Backstab and weaponry
FredN
Member Posts: 517
.....I would dearly like to know who decided which weapons could be used to backstab, and what the rationale was. I know that the criterion is whether or not a pure thief can use the weapon. But who deicded that thieves could use quarterstaves, and not bastard swords? Quarterstaves ran anywhere from 6 to 9 feet in length. The average length of a bastard sword blade is around 40 inches. Manipulating a sword like that should be far easier than using whacking great stick.
.....Secondly, backstabs have to be done from hiding. (Yes invisibility also works, but I am talking about the basic mechanics here). I can imagine someone hiding behind a bush or tree while carrying a bastard sword, but I can't see someone hiding very effectively with a ginormous 8 foot staff in their hands.
.....Secondly, backstabs have to be done from hiding. (Yes invisibility also works, but I am talking about the basic mechanics here). I can imagine someone hiding behind a bush or tree while carrying a bastard sword, but I can't see someone hiding very effectively with a ginormous 8 foot staff in their hands.
0
Comments
But think the idea was weapons that can be concealed or disguised. Quarter Staff is actually easy, it’s a common accessory as a walking stick and may be carried by a range of people from the elderly, to shepherds, to any wizard. It also may not be policed as a “weapon” in areas that have weapon restrictions.
By comparison, a Bastard Sword is a large, heavy, *expensive* weapon. It will stand out as a *weapon* in any setting. It’s like the difference between a walking stick and a Glock.
I think the hardest weapon to justify along those lines is a short bow. But then, I often use the euphemisms “scout” or “light fighter” for thieves. Especially good-aligned thieves may find work with a local military or private security force. So the short bow may be the most visible tool of the “legitimate” aspects of their trade.
assume a sneak attack may also be more of a surprise attack or focus on vulnerable
body parts - which may happen from hidden position but could also be from speed,
e. g. if you run at someone from behind with such speed that you'd have an advantage
hitting some areas, even without being hidden and/or sneaking up. Lightning strikes.
(Haste yielding two attacks per round does not really work here IMO since the THACO
doesn't change here. Improved invisible yielding +4 AC makes a bit more sense, but
the DnD system is not really great in general.)
The DnD model in general isn't great and BG as computer game made a few simplifications
and changes to the core rules in addition to that.
I think the "classic" backstab could be done only with dagger/knife and aim at, e. g.
hitting the throat/neck or upper part of the spine or perhaps the liver/kidneys. I
am not sure whether armour factored into it at all; usually DnD uses the AC value
as the simplification, which I think is not good. After all, a complete plate armour
should simply mean that a regular dagger can not really harm you at all whatsoever.
One could reason at the joint area, but that means only a very limited target. In
theory DnD does not even consider that a mortal wound should not be producable
if you only are able to hurt the toe or pinkie finger. DnD just uses so many simplified
assumptions.
There were other RPGs with a better, more realistic model. DSA for instance used
at one point a model where wounds were kept track of, e. g. you fought worse if
your torso was already covered with tons of wounds. The problem was that it
was a lot of work to keep track of and that created a problem for the players.
Plus, players cheat a lot so the DM has to control everything all the times, which
distracts from storytelling. It's all a trade-off.
> I can imagine someone hiding behind a bush or tree while carrying a bastard sword, but I can't see someone hiding very effectively with a ginormous 8 foot staff in their hands.
Well, this can be handled by penalties against hiding or backstab. Technically you could
put the staff on the ground so it would not need to be in the hands at that time; you'd
sneak up from behind, then backstab should be no problem. But what even IS a backstab
anyway? This is not even well-described. Why is a bastard sword considered a weapon
for backstab? What does that mean? Can the exact steps be described? And compared
with a dagger? By the way, if invisibility counts then haste should also count, because
in both cases you would not be easily able to respond. Perhaps not at the same penalty
but definitely at some kind of penalty.
> A sword can be, for example, hidden in the folds of a cloak.
But here you assume that every opponent can not infer that some weapon could be
hidden. That makes no sense. If I am a trained swordsman, I could expect any enemy
to have hidden weapons. That's different to being unable to see an enemy because
that enemy is hidden/invisible.
But here you assume that every opponent can not infer that some weapon could be
hidden. That makes no sense. If I am a trained swordsman, I could expect any enemy
to have hidden weapons. That's different to being unable to see an enemy because
that enemy is hidden/invisible. <
You misunderstand. I am postulating that the ambusher is already hidden; the fact that a sword can be obscured by the cloak just makes it easier to stay concealed (no sunlight glinting off a blade, for example) as opposed to carrying an 8 foot long pole. I am currently playing an MMORPG where the thief type profession is probibited from performing a backstab with any sort of long weapon. This includes things like naginatas, lances/long spears, halberds, and, yes, quarterstaves. Note that short stabbing spears ... something like an asagai, for example ... are able to be used for backstabbing purposes.
Again, categorically disagree about a quarter staff being an obvious weapon. It is well documented as a common aid/tool in ancient and medieval times.
And the point to the bow, and all of this, is to the point of the thief being able to move covertly (or not) as a key part of their ability to conduct thief related business. A thief carrying a bow... or a bastard sword is *obviously* NOT a simple beggar or ordinary part of the crowd moving through town. They will draw attention to themselves which may defeat any hope of getting a surprise attack.
As I said at first, a lot of this a little wonky. A Fighter/Thief of any sort gains the ability to use and carry a halberd or two-handed sword. An attentive DM would make it very difficult for such a character to do covert thieving business, while fully kitted out. A CRPG will miss the nuance.
The backstab rules are sort of a way of forcing the point. It makes it so your character is limited on what they can use for such a covert sort of attack.
I think the issue really comes down to looking at this as a role playing issue. Not about the pure mechanics of it. And that is a serious limitation of a CRPG that it always comes back to mechanics. But D&D was a role playing game first and foremost. Be the thief, play the part.