Hey, even my players don't make that much use of hirelings and henchmen, I think because the H&Hs die all the time. Which to me seems like a feature rather than a bug in that the PCs aren't the ones dying . . .

I think the guilt starts getting to them.

Blackadder23 wrote:

In one of my AD&D campaigns, all of the hirelings came from a guild called "The Red Cloaks".

Are they at all similar to the guild called "The Red Shirts"?
 

Rastus_Burne wrote:

Yeah sure, it is about the game you want to play. The thief gets fairly quick level progression compared with other classes, which is a great perk, plus their abilities are very useful in a dungeon/urban context. I really enjoy the thief personally. I've played cleric-less games, and do not mind breaking outside the realm of archetypical parties, but I do think the game has to work for the players too. I would rather hand out a few extra backstabs every now and then, than have a party constantly dying. But you're right: it is an ability that is best handled sparingly. 

Situational for me as well.  Thats why they have those other skills to go ahead and get in position.  Back stab gets used a lot more when the party plans for it.

Morgan
 

Devinbattery wrote:

I'm much more liberal with backstabs personally. In the described situation, I'd probably have the thief roll a hide in shadows check and then, if successful a move silently check with a hefty bonus since the other group would not know where he is coming from and if that fails, a suprise check. Then if all that fails, no backstab, otherwise I'd still give them a chance, they still have to hit. Thieves are prone to miss a lot of the time anyway, so I think my ruling is pretty fair.

I waffle on this myself, Devin. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

Also, welcome aboard.

Welcome to the board Devin!

Thread Resurrection!

Reading this thread I realize I'm super liberal with backstabbing! 
We have an assassin and a henchman thief in the party (both played by the same player) and I allow more pulp/cinematic use of backstabbing. Basically, if there is a good description and good cover during combat I'll let thief types roll hide or move silently to slip off for a round and maneuver in for a backstab if the combat warrants. It creates a nice tactical element for the thief player to watch and take advantage of. To me, it makes them naturally play like a rogue, which is pretty cool.

Not saying this is better than the old school thief way. We just have a lot of combat and action in our games and it gives the thief types something to do.

Vetus Miles wrote:

Question about Assassin’s “Snipe” ability.
If requirements are met and assassination roll fails.
Would you allow it to still be a backstab? I know the rules doesn’t say it but I would be inclined to allow it.

It actually does say, on page 95: "Normal backstab damage rules per the thief class apply if the result is a hit but not an automatic assassination." Nothing under the Sniper Attack description suggests it works any differently than any other assassination attempt, so this would apply IMO.

Vetus Miles wrote:

Also, has anyone ever used the pick pockets ability as a sleight of hand cover up for a surprise backstab during parlay?

I wouldn't allow an assassination attempt against someone on his guard under any circumstances. I don't even allow backstabbing in combat unless the backstabber is genuinely hidden before combat even begins. These are primarily noncombat actions IMO.