Backstab vs. Sneak Attack

[Ashrem Bayle]

So it sounds like "Backstab" may be an ability that comes back. I will if this a replacement for sneak attack, or another ability.

Honestly, I'd like to see Rogues get both. Sneak Attack damage would be for flanking or whenever the target is aware of the Rogue, but unable to defend himself properly.

Backstab would deal a lot more damage, but would only work during the surprise round, when the Rogue attacks an enemy that has no idea he is there. I'd be fine with that dealing more damage, since these situations are pretty rare and you only get one per encounter.

 

[Nifft]

I'd be tickled by:
- Slower Sneak Attack progression, plus
- Bonus dice (+2d6 or double or something like that) if you catch your foe flat-footed on the surprise round (or first round) of combat.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Li Shenron]

Sneak Attack already encompasses ambushes and backstabbing. A separate mechanic would be redundant.

On the contrary, I'd be glad if coup de grace gets folded into sneak attack.

 

[Frostmarrow]

I'd be happy if sneak attack is an option in a martial feat tree. Use the ability to make 1d4 and 1d6 weapons viable in combat instead of using it to rebalance rogues.

 

[Felon]

So it sounds like "Backstab" may be an ability that comes back. I will if this a replacement for sneak attack, or another ability.

Honestly, I'd like to see Rogues get both. Sneak Attack damage would be for flanking or whenever the target is aware of the Rogue, but unable to defend himself properly.

Backstab would deal a lot more damage, but would only work during the surprise round, when the Rogue attacks an enemy that has no idea he is there. I'd be fine with that dealing more damage, since these situations are pretty rare and you only get one per encounter.

I'm not clear on what you mean by Backstab being a separate ability that "comes back".

I'm always surprised that many folks don't accept this, but backstabbing was rolled up into sneak attack. Sneak-attacking with flank is supposed to be stabbing the guy in the back when he turns the other way. It wasn't called "backstab" because of the complications that arise when people get all literal-minded (and an unfortunately, there is a large contingent of folks playing the game who are fond of literal interpretations). Were it called backstab, folks kept bringing facing into the matter, even when 3e explicitly doesn't concern itself with facing (thankfully so, since I don't want to have to keep spinning my mini around every time something catches my character's attention). Also, many monsters lack "backs" in a literal sense of the word (but could still be attacked while looking in another direction).

The one thing that really annoys me about the rules for Hide and Move Silently is that they require cover or concealment. This means that you generally can't just creep up behind someone unless they're standing next to a hedge or a fog bank (of course, if they're actually standing in the hedge or fog bank, they have concealment themselves and are thus immune to sneak attack). I'd ceretainly like to see backstab come back in the form of some "creeping up" rules.

I personally would have preferred that sneak attack had been two separate abilities. One for striking flat-footed opponents, and one for striking flanked targets. That would make it a modular ability that we could offer classes like ninja and dread commando without coming with a "Sudden Strike" ability that's identical in all ways but one. And while we're at it,

 

[Nifft]

I personally would have preferred that sneak attack had been two separate abilities. One for striking flat-footed opponents, and one for striking flanked targets.

Agree. That would make it easier to implement feats like Ambush (or whatever it was called from Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved; gives +1d6 damage vs. flat-footed targets on first round of combat).

And while we're at it,

Yes?

Cheers, -- N

 

[Felon]

Yes?

Heh. I was going to extend the design into the scout's skirmish ability, which should also use the "ambush" aspect of sneak attack. Currently, skirmish is kind of dumb in that its damage bonus is generally useless during a surprise round when a scout ha the drop on a foe, yet he can get it in the next round even if his target is no longe flat-footed....?

 

[Gentlegamer]

I prefer the more restricted use of the old Backstab ability. I think Rogues/Thieves ought to have to get the drop on someone to use it, and generally not in melee.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I thikn the use of the word "Backstab" in the combat example was merely flavor text.

 

[psionotic]

My guess would be that the Sneak Attack remains pretty much as it is, and 'Backstab,' if it exists at all, becomes the name of a new Rogue maneuver (perhaps purchased with a talent or a feat) that they can 'add on' to any normal sneak attack. Something like:

Backstab: Once per encounter, initiator can declare any sneak attack to be a Backstab. If the attack lands, it is considered to be a critical hit.

Or something similar...