Facing in d20?

[vic20]

Has anybody come up with house fules allowing for the facing of figures to have game significance?

I used to play Gurps, and I sort of miss it. Facing, that is; tho I do miss things from Gurps from time to time (disadvantages and probability curves come to mind.) Dang.... I'm hijacking my own thread in the opening post... sorry!

 

[Hollywood]

Has anybody come up with house fules allowing for the facing of figures to have game significance?

This is a facing system from some rules I've been working on.
-----------------

Minatures
All minatures should be clearly marked with the direction in which the model is considered to be facing front.

Facing
A combatant may change his facing once per round up to 180 degrees. The combatant may also change facing, up to 90 degrees, after every move or double-move, but never after a run.

Table 1: Facings
Front: A 90 degree arc to either side of the target's font.
Rear: A 45 degree arc to either side of the target's rear, the red area in Figure 1.
Side: A 90 degree arc to either side of the target's rear, the yellow area in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Facings
Attached Image File

Flanking
With the use of facings, an attacker is considered to be flanking a target if the attacker is in the rear facing of the target. If the attacker is in a side facing of the target and another attacker is in the front or oppsite side facing, then the attacker is flanking. Attacking from the rear facing gives an attacker an +4 attack bonus. Attacking from the side facing gives an attacker a +2 attack bonus.

 

[vic20]

Re: Re: Facing in d20?

This is a facing system from some rules I've been working on.
<snip>

Thanks for sharing Hollywood. Have you put the system into use in a game yet? If so, what kind of 'problems' did you encounter?

 

[Hollywood]

Re: Re: Re: Facing in d20?

Thanks for sharing Hollywood. Have you put the system into use in a game yet? If so, what kind of 'problems' did you encounter?

It hasn't been used in actual play, just in some rigorous test encounters that we've run. Haven't seen anything too odd happen as its fairly simple and straightforward. However, the one thing to keep in mind is that it does reduce the arc in which a rogue, blackguard, et al. by 50%. Personally I play a lot of rogues, and I didn't find it much of a problem. Just had to adjust tactics a bit and think a bit more when playing than normal... which was a lot of the reason for adding facing in.

 

[vic20]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Facing in d20?

It hasn't been used in actual play, just in some rigorous test encounters that we've run. Haven't seen anything too odd happen as its fairly simple and straightforward. However, the one thing to keep in mind is that it does reduce the arc in which a rogue, blackguard, et al. by 50%. Personally I play a lot of rogues, and I didn't find it much of a problem. Just had to adjust tactics a bit and think a bit more when playing than normal... which was a lot of the reason for adding facing in.

So are you stacking the facing bonuses with flanking bonuses? In other words, if you had two figs on either side of a target, with the target directly facing one fig, would the fig attacking from behind get +6 (+4 from rear, +2 flank)?

It would seem that the proper combat tactic in this system when there is a fig on either side of you would be to turn 90 degrees, resulting in facing neither directly, but not having either to the side or rear, hence no bonuses to attack you.

I also like to think a bit more about tactical positioning when I play.

Thanks again for sharing your system.

 

[Hollywood]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Facing in d20?

So are you stacking the facing bonuses with flanking bonuses? In other words, if you had two figs on either side of a target, with the target directly facing one fig, would the fig attacking from behind get +6 (+4 from rear, +2 flank)?

My bad, I didn't express it enough. The D&D flanking bonus is now express in terms of either being in the rear, side or front facing. So if you are in the rear you are flanking the target, if you are at the sides and have someone opposite you or attacking the target head on, then you are flaking from the side. From the rear you get a +4 bonus to hit, from the side a +2 if you are flanking.

It would seem that the proper combat tactic in this system when there is a fig on either side of you would be to turn 90 degrees, resulting in facing neither directly, but not having either to the side or rear, hence no bonuses to attack you.

Easiest way to resolve that is to simply roll a % and high is in the attacker is in the target's front facing whereas low is in the side facing. But yes, it behooves the target to keep as many attackers in his front arc.

 

[vic20]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Facing in d20?

My bad, I didn't express it enough. The D&D flanking bonus is now express in terms of either being in the rear, side or front facing. So if you are in the rear you are flanking the target, if you are at the sides and have someone opposite you or attacking the target head on, then you are flaking from the side. From the rear you get a +4 bonus to hit, from the side a +2 if you are flanking.

I get it. Do you allow both rear and side flanking to enable rogue sneak attack?

Easiest way to resolve that is to simply roll a % and high is in the attacker is in the target's front facing whereas low is in the side facing. But yes, it behooves the target to keep as many attackers in his front arc.

One thing that would probably be too fine-grained for d20 combat but is a tactical reality with facing rules I have used in the past would be the impact of which side was protected by a shield.

 

[Hollywood]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Facing in d20?

I get it. Do you allow both rear and side flanking to enable rogue sneak attack?

Yup, as long as the rogue is flanking, i.e. either in the rear facing or in the side facing with another attacker opposite him.

One thing that would probably be too fine-grained for d20 combat but is a tactical reality with facing rules I have used in the past would be the impact of which side was protected by a shield.

Thats not too hard. As in 1st/2nd Ed. I don't allow shield bonuses to AC for rear attacks. If you want a bit more fine-grained than that, then the facing that contains the shield, usually the left side facing unless creature is left-handed, and the front facing get shield bonus. The opposite side-facing from the shield doesn't get it.

 

[dkilgo]

Okay, I like the idea that Hollywood has presented, but I have only two questions.

First, are you able to place your figure facing the corner of a grid square.

Second, if the answer to the first question is "yes" then how do you determina side flanking when backed into a corner.

I only ask because I might actually try this out.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Hollywood]

First, are you able to place your figure facing the corner of a grid square.

Yes, front facing may be at any degree mark in a complete 360 degree arc.

Second, if the answer to the first question is "yes" then how do you determina side flanking when backed into a corner.

I'm going to backtrack, since I reviewed some notes last night from a test sessoin we had. Flanking occurs as follows:

a) If you attack from the rear facing.
b) If you attack from a side facing and there is another attacker directly opposite you, i.e. ~180 degrees away from you.

So if you, the target, are backed into a 90 degree corner, you do not expose yourself in any manner in which you can be flanked or attacked from the rear.