Backstabbing w/blunt weapons, and ranger (kit) d clerics

Remove all ads!

Actually, i find that a club is an acceptable weapon to sneak up to someone and hit them with. After all the press gangs from the navy used to do it a couple of centuries back, so why not sneak up on an orc and take them out of a fight with one?
Obviously this implies non leathal damage, but if it's hitting the correct place, which a thief backstabbing would be doing, then it seems logical. Also remember that D&D rule are abstract, and some skills and abilities aeren't exactly what their names imply. In this case backstabbing isn't literally putting a knife in an enemies back, although it usually is i admit, it's positioning for the best strike, and putting that strike in the most critical place.

 

I thought backstabbing was for hitting especially critical organs, andd that would mean you actually need to stick something inside someone, can't see how that can be done with a club?

Though I think backstabbing with a Katana is rather extreme as well, how can you hit anything with such a large sword? saying, get the tip between some plates in the enemies armor and hit his kidney or something

 

A "backslap" with a club (see my "thug"-kit idea above ) would be all right would it only cause the victim to be unconscious, but in BG-2 it works just like using a dagger

Just imagine that:
A thief sneaks up behind his victim, a field-plate covered fighter, attacks him with his club and causes pentuple damage for denting his armor or helmet ???! Hmm, maybe he has to break the club first to cut him with the splinters ...

[This message has been edited by Ragusa (edited September 09, 2001).]

 

*scratches head* So why does a quarterstaff work, but a scimitar or hammer doesn't? What gives here? Is this a quarterstaff-specific bug?

 

Tjekanefir, my thiefs never had any problems using scimitars for backstabbing and I never encountered any problems there. Scimitars *are* suitable for backstabbing

As for the clubs: There seems to be a blunt weapon bug (as far as thiefs can use them: means clubs & staffs only) for the thief class.
This is typical for BG-2, so I remember (I don't know if it is fixed yet) that cavaliers, while restricted to melee weapons, were able to use slings or just thake the manual: It was partly faulty regarding some of the thieving abilities ...

 

All right you morons... I didn't mean backstab with a club or quarterstaff, i meant put points into it before you dual to cleric, so you can have 2** into qarterstaff or a club.

 

Assassin, the point is, that your dc cleric-thief in fact (thanks to this strange bug) *WILL BE ABLE TO BACKSTABB USING QUARTERSTAFFS OR CLUBS* after beeing able to use both classes abilities (means: once he reaches the cleric level above his thief level .... )

[This message has been edited by Ragusa (edited September 09, 2001).]

 

ragusa is correct, scimitars ARE suitable for backstabbing (used belm +2 to backstab mage in sewers for ~75 damage)

 

So... my F/M/T may equip the Staff of Magi thus going invisible, then backstab, reequip the staff thus go invisible, then backstab, reequip the staff thus go... got my idea? Pretty cheesy, pretty cool!

 

A thief won't be able to backstab with all quarterstaffs. I tried to backstab with the Staff of the Magi (with a mage-thief), and, luckily, it didn't work...

And Valygar's katana is for some reason unsuitable for backstab, but who cares when there's a Celestial Fury out there...

 

Well, that is odd, then. I guess it was Valygar's katana causing the problem, not the scimitar. *scratches head some more* Of course, that's even odder...

 

Try your backstabbing tests with a weapon called a wakizashi. I got not suitable...but maybe my game was wacky somehow.

A thief backstabbing with staves is NOT a bug. It may be that many people think it should not be a feature of the game but it isn't a bug. I personally do not believe that backstabbing with any weapon is entirely for the good of game balance considering the poor AI.
I hardly see how the other inherent limitations of clubs and staves are mitigated by the ablility to backstab with them.
You cannot use a shield when using a staff....and the damage is rather poor for a 2H weapon. I think the base damage of a club is also very poor, but at least you can use a shield.

 

Subra,
-First: I did backstabbing with a wakizashi, it *IS* posible, at least with kashiko's wakizashi, which I used successfully through large parts of BG-2 SoA.

-What makes you think that beeing able to "backSTAB" with BLUNT instruments (one of them a *TWO-HANDED-WEAPON* is not a bug, but intended to provide the already formidable thief with more playing options ? Please explain!

