Thanks for finding this Tom. I knew I had seen the diagrams somewhere and it
turns out to be on the page right before this stuff. :)

I've sent an email to Paul to start the development discussion on these issues.
I'm hoping we can implement them without too much trouble. In which case it
souns like we'll be ahead of FRUA on this topic.

You have impressive patience to have performed the kind of testing you did. I am
sure I will try and use this to mour advantage in the future. 8^>

-manikus

--- In UAForever@yahoogroups.com, nologgie@... wrote:
>
> The First Edition Dungeon Master's Guide says the following about special
> types of attacks:
>
> Flank attacks: All flank attacks negate any defender armor class addition
> for shield. Attacks against a rear flank, where the opponent is virtually
> unable to view the attackers, negate dexterity armor class bonus.
>
> Rear Attacks: Opponents attacking from the rear gain a +2 to hit, negate
> any consideration for shield, and also negate any consideration for dexterity.
>
> Stunned, Prone or Motionless Opponents: Treat all such opponents as if
> being attacked from the rear, but in this case the "to hit" bonus is +4 rather
> than +2.
>
> FRUA is very inconsistent about displaying the message 'Attacks From
> Behind,' and I'm not sure whether it gives any attack bonus for it.
>
> I tried testing it by making a 'monster' fighter with a dexterity of 24*,
> equipped with leather armor and a +5 shield (adjusted A/C of -3). With the +2
> for rear attacks, this should have resulted in a 13 point THAC0 difference
> (65% hit probability) between front and rear attacks. When I ran two
> identical 5th level fighters against it, hits from the rear exceeded hits from
the
> front by about 4% through a series of 120 attacks. Less than half the
> attacks were hits, so I wasn't bottoming out. The 4% difference is within the
> margin of error for either a 10% or 0% bonus, so I don't know if it's there or
> not.
>
> FOR DC
>
> The +2 from behind looks pretty easy.
>
> Tracking the armor class adjustments for a shield (including +n shields),
> and dexterity could give four different armor classes based upon attack
> direction and surprise (a surprise attack negates dexterity, but armor and
shield
> would still be in play if it came from the front).
>
> I think it would be really neat if we could have all this, but it looks
> like it could become very cumbersome very quickly. If we could have one, I'd
go
> with negating dexterity over negating the shield. If we only get the +2 for
> rear attacks, it's at least as good as we got with FRUA. Maybe better.
>
> Tom
>
> *Note for FRUA testers: Changing monster ability scores in the FRUA monster
> editor only changes the first of the paired ability scores in the
> MONSTxxx.DAT file, which has no effect other than to display an asterisk by
the
> original ability score if the (friendly) monster is viewed during combat. Hex
> editing or CHAREDIT is needed to effectively change the scores for the purpose
> of bonuses.
> It took me a while to figure this one out.
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 6/17/2009 22:36:42 Central America Standard Time,
> steve_mcdee@... writes:
>
> >
> > Perhaps conceptually it should be the victim's AC that is modified. But
> > positive modification of AC and negative modification of THAC0 are of course
> > equivalent.
> >
> > The Secret of the Silver Blades Journal (and other gold box journals and
> > rule books) contains the following about attacking from behind (top of page
> > 10 of the SSB Journal):
> >
> > "An attack is successful if the random number is greater than or equal to
> > the attacker's THAC0 minus the target's AC. THAC0 may be modified by range,
> > attacking from the rear, magic weapons, and magic spells among other
> > things."
> >
> > It doesn't say exactly how THAC0 is affected. There may be a chance that
> > the target will realise they are being attacked from behind and turn around
> > - if so, I don't know how that reaction is calculated.
> >
> > Note that "attacking from the rear" is a far less onerous requirement than
> > the requirements for a backstab - the SSB journal says of backstabbing:
> >
> > "A thief will stab if he attacks a target from exactly opposite the first
> > character to attack the target. The thief may not back stab if he has
> > readied armor heavier than leather (Exception: Elfin Chain Mail). A back
stab
> > has a better chance of hitting and does additional damage."
> >
> > A single class thief cannot ready armour heavier than leather or elfin
> > chain, but a multi-class thief can: so that qualification on the ability to
> > backstab is important. Note that backstabbing "has a better chance of
> > hitting" - ie it affects THAC0 as well as damage.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> > To: UAForever@yahoogroups.com
> > From: manikus5@...
> > Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 03:30:18 +0000
> > Subject: [UAForever] Re: BackStabbing
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I don't believe there is anything explicit in the GoldBox games or in
> > FRUA, and I'm not sure how one would test this. :)
> > I do however think that there might be something in the 1e literature
> > about this, and I vaguely recall a diagram from basic D&D that shows
> > zones...but I think that the victim's AC may be modified instead of the
attacker's
> > THAC0. I'll see what I can find.
> >
> > -manikus
> >
> > --- In UAForever@yahoogroups.com, Steve McDonald <steve_mcdee@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm pretty sure that FRUA also displayed the text "attacks from behind"
> > in some circumstances where the attack came from behind. I have a feeling
> > attackers may get a bonus to THAC0 if they attack from behind. Can anyone
> > shed any more light on this?
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> <BR><BR>**************<BR>Download the AOL Classifieds Toolbar for local deals
at your
> fingertips.
>
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolclassifieds/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000004)<\
/HTML>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>