D&D 5E A Simple Flanking Rule, What Do You think?

[cmad1977]

The +2 or -2 is the way to go

 

[NotAYakk]

The +2 or -2 is the way to go

Just say no to dynamic to-hit modifiers.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Just say no to dynamic to-hit modifiers.

Cover says hi.

 

[Garthanos]

Yep, that is one area were 5e OA improved by limiting it to one. Personally, I think in my next campaign I make go the PF2e route and take them away completely, except for fighters (class feature), and then offer a feat for other classes.

I disagree it removed decision points and resources and greatly over simplified the default, making it trivial to achieve flanking took away methods of making movement distinctive by class type and to me made the combat story much more bland while simultaneously made flanking ie advantage more potent.
Yup the more I hear about pf2 the less I find it interesting

 

[dave2008]

I disagree it removed decision points and resources and greatly over simplified the default, making it trivial to achieve flanking took away methods of making movement distinctive by class type and to me made the combat story much more bland while simultaneously made flanking ie advantage more potent.
Yup the more I hear about pf2 the less I find it interesting

Which part are you disagreeing with? That 5e limited it to 1 or that PF2e got rid of it for most classes?

 

[dave2008]

...combat story much more bland...

That is the rub isn't? Some people find the codified rules of 4e make the combat story bland, while others feel it is vital. Personally, I was in the middle in that I had no issues with the "combat story" in 4e, but I also didn't feel the rules made much of a difference for the story either.

 

[Garthanos]

That is the rub isn't? Some people find the codified rules of 4e make the combat story bland, while others feel it is vital.

My experience is without codified ability you have put the only tactics and strategy that is real in the hands of the spell casters so the ones most active and interesting in battle are the ones supposedly less central to it.

 

[Garthanos]

Oh but right in 5e the casters are 10x more important than others
(without them adventuring would be 10x harder)

 

[Garthanos]

Which part are you disagreeing with? That 5e limited it to 1 or that PF2e got rid of it for most classes?

Yep, that is one area were 5e OA improved

First phrase.

 

[dave2008]

My experience is without codified ability you have put the only tactics and strategy that is real in the hands of the spell casters so the ones most active and interesting in battle are the ones supposedly less central to it.

I don't disagree, but some of use who started with 1e and never had tactical options codified, just described them and moved on. For those players, a set of rules can feel very limiting to the complete freedom of the imaginations previously. However, I will readily admit that style only works for certain people and groups. Like I have with the group I've played with for 30 yrs.

If that is something you want, and you don't have full DM& Player trust, codified rules are superior.