| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Naroon Shimmerflow |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 10:46:37
greetings wise ones.
Me and my friends use the ad&d 2 ed forgotten realms game settings. During play one of my players wanted to backstab a giant with his morningstars. my first reactins was; no no no... you can only backstabb with piercing weapons.
As we read in the books, there is no information on what kind of weapon the backstabb ability requires. My view is that to backstabb you need something to STABB with.
What do you sages of lore think? Does the books say anything different then what i have found?
PS:plz excuse my bad english, it`s not my mother tounge. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Jeffrie |
Posted - 12 Jun 2010 : 19:05:22
Hoondatha, can i get a copy of that campaign spreadsheet? That's way cool. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 30 May 2010 : 15:58:42
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
But isn't the whole idea of backstabbing that the Thief knows how to hit the deadliest spot? Using a weapon that turns more or less half your body into pulp sort of goes against that. You will probably hit somewhere critical, but so would any warrior handling the weapon to or just about any one else scoring a lucky hit with the weapon.
I don't think a ballista bolt would pulp the body, as much as just go thru it. And in D&D, someone powerful enough can keep going after getting shot with a ballista bolt... But if a clever thief could set it up just right to be able to pull it off, then I'd say that the bolt tore thru some vital organs en route, causing even more damage.
It's kinda moot, though -- getting that proper setup, and all the right rolls, would be nearly impossible. My stance, however, is that it is not impossible -- just nearly so. Doing it without proper preparation? Nope, not happening. All the proper prep and a lot of luck? Maybe.
I would also say that such circumstances could occur, and would be most likely to occur in lair defence situations, where a baliista has been set up to cover, say, a corridor or a room. It would have to be hidden (firing through a murder hole or something similar), and the wielder would need to have spent a long time practicing, so as to be able to "zero in" almost instantly. I'd say that preparing such a setup would take weeks (tendays) or months. So, only suitable for prepared defences.
Agreed. The prior preparation is everything, in this case.  |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 30 May 2010 : 09:39:17
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
But isn't the whole idea of backstabbing that the Thief knows how to hit the deadliest spot? Using a weapon that turns more or less half your body into pulp sort of goes against that. You will probably hit somewhere critical, but so would any warrior handling the weapon to or just about any one else scoring a lucky hit with the weapon.
I don't think a ballista bolt would pulp the body, as much as just go thru it. And in D&D, someone powerful enough can keep going after getting shot with a ballista bolt... But if a clever thief could set it up just right to be able to pull it off, then I'd say that the bolt tore thru some vital organs en route, causing even more damage.
It's kinda moot, though -- getting that proper setup, and all the right rolls, would be nearly impossible. My stance, however, is that it is not impossible -- just nearly so. Doing it without proper preparation? Nope, not happening. All the proper prep and a lot of luck? Maybe.
I would also say that such circumstances could occur, and would be most likely to occur in lair defence situations, where a baliista has been set up to cover, say, a corridor or a room. It would have to be hidden (firing through a murder hole or something similar), and the wielder would need to have spent a long time practicing, so as to be able to "zero in" almost instantly. I'd say that preparing such a setup would take weeks (tendays) or months. So, only suitable for prepared defences. |
| Sill Alias |
Posted - 30 May 2010 : 05:27:49
Must be high DC barrier. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 29 May 2010 : 21:13:03
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
But isn't the whole idea of backstabbing that the Thief knows how to hit the deadliest spot? Using a weapon that turns more or less half your body into pulp sort of goes against that. You will probably hit somewhere critical, but so would any warrior handling the weapon to or just about any one else scoring a lucky hit with the weapon.
I don't think a ballista bolt would pulp the body, as much as just go thru it. And in D&D, someone powerful enough can keep going after getting shot with a ballista bolt... But if a clever thief could set it up just right to be able to pull it off, then I'd say that the bolt tore thru some vital organs en route, causing even more damage.
It's kinda moot, though -- getting that proper setup, and all the right rolls, would be nearly impossible. My stance, however, is that it is not impossible -- just nearly so. Doing it without proper preparation? Nope, not happening. All the proper prep and a lot of luck? Maybe. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 29 May 2010 : 19:36:13
quote:
Originally posted by Sill Alias
Yep, it is kinda makes no sense to sneak attack on human with ballista. The basis of the sneak attack is to cover the weakness of the rogue by super damage in back or other stuff. But it would be nice to think about like setting a trap for unusual monsters like dragons or giants.
