UA Facing?

[FCWesel]

If you are moving MORE then 5' step (or staying still) you can change your facing every square you enter and then once at the end of the move.

If you are staying still or making a 5' step you can move ONCE in the round as a free action. You can move additionally as a Move Action.

You could easily allow more "turnings", or even do it so that you get 1 free one plus one per Dex bonus if one isn't enough for you.

FYI, Whirlwind Attack lets you attack anyone in any area without the -5/-10 penalty. There's also a feat that aids in reducing those same penalties to spot checks by 5.

 

[Azlan]

Although I like the idea of facing, this doesn't sound like a great solution to me -- turning around once in six seconds is a little silly.

That's why I think the following addition should be added to this rules variant (that is, if it isn't already): In response to an opponent positioning himself at your flank or rear, provided you are already aware of that opponent, you may make a facing change during a turn that is not your own, but you may do this only once per combat round.

That way, a lone opponent could not run circles around you, stabbing you in the back. It's only when you're facing multiple opponents that you should be susceptable to being attacked from the flanks and/or the rear.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

It seems to me that the real winners from the facing system would be rogues (already discussed) and characters with Spring Attack. Under the facing rules, a character with spring attack could pretty much be guaranteed an attack at his opponent's back every round and might not even have to risk having his opponent circle around him.

Unless the rules are much better than they sound here, I'll stick with no facing.

 

[Silveras]

I have not used the rules yet, but I wanted to dispel any misconceptions.

You may change facing as you move, picking a new facing as you enter each square on the grid.

You may also change facing at the end of your movement.

If your movement is limited to a 5 ft step for some reason, of if you choose not to move, THEN you may use a free action to change facing (on your turn, not someone else's).

Moving forward (into a space defined as your front) is normal; moving into a flank or rear space costs double. As you move, designate your facing as you enter each square.

As noted, attacking into your flank area is done at -5, and to your rear at -10.

Attacking a being from its flank squares (no need for another characer on the other side) gets you +2 to hit. Attacking from the rear area gets you +4, instead.

Some feats and class abilities (Cleave and Great Cleave, Combat Reflexes, Mounted Combat, Whirlwind Attack, Improved Uncanny Dodge) have "special case" rules. Cleave attacks, for example, can be made to the flank areas with no penalty. A rider with Mounted Combat can attack into his mount's flank areas with no penalty. Whirlwind Attack allows attacks in any direction without penalty. Improved Uncanny Dodge negates an attacker's flanking or rear direction attack bonus.

Much of the rest of the section spends time describing how special-case creatures (Beholders, for example) are handled.

Hope that helps.

 

[Silveras]

Note that there is also a new feat described that reduces the perception penalties for the flanks and rear.

Also, there is a "variant of the variant" that adds shield facing rules.

 

[MerricB]

Of course, the problems inherent in how you turn in a reactive manner are the problems that the abstract facing of 3E tries to solve.

Cheers!

 

[Stalker0]

Of course, the problems inherent in how you turn in a reactive manner are the problems that the abstract facing of 3E tries to solve.

Cheers!

THat's why I'm hoping my dm willl try this rule, just so he'll stop whining how there's no facing in 3e

 

[Etan Moonstar]

It seems to me that the real winners from the facing system would be rogues (already discussed) and characters with Spring Attack. Under the facing rules, a character with spring attack could pretty much be guaranteed an attack at his opponent's back every round and might not even have to risk having his opponent circle around him.

Unless the rules are much better than they sound here, I'll stick with no facing.

Rogues BENEFIT from this rule? Per core 3.5 rules, once a rogue gets into a flanking position, he gets sneak attack with every attack he makes until the opponent goes down or is no longer flanked (this is very important for two-weapon fighters or rogues with high enough levels to gain multiple attacks). With facing, any intelligent opponent is going to face in such a fashion that the rogue will not be able to get into a rear square by taking a 5' step; thus, whether the rogue subsequently tumbles into the rear square or not, the rogue has now been limited to one sneak attack per round (as you cannot take a move action and make a full attack). A halfling rogue with a 12 Strength dual-wielding small shortswords for a whopping 1d4 damage each (to use an example from our current game) does not need to have his sneak attack damage nerfed in this manner.

 

[Etan Moonstar]

My point is that if you make sneak attacks too easy, you make rogues better fighters than fighters are.

It's the major pitfall of most facing systems.

Compare the average damage potential of a typical rogue (relatively low strength and using a modestly damaging weapon) with the average damage potential of a typical fighter (relatively high strength, greatly damaging weapon, and stuff like Power Attack and Cleave as a virtual given). Also compare relative defensive abilities; while the rogue will have a higher Dex, the fighter will typically wear heavy enough armor to compensate (and either a shield, thus boosting his defense more, or a two-handed weapon, thus boosting damage potential more); the fighter also has vastly more hps. Finally, keep in mind that the fighter gets to deal his maximum potential damage in any situation he comes across, regardless of flanking or creature type, while the rogue's sneak attack is only useful in certain situations. A couple of extra d6 of damage does not come even close to making the rogue a better fighter than a fighter; it does stop the rogue from sitting there feeling useless while the fighters wade in and hack, the clerics buff and bash, and the wizards sling spells by giving the rogue an option that requires a certain higher degree of tactical planning--get flanking position and sneak attack.

 

[Silveras]

Rogues BENEFIT from this rule? Per core 3.5 rules, once a rogue gets into a flanking position, he gets sneak attack with every attack he makes until the opponent goes down or is no longer flanked (this is very important for two-weapon fighters or rogues with high enough levels to gain multiple attacks). With facing, any intelligent opponent is going to face in such a fashion that the rogue will not be able to get into a rear square by taking a 5' step; thus, whether the rogue subsequently tumbles into the rear square or not, the rogue has now been limited to one sneak attack per round (as you cannot take a move action and make a full attack). A halfling rogue with a 12 Strength dual-wielding small shortswords for a whopping 1d4 damage each (to use an example from our current game) does not need to have his sneak attack damage nerfed in this manner.

I agree. The Rogue "benefits" in that s/he no longer needs another character to set up a sneak attack against a foe who is not denied Dex bonus, but the new rules also deny the Rogue sneak attacks unless they come from the "rear area"; the sides ("flanks") do not enable sneak attacks.

This will make combats longer, as creatures maneuver more to put their backs to a wall or other cover.