No flanking or facing bonuses?

[Ninth Hour]

So I'm new to 5E but not D&D. I just completed the first quest at Caer Lem.

During the battle at the Sorak Camp, one of the warriors climbed up and positioned himself next to a wall on his right(left from my perspective), leaving his rear, left side, and front open. My cleric engaged him in front, while my paladin ran behind to his rear. Here's a rough diagram:

W= wall
P= paladin
C= cleric
S= Sorak

W P
W S
W C

To my surprise, the paladin missed completely. He did not get any sort of "flanking" bonus for the target being engaged on two sides. Nor was there any bonus for attacking to the target's rear.

Shouldn't the target be considered flat-footed? Or at least, shouldn't the attack roll happen at an advantage? Since Solasta is supposed to be close to rules as written for 5E, are such factors really not considered in the tabletop game?

[Curath]

Flanking is only an optional rule in D&D 5th edition, not part of the core rules. Some people use it in tabletop 5E, some don't. It does tend to make certain spells less valuable, because you can't get benefit from advantage more than once. Why use Blind spell if you can get the same advantage by standing near the enemy with two characters. Sure, in some cases you might want to burn a spell slot for that, but much less frequently.

[Aldain]

Flanking is a variant rule for 5e, not a baseline one.

[Soteria]

Rogues get advantage sneak attacks in that situation, but no one else.

[DiceWrangler]

There is no facing or flanking bonus in the standard rules but Rogues can be eligible for a Sneak Attack if an ally is adjacent to an enemy. Note there are optional rules (in the DMG) regarding flanking but not facing.

[DiceWrangler]

Originally posted by Soteria:

Rogues get advantage in that situation, but no one else.

Only in the optional rules (in the DMG).

[Ninth Hour]

Ultimately, I'll adjust. I was just surprised and a bit disappointed that no such rules were implemented, since facing and flanking bonuses are not unusual in similar turn based combat games. But it would make sense if the devs wanted to hew closely to RAW.

Does facing at least affect Sneak attack- i.e. attacking to side or rear can trigger it? Or do you always have to be in stealth first? Edit: Dicewrangler mentioned that rogues can inflict sneak attack in the "flanking" scenario mentioned, which I assume occurs regardless of stealth?

On another note, I do like how combat and movement in three dimensions is represented. Requiring your party to parkour up and down ledges gives strength and Athletic skill out of combat relevance. I also like how the environment can be used- shoving monsters off ledges, pushing rocks onto enemies below. I hadn't even realized until after the mission was over that you could have shot the stalactites and caused them to inflict AOE damage below.

An interesting side effect of implementing such mechanics is that, at times, this felt like a platforming game. It feels unexpected and unique in the turn based RPG genre and I'm guessing that later maps will continue to lean into the challenges posed by verticality?

[Aimee]

The developers from Solasta took a lot of liberties in the DnD 5e ruleset implementation, so dont stick to the rules too much. You will have to relearn a lot of things, but can use some of the ruleset that you might know already. Just dont take anything for granted, and you should be fine.
The only bonus from melee teamwork thats in the game is for some creatures, called Packtactics. Its not a flanking bonus but a bonus when 2 creatures are attacking the same target, and they get advantage on the roll.

Cover in the game does work, so thats nice.

[Cartesian Duelist]

Originally posted by Ninth Hour:

Does facing at least affect Sneak attack- i.e. attacking to side or rear can trigger it? Or do you always have to be in stealth first? Edit: Dicewrangler mentioned that rogues can inflict sneak attack in the "flanking" scenario mentioned, which I assume occurs regardless of stealth?

No, because as noted earlier, 5e doesn't use facing.

Sneak Attack
Beginning at 1st level, you know how to strike subtly and exploit a foe's distraction. Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll. The attack must use a finesse or a ranged weapon.
You don't need advantage on the attack roll if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it, that enemy isn't incapacitated, and you don't have disadvantage on the attack roll.
The amount of the extra damage increases as you gain levels in this class, as shown in the Sneak Attack column of the Rogue table.

[Soteria]

Originally posted by Ninth Hour:

Does facing at least affect Sneak attack- i.e. attacking to side or rear can trigger it? Or do you always have to be in stealth first? Edit: Dicewrangler mentioned that rogues can inflict sneak attack in the "flanking" scenario mentioned, which I assume occurs regardless of stealth?

The rule is stated above, but to elaborate: as long as one of your allies is adjacent to the target or you have advantage, you get a sneak attack. Stealth gives advantage, as do various other situations/spells. Rogues can use cunning action to hide as a bonus action, so usually stealth is the easiest way to get advantage.