I can to a degree see the point in that one. If a thief was proficient in both ballista and crossbow (and I allowed backstabbing with missile weapons) I would probably allow a backstab against huge creatures such as dragons or giants. Its not a situation that would come up to often anyway, so why not? Its not something that would be a serious balance problem for a game. |
| Sill Alias |
Posted - 29 May 2010 : 19:29:04
Yep, it is kinda makes no sense to sneak attack on human with ballista. The basis of the sneak attack is to cover the weakness of the rogue by super damage in back or other stuff. But it would be nice to think about like setting a trap for unusual monsters like dragons or giants. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 29 May 2010 : 19:10:01
But isn't the whole idea of backstabbing that the Thief knows how to hit the deadliest spot? Using a weapon that turns more or less half your body into pulp sort of goes against that. You will probably hit somewhere critical, but so would any warrior handling the weapon to or just about any one else scoring a lucky hit with the weapon. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 29 May 2010 : 15:18:16
Honestly, I'd say it would be possible to backstab with a ballista -- but the ballista would have to be loaded and in place, first, the unaware victim would have to get maneuvered in front of it, and then it would have to be fired -- likely with a penalty -- by someone proficient with a ballista. Even if all of those conditions took place, I'd still give the victim a chance to dodge. And hit or not, there would be a chance for anyone in front of the victim to get hit.
So, if you're ready beforehand, it's possible, but not bloody likely. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 29 May 2010 : 09:38:56
The ballista point just becomes one of using common sense, its not always necessary to have a written rule. And good luck in trying to use a ballista silently. Even chain-using weapons would be out of the question in my opinion and siege weapons are just ridiculous in this case. |
| Dracons |
Posted - 28 May 2010 : 11:16:31
The ballista line was from the movie The Gamers. I'm shocked no-one picked it up. Happened when the thief wanted to kill their enemy at a bar, he won initivie, and was trying various ways to kill him. He started with dagger, but it wouldn't do enough damage, so he changed it to his sword. His friends said that still wouldn't be enough. So he took out the ballista. |
| Sill Alias |
Posted - 28 May 2010 : 10:26:40
Must be taken as plot hook to kill the giant beast, I suppose. |
| Artemel |
Posted - 28 May 2010 : 10:25:15
Seeing as it takes rounds to load... I doubt your opponent will stand there flat-footed the entire time. |
| Sill Alias |
Posted - 28 May 2010 : 08:51:27
Point blank shot and sneak attack with balista? Did someone tried that? |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 28 May 2010 : 07:55:29
quote:
Originally posted by Sill Alias
Maybe it also depends on the range. Shot in the back from great distance does not count if he turns around to notice it.
If I remember correctly, sneak attack, as introduced in 3E, allowed sneak attacks with missile weapons at the equivalent of "point blank" range alone. If I had to justify not allowing sneak attacks at greater distances, it's that with crossbows and bows, at long distance, it's not possible to make the aime precise enough to benefit from the backstab (the extra damage was justified by the idea that the thief knows where to strike, and strikes just there). So, long-range missile sneak attacks / backstabs: as a general rule, not done, unless there are exceptional means (usually means: magic) (well, not in my 2E campaign, anyway). |
| Sill Alias |
Posted - 28 May 2010 : 04:37:48
Maybe it also depends on the range. Shot in the back from great distance does not count if he turns around to notice it. |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 27 May 2010 : 13:23:55
quote:
Originally posted by dracons
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
(On the other hand, there are no restrictions on missile weapons, either, in the PHB, and I do not think anyone is advocating that missile weapons can be used for backstab).
You want to sneak attack with a Ballastia?
Uh huh...
A freaking seige weapon!?
Uh Huh...
Ok, there's gotta be a rule...
I did not want to sneak attack with a ballista, of course, but in 2nd Edition (which we were taking about), strictly speaking, there was no specific rule prohibiting it, but common sense kicks in at some point. Traditionally, as backstab was a thief's ability, the interpretation of the rule was that backstabbing was only allowed for weapons a thief was allowed to gain proficiency in (and, no, the ballista was not among them, but crossbows, thrown daggers, and short bows were). Traditionally, backstab was limited to melee weapons. And that's how I always enforced it.
But, going back to the ballista, you don't need specific rules for everything. As for the ballista - in 2E, backstab was possible only when achieving surprise. Someone is lugging around a ballista, that's going to seriously cut down the chances for achieving surprise.
And in general, the overruling rule is still - the DM is always right. If DM says, no backstabbing with a ballista, then there's no backstabbing with a ballista. |
| Dracons |
Posted - 27 May 2010 : 09:15:43
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
(On the other hand, there are no restrictions on missile weapons, either, in the PHB, and I do not think anyone is advocating that missile weapons can be used for backstab).
You want to sneak attack with a Ballastia?
Uh huh...
A freaking seige weapon!?
Uh Huh...
Ok, there's gotta be a rule... |
| Dinnin |
Posted - 27 May 2010 : 07:46:37
quote:
Originally posted by Cleric Generic
I'd have thought that backstab, in the absence of any rules text that specifies otherwise, is like the sneak attack of latter editions. Yes, if you know what you're doing you can stab someone in the heart and achieve instant lethality, but you could do the same by deftly planting an axe in the back of the head or mace to the back of the neck. I can't think of any fundamental reason why you couldn't 'backstab' (i.e. precision stealth strike) with anything, provided you know what you're doing (e.e. with any weapon the thief is proficient with).
