Flanking/Facing

[Tzun]

I know some people hate the optional flanking rule. I enjoy it because of the extra dimension of positional tactics it brings to combat but I don't like the way it's done in the DMG for 5E.

Our DM introduced the facing rule in a game once to implement flanking. I don't know where the rule came from. It was interesting but a little too fiddly because the players could change facing with a free action and change with a reaction when being attacked. It just slowed things down too much.

So here's my reworking of the flanking/facing rule. The idea is that the player does not get to directly control their facing and fiddle around with it slowing down the game.

Rule: In melee, you automatically face the target of your attack. The targeted creature automatically faces and maintains it's facing on the melee attacker that attacks it first. Subsequent melee attacks on the targeted creature's sides and/or back (as determined by the direction it's facing) has +2 on their attack rolls.

Any comments, potential issues, suggestions are welcome.

[MoiMagnus]

I've played with the Flanking rule, and while we liked the tactical gameplay from it,we found that the fact that it gave advantage was not a good idea. Not only did advantage became really easy to obtain, but it made a lot of other way of getting an advantage mostly useless.
We no longer play with it, but if we were to re-add it, we would probably try "+1d4 to attack roll" instead of "advantage".

I find that facing rules do not work at all in 5e since you can go around anybody without problem. Contrary to prior editions, you don't get opportunity attack from turning around someone, you only get an opportunity attack if you leave the control zone.
I fear that facing rules like your would just end being "It's my turn, I go behind you and attack you. It's your turn, you go behind me and attack me. Etc."

[nickl_2000]

Assuming this is 5e, we simplify it at our table.

If you are flanking you get +1 to your attack roll. If you get advantage to your attack for some other reason, you don't get the +1. Monsters get the same bonus and use it all the time.

[Tzun]

In this facing rule you are always facing your initial attacker. If they circle around you, you're still facing them. You would require a second attacker and only that second attacker gains advantage because the targeted creature has his attention or "facing" on the initial attacker. The rule in the DMG says that if 2 attackers are on opposite sides of a target creature, both attackers get advantage. I agree that flanking can trivialize some class abilities like the samurai subclass, but I really like the added tactical dimension and I'm hoping this new rule makes flanking a little less powerful. Another way to nerf it a bit is maybe only give a +2 to attack, kind of like the archery fighting style.

[Zman]

Facing rules end up being really fidly and difficult to model well. IMO, Flanking rules can be done well and add a depth of tactics that is desirable.

Advantage for Flanking is rough, it's just too good. Adding 1d4 isn't bad for flanking though.

I'm partial to this... it is quick and easy to apply and acts as an incentive for moving around.

Flanking
Positioned on in one of the opposing three squares/hexes from an ally threatening the target in melee. Gain a +1 bonus to hit.

Perfect Flank
Position in the directly opposite square/hex from an ally threatening the target in melee. Gain a +2 bonus to hit.

[Tzun]

...
Flanking
Positioned on in one of the opposing three squares/hexes from an ally threatening the target in melee. Gain a +1 bonus to hit.

Perfect Flank
Position in the directly opposite square/hex from an ally threatening the target in melee. Gain a +2 bonus to hit.

So everyone flanking the creature gets the bonus?

I updated the rule. I think I like the +2 instead of advantage.

[Dienekes]

I've been using Flanked and Surrounded.

Flanking gives +2.

If an enemy is Flanked twice over, they are Surrounded and instead get +5.

But then I've also a tendency to throw minions at my players, so while they can use the flanking bonus pretty consistently, I don't think they've ever pulled off a Surrounded bonus. While the horde of goblins have gotten it a few times.

[Tzun]

I've been using Flanked and Surrounded.

Flanking gives +2.

If an enemy is Flanked twice over, they are Surrounded and instead get +5.

But then I've also a tendency to throw minions at my players, so while they can use the flanking bonus pretty consistently, I don't think they've ever pulled off a Surrounded bonus. While the horde of goblins have gotten it a few times.

Wow sounds pretty brutal if you get surrounded although probably serves you right if get yourself in that mess. That's when the optional cleave rule would be useful. :)

[Zman]

So everyone flanking the creature gets the bonus?

I updated the rule. I think I like the +2 instead of advantage.

Yes, both Flankers get the bonus, ie the flanked creature is dividing their attention equally.

[BerzerkerUnit]

I’m considering flanking rules preventing AoOs. So when you and an ally threaten a target the target can’t take AoO.