The Crusade

[krelji]

With the old backstab my char sometimes dealt enough damage to kill a
dragon with it. With the new backstab, the damage was sufficient to put
someone unconscious, and my char is a weakling elf.

[Naga]

I've heard shadowy legends about 'cut throat' in the far distant past of Geas...you can all imagine what that must have done

skill cut throat
SKILL: cut throat SKILL: 0 KNOWLEDGE: 0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This indicates your ability to sneak behind your enemy and cut
the throat of your enemy wide open. This can be used as attack
and cause much damage, or, if your enemy is in a helpless state
you can perform it to kill instantly.

[luminier]

well there you have it.... iunno i still like the ol sneak in and gore to the abdomen....torso.... either leg.... either arm.... *smirk*... then again it has a higher miss rate. ive always love skills like cut throat and hit eyes... and sign language... all ones i have wanted to learn.

[tessa]

I think Tessa was one of the priviledged few to see it in action:

Someone makes a quick movement with his knife. Eeeeeks, you are hit by a
large spray of blood emanating from a wound in Xxx's throat! As the
rhythmic squirts grow weaker and weaker you wonder how much blood can flow
from a single wound.
Xxx died.

[endellion]

Okay, is there any place on the mud, or anyone that knows how to speak sign language. Now I am incredibly intrigued!

[tessa]

Okay, is there any place on the mud, or anyone that knows how to speak sign language. Now I am incredibly intrigued!

That's something to learn ICly.

[Furius]

I believe the backstabbing thing is silly, to be honest. If this was a real medieval setting, the doctrine of double effect would take care of this no problem. Backstab a bad guy? No problem for a 'good' guy, technically. Justifiable, morally.

A few comments made in this thread (and this one in particular) have been bothering me for a while, and although it seems to have died a while ago, I've achieved some very high level of geekdom in medieval philosophy, so I feel the need to comment on this.

The principle of "double effect" applies to effects, not actions, so it can't be used to legitimize some action that is, in and of itself, evil. Because backstabbing is defined in GEAS as evil, the principle doesn't apply here. Double effect kicks in where some otherwise legitimate action has a good (intended) outcome and an evil (unintended) outcome, the circumstances are serious enough to risk the evil outcome, and reasonable steps are taken to minimize the evil done.

Sticking to Aquinas, an action is evil if one of the following is evil:
1. The action itself.
2. The motive.
3. The circumstances.

So it is one thing to give to the poor, another thing to give to the poor because I robbed a bank and I'm trying to get rid of the money before I'm caught, and yet another to spend so much time giving to the poor that I forget to go to work and I lose my job and my kids starve.

It follows, also, that there is no motive and no set of circumstances can make an evil action good. (There are some apparent exceptions to this, such as killing in self-defense and stealing a loaf of bread from a rich neighbor to feed one's family, but because these actions are specifically defined in medieval thought not to be evil, they are not exceptions to this rule).

So, in IC terms, backstabbing is evil, and double effect can't justify it because it doesn't apply here.

[isengoo]

Except backstabbing isn't inherently evil. It has no effect on karma, only reputation.

But let's not go there again

[Abharsair]

Except backstabbing isn't inherently evil. It has no effect on karma, only reputation.

Not everything which can be considered evil is "punished" by the game. Sometimes because the system simply isn't smart enough, sometimes because we leave it to the players to determine and enforce it.

It's pretty simple really: if a guild decides that something is evil, and it's not contradicting what this guild stands for, then it's for them evil, and it's moot to argue OOCly whether this is right or not. So if the Crusaders (just as an example) would declare one day that "pink" is the color of Evil, and everyone wearing it is a supporter of the Big Bad One, then it's "evil" from their perspective. Whether it's punished by the system, or evil from our modern point of view, is completely irrelevant in that case.

But let's not go there again

Alrighty!

[lanyara]

Hope those thoughts aren't minded much ... but ...

If a raging ogre horde comes in and tries to kill the inhabitants of a village then I will try to stop them at all costs (if I care about the inhabitants of said village that is). Be it via negotiations or combat or whatever else.

In this regard I would not understand that backstab is something inherently viewed as disliked by the NPCs.

