It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

Thanks again Kipper for the help. I will give a shot. Here's a video I stumbled upon showing how backstab works in Curse of the Azure Bonds. It looks ALOT easier in that game. I hope it is....
cbarchuk: My party is currently in Koval Mansion. I got ambushed by one lone thief who failed so I attacked him. I couldn't even set a backstab against the one thief. Am I terrible or what? It just isn't intuitive to me. I made sure to write who went so I could keep track of where I am in the round. It went something like this...
01kipper: It sounds like what you described would work on C64 (as long as the thief only has leather armour or no armour equipped, ETA: and no shield equipped).

But if the PC version requires two setup attacks, try this strategy with the enemy thief in Kovel mansion:

1. Delay until after the enemy moves (not a problem if he moves first).
2. Attack enemy with "setup character A" (not your thief)
3. Attack enemy with "setup character B" (not your thief)
4. Attack enemy with your thief, opposite "setup character B".
Hey Kipper, something jumped out me that you mentioned in a previous post: You said it's important to note that no one else attacked the enemy between the set up attack and the backstab. This might be the problem. You'll notice in the youtube video I posted that he always had his thief attack right after the set up attack. I'm going to check it out tonight. Does the set up attack need to be the actual first attack of the round? Does it need to hit the target?

Also I would love if someone who has the gog version can verify or not if backstab is working correctly.
Post edited March 09, 2016 by cbarchuk

Well there's good news and bad news I guess. I'm in the kobold caves and just came across Princess Fatima I think her names is. I decided to attack her so I could figure this thing out that that is driving me crazy. I'm unfortunately one of those types of people that hates to not understand something. So I'm a glutton for punishment. I decided to work this out by setting up and attacking my own party I originally thought that backstab required 2 setters. But it doesn't. I got it to work with just one setter and my thief on the opposite side. So that's the good news. The bad news is it only happened once and I'm not sure how I did
cbarchuk: Does the set up attack need to be the actual first attack of the round? Does it need to hit the target?
No, it doesn't matter where the setup occurs in the round, nor does it need to actually hit. The setup and the backstab can even happen in different rounds, the most important thing is that nothing happens to the target between the setup and the backstab.
I also noticed the manual says the thief needs to attack exactly opposite the FIRST attacker. Sounds like this is saying the first attack each round against the target is what sets up the backstab.
Post edited March 09, 2016 by cbarchuk

Okay I decided to start up Curse of the Azure Bonds and try backstab out in that game. I created a party of 5 human fighters and 1 human thief. Went into the tavern, punched the barkeep, and started a brawl. Well guess what, backstab worked beautifully and intuitively. It worked every time right after 1 set up attack. The only time it failed is if the enemy took their turn IN BETWEEN the set up attack and backstab. So you don't even have to wait till the enemy takes their turn though it can help to do so because then you're guaranteed your backstab won't get interrupted. But it worked great. It's implementation in POR is either a bug, or it's completely borked. Thanks for entertaining this long and arduous experiment.
Knowing how to use backstab will help tremendously once you start encountering Drow.
PetrusOctavianus: And I see dtgreene (who hasn't even played many of the games she is offering advice about) is spamming her usual slander about the AD&D designers being "sexist" for making males have higher STR. It's like accusing Nature of being sexist.
The problem is that, regardless of how Nature might be (and in Nature being female is not strictly a negative thing anyway), it is unfair to those players who like to play female characters. There is no sensible gameplay reason why female characters should be strictly inferior to male characters. If you are designing a game and you *really* want male and female characters to be different gameplay wise, make sure to balance the choices. (The best option, IMO, is just to make sex purely a cosmetic thing that doesn't affect character stats or abilities.)

In any case, this sexist rule is not present in 2nd edition anyway.