Originally Posted by Gaidax
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Originally Posted by Gaidax
I think elevation giving advantage only makes sense.

Also positioning benefits are in rules. Page 252... So I am not even sure what exactly you're so offended about with Larian using the rule.

[Linked Image]

Three reasons:

1. They didn't actually implement that rule (only the Advantage part and not the other 90% of the optional rule)

2. No one uses that. Some DMs use Flanking, some don't. I've literally never seen a DM use Facing.

3. They literally used the same mechanics as "Backstabbing" in DoS 2 but didn't include the ground indicator to know if you're going to get it or not.

I lied, 4 reasons:

4. Advantage for positioning yourself behind someone is drastically overpowered, and it cheapens other sources of providing advantage. This gives melee combat an extreme amount of "sameyness" where the objectively best choice, each turn, is to circle-strafe your opponent to get Advantage, then they do the same to you.

It does not matter who uses it or not - it's official in print and everyone can use it at will. Reality is that the rule is there. It also does not need 100% carbon copy down to last letter, but what they do is close enough. As you can see attacking from behind gives both advantage and -2AC in case creature has a shield. All fine and dandy by rules.

That's certainly much better than people here meming, as if it's some sort of never heard of thing completely unrelated to 5e, when in fact it's bloody there in print black on white page 252.

It also does not matter if it's overpowered or any other silly reason in your head-canon - the rule is there. Take it to WoTC if you think it's so busted, not to Larian.

The guy lists 4 good reason why this should not be implemented, but you just say because it is an optional rule so they can use it? We are not arguing if they can or not, but if they should or not dude.