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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8163157" data-attributes="member: 6987520">First off, thanks for the reply. I know it is a lot to digest sometimes (at least, it feels that way to me LOL!).I am not thrilled with movement in 5E, either. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />But as written it is a discrete activity on your turn--that is when you get to move. In order to get an actual "break" in your movement, you need to take some form of action. So, a PC can move, attack, and continue moving or move, open a door, and continue moving, etc. but you need an action of some kind.The part that is bolded is what I don't agree with. If the rogue stops, and then continues moving without doing an attack, he didn't really "stop his movement"--he continued it. With your interpretation, the rogue is always guaranteed an attack with advantage--which is the same as flanking. shrugI don't think the orc getting an OA via marking would really stop such tactics, since as well PCs get to use them against other creatures, but I could be wrong.Well, it didn't face the fighter, it put the fighter on its side (yellow) so the fighter was no longer in the rear (red). Anyway, I wouldn't say it made an error because one foe or the other will be at its back and it has no way of "knowing" who is fighter or rogue or whatever, so it moved to try to position itself to the current threat after the fighter moved.With your ruling, the only thing that would be good would be to hold the reaction to get an OA as the fighter passes, but if there is room to move he can move into the rear position and never pass through the orc's reach until that square--so no OA for that then.[ATTACH=full]130860[/ATTACH]And now the orc as either to change its facing or allow the fighter to attack with advantage. Now, this is true only in this case. In other cases with your idea of the rear "leaving your reach" the orc might get an OA. It just depends. It still doesn't make sense to me to allow an OA when some is moving behind you, but you see it that way so okay.  <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷‍♂️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-2642.png" title="Man shrugging    :man_shrugging:" data-shortname=":man_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /> I'm not here to try to change your mind. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />Several more decision points to arrive at basically the same thing isn't a good thing IMO, especially since 5E is supposed to be simpler when possible.Since it appeals to you, kudos!I do think limiting the advantage to few allies helps balance out flanking (however it is achieved) so I am totally onboard with that. Facing does help with "hiding" for rogues, so I, too, am all for that. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />FWIW, we already use facing in our VTT and the rear advantage mechanic. For flanking, you have to use your bonus action to grant your ally advantage on their next attack (not all of them, just the next one). Those have balanced it out well for us, but thanks again for providing more detail. Much appreciated. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification