Quote from: Omega;922181If Im reading the 5e rules right its a free action to unsheath/ready a weapon.

Thus removing any significance from the decision to have your weapons ready, or from having a fast-draw skill?

Quote from: Exploderwizard;922251The thief using a spear is edition dependent. OD&D and B/X no problem. An AD&D thief cannot become proficient in spear or any sort of bow or crossbow. club,dagger, dart,sling, and sword are the available weapons (without non proficiency penalty at least).

The thief was a class that could only really excel by denying other classes the activities that they were already doing. I blame the class for the fucked up perception that a character couldn't do anything unless it was specified on the character sheet as an option. The thief truly earned its name stealing the fun from the other classes. As if that were not bad enough, the designers in their infinite wisdom had to pile on elite special forces combat ability rendering the fighter an amateur melee combatant in comparison.

I blame Gary's unclear writing combined with people's shitty reading comprehension, because that's not how the thief worked.

Quote from: Bren;922160A spear isn't something one can just "whip out."

"Lemme whip this out..."

Quote from: Omega;920905You love being wrong on this don't you? Yes. Yes you do.

Once again lets point out that the fighter outperforms the Magic User in sheer damage output. The wizards powerful to be sure. But its a very different and oft fragile power. (Least pre 3e) And in 5e the Fighter out-performs every other class that I've checked so far.

Really. Sometimes I think you post like this just to make me point out again just how much casters suck compared to a fighter. :cool:

Obviously he has no idea what "team" means.  He reminds me of people in WW2 games who get the infantry and whine that they don't get to shoot tanks from 2000 meters away.  If you think infantry is useless in a WW2 game it says a lot about your skill but nothing about infantry in WW2.

Same thing here.

Quote from: RPGPundit;922151You've never played D&D correctly, I see.

In my games, I'm pretty sure no Thief feels useless. They just don't get to do more damage every single round than a fighter would. It was one of the worst features of 3e+ that the fighter was the least useful character even in a fight.

A fair number of people, not just Dink Winkerson there, absolutely cannot tolerate a situation in which somebody else can do something they can't.  The notion of "Okay, this one is for the magic users," or "Save your spells, we can handle this with swords" is anathema to them.

I personally think people like this need to learn what "team" means.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;922326"Lemme whip this out..."

You expect to reach the enemy with that?  Son, the only person in danger from that spear is the guy in your file standing right in front of you.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;922251The thief was a class that could only really excel by denying other classes the activities that they were already doing. I blame the class for the fucked up perception that a character couldn't do anything unless it was specified on the character sheet as an option. The thief truly earned its name stealing the fun from the other classes. As if that were not bad enough, the designers in their infinite wisdom had to pile on elite special forces combat ability rendering the fighter an amateur melee combatant in comparison.

Except... you know... Not really.

Anything else youd like to get wrong?

Quote from: Skarg;922291Thus removing any significance from the decision to have your weapons ready, or from having a fast-draw skill?

PHB page 190. There is no fast draw in 5e. Or more aptly everyone can unsheath and attack in a round using their free action.

Dual Wielder feat allows you to unsheath and use two weapons.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;922325I blame Gary's unclear writing combined with people's shitty reading comprehension, because that's not how the thief worked.

And thusly some believed you can backstab with a ballista!

https://youtu.be/s4ZeTAfYoY4

LOL

Quote from: Omega;9214671: Obvious from every thread where you bitch incessantly about caster/wizards ad nausium.

2: Then why do you keep using it as an example? The wizard has some focused spells. And for the umpteenth time. So what? The gun has an ammo limit. The ammo tends to have a miss factor of some sort, either totally or partially. Or had their effects sometimes diminished. Moreso in 5e. Said ammo may be appallingly rare other than what you pick up naturally. And while not as fragile as before, said gun is still on the fragile side.

A)  Spells get resisted, or avoided, they do NOT fail.  Ever.  Never have. B) limited ammo means nothing if everything revolves around having it available.  And every player at the table understands that Magic is THE go-juice and will pattern their behaviour around it.  It's not malicious, it's how the game was built.  And C), I've never claimed that damage spells were good, I've always said that most blasting spells/AKA Evokers are among the weakest of the spells.  But then again, even they're pretty good, seeing that half-damage is still damage.  But true power lies in not doing damage, but instant removal of the threat.  Which is what the Save or 'Die' spells do.

Quote from: Omega;921467X: Back on the subject of the Rogue and backstab. Surprisingly enough the Rogue can output more average damage than the Wizard. Not by much. But dont underestimate teamwork and backstab.

'Teamwork' doesn't work with Backstab.  It works with Sneak Attack, which is a 3e construct, but Backstab was in 1-2e (I don't know about earlier) and you have to catch your opponent unaware, which is damn hard in a mass melee.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;922331A fair number of people, not just Dink Winkerson there, absolutely cannot tolerate a situation in which somebody else can do something they can't.  The notion of "Okay, this one is for the magic users," or "Save your spells, we can handle this with swords" is anathema to them.

I personally think people like this need to learn what "team" means.

...So... "OK, you guys sit over there, I've got this." is teamwork?  OK, so it apparently swaps around (Fighter does X, Thief does Y, Cleric heals and Magic-User does everything else ) but it doesn't look teamwork to me.  It means that everyone sits around while one guy gets to do his 'thing' and they swap when the situation demands it.

But what do I know?  I'm not one of the blessed ones who played at Gary's table to know how it was done right.

