Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DarkMaster" data-source="post: 1403240" data-attributes="member: 16362">Sorry stupid is a bit extreme, but I agree the rule was not well prepared. I like the idea of adding the perception part to the equation.Aware is the knowledge that somebody is flanking you. If your character has no way of detecting the presence of that opponent he is not aware of it. Well in the case that you know two people are attacking you you are aware of the second opponent even if he is not attacking you. Then flanking would be logical since you are taking defensive measure against that unknown opponent therefore reducing your capability against the other foe. Also don't forget that you need both the perception and the position aspect to gain the flanking effect. When two opponent are facing you, you are aware of them both but they don't get the flanking bonus.No if he is not aware of the invisible opponent the one attacking do not get the bonus until he can see the other guy.Also turning the back was not an option when you were flanked, now it is. The new ruling allow the defender to decide if he is flanked or not, before he had no choices. Simply threatening an area was enough to provide the flanking bonus, theoritically the invisible creature could hover around without ever attacking and keep on providing the flanking bonus to the other creature, now it is impossible(that is a good thing).I don't agree with your last sentence, what about two invisible creature flanking the wizard, the first one attacking will not get the bonus (would still get the one for being invisible) the second one would. before both would get it.Now what are the repercution of giving that power to the defender, guess we will have to do our own experimentation at our tables.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DarkMaster, post: 1403240, member: 16362"] Sorry stupid is a bit extreme, but I agree the rule was not well prepared. I like the idea of adding the perception part to the equation. Aware is the knowledge that somebody is flanking you. If your character has no way of detecting the presence of that opponent he is not aware of it. Well in the case that you know two people are attacking you you are aware of the second opponent even if he is not attacking you. Then flanking would be logical since you are taking defensive measure against that unknown opponent therefore reducing your capability against the other foe. Also don't forget that you need both the perception and the position aspect to gain the flanking effect. When two opponent are facing you, you are aware of them both but they don't get the flanking bonus. No if he is not aware of the invisible opponent the one attacking do not get the bonus until he can see the other guy. Also turning the back was not an option when you were flanked, now it is. The new ruling allow the defender to decide if he is flanked or not, before he had no choices. Simply threatening an area was enough to provide the flanking bonus, theoritically the invisible creature could hover around without ever attacking and keep on providing the flanking bonus to the other creature, now it is impossible(that is a good thing). I don't agree with your last sentence, what about two invisible creature flanking the wizard, the first one attacking will not get the bonus (would still get the one for being invisible) the second one would. before both would get it. Now what are the repercution of giving that power to the defender, guess we will have to do our own experimentation at our tables. [/QUOTE]

Verification