Originally Posted by linkezio

Can anyone tell me, where did Larian's bad idea of giving advantage/disadvantage based on the height of the characters came from?

The fact that you are on high ground is an advantage in itself:

- You can get out of your enemy's line of sight whenever you want.
- Your enemy will take a while to get to you.
- Your enemy has difficulty throwing objects where you are.
- Your enemy has no vision of what's behind you.
- You can push him if he gets close and he'll take a lot of damage and he'll have to climb again.
- Until now, there is no way for him to pull you.
I agree it's massively over tuned. Here are other considerations:

Some players are really attached to high ground Advantage (not even realizing that low ground disadvantage is a thing). So I'm still proposing using "Combat Advantage" from 4e, where high ground would give a +2 to hit.

Low ground Disadvantage somewhat acts as cover, but still feels silly since most trained riflemen/archers can hit a target on higher elevation. I'm somewhat mixed on removing it entirely (after discussions with other forum members), but it's either players don't notice it exists, they dislike it, or they think it should be a -2.

Lastly, high ground Advantage & low ground Disadvantage make no sense for spells.

Last edited by DragonSnooz; 27/07/21 03:33 PM.