeah, that's right. This is OOC. Okay, well if Dirr's experience is any indication, pulling off a backstab or sap is gonna get you crim flagged in a lawful area. Don't be deceived by what NPCs can do. Rule #1!!!!

Rule #2 - find out OOC.

[crymerci]

I don't think it's just a case of lawful/not lawful. Just as with other criminal activities, many factors can contribute to how likely it is that you get away with a crime.  If you think about it realistically, you can probably guess what some or all of those factors are.

[Flaming Ocotillo]

I don't think it's just a case of lawful/not lawful. Just as with other criminal activities, many factors can contribute to how likely it is that you get away with a crime.  If you think about it realistically, you can probably guess what some or all of those factors are.

Thinking about it realistically won't help! That falls somewhere in rule #1. Unless you mean, "think about it realistically based on the PC universe".

If that's what you mean, then I applaud you for making the distinction, but then it still won't help. Why? Because Armageddon isn't a simulation of real life, where realistic behavior governs whether something responds in a realistic manner. You can pick locks in front of a hundred templar NPCs and they won't react negatively unless an imm intervenes to simulate this realism thing, so it's my belief that having faith in realism doesn't necessarily mean that's how things are.

Anyone who knows the crim code knows that if you get flagged once for performing the _end result_ of an action (some actions only flag based on the degree of success or failure), then that's the way the story goes, from now until an imm decides that the universe no longer functions that way. No amount of realistic thinking will change that, including wearing a hood or only working at night, or emoting moving very quietly with a cloth-wrapped sap. Maybe you'd like to fund the "find out OOC" campaign, crymerci, by choosing to offer a credible example to support your message. This is something I encourage everyone to do. The credible support part is one of my favorite parts of a posted message.

[crymerci]

I don't think it's just a case of lawful/not lawful. Just as with other criminal activities, many factors can contribute to how likely it is that you get away with a crime.  If you think about it realistically, you can probably guess what some or all of those factors are.

Thinking about it realistically won't help! That falls somewhere in rule #1. Unless you mean, "think about it realistically based on the PC universe".

If that's what you mean, then I applaud you for making the distinction, but then it still won't help. Why? Because Armageddon isn't a simulation of real life, where realistic behavior governs whether something responds in a realistic manner. You can pick locks in front of a hundred templar NPCs and they won't react negatively unless an imm intervenes to simulate this realism thing, so it's my belief that having faith in realism doesn't necessarily mean that's how things are.

Anyone who knows the crim code knows that if you get flagged once for performing the _end result_ of an action (some actions only flag based on the degree of success or failure), then that's the way the story goes, from now until an imm decides that the universe no longer functions that way. No amount of realistic thinking will change that, including wearing a hood or only working at night, or emoting moving very quietly with a cloth-wrapped sap. Maybe you'd like to fund the "find out OOC" campaign, crymerci, by choosing to offer a credible example to support your message. This is something I encourage everyone to do. The credible support part is one of my favorite parts of a posted message.

Wow, someone wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning?  Careful there, you're starting to sound like me.

I'll go ahead and post my experience, although I really think it's something that should be figured out ICly, or OOCly through use of common fucking sense.  I'm sure someone will tell me or edit me if it's too IC.

The following refers to theft.  I have played a pickpocket, and a fairly decent one, but never an assassin (an actually active assassin, not just the class).  I don't know if the code works the same for sap/backstab/pick does for steal, but I would imagine it does.

Time of day does matter.  The number of witnesses (whether NPCs or VNPCs in the room description) does matter.  Weather can matter.  Your own "criminal record" can matter. Other things may matter, but those four I am pretty damn sure of, and no one ever told me, I figured it out for myself so it's not some sooper sekrit info that is being withheld from anyone.

[Flaming Ocotillo]

As nice as it would be to believe that all sorts of incredible factors of realism are being accounted for, like weather, lighting conditions and your past history of crime, they just.. well, don't have any effect on the code. They are all very valid aspects of roleplay when playing a criminal and performing criminal deeds, but they don't actually exist in the code.

Rooms are just flagged as crim or non-crim (I'm not sure what the actual naming scheme is for flags in the Armageddon room editor), and certain _end result_ actions will trigger a wanted flag in those rooms.

In the case of the steal skill, there are three possible end results with only one of them resulting in a criminal flag, and that could be why someone would be confused into thinking there's a certain inconsistency which revolves around failing the skill and being flagged.

I can't imagine that the sap skill has three possible end results, as someone is either left conscious after a sap, or is not left unconscious. And while writing this message I've completely forgot why I was writing it in the first place. I think I was making a point about consistency with the code. Isn't it "uncool" to talk about the code? I feel so dirty talking about game mechanics.. it's like people are staring at me on the sidewalk like a street beggar, looking the other way and trying to disassociate themselves with me.

Feeling the shame and guilt that I do (I attribute it to years of Armageddon MUD conditioning), I think I'll turn this post around and claim that yes, there are many factors that can cause you to be wanted by the law. Trust your gut instinct and hang on to the unpredictable ride that is Armageddon MUD.

[Angela Christine]

Anyone who knows the crim code knows that if you get flagged once for performing the _end result_ of an action (some actions only flag based on the degree of success or failure),

I don't see the problem, there are many possible degrees of success here.

1. The target sees you comming and escapes being hit.  Auto-combat ensues, crim code kicks in.

2. The target does not see you comming, but your attack does not kill or KO them in one hit.  Auto-combat ensues, crim code kicks in.

3. The target does not see you comming, and your attack does kill or KO them in one hit.  You succeed, but just barely.  Your roll was high enough to kill the target, but not high enough to pass the threshold to be un-noticed by people in the area.  Much like when you try to steal and successfully take the item, but someone notices you.

4.  The perfect sap.  You kill or incapacitate the target instantly, without anyone noticing.  In other words a very good roll.

AC

[Ueda]

AC wrote:3. The target does not see you comming, and your attack does kill or KO them in one hit. You succeed, but just barely. Your roll was high enough to kill the target, but not high enough to pass the threshold to be un-noticed by people in the area. Much like when you try to steal and successfully take the item, but someone notices you.

Wow I didn't know tha' could happen I want to play a thief now just so I can RP that out

[Stroker]

I figured it might be something like AC described in number 3.

[EvilRoeSlade]

It seems that there is another issue here, that issue being whether or not it's appropriate to discuss what we know about the code.  When I see this:

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.

I know exactly what it means code-wise, and how to use it best to my advantage.  It doesn't seem to be IC sensitive, more along the lines of common sense.  But is it appropriate to tell everybody what it means?  I have no idea.

[Stroker]

But is it appropriate to tell everybody what it means?

Yes, yes it is.

[Angela Christine]

Just to be clear, I was speculating on how many possibile outcomes there could be.  I don't know anything about the code.  I've never successfully robbed, sapped or backstabbed anything.    Ignorance is bliss, if I actually knew stuff I'd have to shut my mouth.  

AC