Is a Horse Still a 10 by 10 creature?/Should there be facing?

[The Little Raven]

What ease of play? The 10' fat horse clogs the battlemat something fierce. Its fat ass eats up so much room, the main way it eases play is by discouraging players from bringing their mounts to combat.

How does a creature whose footprint suggests it is facing 1 of 2 directions help a game that assumes any creature can be facing any 1 of 8 directions at any particular time? Sizing that implies facing in a system that doesn't use facing doesn't help in any way. It's useless.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I'm still trying to think of the 'bookkeeping' part you mentioned.

Unless people are blind, you're going to know what direction the miniature is facing. If you feel that the sneak attack MUST be a backstab as opposed to a stab in a vital organ, then hey, if you're in a 10 foot long five foot wide hallway with the fighter in full plate behind you and the sneaky rogue in front of you... which direction do you face?

It seems more simple than to me than I think it does to you.

As far as the mini getting knocked down, heck, do you know how many times people I've gamed with have forgotten to add aid and bless to their attack roles? Not a big deal.

And having miniature bases that are a little more representative would simply be 'nice'.

Simple things like someone bumping my mini, and then resetting it facing the wrong way, and me not noticing. Then something happens, like a "backstab" or a "side-flank" and things would have been extremely different if that minor mistake hadn't occurred.



But if you put facing in, then you have to make it relevant to the rules (so, backstab would only work against an enemy's rear). If no rules take advantage if the fact that this orc is facing away from me, then it's pointless to include facing.



Can you demonstrate anything that facing would add to the game, except additional bookkeeping in addition to your location/movement and extra rules clutter to deal with situations like attacking someone from the side/behind and whatnot?

 

[MerricB]

What layers of complexity would you foresee in a 6 second round?

Which direction are you facing? Seems pretty simple. It's not like backstabbing actually works like it used to.

Err... the reason backstabbing doesn't work like it used to is *because* they got rid of facing. The moment you put it back in, then you have to worry about a bunch more modifiers.

In oAD&D, the opponents your shields defends you against depends on...
-> your facing,
-> what side they attack you from (only protects you from ahead and left flank attacks)
-> how big your shield is

Of course, when can you change your facing...
-> whenever someone attacks you?
-> only during your turn?
-> whenever someone moves next to you?

When a horse moves, can it...
-> move any direction
-> need it turn? How much does it cost?
-> Does turning provoke AoO?
-> go backwards, or only forward?

If you're facing one direction, what does that mean about Spot checks?

Cheers!

 

[The Little Raven]

It seems more simple than to me than I think it does to you.

That's because you're oversimplifying things in order to avoid the potential problems it has. I've brought up several issues it introduces to the game, which you haven't addressed. Since Merric has a cleaner and itemized list of those issues, address them with something other than "My group doesn't worry about this," if you would be so kind.

As far as the mini getting knocked down, heck, do you know how many times people I've gamed with have forgotten to add aid and bless to their attack roles? Not a big deal.

"You forgot your +1 damage" is a far cry from "You weren't facing the right direction, so you didn't get your Spot check to notice that assassin creeping towards your cleric," which is an example problem facing presents.

And having miniature bases that are a little more representative would simply be 'nice'.

Yeah, it would be nice, but it still doesn't give me any reasons why facing adds something positive to the game. I'm asking "What good does it provide?" and you're responding with "Well, it isn't all bad."

 

[Pygon]

When I was seriously DMing 3.5 for the first time and had a couple Huge centipedes attack the party while they rested, I realized how awkward square bases are. The centipedes should really only take up 15'x5', not 15'x15'! Still, square bases avoid certain difficulties. If you're surrounded in combat as a rectangle, you can't even turn!

What might be nice, however, is a clear abstraction to handle exceptions for creatures like these centipedes. They should be able to stand beside each other and only take up a space 10'-20' wide as long as their attentions are focused that way, yet find some way to allow them to reorient themselves should they choose a different facing.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

What might be nice, however, is a clear abstraction to handle exceptions for creatures like these centipedes. They should be able to stand beside each other and only take up a space 10'-20' wide as long as their attentions are focused that way, yet find some way to allow them to reorient themselves should they choose a different facing.

And that is one of the major problems, there is no good way I can come up with that would allow this easily.

Not only that, but facing encourages the idea that you are playing a turn based game. In 6 seconds you watch someone walk up right behind you and stab you in the back without ever turning around....unless you add rules for being able to turn around in the middle of other people's turns. Then you need to know how many times you an turn in one turn. And you aren't capable of doing what most heroes do in movies(parrying a blow on one side of you, knocking the person off balance and within a second twirling around behind you to block a blow of another enemy).

 

[Henrix]

Facing is ridiculous in six second rounds. Any trained fighter can turn in a fraction of a second.

What matters is if you're surrounded and thus have to split your attention.

Facing out of combat, and not noticing opponents, is another matter, however.

 

[Klaus]

One of the things I thought was incredibly lame about 3.5 was a horse going from 10 by 5 to 10 by 10.

How's 4e handle that whole situation? Must things like purple worms still be circular?

Or to ask another question, what exactly is the problem with facing?

I can't believe this is still being misunderstood.

In 3.5, a horse ISN'T a 10x10 creature. A horse NEEDS a 10x10 space to fight *effectively*. A horse can certainly fight inside a 5x10 space, but it will not be as effective in it, as represented by the attack/AC penalties from squeezing.

In battle without facing, a horse (and all other creatures) are assumed to be constantly circling about, keeping an eye on all of its sides. If you see an image of cowboys trying to restrain a bucking horse, you'll see that they form a rough circle around the creature, which, in D&D, is translated into a square.

 

[MerricB]

When I was seriously DMing 3.5 for the first time and had a couple Huge centipedes attack the party while they rested, I realized how awkward square bases are. The centipedes should really only take up 15'x5', not 15'x15'!

Actually, in a lot of cases, centipedes should take up 50'x1', not 15'x15'! It's an abstraction, but a useful one.

Cheers!

 

[vagabundo]

What ease of play? The 10' fat horse clogs the battlemat something fierce. Its fat ass eats up so much room, the main way it eases play is by discouraging players from bringing their mounts to combat.

Have you ever tried to manoeuvre a horse around in RL? It does take up a lot of room. out in the open it shouldn't matter much, bring one into the dungeon should cause spacing problems.