|
7 months ago ::
Oct 31, 2012 - 10:29AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2009
|
I hope I am not dredging up already discussed topics here, but with the Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic, why have a prone character be at a -2 on attack rolls instead of Disadvantage?
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Oct 31, 2012 - 4:01PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jan 28, 2010
|
I always wondered about it myself.
I mean at one point they will add +1 and -1 bonuses all over the place on all kinds of rolls through spells anyway to keep the game interesting (they already do).
I wish the core rules would have stayed clear of these tiny minuses and pluses.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 01, 2012 - 3:40AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Oct 30, 2012
|
Yup agreed.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 01, 2012 - 4:00AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
Propably because they didn't want prone to be a penality as stiff as what disadvantage impose and
Also in 4E prone impose a -2 to attack roll only and may be they wanted to retain it
Yan
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 01, 2012 - 4:50AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
Also it doesn't harm the prone sniper as much.
Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds.
Constitution Based Class for Next!
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 01, 2012 - 8:31AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jan 28, 2010
|
Shooting a bow precisely while you are prone is indeed near impossible. Crossbows however...
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 01, 2012 - 9:41AM
#7
|
|
|
Same here, they should just change it to disadvantage (with the exception of crossbows).
Also, I don't like that getting up is only 5 feet of movement (instead of full movement) I find that take's a bit away from the advantage of knocking someone on the ground.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 01, 2012 - 12:38PM
#8
|
|
|
I wondered about it at first, but I understand now why it's done that way.
A -2 is a lesser penalty than disadvantage. If they both took disadvantage, then if two combatants were fighting from a distance, one of them dropping prone would simply give them both the same penalty to hit each other. But in reality, it should be harder for the guy standing up to hit the guy on the ground than vice versa. Otherwise you have no tactical advantage to being prone. It's just a choice of, "hey, let's equally penalize both of us, while making me vulnerable to melee attacks to boot!"
It's a good rule.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 01, 2012 - 12:40PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Apr 21, 2007
|
If you put too many ways to get disadvantage they cancel eachother out. You need a little stacking or else the game will be too simple/boring.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 05, 2012 - 9:49AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
May 26, 2010
|
Also, I don't like that getting up is only 5 feet of movement (instead of full movement) I find that take's a bit away from the advantage of knocking someone on the ground.
I agree heartily on this point. It comes up periodically in the forums that standing from prone needs to take more effort. There's something fundamentally wrong in the playtests about watching everyone, especially characters wieghted down by platemail or unathletic, spring back to their feet almost like nothing happened. Personally, I could see it costing all but 5 feet of movement instead of costing all movement, but I'd be content either way.
A manuever that lets characters do a kip up for expertise would be perfectly reasonable for cinemeatic gameplay, but the way the current rules apply to all characters pushes well passed my suspension of disbeleif.
|
|
|
