Backstab

Hi Alex,
Tonight I have a bit of free time and I thought I would spend it strengthening my rules knowledge of ACKS. At the moment, I find myself reviewing the Backstab class feature. Could you provide some examples of where Backstab is allowable during combat and where it wouldn’t? I started D&D in the Red Box Days and have progressed up to 4e. 3e and 4e altered the Backstab term to Sneak Attack (though 4e has brought Backstab back in a different manner)and the rules were pretty concise on when it was allowed and when it wasn’t. I would like to be sure that we are using the Backstab rules correctly.
I understand that the thief needs to succeed on both a Move Silently and Hide in Shadows check. Can this be done in the same round? Does Hide in Shadows actually require shadows or can one use cover from being around a corner? Can he attempt a hide in shadows after moving on his turn? Can the thief essentially try for Backstab every round? Then there is the Acrobatics Proficiency. As written, it seems like an attempt can be made every round - is that the intent? Is there a penalty for failure - doesn’t seem to be but just want to be sure?
Basically there are a number of interactions here and I just want to be clear we are handling it properly. Thanks a bunch!

Another question, this one regarding the bargaining prof. Buy goods at 10% less and sell for 10% more. Has this proficiency been balanced for mercantile ventures and is it meant for use with large scale purchases like that? I’m assuming yes, but just want to be sure. And if so, does it make sense that all merchants who are buying/selling large quantities of merchandise would also have the skill and therefore the final price would be based on an opposed roll?

Hi Duskreign!
A thief can backstab under the following circumstances: (a) the enemy is surprised, (b) the enemy is retreating, (c) the enemy is unaware of the thief, (d) the thief uses acrobatics to tumble behind him.
To answer your questions:
Move Silently and Hide in Shadows check. Can this be done in the same round? Yes.
Does Hide in Shadows actually require shadows or can one use cover from being around a corner? Being around a corner is simply a case of not being in line of sight. If you’re not in line of sight, they just can’t see you. Hide in Shadows would be used when it’s shadows, or when it’s not full cover.
Can he attempt a hide in shadows after moving on his turn? That’s very contextual. If he is moving silently and has so far not been seen, and then wants to take cover as he ends his move, sure. But you can’t hide in shadows while you’re being watched - it’s not invisibility, and there’s no 3.5e “hide in plain sight”.
Can the thief essentially try for Backstab every round? No, unless he has Acrobatics.
Then there is the Acrobatics Proficiency. As written, it seems like an attempt can be made every round - is that the intent? Is there a penalty for failure - doesn’t seem to be but just want to be sure? The penalty for failure is that he can’t move that round.

Another question, this one regarding the bargaining prof. Buy goods at 10% less and sell for 10% more. Has this proficiency been balanced for mercantile ventures and is it meant for use with large scale purchases like that? I’m assuming yes, but just want to be sure. And if so, does it make sense that all merchants who are buying/selling large quantities of merchandise would also have the skill and therefore the final price would be based on an opposed roll?
Any merchant is going to have Bargaining, yes. I generally assume the merchants have (5-city class) ranks in bargaining. So in a class VI town, the adventurer with Bargaining is the shark who preys on bumpkin preasants. In a class I town, the merchants have 4 ranks of bargaining, so odds are the adventurer is the prey :wink:

Thanks Alex. Very helpful. One more quick question. Can you move and make an acrobatics check at the end of a move?

Duskreign, under the rules as written, you cannot. If a player wanted to do an acrobatics check in lieu of an attack, after a move, I would likely permit it under most contexts, but I would not, e.g., permit an acrobatics check to be incorporated into a charge.

Thanks.

“I generally assume the merchants have (5-market class) ranks in bargaining. So in a class VI town, the adventurer with Bargaining is the shark who preys on bumpkin peasants. In a class I town, the merchants have 4 ranks of bargaining, so odds are the adventurer is the prey”
Might be useful to include this somewhere in the bargaining rules as a guideline. Or, perhaps, in general if it similarly applicable to various NPC skills. In my experience, stuff like this is great if you need a stat for an NPC on the fly and you don’t necessarily want to make it up on the spot/take the time to create the whole character.

I agree. Duskreign’s minion and I were discussing this just yesterday.

I’m struck by Bargaining, and I confess it ‘feels’ wrong to me.
There are some proficiencies that can be selected to an implied cap of 3 times - Alchemy, Art*, Animal Husbandry, Craft, Healing, etc… (And Engineering which has a cap of 4). These proficiencies represent a rich Specialism in a chosen field, and the cap represents the limit of that specialism - you are a Master Engineer, or a professional Alchemist.
There are other proficiencies that don’t have an implied cap - Art*, Animal Training, Collegiate Wizardry etc… These proficiencies represent fields where the depth of specialism isn’t there, but where each selection gives an additional area of expertise (Broad rather than Deep).
*Art is in both categories because you can be both a Deep specialist in a given field, but you can also choose multiple fields (e.g. Sculpture, Painting, etc…)
So what bugs me about Bargaining?
There’s no cap on it so in terms of the consistent treatment of the rules it ought to be a Broad proficiency, but multiple purchases provide Deep Specialism in bargaining rolls which suggests it ought to be capped.
Is that a deliberate intention, or an accident of game design?
I confess there may be other proficiencies that act the same way, but Bargaining struck me because it was under discussion here.

Interesting observation, James.