Suggestion: Advantage Flanking

[Dxella]

Missing flanking rule as far as i noticed.

[Xeterog]

5e Flanking is an Optional rule in the DMG. I don't think it's in the SRD that Solasta has available to use (but not sure as I didn't look it up)

[Mr RocknRoll]

He is correct. It is optional and not included in the game.

[DiceWrangler]

Have you ever ran or played in a D&D 5e game that granted Advantage on Flanking? It changes the tactical game dramatically because just about every melee attack is made with advantage -- which makes AC nearly useless as a defense. Many PCs, especially tanks, have a higher AC than most monsters and monsters usually outnumber PCs so monsters would benefit from it more than PCs since they could flank more often. There are many optional rules in the DMG and PHB that are terrible -- and this is one of them.

[subetai99]

Giving flanking advantage on attacks is OP. Especially, since the monsters will almost always outnumber the party, thus be able to constantly flank them. I'm in a Foundry online game, with friends, I'm the only melee fighter in a group of ranged casters and archers. I think my life expectancy is pretty low. I've nearly died a couple of times and we just hit level two! Thinking about just stacking javelins and letting the ranged people deal with it! lol

[Dxella]

@Xeter You are correct, it aint in the SRD so thats most likley why.

@Dice Yes ofc i played and ran several campaigns. i been playing and aswell as dming since 2nd edition. In fifth its stupidly easy to get super high AC. So no it does not make AC useless.
What's next, you going to complain that Dex is OP because it can migate so much damage aswell?

I KNOW it is an optional rule. But still want to have it in the game, ( Like a togglable thing)
I understand it aint for everyone. just as Rolling stats aint for everyone, or rolling HP aint for everyone. But This is the Beauty of DnD and always been. One can add the rules that suit the group.

It aint OP, it is tactical and strategic.
Flanking is very specific since they need to flank you on oppsite directions. And if it happens you will need to deal with it quickly. Or prevent it in the first place with better placements.
I have more issues on how easy it is to trigger stealth/hidden.

[wizard1200]

Originally posted by DiceWrangler:

Have you ever ran or played in a D&D 5e game that granted Advantage on Flanking? It changes the tactical game dramatically because just about every melee attack is made with advantage -- which makes AC nearly useless as a defense. Many PCs, especially tanks, have a higher AC than most monsters and monsters usually outnumber PCs so monsters would benefit from it more than PCs since they could flank more often. There are many optional rules in the DMG and PHB that are terrible -- and this is one of them.

It depends on the implementation in my opinion: It works great if only the attacker within the single tile in the back of the target gets an advantage.

[Something completely different]

Originally posted by Dxella:

@Dice Yes ofc i played and ran several campaigns. i been playing and aswell as dming since 2nd edition. In fifth its stupidly easy to get super high AC. So no it does not make AC useless.
What's next, you going to complain that Dex is OP because it can migate so much damage aswell?

Don't agree with you there. Playing (and mostly dm'ing since 2e myself and my experiance is quite different with 5e.

It's by design that players in 5E have more armour class and monsters have more hp.

I am not certain what you consider 'super high ac' but lets go for 25. Full plate, shield, defender, haste and shield of faith running.

That's solid AC but it also has some buts in that two of those buffs are concentration based. A monster with a +10 attack (Far from unrealistic if you're level 5 and up) normally would have a 30% to hit you still (15 and up on the d20.)
If the monster had advantage it'd have 60% to hit you and 10% to crit you. That's more then half it's attacks hitting.
Even if you had a shield spell ready you'd -still- have a 10% per attack to be hit. That's far from improbable if the monster has multi attack.

And monsters would surround you if they have decent mental facilities or a leader directing them who has.
So a hill giant wouldn't think of it but one being led by a fire giant would be reminded of it.

On the other hand hitting low ac monsters would be all but guaranteed with advantage. Players already have a big advantage against lone tough monsters (easy to cc often with their mental stats) and with this the bigger side would get a larger advantage still.

I don't care as long as it comes as a toggle but I'd never use it as to me it ruins the game both ways by giving the side that already has the advantage an ever bigger advantage almost all of the time.