Well think about it some morning stars have spikes on them.
But yes i agree with Cleric if you know what your doing you should be able to do it with anything, i mean you could use the hilt of your weapon and if you get the right spot it will knock em out. |
| Naroon Shimmerflow |
Posted - 31 Mar 2010 : 12:36:36
hehe thanks a lot for great inputs. It realy help the discussion ;) |
| Fizilbert |
Posted - 31 Mar 2010 : 11:43:49
Looks like several say "no" and several say "yes." Hmm....Glad we could help! lol |
| Sian |
Posted - 31 Mar 2010 : 08:46:07
cap the knee :P |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 31 Mar 2010 : 06:01:51
I have to agree. A larger weapon would probably be needed in any case, so a morningstar might even make sense for weight purposes. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 20:56:35
Good point. As they say in archival school, context is key. If we're talking big giants, it'd be hard to backstab with anything but. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 19:56:41
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
I don't see a problem with allowing backstabs with most other weapons, as long as things don't get too ridiculous (ie: two-handed sword).
Err, the OP did ask about back stabbing a giant, in that case a two handed sword might not be too ridiculous. *Smiles* |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 18:46:37
I started off thinking no, you had to have a piercing weapon (hence the word "stab"), but then I started thinking about it. The research Thauramarth did also helped. So I think I'm going to change my mind. After all, backstab, like the vorpal and sharpness swords, is simply a game mechanic trying to encapsulate the ability a person in real life has to achieve a one-hit-kill. Looked at it that way, I don't see a problem with allowing backstabs with most other weapons, as long as things don't get too ridiculous (ie: two-handed sword). |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 17:34:34
Duel classing, can make it possible for a thief to use any weapon a fighter can use once levels are matched exceeded in second class, a multi-classed character can use all abilities/weapons as they move up level.
The only possible restriction is thief permitted weapons for back stab. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 16:50:20
I would say yes. A morning star has spikes enough to almost be called a piercing weapon anyway and a blow to the neck or head from that weapon would be as deadly as a stab from a bladed weapon. But on the other side I do agree with Thauramarth regarding the weapons usable; it should be one from the Thieves list. |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 16:48:32
Although there's something to be said for limiting backstabs to piercing weapons, there's nothing in the 2nd edition rules that restricts backstabbing to piercing weapons (not in the PHB, and not in the Complete Thief's Handbook. (On the other hand, there are no restrictions on missile weapons, either, in the PHB, and I do not think anyone is advocating that missile weapons can be used for backstab).
I'd say, however, that blunt or slashing melee weapons would also qualify for backstabbing bonuses, on the assumption that the thief would know which areas would be "vitally vulnerable" to such attacks (the blow to the head or the neck; the morning star equivalent of the kidney punch).
This said, I would limit backstabbing bonuses to those weapons that thieves are entitled to use under the rules (see the PHB). A morning star does not feature in that list, although some of the kits in the Complete Thief's Handbook allow thieves to use some other weapons). When it comes to multiclassed (as per 1st and 2nd edition rules) characters, things can blur a little bit, as a multiclassed thief would be allowed to use weapon selection from all classes (the infamous case of the backstab with the two-handed sword). In one of the Sage Advice Columns (Dragon Magazine 243), Skip Williams suggested that fighter/thieves should use their thief THAC0 when making backstab attacks. I would extrapolate from that suggestion that backstabs can only be made with weapons that thieves are allowed to gain proficiency in.
Then one final, personal editorial comment. Despite everything related to the rules, I would agree that from a roleplaying POV, it's more desirable for backstab to be more "knife-in-the-back" than "two-handed-sword" in the back, but the rules do not exactly favour such an approach. My system is still largely 2nd-edition based, but I have adopted a variant on the sneak attack rules from 3rd edition; instead of backstabbing bonus being a multiplier of weapon damage, I add 1d6 per two thieving levels, and inflict a penalty on the chance to surprise when using an unconcealed weapon, which makes daggers, knives, and smaller weapons a more desirable choice for backstabbers. After all, because the 1d4 + 1d6 per two levels of a dagger is only marginally less than, say 1d8 +1d6 per two levels for a longsword, but using a longsword reduces your chances of surprises, and thus increases the chance that the thief will blow the bonus altogether. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 15:31:46
In the end the DM rules, however for the purists a morningstar generally has spikes which makes part of damage piercing on any hit. I however also agree that a well placed blunt attack, such as using a sap should also qualify for back stab bonus. In my opinion the back stab bonus is /should be because of an undefended attack from one skilled in weapon use to do most damage. |
|
|
