Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rogue Agent" data-source="post: 5924648" data-attributes="member: 6673496">That would be incorrect. Although it didn't use the term &quot;opportunity attacks&quot;, AD&amp;D did include opportunity attack mechanics. The term &quot;attack of opportunity&quot; actually comes from the AD&amp;D 2.5 rulebooks, but those rules simply centralized several mechanics that had&nbsp; been present since AD&amp;D1.&nbsp;(1) Characters could choose to either &quot;fall back&quot; or &quot;flee&quot;. And&nbsp; choosing to &quot;flee&quot; meant opening yourself up to a rear attack from your&nbsp; opponent. &nbsp;(2) Spells were specifically delayed until after other attacks had been&nbsp; resolved so that they could be disrupted in pretty much exactly the way&nbsp; AoOs allow.&nbsp;(3) The rules for grappling allowed armed targets to make an attack&nbsp; first. If the attack was successful that &quot;indicate<s> that the attacker&nbsp; trying to grapple, pummel or overbear hos been fended or driven off, and&nbsp; the attack is unsuccessful. The weapon-wielder then has the opportunity&nbsp; to strike at the weaponless one &quot;for real&quot;, if he or she so chooses.&quot;&nbsp; Sound familiar?</s>&nbsp;<s></s><s>And so forth.</s><s></s><s>Turn-based systems, in general, require some form of interrupt mechanic in order to mitigate some of the bizarre side effects the otherwise beneficial abstraction of turn-taking creates.</s><s></s><s>With all of that being said: The mere absence of these mechanics from the playtest packet seems almost meaningless. There are lots and lots and lots of things missing from the playtest packet. Those bemoaning the missing elements are fooling themselves just as much as those praising the seeming minimalism of 5E.</s></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rogue Agent, post: 5924648, member: 6673496"] That would be incorrect. Although it didn't use the term "opportunity attacks", AD&D did include opportunity attack mechanics. The term "attack of opportunity" actually comes from the AD&D 2.5 rulebooks, but those rules simply centralized several mechanics that had been present since AD&D1. (1) Characters could choose to either "fall back" or "flee". And choosing to "flee" meant opening yourself up to a rear attack from your opponent. (2) Spells were specifically delayed until after other attacks had been resolved so that they could be disrupted in pretty much exactly the way AoOs allow. (3) The rules for grappling allowed armed targets to make an attack first. If the attack was successful that "indicate[s] that the attacker trying to grapple, pummel or overbear hos been fended or driven off, and the attack is unsuccessful. The weapon-wielder then has the opportunity to strike at the weaponless one "for real", if he or she so chooses." Sound familiar? And so forth. Turn-based systems, in general, require some form of interrupt mechanic in order to mitigate some of the bizarre side effects the otherwise beneficial abstraction of turn-taking creates. With all of that being said: The mere absence of these mechanics from the playtest packet seems almost meaningless. There are lots and lots and lots of things missing from the playtest packet. Those bemoaning the missing elements are fooling themselves just as much as those praising the seeming minimalism of 5E.[/s] [/QUOTE]

Verification