Dark Souls Without Backstabs

Anyone ever gotten backstabbed to death, and wondered what Dark Souls would be like if their weren't any?

Thrust weapons will have more advantages. Spears would be more OP. Aggressiveness would be hard to counter unless you know how to parry. I have fought many times with no bs rules it's fun.

I disagree. Sure, BS can get annoying, but so can spears that poke and roll, for example. BS can be predicted and countered. The only thing that can't be predicted is lag. And, that applies to everything.

The more we dull down the combat (in the spirit of being "fair"), the more dull the combat becomes.

No backstab Fight Clubs provide the most fun in PvP for me. Even when I invade I don't backstab, and because of the way I fight I get backstabbed only seldomly.

To answer your question, I think no backstabbing would increase the overall experience of Dark Souls because I've gone through periods of both only backstabs and no backstabs, and I enjoy the no backstabs much more.

I believe backstabs should remain in the game, though. People should get backstabbed when healing or casting spells right in front of you.

The Letter X wrote:No backstab Fight Clubs provide the most fun in PvP for me. Even when I invade I don't backstab, and because of the way I fight I get backstabbed only seldomly.

To answer your question, I think no backstabbing would increase the overall experience of Dark Souls because I've gone through periods of both only backstabs and no backstabs, and I enjoy the no backstabs much more.

I believe backstabs should remain in the game, though. People should get backstabbed when healing or casting spells right in front of you.

You also out range everyone, When it comes to those katanas my rapier/dark silver tracer cant get thru.

Reducing the use of backstabs in PvP could make it much more enjoyable for those who hate dying to players who rely entirely on backstabs, though I like how they are in PvE.

I think they need to be changed; for instance, the BS window needs to be drastically reduced in both PvE and PvP and I'm of a mind (this is probably a wee bit unpopular) that certain weapons shouldn't be allowed to BS at all - to generalize, all those weapons that perform that ludicrous 2-step BS animation.

Having said that, I don't think backstabs should eliminated from the game because at the end of the day it's an attack that makes sense. In real sword combat backstabs are possible so why not in DkS? Again though, I still hold that drastic changes are needed.

eliminate backstabs? not a very good idea in my opinion. me thinks it would skew the balance of the game too much.

should backstabs be less exploitable? hells yeah! unfortunately lag is harsh mistress and i'm afraid backstabs will always be easily exploitable.

I would change one thing and one thing only about backstabs. The name. I would call it "Critical Attack from behind." A backstab implies stealth was used and the person was stabbed in a focal attack point to maximize the output of a smaller weapon (ex: lung stab to cause death and prevent the victim from screaming).

In Dark Souls though, the mechanic is more attuned to martial arts techniques in which certain orientations of the victim make it near impossible to adequately protect oneself. In this instance, the person has allowed (or been tricked into) exposing their back which is always a vulnerable area, even if the person knows an attack is coming. There is very little self protection available except attack avoidance as opposed to front or side attacks which allow better defensive maneuvers including blocking, parrying and even simply absorbing the blow with trained muscle techniques. The back has none of those. As a great real world parallel, when I was first learning high kick techniques with martial arts, one of the best pieces of advice for male practitioners is to always place one hand down (aka, protect the nads). Failure to do so allows your opponent a free attack on another region which has little to no defense.

Getting back to Dark Souls and armed combat comparing to realistic scenarios, if I hit you in the back with a weapon, whether I'm behind you or from the side (remember complaints about wide angles on the "backstab" mechanic) I will very likely kill you or cause enough damage to make the fight mine. The injury in and of itself to that part of the body is far more likely to cause catastrophic injury than other parts of the body. Hence the critical from behind concept rather than backstab. I think, as a whole, we've been conditioned to assume critical attacks only come from "surprise" elements like stealth or parrying. However, some opportunities are critical attacks regardless of conditions.

Now, some weapons have a higher critical bonus, reflecting that they're easier to pinpoint critical zones of the body. This is similar to surgical implements. I can cut you open easy with a broadsword but if you really want that appendix out safely most doctors find that a scalpel is much more accurate. This also encourages the use of these weapons in game as it allows for another fighting technique. I know larger weapons can get an advantage with a critical from behind attack too but some weapons really get an advantage, they just need to specialize more.

Almost last but not least, the animations are just for looks and bring two things:
1. Adrenaline for the player landing one, just like a riposte animation
2. A very emphasized statement that someone just got jacked up

EDIT: As a Great Scythe User I can still admit, like Pendant said, my Riposte and critical from behind attacks are indeed ludicrous

Finally, lag still sucks

skarekrow13 wrote:I would change one thing and one thing only about backstabs. The name. I would call it "Critical Attack from behind." A backstab implies stealth was used and the person was stabbed in a focal attack point to maximize the output of a smaller weapon (ex: lung stab to cause death and prevent the victim from screaming).

In Dark Souls though, the mechanic is more attuned to martial arts techniques in which certain orientations of the victim make it near impossible to adequately protect oneself. In this instance, the person has allowed (or been tricked into) exposing their back which is always a vulnerable area, even if the person knows an attack is coming. There is very little self protection available except attack avoidance as opposed to front or side attacks which allow better defensive maneuvers including blocking, parrying and even simply absorbing the blow with trained muscle techniques. The back has none of those. As a great real world parallel, when I was first learning high kick techniques with martial arts, one of the best pieces of advice for male practitioners is to always place one hand down (aka, protect the nads). Failure to do so allows your opponent a free attack on another region which has little to no defense.

