High ground

[chairman meow]

I feel like every battle just turns into me and the enemies running to high ground and slowly sniping each other. From what I understand, this high ground mechanic isn't in 5E rules?

[Myunihausen]

Originally posted by Something completely different:

It's not and it's one of the two things I really do not like in BG3, the other being the way they implemented reactions.

I'm not sure if it's the current build but I have seem to lost mine. I haven't seen a AoO in sometime regardless of enemies walking past, and it's like the AI knows it can get away with it. Sorry for being off topic.

Streeja has it right IMO.

[Brady4444]

Removal of advantage gain from elevation might move the balance of combat to allow melee to play a greater role than they do at present. Range might then still play a part, especially for hitting important targets (casters/healers/explosives).

[Aria Athena]

I don't like that the high ground gives you that much of an advantage. I find that something like a +2 would be more balanced than advantage on rolls.

[roygbiv]

I'd be in favor of keeping the advantage roll for attacking from high ground, but removing the disadvantage on attacking from low ground.

[bullse]

Originally posted by roygbiv:

I'd be in favor of keeping the advantage roll for attacking from high ground, but removing the disadvantage on attacking from low ground.

Wait, huh?

[dulany67]

Originally posted by Indure:

...range characters would happily camp in a single position the entire fight. We can already see that taking place in a game like Solasta.

True

[jonnin]

D&D rules are flexible. A DM could give you something for high ground, but probably would only do so when it was significant, eg on top of a 2+ story building vs the guy in the street.

This kind of stuff really bogs down tabletop and the modern approach is to avoid that, though.

[lejes]

It is not an official D&D5e rule, so it should not be in game. Also, every fight has to be planned to get to high ground as fast as possible, wich feels weird tbh.

[Patrick]

Yep - it's a dash for the high-ground (or worse: enemies just happen to start of there, optimally placed, and you have you pants down. Unless you meta-game - knowing what's coming up - and sneak about before triggering conversation). Sure, you can recover from initial poor positioning, but is seems so...contrived...and the advantage conferred is simply too much to NOT want to be on the high-ground. Let's hope they pay attention to the huge discussion on this on their forums and change at least this.

[lejes]

Originally posted by bullse:

Originally posted by lejes:

It is not an official D&D5e rule, so it should not be in game. Also, every fight has to be planned to get to high ground as fast as possible, wich feels weird tbh.

Remind me again, when did Larian agree to fully 100% adhere to you DnD fanbois 5e rule set?

They didn't, but there is no reason not to. Also, imported ruleset from DoS2 fits poorly with the rest of D&D rules and makes an overall worse game.

[jonnin]

It may help if you go to the high ground THEN start a fight, rather than scramble afterwards. All but two fights that I know of, you can do this. The spectator/drow is one of them. The other is the herpies where the enemy do not spawn from thin air until you walk to the low ground (bad encounter design). You can send 1 to trigger and the rest up high, but their flight negates any real advantage now, so meh.

That does not help with the 'this should not be' problem, but it helps deal with it.

[[TG] zac]

Originally posted by Myunihausen:

It's was huge in DOS2. If it's in 5E at all, I never used it.

Lots and lots of stuff that just isn't in 5e anymore.
Including
A number of skills
certain weapons having special attacks (trip etc..)
multiple base classes
about 1000 prestige classes
(could go on for multiple pages really)

Heck the handbook doesn't even mention allot of play styles and tricks the older ones did.

And that's not even counting the fact the game differs from 5e in allot of (questionable) ways.

[[TG] zac]

Originally posted by Brady4444:

Removal of advantage gain from elevation might move the balance of combat to allow melee to play a greater role than they do at present. Range might then still play a part, especially for hitting important targets (casters/healers/explosives).

Another simple solution would be to
1: Make getting back up into something you have to do on your own turn (instead of automatic) & eat an action.

2: Bring back some things from older editions (like melee having more access to control via tripping & certain weapons having bonuses on doing these things (Staff's, Khopesh etc... were great for tripping)

This would make melee more useful

[Slap Happy Pappy]

OR, and I'm just throwing this out there, follow the ruleset that they licensed.

[bullse]

Originally posted by Slap Happy Pappy:

OR, and I'm just throwing this out there, follow the ruleset that they licensed.

Licensed does not mean nor infer full strict adherence. You going to answer my question? When did Larian promise or indicate that they would fully and strictly adhere to DnD 5e rule set? Furthermore, given how many 'DnD' like computer games that have been created over the past few decades, none, NONE, of them have fully and strictly adhered to any DnD rule set, but all of a sudden, the DnD folks are up in arms over Larian's version of BG3 for not fully and strictly adhering to DnD 5e or whatever rule set?! Really? LMAOGTFO.