Initiative is random and rolled each round. I believe it's something like 1d6 - d every round, where d is dependent on the character's DEX, and lower values let you act sooner.

Of course, looking online, it appears that the actual AD&D 1e initiative rules were a mess, so it is likely that the game doesn't follow the mechanics exactly as written in the rulebook.

Also, a quote from the Pool of Radiance manual: (It doesn't indicate the type of die used for initiative, however.)

Initiative is checked for each round. If all your characters have 18 Dex it will be totally random who acts first. If they have diverse Dex stats, it will be more predictable.

Thank you again guys for continuing to entertain this thread. I'm actually having a blast playing the game. In some ways I'm enjoying it more than modern games. It's like taking a stroll back to my childhood. I just want to make sure I understand some of the finer points of the game. I'm not as savvy with 1st edition.

Let me just confirm something:

1. Characters with lower DEX act later in the round
2. It is easier to set up a backstab if the thief acts later in the round

Therefore, it is easier to set up a backstab if the thief has lower DEX. Is that right?

If so, this is definitely *not* what I would expect.

Then again, the Delay option likely makes this moot, and DEX *does* affect your AC, so it might not be worth it, but it is still counter-intuitive and not like other games (like Wizardry where thieves need high Agility to inspect treasure chests).

No, because you can set up the backstab in the previous round, typically by a Cleric.

Could someone jump in the game and see if they can consistently set up a backstab? I would honestly like to see if someone can do it.

I don't keep any of my saved games, but I just tried it out for you with a fresh party.

**Important note: I'm playing the Commodore-64 version of the game on an emulator (VICE).

I created a party of 6 human thieves (18 STR, 18 DEX, 18 CON). I equipped them with leather armour and longswords and sent them into the slums and headed for the room in the north-east section where there are 4 orcs arguing over a piece of paper.

I kept on delaying all of my thieves until the 4 orcs all had their turns. I then proceeded to pair up my thieves on each orc, one thief to first setup and then one thief to attack from the opposite side. I got three consecutive backstabs with the second thief in each pair.

I reloaded and tried it again, this time delaying until after the orcs and then attempting to backstab from the opposite direction the orc had just attacked (without having a thief first make a setup attack). This did not work, no backstabs.

So I had 100% success rate backstabbing when I had one setup character attacking first. It sounds like the PC version of the game works differently (and presumably not as intended).

Interesting...could you try it on some large (more than one square) monsters and see if it works on them?

OK, this time instead of heading for the slums I instead took the boat to Sokol Keep. I entered and head west towards the scorpion room.

This fight was a bit more tricky to determine if backstab was working due to: (1) my thieves missing a lot of the time because of the scorpion's low AC; and (2) the scorpions mowing my thieves down when they attacked.

However, after many many attempts I conclusively determined that YES, backstab is still working correctly against them, whether I attack diagonally, longwise, or shortwise across them.

I found the relevant section in the rulebook (below): So, it looks like if it requires 2 setups in the PC version of PoR before you can backstab, then the "exception" for the thieves is not being applied properly.

Also, just for fun, I tried ganging up on a scorpion with my thieves indiscriminately (just trying to get the 3rd and 4th and subsequent attacks in) WITHOUT trying to setup a backstab, and this was not successful, the 3rd and subsequent attacks were not automatic backstabs.

It doesn't matter exactly what "round" it is, just as long as the enemy does NOT have its turn between your setup attack and your backstab attack. The setup can be at the end of the previous round, and the backstab can be at the start of the next round (I just tested this to confirm).

My backstab character did attack from the opposite direction the enemy was facing, but only because my setup character attacked first to make the enemy face him! (And it's also probably important that no one else attack the enemy between the setup attack and the backstab attack).The important thing is that the backstab character attacks from the diametrically opposite direction of the setup character.

eg:
(E=Enemy, S=setup attacker, B=backstab attacker)

SEB

S
E
B

S
..E
....B

However, the problem may be that the PC version of the game isn't handling the "setup" attacks properly, remember that I'm testing all this on the c64 version.

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...

ROUND 1

Enemy thief attacked first. (I'm assuming this is his turn for round 1)

1. It's my thief's turn. I don't have another ally adjacent to the enemy thief so I delay.
2. Fighter/Cleric - delay
3. Mage - delay
4. Fighter - He's in the best position to be the set up attack. So I move him in front of the enemy thief. He attacks and misses.

Okay so at this point the enemy has had his turn and one of my characters has done a set up attack to keep his facing locked.

5. Cleric - delay
6. Fighter/Mage - delay
7. Friendly NPC - delay

Okay at this point, all move characters have had a turn. All have delayed except my fighter. I'm confused at this point. Is it the end of the round? I'm not sure. I'm still waiting on my thief's turn to come back up again.

8. Fighter/Cleric - delay
9. Fighter/Mage - delay
10. Finally my thief's turn. I move on the opposite side of the enemy thief from my fighter and attack. The thief turns around and faces me. No backstab.

At this point I have no idea where I am in the round or what I would do next to make the backstab worked assuming the thief still had hitpoints left.

Does anything look incorrect?

EDIT: I just saw your last post which answers some of my questions so sorry for asking them again. I also realize you're on the C64 version as well which I wouldn't imagine is any different but who knows. I don't believe in my examples the enemy ever had his turn in between my set up attack and backstab. I could be wrong though. I'll keep testing it. I really want to figure this out because it's driving me nuts that I don't understand it...lol.

Here's another thing to test: Does Invisibility affect the backstab rules at all? In other words, if you cast Invisibility on a thief, does it allow her to backstab without assistance?

Also, does being Invisible prevent opportunity attacks? (Of course, one should check to see if Invisibility prevents enemies from targeting the character first.)

Remember that, assuming the game didn't mis-implement Invisibility, that certain actions, such as attacking, will break it.

Invisibility is underpowered in the Gold Box games. It doesn't help with backstabs, as in FRUA it doesn't prevent your invisible characters from being targeted by spells or ranged attacks (may improve AC against missiles, though). It does prevent opportunity attacks against enemies who can't See Invisible, so it's useful for thieves to get in position for backstabs. Also useful for thieves with Wands of Lightning Bolt. But the source should be a Ring of Invisibility, never a spell.

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".