Getting back to Dark Souls and armed combat comparing to realistic scenarios, if I hit you in the back with a weapon, whether I'm behind you or from the side (remember complaints about wide angles on the "backstab" mechanic) I will very likely kill you or cause enough damage to make the fight mine. The injury in and of itself to that part of the body is far more likely to cause catastrophic injury than other parts of the body. Hence the critical from behind concept rather than backstab. I think, as a whole, we've been conditioned to assume critical attacks only come from "surprise" elements like stealth or parrying. However, some opportunities are critical attacks regardless of conditions.

Now, some weapons have a higher critical bonus, reflecting that they're easier to pinpoint critical zones of the body. This is similar to surgical implements. I can cut you open easy with a broadsword but if you really want that appendix out safely most doctors find that a scalpel is much more accurate. This also encourages the use of these weapons in game as it allows for another fighting technique. I know larger weapons can get an advantage with a critical from behind attack too but some weapons really get an advantage, they just need to specialize more.

Almost last but not least, the animations are just for looks and bring two things:
1. Adrenaline for the player landing one, just like a riposte animation
2. A very emphasized statement that someone just got jacked up

Finally, lag still sucks

Wow you wrote alot! : D

Lol...

The question is then: did you read a lot?

I hate backstabs. That being said, i understand the mechanics aren't the problem (as much) as the users/players. Backstab has a bit of a large window, which i would like to see shrunk in dark souls 2. But the real issue is the LAG backstabs. Countering backstabs is part of combat, and i'm fine with that. I just can't deal with being randomly stabbed when i couldnt see it coming.

I don't think removing backstabs would help. In a fit of anger i would attest it should be removed, but thinking on it at all. Its not the real issue. We just need dedicated servers and preferably a smaller backstab hitbox. It would still be nice if having a shiled on your back at least reduced damage from a backstab. But i can only imagine the abuse of that.

Sadly, in any game like this. Any PVP game, will never be "fair". Someone will always feel cheated.and in alot of ways its the truth but its the world we live in. Your best bet is letting it go.

But i still hate being backstabbed.

Then 90% of the playerbase would stack poise and it would become a stun-locking game. It's already annoying when you're fighting someone in full Havel's, with a small weapon, and he backs himself into a corner to heal. Nothing you can do. Now imagine that tactic being used by 90% of the players, but they don't even need to find a corner. Doesn't sound fun.

Backstabs aren't perfect as they are, hell they're almost broken! But removing them would be a terrible idea.

I think every weapon that doesnt have the crit bonus should be able to bs I mean some weapons look stupid backstabing and not now that there is no ninja tank house wifes you have people with no armor that rely on bs to win. Yes its annoying but dont remove them just tweak them to make it somewhat enjoyable.

With the amount of pyro/magic people rely on, backstabs is my only realistic option at the moment

Feelsgoodman landing one with hornet ring. Apparently ds2 will have dedicated servers so hopefully some more proper sword fights.

Ever get backstabbed by a demon greataxe buffed?? Intant death : p

-Backstabs are good on paper. Lag ruins the intention of the developers with regards to how backstabs were supposed to work in game. Its not the hitbox thats the problem per say, its the tail that follows the hitbox (zoomstabs, aka telestabs, etcetcetc).
-I dont know how to fix the issue actually. You cant really fix lag (dedicated servers wont necessarily fix this), so I dont know how they can fix backstabs to make them "perfect".
-I have an idea however. What if there was a "meter" or "gauge" of some sort that would only allow a backstab to be performed if the backstab recipient had not rolled for 1 full second? Furthermore, what if you could not perform a backstab for a 1/2 second after you roll?
-This would stop people from being able to perform a rollstab and also stop people from being backstabbed while rolling. When the intended recipient of a backstab rolled, considering lag, the intiniator of the backstab would not be able to perform said backstab because the intended backstabee had not registered as "not rolling" for 1 second. Even though the intended backstabee had registered as standing still for a fraction of a second on the "backstabor's" end.....make sense? lol
-Through this method pivot stabs would be unaffected as well as lock-off backstabs...just a thought.

I'd hate the idea of removing backstabs, yes they can be annoying but for me that almost completely eliminates the chance of winning against someone that uses a full giants set in PVP. Sometimes the only way I can win against someone using that set is to either change to another weapon (allowing them time to get hits in on me because I'm incompetent) or rely on using performing a backstab when they let their guard down.

I can agree though that making it to were certain weapons can't backstab would be alright. I'd really only like to see greataxes and ultra greatswords have the inability to backstab though.

I have a hard time believing some one can stab someone in the back with a club...just saying...

Samurainova wrote:I have a hard time believing some one can stab someone in the back with a club...just saying...

LOL!!! Thats true ^^

Lol....That's why I prefer the term "critical from behind." My Great Scythe is a stab but holy jebus is it crazy looking.

skarekrow13 wrote:Lol....That's why I prefer the term "critical from behind." My Great Scythe is a stab but holy jebus is it crazy looking.

Lol it would cut someone in halfway down the middle if you actually stabbed them like that! XD

tinypantha wrote:

The Letter X wrote:No backstab Fight Clubs provide the most fun in PvP for me. Even when I invade I don't backstab, and because of the way I fight I get backstabbed only seldomly.

To answer your question, I think no backstabbing would increase the overall experience of Dark Souls because I've gone through periods of both only backstabs and no backstabs, and I enjoy the no backstabs much more.

I believe backstabs should remain in the game, though. People should get backstabbed when healing or casting spells right in front of you.

You also out range everyone, When it comes to those katanas my rapier/dark silver tracer cant get thru.

I don't outrange your greatscythe.
I also don't outrange other halberds, ultra greatswords, or spears.

What about making them exclusive to a ring that makes them possible when worn?

fujiphoenix wrote:What about making them exclusive to a ring that makes them possible when worn?

You know...that's a pretty awesome idea. I like it!