Re: RE: Backstab.

From: Ghost Shaidan (
Date: 02/06/97

> On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Mental wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Ryan Linn wrote:
> [why don't you just add some delay to the backstab command?]
> > Command lag would not prevent a backstab flee loop, since the player 
> > leaves combat, waits, and steps back in.  But that will at least slow 
> > them down (not by much.)


> Anyway, if you delay the person when they backstab, that will force them 
> to spend at least one round of combat [depending upon how much you delay 
> them] fighting the mob.  This will help discourage thieves who want to 
> get quick free xp.  I like this solution better than automatically making 
> a mob immune to backstab after it's backstabbed once.  Although, making 
> it an affect might not be too bad -- one that sets the AWARE bit for a 
> time, so it'll discourage multiple successive backstabs without giving 
> the mob an advantage permanently it has no business having. :)

a wait state will NOT STOP a good player.  let them get a few levels
normally...set your wimpy to 50% (max) and go backstab a mob, the first
attack of that mob, will cause you to flee, NO MATTER THE COMBAT DELAY!
the delay will kick in AFTER you flee, so this isnt the answer.

I tried it, and this is what my players came up with.. so i went to the
aware bit toggled on the mobs with the first Backstab. 

If you dont think the aware bit should be setworks, make a new flag
SEMI_AWARE and give the mob a % chance per level difference or something,
or just modify thenormal aware flag to do this, that will give high level
thieves the ability to knock out lower level mobs (like they probably
should be able to) and give lower level punk thieves a smack in the face
when the higher level mobs notice them.

My .03$ (experience and inflation)

hope it helps.

Ghost Shaidan, 4000 (

| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
|   |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/18/00 PST