I mean, it would make sense to include something like a knock-out attack using clubs, making the victim unconscious - but, at least for me, it is questionable to treat a club just like a dagger and simply adding up the multiple damage for backstabbing (see my field-plate knight example above). The point is that backstabbing even a armor covered enemy with a dagger is possible by "STABBING THE BLADE" through openings in the armor, try that with a club or a quarterstaff ... (I know about the lack of realism when the game allows to backstab with C'Fury already ...)

-Backstabbing too powerful and not good for game ballance considering the poor AI ??! What about C'Fury, field-plate covered & fast regenerating fighters wielding two-handed swords or just take cloudkill, fireballs, skull traps and the instant death spells ... do you want to limit a thief to stealing, sneaking, missile weapons and traps - oh, sorry, traps are not only cheesy, they even more unbalance the game to the favour of the non-fighters ...


Btw - the base damages for a club and a staff are identical: 1d6, and that is not really poor since this is a feature of shortswords, maces and flails as well. The lack of 2 or 4 additional damage points compared to a longsword or a katana are neglectable in gameplay, where factors like strength-damage boni are way more decisive.

[This message has been edited by Ragusa (edited September 10, 2001).]

 

When I have played a solo thief, I have relied almost entirely on backstabbing, to annhilate opposition. There isn't too much a solo thief can't take down with his backstab attack alone. That is my opinion of unbalanced. I think you will find that most thiefs will opt for longsword except for the few who think Celestial Fury is fun. I don't think you will find alot of thieves who choose clubs or staves to be playing solo. I have one exception to that and it involves another uber weapon...the staff of the magi, so I am not at all opposed to the unconvential thief who wants a blunt weapon.

I'll bet alot of the people who desire to play a thief and are using blunt weapons aren't going to be relying on backstabbing attacks any way. Most are probably standing near the middle of the fight, ready to heal their fighters or summoning reinforcements.

The term backstab doesn't mean anything more than attacking from a stealth condition, thereby granting extra damage. Perhaps you will tell me why many people feel as if this extra damage should be contingent upon the type of weapon? It isn't axiomatic that the "backstabbing" require a piercing weapon...except in EQ. Refer back to your PnP rules and see what they say.

So the whole point is...if backstab attacks are going to be allowed, then there is no good reason to restrict the type of weapon doing it, except to maintain game balance. The restriction of 2h swords is good. Restriction of clubs makes no good sense. (I hope its true that SotM isn't suitable for backstabbing bonuses, would be worse than CF.

[This message has been edited by Subra (edited September 11, 2001).]

 

You pointed out some good things in your post. Backstabbing *is* without any doubt, an very powerful weapon. And yes, it can unballance the game. On the other hand, it is the only way for a thief to kill a strong enemy and to survive without using missile weapons or traps.

That in fact *is* the reason why I'd like to see a restriction of the weapon types suitable for backstabbing. The lower weapon damage will defuse the backstabbing a bit. So stricter weapon type restriction would help to restore the game ballance to some point.

I actually favour daggers for this discipline and I gave my dc fighter-thief grandmastery with daggers. IMO shortswords and scimitars should be allowed too, but that's it. Due to their size I had always problems with using a katana and longswords for backstabbing after my first game. This certainly applies for staffs as well.
As I pointed out before I could accept a club specific attack to knock out enemies but I actually dislike the way BG-2 ignores the specific weapon differences.
Since there are blunt damage modifiers for armor types or golems, I can't see a reason why blunt weaponry couldn't have been excluded for backstabbing. The more consequent approach would have been to include a specific club-attack as well.

When your use of backstabbing unballances the game, chamge your tactic. It is just as with using traps and cloudkills - it depends on the player if it is cheesy or not.

[This message has been edited by Ragusa (edited September 11, 2001).]

 

I concur Ragusa. The PnP rules on Backstabbing is that only piercing weapons work. Hence Daggers, short sword...

[This message has been edited by Nobleman (edited September 11, 2001).]

 

A scimitar's not really a piercing weapon either. I'd think it would be too heavy and too curved to backstab with.

But then again, as some have said, we may be being too literal. If you jumped an unsuspecting victim with almost any weapon and struck him accurately in an appropriately vital spot you could probably inflict quadruple damage compared to just whacking him with it in whatever place you had a chance to in the middle of combat where he was actively defending himself.

