but it should only be possible if there is an ally near the enemy. Normally you are not able to defend yourself from two different directions at the same time.
That's something that totally make sense and that many would probably agree with.
It would also increase the value of melee characters if they also change the exploit jump/disengage... i.e, disengage should become an action instead of a bonus action IF you're engaged in melee.
That way you'll have to choose : staying engaged in melee and trying to kill your opponent - but with a risk of being backstabbed, accept an AOO to disengage OR use your action to disengage.
On the other hand, your melee characters would have a goal to rush into the melee and wouldn't have to run after every ennemies. That would increase tactical possibilites and synergies with your allies. That could also become usefull to block a door because it wouldn't be that easy to disengage.
Originally Posted by CMF
The limited extrapolation of the scenarios and examples provided to demonstrate stubborn behavior rooted in flaws in logic being taken at face value and not understood in the context it is provided is somewhat frustrating and I give up, ty. I am now going back to leap frogging and playing battle toads with my green skinned dwarf rogue back stabbing to my heart's content.
Sorry that you don't understand what we're talking about
