D&D 5E D&D 5E Does flanking grant advantage ?

[Rya.Reisender]

Seriously guys, it's not THAT important. Okay then instead of "Looking for a DM that doesn't house rule", I'll say "Looking for a DM that doesn't house rule or use optional rules", problem solved.

Several people here seem to interpret "You are using as house rule" as an insult, similar to "You're an idiot", but I don't think that what the majority actually thinks. I hate house rules personally, a lot, but still, if others enjoy playing with house rules I certainly don't look down on them, that would be weird.

 

[Ovinomancer]

H

Hey Guys,

I just came up with a great houserule! Let's have one of us be the DM and everyone else play a character that has six ability scores, a race, and a class. I'm sure our D&D game will improve when we implement this houserule.

Huh? I can pick up that you're trying to be snide but can't, for the life of me, figure out how you're trying to go about it.

 

[Hriston]

When I show up at a table, I would expect to be informed of all optional and house rules in play, though, as both deviate from the base game.

What if the DM told you only the base rules are being used, and when combat begins you find out the DM consistently grants advantage for tactical positioning in combat, including flanking of opponents? Would you complain that an undisclosed option/houserule is being used?

 

[SkidAce]

Over the years, when a new group formed or a new person joined, unless they were brand new, the common phrase heard was "what are your house rules?".

The emphasis was on "your".

So its seems the intent is simply...."what do you do different?"

 

[Ovinomancer]

What if the DM told you only the base rules are being used, and when combat begins you find out the DM consistently grants advantage for tactical positioning in combat, including flanking of opponents? Would you complain that an undisclosed option/houserule is being used?

You're asking me a question I've already answered, and quoted the answer to ask your question. Perhaps you should quit beating around whatever bush you think I'm in and get blunt about whatever issue you have with my statements. Playing the '20 already answered questions game' is only fun for one of us.

 

[GameOgre]

Never played a long game of D&D without house rules. Short games yes but the longer the game the longer the list of house rules.

I would actually consider a by the book game inferior to a house ruled game unless everyone involved found the official rules for every situation that came up in game well done. Since players generally are crazy and constantly do things nobody could think of before hand(last night I had a pc fling his shield at a npc from atop a castle wall three hundred feet strait up, while the npc was just trying to walk out the gate) I would be amazed if house rules didn't become necessary.


If however everyone is fine with the official rules then great! I don't understand peoples desire to interfere with someone else's game.


If you are playing D&D with actual fish heads and home made playing cards and everyone is having a great time, you are playing D&D right!

 

[SkidAce]

Fish heads fish heads, roly poly fish heads....

 

[Werebat]

Fish heads fish heads, roly poly fish heads....

Fish heads, fish heads, eat them up: Yum!

 

[Hriston]

You're asking me a question I've already answered, and quoted the answer to ask your question. Perhaps you should quit beating around whatever bush you think I'm in and get blunt about whatever issue you have with my statements. Playing the '20 already answered questions game' is only fun for one of us.

I wasn't sure if you would consider that using an option/houserule, given that the base rules, specifically the advantage/disadvantage rules on page 173 of the Player's Handbook, give the DM the freedom to grant advantage as s/he sees fit. From your answer I can see that you would, and the issue I have with that is that the DM's discretion to grant advantage and impose disadvantage for any reason whatsoever is explicitly stated in the base rules. I guess what you're saying is you'd like the DM to tell you up front what sorts of things s/he routinely gives advantage/disadvantage for, and I think that's fine. There's nothing wrong with that level of transparency, but the base rules don't require the DM to have such a predefined list. In fact, it would be a houserule to say you can only derive advantage or disadvantage from sources other than those that rely on DM determination.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I wasn't sure if you would consider that using an option/houserule, given that the base rules, specifically the advantage/disadvantage rules on page 173 of the Player's Handbook, give the DM the freedom to grant advantage as s/he sees fit. From your answer I can see that you would, and the issue I have with that is that the DM's discretion to grant advantage and impose disadvantage for any reason whatsoever is explicitly stated in the base rules. I guess what you're saying is you'd like the DM to tell you up front what sorts of things s/he routinely gives advantage/disadvantage for, and I think that's fine. There's nothing wrong with that level of transparency, but the base rules don't require the DM to have such a predefined list. In fact, it would be a houserule to say you can only derive advantage or disadvantage from sources other than those that rely on DM determination.

You could have just asked that, and skipped the bad socratic questioning.

But, to respond to your points, here, you're engaging in an excluded middle. If the DM implements his discretion in a manner that's indistinguishable (or nearly so) from the optional rule, that's a rule he's using, and one not apparent from the base rules. On the other hand, nothing in my response would imply that I would require that the DM provide, in advance, in-game rulings based on the emergent play. I can expect to be told about house rules in effect, and still be perfectly fine with the DM granting advantage in situations not covered explicitly by the rules as he sees fit. My line is where the latter becomes such a common ruling that it should be codified as a house rule.