Quote:
Originally Posted by mburr0003
You don't need surprise to perform a Backstab roll.
|
Yes, but you do need hiding places in order to achieve surprise, which is why the mere fact that you can start combat behind an opponent using the Backstab rules isn't good evidence that you're intended to be able to remain unseen behind that opponent even without a hiding place until you attack.
Remember, you were asking how I interpreted the text about All Out Attack. That is my answer: it's a friendly reminder, not a secret rule-by-implication about being undetected until you attack.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburr0003
Which is why I'm fine with a Backstab to the front. Sometimes the rules aren't written to cover every situation and require a GM's touch.
And I'd let the Backstabber wait a turn or two for the enemy to be in a good "Backstab position". I don't interpret all these rules literally.
I find that it mostly crumbles in the face of "GM vs the PCs" scenarios when the GM doesn't want to allow the "rule of cool" to ruin their carefully planned encounter where Stealth isn't allowed.
|
I dunno, it sounds like you already don't use the Backstabbing rules as written, you're using Backstab v1.1 partly because Backstab v1.0 from Exploits pg 57 just doesn't work in too many situations: it's too rigid about positioning.
You're not abandoning Exploits pg 57 and Schrodinger's hiding places because you don't want to allow stealth to ruin your cool spider cellar. You're abandoning it because it just doesn't model a backstabby thief in a spider cellar well enough.
Me neither. I can imagine using a revised version of Backstab, but the version in Exploits is flawed, at least for thieves. It's great for Swashbucklers, Scouts, and Martial Artists though.