On another note, I do like how combat and movement in three dimensions is represented. Requiring your party to parkour up and down ledges gives strength and Athletic skill out of combat relevance. I also like how the environment can be used- shoving monsters off ledges, pushing rocks onto enemies below. I hadn't even realized until after the mission was over that you could have shot the stalactites and caused them to inflict AOE damage below.

An interesting side effect of implementing such mechanics is that, at times, this felt like a platforming game. It feels unexpected and unique in the turn based RPG genre and I'm guessing that later maps will continue to lean into the challenges posed by verticality?

Yeah I like the 3d elements, too. It's really common. And you can absolutely "cheese" fights against pure melee opponents who can't climb (like wolves) by climbing on top of something.

[Ommamar]

Rogues sneak attack is based more on where there allies are as opposed to where they are, The exception of course being if you actually attack from stealth, usually it isn't worth it to mess with getting your rogue back in stealth as you can just target who is next to your party members.

I like the idea of using the environment for damage, it can take a lot to setup usually doing minimal damage for the effort to get things positioned correctly. It is kind of disappointing that in two different instances in the tutorial you are shown to use the environment to take out enemies. In the regular campaigns though you rarely use the environment in that way.

[psychotron666420]

Originally posted by Soteria:

Rogues get advantage in that situation, but no one else.

Rogues do not. There is the optional rule that everyone gets advantage, but it's optional. Rogues get sneak attack in that situation, but not advantage.

[Platostotle]

Just to clear some confusion:

There is an optional rule in table top that allows advantage for flanking a target. This applies to everyone.

Rogues can get a sneak attack as long as the target has another enemy adjacent to it, but this does not grant advantage.

I'm not sure if the developers are even allowed to use the optional rules since they are limited to what's in the SRD. It's either basic rules or homebrew. I don't believe they're able to use any other published rules without a licensing agreement from WotC.

[Soteria]

Originally posted by psychotron666420:

Originally posted by Soteria:

Rogues get advantage in that situation, but no one else.

Rogues do not. There is the optional rule that everyone gets advantage, but it's optional. Rogues get sneak attack in that situation, but not advantage.

Yep, you're correct. I misspoke.

[Ninth Hour]

Thank you all for the responses. This is an enlightening discussion. Given the pains that were taken to simulate a variety of factors in combat (e.g. light level, attacks of opportunity, disadvantage of range attacks in close quarters), it felt like a surprising oversight to have no flanking or facing bonuses, especially as these are fairly common for turn based tactical games. However, it sounds like the devs did not want to risk including a "house rule" that would seem very similar or identical to an optional rule in tabletop, given the limitations of the SRD.

Still, I wonder if they could have included something akin to the "flatfooted" mechanic of earlier editions- for example, a target losing its dexterity bonus to AC if attacked unaware or from the rear when engaged with an adjacent ally. At least something to acknowledge that direction of an attack matters.

But I get that development is already complete, so I'll just accept it. And I suppose it works in your party's favor too, since the enemy attacking your rear doesn't give them any bonuses either.

[kbot]

Originally posted by Ninth Hour:

Thank you all for the responses. This is an enlightening discussion. Given the pains that were taken to simulate a variety of factors in combat (e.g. light level, attacks of opportunity, disadvantage of range attacks in close quarters), it felt like a surprising oversight to have no flanking or facing bonuses, especially as these are fairly common for turn based tactical games. However, it sounds like the devs did not want to risk including a "house rule" that would seem very similar or identical to an optional rule in tabletop, given the limitations of the SRD.

Still, I wonder if they could have included something akin to the "flatfooted" mechanic of earlier editions- for example, a target losing its dexterity bonus to AC if attacked unaware or from the rear when engaged with an adjacent ally. At least something to acknowledge that direction of an attack matters.

But I get that development is already complete, so I'll just accept it. And I suppose it works in your party's favor too, since the enemy attacking your rear doesn't give them any bonuses either.

There are actually a lot of issues using flanking in 5e beyond whom it benefits at any time, impacting balance and the 'feel' of the game from the ground up.

-Trash is more draining (you're generally outnumbered by NPCs, e.g. swarm of goblins).
-Bosses are easier (players tend to have an easier time flanking them).
The combination of the above tends to make the bosses swarms more dangerous than the boss...and clearing to it in the dungeon more difficult than the finale itself.

-Numerous abilities (e.g. reckless attack) / spells are immediately devalued (or pointless, since it's so easy to get advantage). These classes/subclasses would need a rebalance.
-Same for monsters (pack tactics being redundant but the examples are legion).

-Players are incentivised to get a sort of conga line of death going (not going to explain this in depth) which is just silly.

*OF COURSE a good DM can work alleviate these issues (like everything) and home brew away. Too bad Solasta, as much as I enjoy it, is not a good DM and the game/campaigns are already designed (and I don't think any of the excellent player made additions have thought about it).

This seems like something a mod could totally fix if you really, really want it?