Backstabbing in spars

[Kregor]

Speaking of backstab, I have seen pc's getting into a spar and backstabbing the opponent. In my books that's a no-no. For backstab to work, you need to have access to the pc's back and for that pc not to know you are sneaking in for the kill. In a spar, there is no chance of this to happen. So please, you thieves out there, refrain from using that skill when in such a situation.

Exer touched on this in another thread, but I would like to see more discussion and perhaps a ruling as far as RP goes for this. Since I, personally, have been backstabbed to start off a spar with two of my chars now by two different thieves, and I have seen several others.

For the record, I agree with every point Exer mentions, no thief is going to be so good at backstabbing that if I am looking at said thief, face to face, in combat stance, ready to begin a sparring match, are they going to be able to get around to my back and stab me off guard.

The damage due to backstabbing, as explained in the PHB, takes certain things for granted:

1) Surprise: You are catching the opponent off guard and flat footed. Your opponent is not that in a spar.

2) Hit location: It also assumes you hit them where it hurts. Even if an opponent were "willing" to take a backstab, natural flinch reaction is going to take place when they expect the attack coming, and your reflex is to shift away your most vital points. You can't override reflex.

I don't think it should be a matter of being set up as a "rule" before a spar begins, RP still applies even in a spar, and if this is bad RP, it should just stand as bad RP.

All the other dirty tricks a thief can use (kicking, dirtkicking, gouging, circling, etc.) would be perfectly acceptable in an all's fair duel, because those are all skills designed to be used in the heat of battle, not with the assumption of stealth that you don't have in this situation.

[Ursan]

I have no strong opinion either way on this, but I think that most players who's main characters are not thieves will likely side with the arguments above. So just to make for an interesting debate, here is another way to look at it.

A lot of what happens in a spar is influenced by the OOC ground rules players decide upon before the spar. I think this is a valid way to decide what goes on.

Perhaps players take the 'backstab' skill too literally though. If we go strictly by the phb, yes it is as its name implies... an attack from behind. Just for the sake of an interesting debate, what if we made room to interpret it in other ways...

Anyone who has seen the film Troy will be aware of the rather impressive way in which the inimitable Mr Pitt dispatches an enemy army's champion. Face to face, he runs at the standing foe...feints right.. leaps to the left... and plants his spear in the opponents neck.

This is one way the backstab might be interpreted. The skill and agility of the user being such that seen or unseen, behind or in front... an overwhelming assault is still possible.

Equally, the Japanese Samurai practised several methods of drawing a blade which were so swift that the move became a disabling strike before the opponent had realised the attackers weapon had been drawn.

As I said, I dont have a strong opinion either way in this. However, I do feel it is unfair to call something 'bad roleplay' merely because it does not fit with a particular notion or rule from the phb.

One of the things that so impresses me about Forgotten Kingdoms is the way the Immortals and Admin team work to make a 3-dimensional world out of a 2-dimensional hobby.

{I am plagiarising something an Imm said to me with that last line.. but since I couldnt word it better myself, I'm sure they'll understand }

[Talamar]

I just wanted to add, that Kregor mentioned that relfex makes you flinch and protect your vital spots, rending a backstab nonesensical when taken from that view point.

An argument to that, is that a thief trained in such strikes, should have the agility to still hit where he can do the most damage regardless of your instinctive flinching.

For example. just because you flinch when I start to punch you, doesn't mean I don't give you a charlie horse.

[Kregor]

Perhaps players take the 'backstab' skill too literally though. If we go strictly by the phb, yes it is as its name implies... an attack from behind. Just for the sake of an interesting debate, what if we made room to interpret it in other ways...

One of the things that so impresses me about Forgotten Kingdoms is the way the Immortals and Admin team work to make a 3-dimensional world out of a 2-dimensional hobby.

To balance that out, I have been witness to a thief being roundly scolded by an imm during a quest for using backstab against undead and non-humanoid creatures. When confronted with a request for a reason, this imm cited almost the exact same criteria that I used in my post as being the conditions necessary for a sucessful backstab. I believe the last words left by the imm on the incident were in the form of a helpful hint on the lines of "Before you backstab someone, think about it as to whether you could successfully make a backstab at all or not."

[Talos]

3rd Edition rules actually do take a broad view of this skill, as Ursan suggested. 3ed changed the name from 'backstab' to 'critical strike', to represent that the attacker is striking any vulnerable area available, not just the back. however, it does still require that the victim be flat footed or immobilized. Basically, any time the defender would be denied their dex bonus to AC, the thief can critically strike. Within the context of a spar, there is only one condition that could allow a critical strike, and that is if the defender is surprised. However, this is highly unlikely in a spar since both are expecting a fight. The attacker would essentially be suckerstabbing the defender when the two shake hands or something. Definately not honorable, and if both parties are very suspicious and cautious types, and it's a down-and-dirty spar rather than formal and by the books, I'd say neither is going to be surprised in this manner. But regardless, the mud has no mechanism for determining surprise, so I would be wary of forcing this rp on someone, you should not be surprised to generate a lot of IC hostility if you do it.
And as a final note, 3ed rules also do NOT allow undead to be critically struck, no matter their surprise or lack of mobility. Critical strike is premised mostly on striking vital organs. Lungs, kidneys, etc. Undead have no need of such organs, and feel no pain, so critical strike is entirely useless against them. There may be a few VERY special situations that allow this. My memory fails me here, but I think there may be some spells that grant this ability temporarily. It might also make sense for a weapon with holy damage applies to do it. And I'm almost certain some prestige classes can get a feat that allows them to use critical strike against undead.
So there's a quick 3ed summary of backstab/critical strike. Obviously FK is a hybrid between 2ed and 3ed rules, but the general principles of both are the same iirc. No backstabbing undead, no backstabbing people who know you're there, and are warry of you.