Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: May 2014
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: May 2014
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
I personally like it, because it adds a tactical aspect to the game, that I feel flanking doesn't add.
I get peoples frustrations with it though. I don't find it too tedious, and makes playing a melee fighter at least somewhat more interesting than "point, click, miss"


Facing each turn is very tedious... Walk to enemy's back every turn is very very tedious. I think point click miss is fine, it speeds up combat, this is already a slow pace turn-based game, we can add more strategy in other aspect.

Last edited by dunehunter; 14/10/20 02:28 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Giving advantage when two characters are within melee distance of the same enemy and to ranged attacks against enemies already engaged in melee would be a nice replacement I think


Necromancy is just recycling...
Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Druid_NPC
Giving advantage when two characters are within melee distance of the same enemy and to ranged attacks against enemies already engaged in melee would be a nice replacement I think


These would give way too much advantage to enemies since there is usually more of them than our party of 4. I agree with others that you should get advantage for flanking when you have party members on opposite sides of the enemy. Or maybe even only a +2 to hit. Since this is a video game, the computer can easily do all those small calculations that 5e tried to let players not worry about.

Your point about ranged attacks is interesting. Most systems, including past d&d versions, actually give a penalty for shooting into melee combat. True, 5e did away with this, but saying that these attacks should actually get a bonus is too much imo. Maybe it'd be fine if you only got advantage for shooting the back of an enemy while they are also facing a melee threat on their front. That could encourage some interesting positioning of your tank: sending your tank deep into enemy lines so that enemies turn around to face him, exposing their backs to your archers. You'd be allowing your tank to be more easily flanked and ganged up on in exchange for advantage on ranged attacks, which is a nicely tactical decision.

Joined: May 2014
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: May 2014
Originally Posted by Druid_NPC
Giving advantage when two characters are within melee distance of the same enemy and to ranged attacks against enemies already engaged in melee would be a nice replacement I think


Only when two characters are within melee distance and one behind enemy get advantage will be fine i think, in this way enemy won't get too much advantage as they are not smart enough to both engage your character and go around back.

Last edited by dunehunter; 14/10/20 04:09 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3


These would give way too much advantage to enemies since there is usually more of them than our party of 4. I agree with others that you should get advantage for flanking when you have party members on opposite sides of the enemy. Or maybe even only a +2 to hit. Since this is a video game, the computer can easily do all those small calculations that 5e tried to let players not worry about.

Your point about ranged attacks is interesting. Most systems, including past d&d versions, actually give a penalty for shooting into melee combat. True, 5e did away with this, but saying that these attacks should actually get a bonus is too much imo. Maybe it'd be fine if you only got advantage for shooting the back of an enemy while they are also facing a melee threat on their front. That could encourage some interesting positioning of your tank: sending your tank deep into enemy lines so that enemies turn around to face him, exposing their backs to your archers. You'd be allowing your tank to be more easily flanked and ganged up on in exchange for advantage on ranged attacks, which is a nicely tactical decision.


Well my interpretation for suggesting this is that in order to hit we are rolling against the target's defence, an enemy with melee attackers in front of them will be too focused on them to properly avoid archers.


Necromancy is just recycling...
Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Druid_NPC
Giving advantage when two characters are within melee distance of the same enemy and to ranged attacks against enemies already engaged in melee would be a nice replacement I think



Advantage, no, but this is supposed to be a condition that rogues can use to get sneak attack. Sneak attack isn't supposed to only be activated when you have advantage but seems to be the case in this game so far.

Joined: May 2014
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: May 2014
Originally Posted by Koshea
Originally Posted by Druid_NPC
Giving advantage when two characters are within melee distance of the same enemy and to ranged attacks against enemies already engaged in melee would be a nice replacement I think



Advantage, no, but this is supposed to be a condition that rogues can use to get sneak attack. Sneak attack isn't supposed to only be activated when you have advantage but seems to be the case in this game so far.


Yeah that might be a bugt tho, because on paper u can sneak attack when ally engage enemy.

Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Quebec
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Quebec
Originally Posted by Eugerome
I think backstabbing here is an odd mechanic here, particularly since you can't perfectly control the direction your characters face.

Also, does it kick in if you try to move away from an enemy and get an attack of opportunity?

Hello,

a) Actually, if you hold Ctrl, you can choose exactly where you face, but I learnt that after 25 hours and only because someone told me.

b) Good question about if moving away means they also get a bonus to hit you.

Last edited by Baraz; 14/10/20 07:39 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Baraz
a) Actually, if you hold Ctrl, you can choose exactly where you face, but I learnt that after 25 hours and only because someone told me.


Oh nice, didn't know that, thank you!

Last edited by Eugerome; 14/10/20 08:07 PM.
Joined: May 2014
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: May 2014
Handling facing every turn is super tedious imho

Joined: Oct 2020
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by dunehunter
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
I personally like it, because it adds a tactical aspect to the game, that I feel flanking doesn't add.
I get peoples frustrations with it though. I don't find it too tedious, and makes playing a melee fighter at least somewhat more interesting than "point, click, miss"


Facing each turn is very tedious... Walk to enemy's back every turn is very very tedious. I think point click miss is fine, it speeds up combat, this is already a slow pace turn-based game, we can add more strategy in other aspect.


To each their own I guess. If nothing else I'd say they could scrap it all together, and maybe give it to the Rogue (since they nerfed that class so hard as is)

Joined: Oct 2020
P
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
P
Joined: Oct 2020
I actually like the facing mechanic more than the flank

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5