Rogue Back Attack

[exoknight]

Reading through the Rogue class I was wondering how hard is it to get off a back attack? A first level rogue would need to be hidden to get the advantage. Do you allow for a rogue to be flanking a character and the roll -10 hide to get off a back attack on target? It seems like it would be difficult to get off.

Also who is eligible for a back attack? Ooze no, but what about other creatures like elementals or undead who don't have clear anatomy?

Do you follow the 3.5 rules for who can be back attacked? Or the more liberal Pathfinder rules? Or something of your own creation?

What weapons can be used to back attack? No longer then arms length. Not knowing all the weapon sizes. I assume dagger yes, short sword no?

[Rigon]

Reading through the Rogue class I was wondering how hard is it to get off a back attack? A first level rogue would need to be hidden to get the advantage. Do you allow for a rogue to be flanking a character and the roll -10 hide to get off a back attack on target? It seems like it would be difficult to get off.

I'd allow the attempt with the roll. The beauty of the SIEGE Engine is that, as A CK, I can say yes more often than I say no.

Also who is eligible for a back attack? Ooze no, but what about other creatures like elementals or undead who don't have clear anatomy?

Do you follow the 3.5 rules for who can be back attacked? Or the more liberal Pathfinder rules? Or something of your own creation?

For me, it would have to be bipedal shaped with a clearly defined anatomy for the attack to make sense. Since the rogue is trying to hit a major organ or such.

What weapons can be used to back attack? No longer then arms length. Not knowing all the weapon sizes. I assume dagger yes, short sword no?

I would allow any weapon around the size of a short sword to be used.

R-

[Fiffergrund]

Do you allow for a rogue to be flanking a character and the roll -10 hide to get off a back attack on target?


Just being behind a target isn't good enough. You have to be unnoticed.

If the rogue is stationary and hidden, and the target passes by without noticing the rogue, then no roll needed.

If the rogue maneuvers behind the target in a manner that is is clearly noticeable by the target, then no back attack allowed.

If the rogue takes time to maneuver behind the target in a subtle or misdirecting manner, staying on the periphery, and then sneaks up behind, then a move silently success is needed, then the back attack applies.

YMMV

[Treebore]

I kind of do it the 3E way, if they try to sneak around an opponent who is engaged with another opponent, so CANNOT keep an eye on the Rogue at all times, I give them a Hide roll at the CL of the opponents level/HD to see if they can make them lose sight of them, then make them do a Move Silent and additional Hide check to move in and do the Backstab unnoticed. If its a one on one fight, no way is the Thief/Rogue going to be able to do it, because they have their opponents complete and undivided attention. Now if the Thief has a Ring of Invisibility, or some other way to go magically "unseen", that will make things a little easier for them, while slowing them down for a round while making use of such an item.

[exoknight]

Reading through the Rogue class it looks awfully hard to get a back attack in. I like the concept of getting the extra damage if you flank the opponent with melee combatant.

[Buttmonkey]

It's easier than in 1E. You either have to make a hide in shadows check or a move silently check, but not both as in 1E.

[exoknight]

It's easier than in 1E. You either have to make a hide in shadows check or a move silently check, but not both as in 1E.

Its the last ten years of 3.X/Pathfinder clouding my mind. I played 2e for 10 years but never 1e. I haven't played AD&D in long time so I don't remember all the exact details anymore. I recently started messing around with C&C and enjoy the system. Its not too light like S&W and not too complex like 3.X so its just right for me. Just trying to see what I will houserule or not.

[Treebore]

It's easier than in 1E. You either have to make a hide in shadows check or a move silently check, but not both as in 1E.

Its the last ten years of 3.X/Pathfinder clouding my mind. I played 2e for 10 years but never 1e. I haven't played AD&D in long time so I don't remember all the exact details anymore. I recently started messing around with C&C and enjoy the system. Its not too light like S&W and not too complex like 3.X so its just right for me. Just trying to see what I will houserule or not.

Fortunately that is what C&C is all about, making it your perfect game, so do it! Go all the way!

