Facing

[MoogleEmpMog]

Facing rules are pretty lame, and grievously exploited in any game where they exist. I have not-so-fond memories of Champions characters teleporting or even flying around behind enemies because it would halve their target's defenses.

I never understood how people could think that facing should matter, as if the opposition just faces one direction and then freezes into that position until it's their turn again.

In my case, it's because of extremely fond memories of Final Fantasy Tactics characters teleporting or even flying behind enemies because it would halve their target's defenses.

For a Tactics/RPG, I like the purely gamist conceit of granting bonuses to players who exploit tactical movement. I recognize that it's unrealistic and probably undesirable even from a gamist standpoint, but I personally find it a fun element to consider.

 

[Stormtower]

Or what if its a creature of all backs! hmmm.. *scratches chin*

The beast with two backs? I think that's a violation of the Eric's Grandma rule.

 

[Li Shenron]

I think that facing is an added significant complexity that most gaming group cannot afford. The best would be having it optional in the DMG, but it's not easy to make it optional either, since some core actions or class abilities (Rogue) are inevitably affected, and game balance should be checked twice, with and without facing.

 

[Henry]

(Argh, going to have to start picking my own posts apart to make sure there's nothing in there that could be misconstrued)

Rodney, you ladies and gents could post a one-word blog, like "Sweet Potatoes." and the same day there would be rampant speculation across the Internet that sweet potatoes were now (1) a playable race in 4E, (2) a new item for the equipment lists, or (3) the name of a special ability.

(Thanks for the clarification on the whole "facing" rumor.)

 

[allenw]

The beast with two backs? I think that's a violation of the Eric's Grandma rule.

No, since we're talking about squares, it would be "the beast with four backs." Heavens to Betsy!
(Good thing this isn't GURPS, with hexes...)

 

[Henry]

No, since we're talking about squares, it would be "the beast with four backs." Heavens to Betsy!
(Good thing this isn't GURPS, with hexes...)

Actually, you're forgetting the up and down directions, because of flying or swimming creatures, in which case it would be "the beast with six backs." Or if you were using hexes, it would be "the beast with 12 backs."

(Damn, "the beast with Twelve Backs" sounds like some mythological monster or something... )

 

[Stormtower]

Actually, you're forgetting the up and down directions, because of flying or swimming creatures, in which case it would be "the beast with six backs." Or if you were using hexes, it would be "the beast with 12 backs."

(Damn, "the beast with Twelve Backs" sounds like some mythological monster or something... )

Oh, if only we'd had such complexities back in the days of the "Phil & Dixie" comic. You know Foglio would have snuck this into "Sex and D&D" somewhere.

 

[lukelightning]

I hate facing with a deep & burning passion.

Me too. I've had many a facing-related argument.

You don't even need facing for the "sneak by a guard" trick. Just roll a sneak vs. the guard's spot. If the guard fails to spot you, just assume the guard was looking the wrong way when you moved by. As a DM I'd give circumstance bonuses for situations where the spotter has an obvious/definite facing (e.g. king sitting in a throne while you sneak behind).

(Damn, "the beast with Twelve Backs" sounds like some mythological monster or something... )

Kind of a reverse hydra. One head and twelve bodies.

 

[Benben]

"This monkey only has five asses. He is of no use to me."
--South Park.

 

[Lanefan]

Facing rules in general can be a nuisance if over-used. That said, there's times and situations when using some sort of facing adds more than it subtracts. Sneaking and sneak-attacking (formerly and more descriptively known as backstriking) have been mentioned already. Another is to give some advantage to a creature has that *can* see all directions at once...an Ettin, for example, or someone wearing a Robe of Eyes. Flanking is another; it's always bothered me that someone with an opponent on each side loses AC against *both*, instead of having it work like the Dodge feat with the player saying which foe the shield (or whatever) is defending against.

Lane-"today, the master of rambling incoherent thoughts"-fan