Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 2782253" data-attributes="member: 18280">The Argument as I understand it Part IV(3) What is meant by "ignoring an opponent" in this context?Long ago, in order to clarify what was meant in the house rule I proposed, I wrote:"Ignoring an Opponent" is the title of a house rule, and does not mean that you are actively ignoring him. It means, rather, that you are not actively defending against him so that you may concentrate your defense elsewhere. This is extremely similar to what you are doing with your allies. You are not actively defending against them; you are not actively ignoring them. It is harder to not actively defend against someone who might menace you, hence the Concentration check. You are paying, in fact, exactly the same amount of attention to the foe you are "ignoring" as you are to your allies. You are not actively defending. Period.However, the facing rules in Unearthed Arcana allow for a potentially better definition of what is meant:For the purposes of this rule, the character wishes to select an opponent to whom he always maintains direct facing, regardless of whether or not facing rules are used.The Unearthed Arcana rule allows one to negate sneak attack from a single opponent in precisely this manner, giving no more than a +4 advantage to any other character's attack roll.  This is far less of a penalty than my house rule imparted.  Nor does it require a feat.  If we are to assume that WotC designers are no more likely to be "drinking and lolligagging" when producing one book than when producing another, we must also accept the statement that this variant "won’t change the power level of your game."RC</blockquote>

Verification