Quote from: Skarg;918828Yes, I'd say that's very true, though there were also other factors (he himself mentioned marksmanship - few pilots had much ability to hit). It's also why I like simulationist games that model the situation so that players get choices about what to do and how to approach situations, and have them have logical consequences that flow from lower-level mechanics, instead of being unavailable because the game abstracts everything, or even allows those choices but abstracts the cause & effect (e.g. a game designer might decide that an approach always has the same sort of effect, but a detailed simulation would show that it only has that effect with certain circumstances/enemy-tactics, but not others, which can be more complex (or impossible) to represent at an abstract level, compared to a detailed one).


Absolutely. He could've been shot or crashed on day one, while others who did die sooner might have been as good or better but just caught a bullet. When you insist someone have a predictable survivability, you force fate in an unrealistic way. I want to play in a game where it is about actually being in the situation modeled, and I don't believe in predestiny, fate, or super-heroes. I do believe in exceptional people, but also in the lethality of weapons and accidents, etc. I am very interested in the challenge of making choices and thinking of clever logical tactics and trying to beat hard situations. I am not interested in just playing a certified uber or winning character with mechanics that don't have much to do with the situations they pretend to be about.

Sorry I'm late to the fighter ace party.  

The Aces were effective because they were trying to kill people and all their targets were just flying around.  

Plenty of others were as good at  marks manship, or piloting but they didn't have the will to kill people.   So those guys just flew around until they got killed.

https://www.amazon.ca/Combat-Psychology-Physiology-Deadly-Conflict/dp/0964920549

My source.

Quote from: Omega;922340Except... you know... Not really.

Anything else youd like to get wrong?

The thief class was weak as evidenced by their low XP to advance requirements. The main focus of thief abilities revolved around the use of stealth and trap detection/removal which a member of any other class could do if properly equipped. The thief ability table provided only a second chance last ditch chance to succeed in case normal chances failed.

Thus in order for the thief to have a protected niche, the activities previously undertaken by members of other classes that duplicated thief functions either became (mistakenly) prohibited or the thief was rendered even weaker as a class. It was a class that could only hold its own by denying other classes the ability to perform everyman functions.

Quote from: rgrove0172;917270Ok the question goes deeper than simply the "backstab" mechanic present in so many games actually but rather ...

How do you handle the attack against a totally unaware target?

How I treat it depends on system.

In DCC, depending on the relative levels, I might allow you to roll a straight-up critical table. Yes, with your attack roll. Unless you're a zero-level sneaking up on an Warrior NPC, then you might "just" get bonus damage.

In Exalted2e, I wouldn't adjust anything. The defence being 0 takes care of this.

In Usagi Yojimbo, I'd probably give you the bonuses for total concealment and be done with it, maybe throw a single advantage dice on top of that. That's likely to be enough, anyway, but I might allow you to replace one of your Criticals (they're like Special Effects in MRQ2/Legend/Runequest6/Mythras, but some weapons have nastier "criticals") with a nastier critical that's not normally available. And/or I might disallow the use of "saving Gifts".

In BRP/MRQ2/Legend/Runequest6/Mythras, I'd probably give you the maximum bonuses, and allow you to add points above 100 to your critical range on a 5-to-1 basis. Maybe allow you to claim the "Maximise damage" Special Effect even if your roll didn't qualify for it.

In ORE, I'd probably give you a free Master Die, that you don't lose from taking a penalty to your roll (something that happens in some variants of ORE). That's usually enough to slit their throat.

In other systems, it might vary even more.
 
It's almost always going to be more lethal than it would be otherwise, though. Why?

It's a proven fact that people are more vulnerable to injury when they don't expect it. Ask any combat arts/sports player: hits you didn't expect hurt the most. There's a scientific explanation for this, but that's entirely besides the point:).
The point is, a backstab attack is, by definition, unexpected. I'm sure you can see where this is going.
Thing is, most systems don't account for this fact. Sometimes, it's necessary to institute houserules.

Then again, see also that post.

Quote from: Crüesader;917273The human body is a funny thing sometimes.  Bullets have bounced off skulls- hell, people have survived with pieces of their skull (and brain) actually missing.  Even a trained assassin can't account for everything.  You backstab a guy- but maybe his gaps in his ribs aren't where you thought because his garments threw off your calculations.  Or maybe you just happened to hit that one buckle on a strap, or maybe the guy coughed or turned at just the right moment. Even wounds that you think would kill someone (especially stabbing wounds) don't have an immediate effect.  A guy I knew in high school got stabbed twice and didn't even realize it until someone started screaming.

I'd put an initiative penalty on the guard at the very least.  He's gonna need a moment to figure out just what happened and get over the shock.  But if you sliced his throat 'wrong', there's a chance his windpipe is completely fucked and he won't be screaming- he'll be gasping.  

But like you said, house rule.  But you can't always make it easy instakill, because there's ways to exploit that.

So yeah, I'd give you bonuses. But if the dice hate you? Well, it's also true that in reality taking out a sentry with a sharp weapon is notoriously unreliable, which is why people today prefer to use silencers and the like.
So, if it's not going to be an instakill, blame Mr. Murphy, not the honest Referee;)!

Quote from: tenbones;922352And thusly some believed you can backstab with a ballista!

Wait? You mean you cant?

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;922331A fair number of people, not just Dink Winkerson there, absolutely cannot tolerate a situation in which somebody else can do something they can't.  The notion of "Okay, this one is for the magic users," or "Save your spells, we can handle this with swords" is anathema to them.

I personally think people like this need to learn what "team" means.

I have a minimum bar for players which that feeling falls far beneath... such whining will be chided and not permitted to continue in game. Out of game, they shall be schooled and not indulged.