Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 2773461" data-attributes="member: 32740">That is just bass-ackwards logic.&nbsp; The penalties for being flanked assume that you are ALREADY making the best possible defense in the situation.&nbsp; Pretending one opponent isn't there is not going to IMPROVE your defense in ANY possible fashion simply because you're not dividing your attention.&nbsp; You're assumed to be dividing your defensive efforts against these two opponents because to NOT do so is... unthinkable.&nbsp; There is no rule that deals with ignoring a flanking opponent because it is incomprehensible to think that there is any advantage EVER in ignoring an opponent in combat.The way to eliminate the penalty of being flanked is to NOT BE FLANKED anymore.&nbsp; Just because you decide not to defend against it shouldn't make you safer, or better able to conduct attacks.&nbsp; It should make you insanely vulnerable.I would like to think that noone in my campaigns would be so silly as to try this foolishness because they understand that &quot;gaming the rules/system&quot; like this is not going to win the DM's approval for your cleverness.&nbsp; If anyone DID try it I would likely make some kind of spot decision - but that decision as to the effects would be disastrous for the character.&nbsp; Yes, I'd eliminate the attackers advantages for flanking but the ignored attacker would have FANTASTIC bonuses instead up to and including a free coup-de-grace.&nbsp; Yes, it's that important.&nbsp; Treating the ignored attacker as invisible is a good idea and would perhaps be the minimum of what would result.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Man in the Funny Hat, post: 2773461, member: 32740"] That is just bass-ackwards logic. The penalties for being flanked assume that you are ALREADY making the best possible defense in the situation. Pretending one opponent isn't there is not going to IMPROVE your defense in ANY possible fashion simply because you're not dividing your attention. You're assumed to be dividing your defensive efforts against these two opponents because to NOT do so is... unthinkable. There is no rule that deals with ignoring a flanking opponent because it is incomprehensible to think that there is any advantage EVER in ignoring an opponent in combat. The way to eliminate the penalty of being flanked is to NOT BE FLANKED anymore. Just because you decide not to defend against it shouldn't make you safer, or better able to conduct attacks. It should make you insanely vulnerable. I would like to think that noone in my campaigns would be so silly as to try this foolishness because they understand that "gaming the rules/system" like this is not going to win the DM's approval for your cleverness. If anyone DID try it I would likely make some kind of spot decision - but that decision as to the effects would be disastrous for the character. Yes, I'd eliminate the attackers advantages for flanking but the ignored attacker would have FANTASTIC bonuses instead up to and including a free coup-de-grace. Yes, it's that important. Treating the ignored attacker as invisible is a good idea and would perhaps be the minimum of what would result. [/QUOTE]

Verification