It could lead to odd scenarios:

- the NPCs hate you for using backstab, but you still saved their village because you killed that evil bastard that tried to murder all the NPCs in that village. Would they rather like of you to not save them? Well, perhaps they want of you to stop the ogres but don't use backstab ... still strange though.

or

- you don't use backstab and some NPCs die as a result.
Hmmmmm. Is that more evil? Would I like this situation if I would be such a NPC?

Of course this is not a very common scenario, because strong "good" guys will be there to stop those ogres anyway and they will hardly have to rely on backstab.

But for the sake of discussion, let's take an evil halfling (no, not Lanyara ...), and let's assume this halfling doesn't use the missile system, and thus is somewhat useless. And also can't toss spells or use miracles.
Still, that little evil dude trained how to use his knives for a long time, and goes on and slays ogre after ogre after ogre via backstab - and hence saves the village! That would be my hero! I'd give him cake! I'd instantly seek out to marry him with someone in that village! I'd rest him on a flower bed!

Why wouldn't evil guys be able to do exactly that actually?

It seems like an extreme black/white box thinking if they could not because this would be hated by the NPCs. It would be kind of nice to see "evil" characters do "good" actions (even if the methods would be "evil" or disliked by NPCs) without any repercussions at all or threat of having their aura "harmed" (and remember, in my opinion anyone who has an "evil" aura must have done something "evil" and is hence automatically someone I can engage or otherwise harass, so that his "karma" gets better again at least. This is something independent of the crusaders by the way! The system encourages conflict a lot, not only by opposing deities but also because karma affects karma.)

But the village folks probably - and currently - would dislike that little evil backstabbing halfling now even more because he used ... backstab. And just ... backstab alone. Hmmmmmm.

Granted, this is not reallife but ... if someone rescues me from someone else who wants to kill me in reallife then I really don't care how he does so.

I would be glad and I would loudly go on and praise him as being a very good person!!! (On a side note .. would be cool if the reputation of someone could be cheated by bribing or lying as well.)

Ok, we don't have a working god concept in reallife (resurrecting folks is difficult in reallife, but quite easy in the MUD) but still.

If I'd be a NPC I'd actually love ANYONE who helps or rescues me! Be it crusader be it Satho cleric be it ... anyone else. (A bit unlikely that a Satho cleric would rescue villagers ... actually, that is a big problem with evil characters. Really evil characters tend to care less about NPCs in general, and especially not care at all about "good NPCs". Imagine a livequest where a dragon attacks Arborea ... which evil character would bother to defend Arborea? Why would he really care?
Or what if a dragon attacks Asador ... would "good guys" come and defend Asador? Probably not. But this is off topic, I just wanted to give an example of scenarios. Perhaps the situation of rescuing villagers would more apply to "neutral evil" characters ... I dislike the DnD alignment concept a lot by the way.)

I have no problem at all that backstab is wanted to be used only by "evil" guys (or at least has repercussions if "good" guys use it), and the indicator that you target the spine in a sneaky way is a good hint that it is something extremely unfair and evil and hence disapproved by the general population. Basically a bit like the good old "cut throat" just less effective?

But if the gods don't regard this is an inherently evil action (with a karma change) then this simply can not be an "evil" action per se from the gods view.

Skinning and butchering humans seem to lead to a karma change and hence are "evil" per se (from the gods point of view). And everyone can find out in-game by asking the NPC cleric. (Sooner or later you should be able to "find out" what actions are disliked by certain deities.)

It's ok that guilds label different actions differently (what Satho clerics do is what makes sense for Sathonys, and hence is a "good action" for them) but the backstab issue seems more like a code of conduct (honour) assessed negatively by NPCs in certain areas, while at the same time ignored by the gods.

A headshot by someone with a bow who was sneaking or hiding and was unseen seems to be the exactly same issue (a code of conduct) - your target couldn't see you, you still instantly killed him (how is that fair?), and the NPCs don't have a problem with that. Or, you are a big tshahark and cut a halfling in two with your first hit. Or specials that would disable you instantly (knockouts), where you are helpless and as a result basically dead quickly (as you can tie someone up, remove weapons, armours etc.. etc..)

But NPCs don't have a problem with this ... hmm. Only with backstab. Hmm and perhaps with cut throat. I wonder if gods care about cut throat though. :)

I can however understand the reasoning that code alone can not account for all situations, it just seems a little bit odd when guilds declare it as an evil action but gods don't care at all about this (whereas skinning/butchering/cannibalism really seems to have a toll on your aura).