That and being critted isn't fun.

[TrueWarlord真の武]

Originally posted by Dxella:

@Xeter You are correct, it aint in the SRD so thats most likley why.

@Dice Yes ofc i played and ran several campaigns. i been playing and aswell as dming since 2nd edition. In fifth its stupidly easy to get super high AC. So no it does not make AC useless.
What's next, you going to complain that Dex is OP because it can migate so much damage aswell?

I KNOW it is an optional rule. But still want to have it in the game, ( Like a togglable thing)
I understand it aint for everyone. just as Rolling stats aint for everyone, or rolling HP aint for everyone. But This is the Beauty of DnD and always been. One can add the rules that suit the group.

It aint OP, it is tactical and strategic.
Flanking is very specific since they need to flank you on oppsite directions. And if it happens you will need to deal with it quickly. Or prevent it in the first place with better placements.
I have more issues on how easy it is to trigger stealth/hidden.

First of all, this:

"i been playing and aswell as dming since 2nd edition. In fifth its stupidly easy to get super high AC"

Wrong.

In D&D 3.x (and even in 4ed) you would be with 50+ AC easily with magic items around lvl 16, while in D&D 5e it's hard to get around 30 AC at level 20.

Second, D&D 5e has a different movement system. While in older editions you would get an AoO just by moving in a square that an enemy has reach (unless 5-foot in 3.x or "slide" in 4e), in D&D 5e you only get an AoO if you move OUT of an enemy reach. Also in D&D 5e movement system you can attack while you move, because movement is not an action anymore.

That means that in D&D 5e you can go behind an enemy without any risk of AoO, and that is for sure the biggest reason why they made flank optional. I remember the early days of 5e, D&D Next, and all the talk about flank and the stupidy "train" effect it causes in D&D 5e movement system.

Flank has meaning in older editions because going behind an enemy has a cost and consequences, it is meaningfull and tactical in the movement system.

Last but not least, advantage has way more weight in D&D 5e than it has in older editions. Giving advantage with Flank optional rule for so little risk (due to movement system) makes some class features that grant advantage useless and quick gets in the way of balance.

All that said, I'm not against making Flank an optional rule for those who want to play this way. Just please don't make it a default rule, because it's not a default rule in D&D 5e and will never be.

[Dxella]

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

Originally posted by Dxella:

@Xeter You are correct, it aint in the SRD so thats most likley why.

@Dice Yes ofc i played and ran several campaigns. i been playing and aswell as dming since 2nd edition. In fifth its stupidly easy to get super high AC. So no it does not make AC useless.
What's next, you going to complain that Dex is OP because it can migate so much damage aswell?

I KNOW it is an optional rule. But still want to have it in the game, ( Like a togglable thing)
I understand it aint for everyone. just as Rolling stats aint for everyone, or rolling HP aint for everyone. But This is the Beauty of DnD and always been. One can add the rules that suit the group.

It aint OP, it is tactical and strategic.
Flanking is very specific since they need to flank you on oppsite directions. And if it happens you will need to deal with it quickly. Or prevent it in the first place with better placements.
I have more issues on how easy it is to trigger stealth/hidden.

First of all, this:

"i been playing and aswell as dming since 2nd edition. In fifth its stupidly easy to get super high AC"

Wrong.

In D&D 3.x (and even in 4ed) you would be with 50+ AC easily with magic items around lvl 16, while in D&D 5e it's hard to get around 30 AC at level 20.

Second, D&D 5e has a different movement system. While in older editions you would get an AoO just by moving in a square that an enemy has reach (unless 5-foot in 3.x or "slide" in 4e), in D&D 5e you only get an AoO if you move OUT of an enemy reach. Also in D&D 5e movement system you can attack while you move, because movement is not an action anymore.

That means that in D&D 5e you can go behind an enemy without any risk of AoO, and that is for sure the biggest reason why they made flank optional. I remember the early days of 5e, D&D Next, and all the talk about flank and the stupidy "train" effect it causes in D&D 5e movement system.

