To Face or not to Face, that is the question

[Li Shenron]

Personally, I rule that "no facing" only applies in combat situations or similar, where you're making as sure as possible that your back is free (and if it's not, you turn around). In a non-combat situation, creatures do face certain ways.

I like doing the same as you, although I tend to say the standard is no-facing, and facing rules apply outside of combat only (and always end up to be just a circumstance modifier to some rolls, usually Spot).

Also as a general D&D rule characters are always supposed to be doing the best they can. This means there's no point for the last PC in the party line to walk backwards "to keep an eye on the back", because he's implicitly doing that. Removing this sort of implicity just leads to a boring matter of players always saying the same thing...

Already mentioned the fact that in 3ed the round is too long to have facing. It is actually very unrealistic that one could move from anywhere to someone's back in battle without the other noticing.

UA facing rules are too complicated for my taste, and they are not designed with realism in mind but rather to be mechanically solid/rigid (easy to adjudicate).

 

[DreamChaser]

I like No Face.

heh heh heh. i believe that is "noh" face. LOL We should all put masks on our mini's to show which way they are pointing.

DC

 

[DreamChaser]

I have a hard time seeing how taking a problem, and then exacerbating the problem, results in a satisfying result.

in what way does the square space rule exacerbate the "horse oozes back on itself" problem? It may create new problems but it does not make old problems worse.

Changing the rules to make everything square increased the need for squeezing rules and make the "can't enter a creature's square" rule a little harder to accept but it did solve the problem it was designed to solve.

DC

 

[Gaiden]

I want to play a Rogue in Gaiden's campaign...

No you don't .

My campaigns are killer - ask any of my players.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

No kiddin' they're deadly, Gaiden. Anyone who gets in combat with more than one opponent dies!

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Facing...

I dont mind the lack of facing, and have seen some relatively elegant rules for adding facing without causing too much fuss.. but they are on my computer at home.

The short version, as I recall it:

Facing only matters in combat. Using minitures shows which way you are facing.
There are 8 directions you can face.
You can change direction for free with every 5' of movement, or pay 5' of movement to turn in place.
Flanking can be done by one character who attacks from your side when another opponent is threatening you. The bonus to hit doubles {to +4} when attacking from the exact rear. True backstabbing.


IIRC, thats about it. It adds a spice of tactical consideration with very little overhead.

 

[ViciousPenguin]

One vote for verisimilitude

I'm going to cast my vote with the nay-sayers here.

* I have an issue with horses that are 10 feet wide (and snakes, and 20 foot wide behirs, etc.).
* I have an issue with a tower shield, a portable wall weighing half a ton, providing you with 360 deg. of total cover. (PHB: pg 125, col 2, para 4 - for the unaware.)
* I have a problem with not being able to sneak up 'behind' someone, especially when it's noisy and they're distracted.

Simple facing rules do not add a great deal of complexity to the game, but they do add a lot to the level of verisimilitude. The key word there, of course, is 'simple'.

 

[DreamChaser]

Facing only matters in combat. Using minitures shows which way you are facing.
There are 8 directions you can face.
You can change direction for free with every 5' of movement, or pay 5' of movement to turn in place.
Flanking can be done by one character who attacks from your side when another opponent is threatening you. The bonus to hit doubles {to +4} when attacking from the exact rear. True backstabbing.

And with everything in the 6 second combat round of D&D happening virtually simultaniously, I can see why I would allow that person to waltz behind me and stab me in the back.

The ultimate problem with facing rules is that D&D is not sequence based. In such a system, everyone takes a portion of their rounds action in initiative order and then again and again until everything is done. In such a system, if a person moved behind you, you would have the option, on your next sequence to turn to face them or let them be behind you, or turn partially or leave the area altogether. This makes facing seem realistic.

However, there aren't sequences within rounds in D&D so facing, IMO, seems absurd.

If there were sequences (which would slow combat down MASSIVELY) it might work something like this:

4 sequences in a round:
standard move = 2 sequences (one half on one sequence, other half on the other)
move action = 2 sequences (begin on first, complete on second)
double move = 4 sequences (1/2 of normal move on each sequence)
5' adjustment =0 sequences
standard action/attack = 2 sequences (one sequence to prep, second is attack)
full attack = 4 sequences (attacks divided evenly over sequences, 1st sequence is the last to get an attack)
charge = 4 sequences (move on all four--up to 1/2 movement in each--and attack on last)
full round action = 4 sequences (finishes in 1st sequence of next round, can free, immediate, swift actions = 0 sequences

Feats like spring attack and ride by attack would allow you to put your movement in sequences 1 & 4 rather than 1 & 2 or 3 & 4.

Dang would I hate to run combat like this. I think my players would string me up too.

DC

 

[Fieari]

Regardless of the realism with regards to the 6 second round, my players find facing more ENJOYABLE, in a tactical kind of way. They -like- being able to get behind a monster. They accept that it works both ways. The fact that the miniatures are clearly facing in one direction or another makes them really want to take advantage of that.

So for the sake of fun, we have facing. Your group may not like it, but for mine, NOT having facing seems awkward and wrong.

 

[TracerBullet42]

We've been using facing ever since Unearthed Arcana came out, and I have to say that I enjoy the facing rules. They are simple and easy enough to put into play, and I just think it makes combat more fun.

So Gaiden...you're not alone.