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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8496760" data-attributes="member: 6779196">Again, people complained about the lack of flanking option in the open playtest, and WotC said they weren’t going to include flanking by default because flanking is difficult to use without a grid and they didn’t want a grid to be an expectation. They suggested those who wanted a flanking rule grant advantage for it. That’s the reason it’s an optional rule in the DMG; because it’s something WotC was well aware a lot of players wanted, but they had a specific design reason they didn’t want it to be a rule in the base game.A lot of the optional rules in the DMG are like that - slower natural healing and the resting variants are the same way. There are also some optional rules in there that were default rules at one point in the playtest, but feedback showed that most players didn’t like it - proficiency dice and healer’s kit dependency come to mind.The optional rules that strike me as half-baked are the ones that were never (to my knowledge) in the playtest or requested by playtesters. Honor and Sanity scores, for example.I agree that flanking has undesirable outcomes on play in 5e. But, I don’t think that’s evidence it wasn’t well thought-out. Rather, I think they thought it out quite well because it was something a lot of their player base wanted, and they came to the conclusion that it wouldn’t play well, so they left it out of the base game but included it as an “optional rule” to satisfy the folks who were adamant that the game needed it.</blockquote>

Verification