 

Basically I mentioned scimitars for this class sums up scimitars as well as ninja-to's and wakizashis whick have a less curved blade which seems better suited than a scimitar's.

If a surprise attack from shadows with a huge weapon like a staff (or a katana) would give a better chance for a critical hit this would be still realistic, but quad damage .....

But maybe you're right and we are getting too literal here

 

I've got it! You backstab with a staff when you use it like a pool cue - and you do an eight-ball, side-pocket kind shot between where the helm-plate meets the shoulder yoke of this dude's Field Plate Armor - and <<BOP!!>> you've stuffed your quarterstaff out his left eyesocket! Quintuple damage!

(okay, I still prefer my short-sword of backstabbing, I'm just enjoying this thread too much!!)

 

Hi,

Good discussion. My feeling is that a thief should be able to "backstab" with any allowable weapon to the class. I think the term "backstab" is an unfortunate one, "back attack" might be better.

As someone earlier stated: the attack is from stealth and is hence a "free" undefended one.
The thief is able to pick their spot.

A couple of points to bear in mind:

1. In my PNP player manual it states that
"back stabbing is the striking of of a blow from behind, be it with club, dagger or sword"
Staffs weren't specifically mentioned but they are blunt like clubs so I guess they are implicit.
2. As to the point regarding staffs and back stabbing plate armor targets - thats what armor class is all about - armor class of plate armor is much better than say leather or nothing and so it is much more difficult to score a hit anyway whether from front or behind.
3. People always get confused when they think of hit points - if my fighter has 100 hitpoints it does not mean that he can survive 10 sword thrusts to the chest - it means that he is very skilled and most of the time due to his skill he can avoid an otherwise fatal hit and end up with a scratch. Now if he is attacked from behind he can't use his skill to avoid it since he doesn't know that it is coming, consequently he takes much more damage. There is a realy good explanation of this in the DM manual.

4. A staff or club if aimed properly can do serious damage to even an armored opponent - that is why blunt weapons were very popular against armored opponents in medieval times, crushing damage was the best way to hurt the knight. Check your armor modifiers, plate armor gets -3/-4 modifers against piercing and slashing but gets no benefical modifier versus blunt. Thats why flails, morning stars and maces were so popular in the middle ages.
5. We accept that it is possible for someone to kill a plate armored opponent with a club or staff from the front and we accept that we can get critical hits with these weapons against these opponents as well, why does attacking from behind change this - we are just talking about an free undefended hit, a super critical if you like.
6. one other point, someone mentioned hitting with a club from behind should result in an unconcious victim and so they shouldn't die, well in PNP land 0 hitpoints means exactly that, an unconcious state where if the victim does not receive medical treatment they will soon die (loses another hitpoint per round until they reach -10 hitpoints and they die. Of course, I do wonder why its possible to kill an armored opponent from the front with the club, but only knock them unconcious with it from behind?

Lets take these points and go back to the plate armor opponent being attacked from behind by a club/staff.
The thief gets a free shot and decides to aim for the head. They swing with all their might and stike an almighty blow to the head. What happens? Well probably for starters the target is very disorientated - a whack to the helmet is going that - theres good chance the helmet could be badly dented or even fly off, again some damage would have occurred, - whatever the actual outcome, the mechanics of the game have indicated that the target has taken siginficant hitpoint damage - remember this does not necessarily mean actual physical damage, just that they are much closer to dying, it could be that they are momentarily blinded by concussion and so will be much less likely to avoid the possibly fatal blow coming their way next.

Lets extend this further, what about the situation where they are killed by such a blow - surely this is not possible with a blunt weapon - well see point 5.Now the head is just one possible target - what about trying to break a limb, or trying to trip u the opponent with the staff etc etc - whatever the attack the result is that the target is less likely to survive the next attack hence the reduction in hitpoints.

Finally, I will agree however that backstabbing can unbalance the game, especially when combined in a dual or multi class such as a kensai/thief. However, it is only a model of reality and hence it will have some imperfections, if you can accept magic and monsters why not backstabbing with a staff.

Cheers,

WittyNewt


[This message has been edited by wittynewt (edited October 21, 2001).]