Flank has meaning in older editions because going behind an enemy has a cost and consequences, it is meaningfull and tactical in the movement system.

Last but not least, advantage has way more weight in D&D 5e than it has in older editions. Giving advantage with Flank optional rule for so little risk (due to movement system) makes some class features that grant advantage useless and quick gets in the way of balance.

All that said, I'm not against making Flank an optional rule for those who want to play this way. Just please don't make it a default rule, because it's not a default rule in D&D 5e and will never be.

I never claimed it should be default, i made a statement that it was missing.
And well i wonder what ive done with my life if im wrong that i havent been playing since 2nd edition =P jokes aside.
The thing with older editions is that you had more ways of bonuses to attacks, and AC.
And straight comparison aint fair because its different systems.
An AC of 20-25 is high for this system and quite easy to get even in lower levels.

just going to use standard array on this.
Half plate armor 15 + 3 dex + 2 shield + 1 Defensive
Variant human, medium armor master, defensive fighting style, and a shield is 21 armor and no stealth disadvantage and without any magic or magic items. And thats even before lvl 4.

Warforged Paladin with Defense fighting style and the defensive duelist feat + Full plate + shield have An AC of 18+2+1+1 (lvl 4) add +3 w reaction, but without shield of faith or magic items.
At lvl 4 it aint to uncommon to gotten a +1 item. Say +1 shield.
23AC +2 SoF + 3 reaction = Full plate 18 + 3 shield + 1 Defensive + 1 warforge + 2 (SoF concentration Spell) + 3 DDF reaction

thats quite high armor for a level 4 character. and thats without Haste since the party are still at lvl 4...
Hard Encounters around level 4, enemies tend to have around +6 / +7 to hit. And more common/easier encoutners have around +4....
that means they need to roll quite high (16 or 17) to have a chance to hit. even without that reaction and Shield of Faith.

Players AC dont tend to sky rocket in higher levels, But they get more things to help them such as magical items, new abilities and spells.
and if you turn the tables in the lower levels a player tends to have +5 / +6 / +7Magic item to hit until level 5.
I get it, it aint for everyone.
Yes it can be hard with more advantage, but i think it is a thing that would be nice as an optional thing.

[DiceWrangler]

Your AC calculations are purely hypothetical in this case because "Solasta" does not have:
* Warforged (race)
* Defensive Duelist (feat)
* Medium Armor Master (feat)

Plus it assumes that Shield of Faith is cast which requires a 1st level spell slot and maintaining Concentration.

[SheckyS]

The optional flanking rules are TERRIBLE.
Since a character is allowed to move around, as long as they don't leave ZoC (Zone of Control), when ends up happening is that every single character and NPC involved in a battle ends up getting advantage on EVERY single attack. It's just stupid.

[Chris_Woods]

I like flanking as a concept, as it encourages more consideration as to your position and makes it less common that everyone gets into position and just throws dice until one side dies.

All that said, advantage is just too powerful in 5th edition. As I understand it, the napkin math for advantage is +5 to the roll, which is a massive bonus. If the Sol team decides flanking is good for the game, I hope it's just a houseruled +2 instead.

It's worth mentioning that while players can make fairly high "off the boat" AC characters (21, as you mentioned) that's typically accomplished by not being capable of much else. Smarter enemies just flat ignore "super tanks" that deal 1d8+2 and do nothing else and just munch on the rest of the team.

[wizard1200]

Originally posted by Chris_Woods:

I like flanking as a concept, as it encourages more consideration as to your position and makes it less common that everyone gets into position and just throws dice until one side dies.

All that said, advantage is just too powerful in 5th edition. As I understand it, the napkin math for advantage is +5 to the roll, which is a massive bonus. If the Sol team decides flanking is good for the game, I hope it's just a houseruled +2 instead.

Yep, that is exactly the reason why i suggested the following flanking variant: only the attacker within the single tile in the back of the target gets an advantage. Two characters could fight back to back to avoid being flanked until an enemy uses the shove action :)

An advantage does not give you a +5 bonus. It allows you to roll two D20 and use the higher result.