[Captain_K]

Ok folks, think about it, how often has your group's thief pulled off a back attack? Each night? Once a month? never? As a thief what is your "coolest" most "high five" skill in your tool kit... OK, so if you're like me, this is it, backstab for 2x or 3x damage (Nothing worse than a 1 damage here). So if it is the best, make it happen, or at least make it achievable.

Call these house rules/guides, combat is messy, crazy and by definition, ill defined. Fighters going toe to toe with a long sword are doing d8 round after round. By the time the thief sneaks, hides, moves silently, etc. they have not "done damage" for multiple rounds. High dex thieves could be hanging back and doing pretty good damage and being part of the game with d6 short bow fire... so when they invest all that time and all that effort why not let them get a shot.. even if the guy is "the big bad guy" really what's 2x or 3x on a dagger or short sword, hell let them skewer the guy with a long sword, the drama and build up to the damage is worth it for the game..

So in game "options", give them more reasons to try and give them chances to succeed. When anything fails, there is nothing in the game like the guilty faced thief being caught with his soft leather boot cracking a discarded thigh bone and being noticed trying to sneak up on the Hill Giant... oops... now get out of this one Finieous.... its all for fun.

In details, yes the thing to stab in the back must have a "back", a "blind spot", and "vital" organs for the back attack to actually function. But your rouge or assassin need not know this, they can roll and multiply all they want, learning the hard way that a Vampire no longer needs their kidney is great gaming. The thief must "make" all their rolls to hide &/or sneak.. again, do they know, heck they "know" they are silent and no one sees them, they must believe in their abilities and unless one of their PCs is "spotting" them, only the bad guys will tip them off rather they fail or not. A stab in the back is just an attack or "is still an attack" back stab 2x or not. So always allow it, always go through the motions, and let the dice fall as they may but let the thief (sorry rogue) have their day, its is all for fun and great adventure.

I would give it at very short range ( I love a dagger from the shadows) with any weapon, even a bar stool. Just make it harder to get the max points, keep in mind, as the CK you're the only one who knows the hp of the creature being back stabbed anyway and rather or not they have vital organs in all the right places... let them try it all and adjust. A mage can attempt to "back stab" an ocher jelly with a spoon, they can roll a d10 x3 for damage, only the CK needs to know the damage is 0-1 and the mage will likely take d6 damage for sticking his hand in the nasty thing... ;}

My last group of folks thought a Vampire, former Paladin - still playing the part, was a "human" for multiple combats.. that thief/assassin was sure he 5x backstabbed the guy at least twice and I don't think he ever figured out both attacks did NOTHING, dagger or long sword for a multitude of reasons, failed rolls, aware, and lack of magic.. but the thief did not know and had a great time doing it, voted savior of the game too.

So go for it, let them try, the results will teach the real lessons, have fun with it, Cap

[Treebore]

Ok folks, think about it, how often has your group's thief pulled off a back attack? Each night? Once a month? never?

Well, since I do it more like 3e, they have managed to pull it off a few times "in combat". It would have been about twice as often if the dice weren't so hateful at times.

[alcyone]

I think whether opportunities present themselves regularly depend on environment in which the rogue operates. There are a lot of published adventures where you open a door, there are some guys standing around a room waiting for you or shooting dice, and you all fight and move on. Those are terrible for rogues that want to back attack. Even if you surprise them, they are always aware of you.

Blind corners in alleys, dungeons, etc, with patrols, wandering monsters, etc. are better.
Taking out a sentry is a good use of the back attack skill, and this works best when there is lots of space, lots of cover, and too much area for the victim to be able to survey (with the loud people hanging back).

I think a good back attack generally requires patience, coordination, and preparation. It's not as bad as the case target ability, you don't need to know much about your target except the shape of their silhouette. Sure, you can blow a charm or a sleep on some targets, but the rogue can backstab all day.

Note that in combat everyone already gets a small bonus to attack from behind (and a smaller bonus to attack from the rear oblique). That's all a rogue gets in my game too if the conditions for a back attack don't exist.

Also, yes, a ring of invisibility can get you that back attack in every fight.