Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Remove Height and Backstab as Sources of Advantage/Disadvantage

Incorrect:

Fog Cloud - Create a cloud of dense fog. Creatures submerged in the fog are Heavily Obscured and Blinded.

Darkness - Create a cloud of magical darkness to Heavily Obscure and Blind creatures within. Creatures cannot make ranged attacks into or out of the darkness.

As a compromise, instead of removing Height Advantage altogether, they implement a Height+Crouch feature. So, basically, if you are more than 10 feet above your enemies, and you Crouch, you force all enemies to get a Disadvantage on all rolls against you because you are on higher ground and getting lower to the ground. Thus, you reduce your own target surface area, making it harder for an enemy to hit.

You still wouldn't get advantage on your ability to hit lower targets, but it would be harder for them to hit you.

In 5e you can voluntarily go prone to do this, (think like dropping in a sniper position). There's also the dodge action, but dropping prone can be done as a free action and only costs half your movement to get back up.

I'm 100% for having free-action prone in game, dodge action in game, and disadvantage from low ground removed.
It would be a dream and make combat have rich depth. Prone could be added next to the bonus actions and dodge could go with the actions.

OK. I know this has been talked to death, but I'm in the Underdark, and HEIGHT ADVANTAGE HAS TO GO!!!!

It's utterly ridiculous. Kuo-Toa archers up on the rocks firing at my characters with max armor and shields and Shield of Faith enabled with an AC of like 21 or 22, and they're pegging me with Critical Hits every two seconds? Why? Because they can roll two d20s every time they shoot, increasing their chances of a Critical Hit every shot. I must have gotten hit like a dozen times in that one battle with a Critical Hit from those archers. It was ridiculous. And then, I'm trying to shoot them, and I kept missing like a noob because I had disadvantage because they were on higher ground.

Ugh! It was frustrating fight. Most of my party was almost dead by the time it was over, and it was MOSTLY because of the archers. It wasn't because of Boooal or the Kuo Toa high priest or anything like that. Nope. It was the dumb archers on high ground.

"Only a fool would meet the Dothraki in an open field."

- Robert Baratheon

"I was fool engaging that huge boar with just a spear, and drunk as fuck.
- also Robert Baratheon ... last words btw.

His actual last words were:

"My memory. King Robert Baratheon — murdered by a pig. Give me something for the pain, and let me die.

Syrio Forel was better:

"What do we say to the God of death?"

Arya: " Not today"


SF: "Go."

Agree with others that the minimum height for advantage should be increased. You should need a huge height difference to gain advantage, such as:
>the top of the gate in the Githyanki fight
>the rafters in the Shattered Sanctum
>the cliffs when fighting the Duergar

But I'm pretty sure in the Githyanki fight, I could get height advantage just by standing on the little rock to the east. That just doesn't feel right in my opinion.

I'm going to repeat myself, because I have the feeling that here again the word "advantage" is mixed with the rule mechanics "Advantage" in DnD 5e.

Height has its own advantage in and of itself --> so if a ranged fighter is on a hill, then he already has multiple advantages, meaning:

The fighter can't be reached so easily by melee fighters, he has higher range (--> parabolic trajectories) and if he takes a few steps back he has cover and can't be attacked by other ranged fighters.
Those are several advantages, not just one, all by just being higher than your oponents.

No reason and definitely no need to also give the DnD 5e rule mechanic "Advantage" in addition here.

I'm surprised not a single person has yet responded to this thread to say thankyou to Larian for listening.

Thankyou Larian. The +2/-2 compromise is fair in my opinion and the -2 somewhat simulates half cover, which often the high ground would have vs lower ground targets because the edge of the cliff would obscure the lower half of their body.

It's been said. Maybe not on this thread but others.

+1

Thank you Larian !

Thanks you larian! Please have a look at help and overwatch posts ;-)

Bit of a gratuitous gravedigging for a settled issue, to be honest.