Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: notesfiles
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!hp-pcd!orstcs!hakanson
From: hakanson@orstcs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.games.frp
Subject: Re: Back-Stabbing
Message-ID: <28500009@orstcs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 13-Apr-84 16:55:00 EST
Article-I.D.: orstcs.28500009
Posted: Fri Apr 13 16:55:00 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Apr-84 09:07:39 EST
References: <1286@pur-phy.UUCP>
Organization: Oregon State University - Corvallis, OR
Lines: 19
Nf-ID: #R:pur-phy:-128600:orstcs:28500009:000:1145
Nf-From: orstcs!hakanson    Apr 12 13:55:00 1984

Yes, but our group's interpretation is that the normal damage for a weapon
includes any bonuses -- weapon bonuses, strength bonuses, etc.  It seems
ridiculous that a thief of low to moderate strength would be allowed to
do the same amount of damage as one with high strength in the same situation.

Of course, some people (and reasonably so, I think) limit it to including
only the weapon damage bonus.  The rationale there is that backstabbing
has nothing to do with strength -- only finesse.  I'm afraid that I can
agree with this approach too, but I believe strength should come into
the calculation as well -- but only with certain weapons (suppose your
backstab weapon is something like a club, for example).  But the AD&D
system isn't complex enough to take this into account, so you have to
be consistent in your campaign.  Another shortcoming of the AD&D backstab
system is that Assassins are allowed to backstab with any of THEIR weapons,
e.g. a two-handed sword.  Now that's getting ridiculous, especially if
the victim is "large."  Ouch!

Marion Hakanson			CSnet:  hakanson@oregon-state
				UUCP :  {hp-pcd,tektronix}!orstcs!hakanson