Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Beholder's Eye Beams
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 2987086" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>This is not strictly true...</p><p></p><p>The flying rules indicate whether a creature with a given maneuverability can fly backwards. This is indicative of moving backwards.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Note: the word "turn" here really refers to a direction of travel, not a facing. Turn here has absolutely no bearing on the game mechanics except with regard to direction of travel. There are no other game mechanics rules at all (tmk) which would take advantage of any facing interpreted by these rules. For example, a creature with good maneuverability uses up 5 feet of movement to start flying backwards, but once started, it can fly just as fast "backwards" each round as "forwards"</p><p></p><p></p><p>In other words, a creature with perfect or good maneuverability can fly forward as part of their movement and then go in reverse, all in the same move action. There is no need to continue moving forward.</p><p></p><p>Just like a PC can walk forward and then go backwards in the same move action.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Btw, would you rule that a good maneuverability creature that is moving "forward" has to use up 5 feet of movement to start moving "backwards", but if it is moving "backwards", it does not have to use up 5 feet of movement in order to change back to "forwards" again? Do you really think that was the intent of the designers, or was it to mean that if the creature switches to the opposite direction (i.e. goes in reverse to its current direction), it has to use up 5 feet of movement?</p><p></p><p></p><p>In real life, we associate moving forward with a facing. But, the game purposely has no facing like 1E and 2E did.</p><p></p><p>And yes, the terminology here could be better, but the terminology here is consistent with what we as humans associate with movement (e.g. turning around).</p><p></p><p></p><p>This is no different than the terminology used for the Beholder arcs (forward, back, left, right, up, and down). It's difficult to discuss movement without using words like forward or backwards, just like it is difficult to discuss a direction without using words like forward or backwards.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 2987086, member: 2011"] This is not strictly true... The flying rules indicate whether a creature with a given maneuverability can fly backwards. This is indicative of moving backwards. Note: the word "turn" here really refers to a direction of travel, not a facing. Turn here has absolutely no bearing on the game mechanics except with regard to direction of travel. There are no other game mechanics rules at all (tmk) which would take advantage of any facing interpreted by these rules. For example, a creature with good maneuverability uses up 5 feet of movement to start flying backwards, but once started, it can fly just as fast "backwards" each round as "forwards" In other words, a creature with perfect or good maneuverability can fly forward as part of their movement and then go in reverse, all in the same move action. There is no need to continue moving forward. Just like a PC can walk forward and then go backwards in the same move action. Btw, would you rule that a good maneuverability creature that is moving "forward" has to use up 5 feet of movement to start moving "backwards", but if it is moving "backwards", it does not have to use up 5 feet of movement in order to change back to "forwards" again? Do you really think that was the intent of the designers, or was it to mean that if the creature switches to the opposite direction (i.e. goes in reverse to its current direction), it has to use up 5 feet of movement? In real life, we associate moving forward with a facing. But, the game purposely has no facing like 1E and 2E did. And yes, the terminology here could be better, but the terminology here is consistent with what we as humans associate with movement (e.g. turning around). This is no different than the terminology used for the Beholder arcs (forward, back, left, right, up, and down). It's difficult to discuss movement without using words like forward or backwards, just like it is difficult to discuss a direction without using words like forward or backwards. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Beholder's Eye Beams
Top