Pages

Showing posts with label grognard. Show all posts
Showing posts with label grognard. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 23, 2021

I need a ruling!

Dear Dragon Magazine: 

One of my players was in a boat and wanted to attempt to backstab a shark that was attacking the boat. 

I posed this question to the google hangout old school grognard chat that I'm a part of.  For the sake of argument I was playing basic fantasy.  Here my friends are the wonderful answer's that I received.  To keep with the anonymity of the chat group, I've just labelled everyone who took part in the conversation with numbers. 

1:  Does the shark have a backside? 

Technically the sneak attack is because the target is unaware of the attack about to hit.  I don't see why the thief would not be allowed to sneak attack target who was not aware.  

2:  Backstab is only with discernible "back" so shark is eliminated altogether. 

Grognard's quoting different editions....

2:  old school technically "unnoticed"  but considering a sharks eyes depending on species are positioned in such a way as to see above their back, the point is moot.  It's called  BACK stab, so it is clearly meant for humanoids only! 

1:  sharks have a spine, and therefore a back. 

3:  and you have to account for the fish's lateral line being able to detect living creatures in the vicinity.

2:  a spine not a back so WRONG! take a biology class again.

3:  the shark is always hunting, always hungry killing machine.  your pathetic sneaky monkey skills have no power over 400 million years of predation perfection! 

1:  I was going to say that a shark's eyeball positioning actually allow it to see nearly 360 degrees around its body and would therefore almost be impossible to attack it unawares. 

HERE'S THE MOST IMPORTANT PART 

1: So while the rules would probably allow the attack a common sense approach to biology would probably prevent the attack  However any good DM worth his salt would probably make a judgement call in this situation and allow the sneak attack to happen for the sake of the story and fun of the game. 

Here's the official rule from Basic Fantasy SRD.


Finally, Thieves can perform a Sneak Attack any time they are behind an opponent in melee and it is reasonably likely the opponent doesn't know the Thief is there. The GM may require a Move Silently or Hide roll to determine this. The Sneak Attack is made with a +4 attack bonus and does double damage if it is successful. A Thief usually can't make a Sneak Attack on the same opponent twice in any given combat.

The Sneak Attack can be performed with any melee (but not missile) weapon, or may be performed bare-handed (in which case subduing damage is done; see the Encounter section for details). Also, the Sneak Attack can be performed with the “flat of the blade;” the bonuses and penalties cancel out, so the attack has a +0 attack bonus and does normal damage; the damage done in this case is subduing damage.

The one thing that I didn't realize was that a sneak attack only applies to Melee weapons.  In the case of the shark the player was attempting to use his bow.  I've decided that I'm fine with missile weapons as well.  In my game I will allow a sneak attack as long as the player can remain unseen, or the monster is unaware.  the only weapons not useable for a sneak attack would be two handed weapons. 

What I ended up doing was allowing the attack because when I described it the sharks were only aware of the boat and were running into it trying to flip it over.  I allowed it for one round.  There were 2 sharks and after 1 died I made the other shark make a morale check (which it lost).  It decided to swim away.  I mentioned it to the Grognard chat, which brought up a whole lotta "sharks shouldn't make morale checks! they are sharks, they are hungry, they should have a morale of 12!". 

In BF the bull shark has a morale of 7. 

What would you have done? 

 


Friday, March 2, 2018

You know what? I'm perfectly happy being a Grognard

Honestly I am.  I've been involved in a few discussions latetly that have led to the "Old school vs New school" thing.  As much as I understand both sides of an argument, and I am empathetic to were someone is coming from (and vice versa hopefully), I still have the view point of Old School being better.  I get it, it's not a contest obviously.

Here's a case in point:
At some point I'll probably have to run a game for the new 5e group.  I started writing out a adventure plot outline thingamabob. Thoughts running thru my head as follows:  Alright check the CRs, make sure they have time to rest safely, hopefully there is a bit of roleplay in here, but not too much because some people don't like it.  Obviously the CR thing is highly annoying coming from an old school guy stand point.  I have to make sure that the encounter is tough, and level wise it matches but they don't die? Why can't they die? Well first things first, it takes for fucking ever to create a character.

I had a discussion with a friend of mine about "balance", and he basically said "Your not going to chance my mind, I like balance".  Balance is a DM illusion.  In this new school game I can fudge the whole damn thing behind the screen.  However next time I DM I won't be doing that at all.  Roll in front of the screen and watch with glee when the terror strikes.

The simple gist is that I understand how to be a new school player/DM, but when I run a game it's going to feel like an old school game.  Because that's what I am.  Balance is getting thrown out the window.

"There is an old dragon who lives in a cave not far from here" says the Innkeeper.  "I've also heard that a bunch of kobolds have been robbing people a few miles from town".  

There's your two choices.  Now keep in mind that dragon is not a small youngling (like in lost mines of phandelver), nah he's a big ugly bugger who has the whole legendary stats, the ability to do things within your turn etc.

So if the players want to take the bait at first level, they can go right ahead.  There is a very good chance they will end up as a crispy treat.

I've recently been watching Venger's youtube channel and he's been talking a lot about the old school aesthetic and how to bring it to new games.  Here's the thing, it all comes down to how you want to play it, and every DM is different.  It seems that the games I've been involved in are very by the book.  Which I'm okay with, but if it's my game I intend to run it differently.

There was a good article about session 0, and I will probably do that at some point.  Once I get everything figured out first (house rules wise).

I also think that I'm going to stop getting into long drawn out conversations about this.  Because it's very hard and time consuming to sway someones opinion and honest there's no point.  Play the game the way you want to. 

The whole balance conversation started when I sent this video to my friend. The guy brings up some wonderful points, and he sells playing old school very well.

Anyways, long story short I'm a grognard and I'm totally fine with it.  And I think that how you learned to play the game will always affect how you actually run the game.  So you know what?  "It's a big world and some of the monsters are going to be above your pay grade".