It is perfectly fine to roleplay any way how to see fit here, but if the gods don't care about it then I'll have a hard time accepting any reasoning by other characters that this can be an "evil" action per se similar to skinning/butchering etc... it really seems more like something that can be used to kill someone more efficiently/faster simply.

[per]

Playing Code's advocate a bit here: If you are sneaking about and backstabbing things during an orc raid and actually manage to kill some of them by your great skills by this, most people will not see you doing good deeds, but may notice you sneaking about. Are you fleeing like a coward, or using the opportunity to steal ? On whose side are you? Okay, so you killed an orc and someone saw you. Maybe you did that to escape town or get away with loot, or just got caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. Sure you could be acting nobly that time, but the code is there to quantify an incredibly complex number of variables and actions precisely by ignoring most, as they are too difficult to track, and sticking with the salient ones.

You are not ill-considered because you backstab here and there. You are considered suspicious because of the lifestyle you lead and potential motives that led you to master and use these skills. But in any case, killing an orc is not killing a townie..

[Sairina]

Just out of curiosity, as I have never heard of "cut throat", but it's in the help files - does it still exist?

[Delia]

To my best knowledge, it does not(correct me if I'm wrong). One could insta-kill with the skill if I understood it correctly and was really nasty to begin with.

[per]

Just out of curiosity, as I have never heard of "cut throat", but it's in the help files - does it still exist?

As mentioned previously, the skill is currently locked. It, "the code", still exists you could say, but it's not in game.

[Sairina]

This is a little off-topic, but I kind of like the idea of a "cut throat" skill... not as a way to kill instantly, of course, more as a regular combat special (similar to impale for swords/spears). It would be nice to have more diverse specials for daggers and knives, especially since they are not much of a threat on their own.

Sairina doesn't fight with knives, so maybe I'm missing something, but the only knife special I know of right now is leap attack - which, if I remember correctly, is basically rolling on the floor and lashing at the foe's legs. Now that's not exactly the first place I'd try to hit that orc with a knife, if I intended to kill it... and knives *can* be rather nasty if you know where to place them.

The special would probably require a lot of skill and have a high risk (maybe, as you'd have to get rather close to the enemy, a malus to stuff like protect/deflect/defense a moment or two after using it, longer if you failed badly). But with the right balance, I can't see what speaks against it. And as it's used openly in a fight, it could probably be used by both good and evil guys (unless the crusade decided to ban its use, I guess).

[luminier]

cut throat could be changed to something less lethal. I think it would be nice for a little more knife "special" diversity as well. I mean think of it. Goring someone in real life would kill them. Backstabbing someone in the head, would kill them. It's not much a stretch here to think something like cutthroat could be made less lethal than it once was. (plus it's oozing badass)

also, leap attack can hit anything, hand, leg, head, neck, anything.

[Olrane]

Thing is, "cut throat" doesn't really add much diversity. It's got too much overlap with backstab. If there were any assassins around, backstab and other tricks are plenty, trust me.

As a side note, I'd like to have a command for different "coups de grace" to be done on helpless foes. For example, I can't say how many times I've wanted to have someone arrested with a knife to their throat, with a code supported way to cut it should the need arise.

[luminier]

I've heard the ability to instantly kill someone when under arrest or helpless was not added for balance. But really the only time I could see it being a problem is if I randomly was rendered unconscious by like... a shockbolt or paralysis and then the enemy would have an instant win. But really, arresting me, cutting off all my limbs, stripping me down and then fighting me is the same thing as killing me, it's just a lot slower.

[Sairina]

As, I said, I never fight with a knife myself, so I don't know the leap special well... I just assumed from the help files. But OK, if you can land a hit any place it's not that bad... though I'd still like to see other knife specials. And I don't think that "cut throat" would need to be an assassins special only, if it was used in a fight instead of against a helpless foe, and if it didn't provide an instant kill. It might still deal good damage, though... and I'd think that it might add actual diversity (besides different fighting styles) if only the mechanics were different enough from leap - like other drawbacks than falling if you fail (being more vulnerable to attacks for a while?), less chance to be successful (as you aim at one location only), but higher or critical damage if you do land a hit.

[isengoo]

Backstab crit + leap crit = pretty much dead target. Not too hard to accomplish, either.