How can I, as DM, avoid the Conga Line of Death occurring when implementing some form of flanking rule?How do you improve Death Saves for the character?Mini Six: How can I avoid the “dodge” skill tax?House rules for flankingHow to effectively use summons when the house rule is that they remember?Can I Sneak Attack if I'm flanking and the opponent knows I'm there?What would change if opportunity attacks had more triggers?How can I modify attacks on creatures making Death Saves to have less Coup de Grace?Does the Instant Death rule apply to zombies too?Is it impossible to flank a large creature on a hex grid?Using the optional flanking rule, would a Spiritual Weapon on the other side of an enemy allow a character to benefit from flanking?

Should a narrator ever describe things based on a character's view instead of facts?

python displays `n` instead of breaking a line

Get top 1 row value from third table while joining 3 tables mssql

Why does the frost depth increase when the surface temperature warms up?

Would this string work as string?

What is the tangent at a sharp point on a curve?

is this saw blade faulty?

Why didn't Voldemort know what Grindelwald looked like?

Asserting that Atheism and Theism are both faith based positions

Comic-book: Kids find a dead female superhero in the woods

Why would five hundred and five same as one?

Capacitor electron flow

What's the meaning of "what it means for something to be something"?

Strange behavior in TikZ draw command

Highest stage count that are used one right after the other?

Reason why a kingside attack is not justified

I keep switching characters, how do I stop?

Do people actually use the word "kaputt" in conversation?

Can creatures abilities target that creature itself?

categorizing a variable turns it from insignificant to significant

What (if any) is the reason to buy in small local stores?

Abstract constant in java

Taking the numerator and the denominator

How are passwords stolen from companies if they only store hashes?



How can I, as DM, avoid the Conga Line of Death occurring when implementing some form of flanking rule?


How do you improve Death Saves for the character?Mini Six: How can I avoid the “dodge” skill tax?House rules for flankingHow to effectively use summons when the house rule is that they remember?Can I Sneak Attack if I'm flanking and the opponent knows I'm there?What would change if opportunity attacks had more triggers?How can I modify attacks on creatures making Death Saves to have less Coup de Grace?Does the Instant Death rule apply to zombies too?Is it impossible to flank a large creature on a hex grid?Using the optional flanking rule, would a Spiritual Weapon on the other side of an enemy allow a character to benefit from flanking?













19












$begingroup$


I’ve heard this phrase being thrown around sometimes on other game tables. Apparently, it describes a straight line of melee combatants on a grid, alternating between members of two opposing groups. This only occurs if the Flanking Variant Rule are used. Under these circumstances, the Conga Line of Death makes sense from a mechanical standpoint, as every melee combatant wants to get advantage on their attack rolls. If this rule were in place, player characters as well as NPCs would understand the in-universe ramifications and probably try to get into a superior position every time, leading to the aforementioned Conga Line of Death.



Now my question is: How can I, as DM, avoid the Conga Line of Death occurring when implementing some form of flanking rule?



The obvious answer would be: “Don’t use the Flanking Variant Rule”. Well, I for one like to grant some form of advantage, when two combatants gang up on their opponent. And it kind of makes sense, that it is easier to hit somebody who has to avoid the attacks of two enemies. So I want to keep Flanking in my game, but like to prevent the Conga Line of Death.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 13




    $begingroup$
    For those answering, please remember that this is not for idea generation. Answers should be supported by actual table experience on what things worked/didn't work/etc. Idea generation answers should be down voted.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    To clarify the last paragraph, are you looking for something that makes the Flanking rules, specifically, not result in the CLoD? Or is an alternative, which avoids the CLodD yet achieves the same effects you cite as reasons to keep Flanking, acceptable?
    $endgroup$
    – sevenbrokenbricks
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @sevenbrokenbricks The concept of Flanking makes sense to me and I would like to keep some form of beenfit resulting from it. But I am not married to the official Variant Flanking Rules. Feel free to suggest a better way if you have one.
    $endgroup$
    – hohenheim
    5 hours ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The Conga Line of Death should be a self-avoiding problem, because while every combatant is trying to maximize their own advantage, they are also trying to prevent their opponents from gaining any advantage.
    $endgroup$
    – asgallant
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    When asking for other flanking rules (per your comment above), are you looking for homebrew (TESTED!) variants or things to do instead of flanking? Whichever it is, please add it to your question.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    4 hours ago















19












$begingroup$


I’ve heard this phrase being thrown around sometimes on other game tables. Apparently, it describes a straight line of melee combatants on a grid, alternating between members of two opposing groups. This only occurs if the Flanking Variant Rule are used. Under these circumstances, the Conga Line of Death makes sense from a mechanical standpoint, as every melee combatant wants to get advantage on their attack rolls. If this rule were in place, player characters as well as NPCs would understand the in-universe ramifications and probably try to get into a superior position every time, leading to the aforementioned Conga Line of Death.



Now my question is: How can I, as DM, avoid the Conga Line of Death occurring when implementing some form of flanking rule?



The obvious answer would be: “Don’t use the Flanking Variant Rule”. Well, I for one like to grant some form of advantage, when two combatants gang up on their opponent. And it kind of makes sense, that it is easier to hit somebody who has to avoid the attacks of two enemies. So I want to keep Flanking in my game, but like to prevent the Conga Line of Death.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 13




    $begingroup$
    For those answering, please remember that this is not for idea generation. Answers should be supported by actual table experience on what things worked/didn't work/etc. Idea generation answers should be down voted.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    To clarify the last paragraph, are you looking for something that makes the Flanking rules, specifically, not result in the CLoD? Or is an alternative, which avoids the CLodD yet achieves the same effects you cite as reasons to keep Flanking, acceptable?
    $endgroup$
    – sevenbrokenbricks
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @sevenbrokenbricks The concept of Flanking makes sense to me and I would like to keep some form of beenfit resulting from it. But I am not married to the official Variant Flanking Rules. Feel free to suggest a better way if you have one.
    $endgroup$
    – hohenheim
    5 hours ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The Conga Line of Death should be a self-avoiding problem, because while every combatant is trying to maximize their own advantage, they are also trying to prevent their opponents from gaining any advantage.
    $endgroup$
    – asgallant
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    When asking for other flanking rules (per your comment above), are you looking for homebrew (TESTED!) variants or things to do instead of flanking? Whichever it is, please add it to your question.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    4 hours ago













19












19








19


1



$begingroup$


I’ve heard this phrase being thrown around sometimes on other game tables. Apparently, it describes a straight line of melee combatants on a grid, alternating between members of two opposing groups. This only occurs if the Flanking Variant Rule are used. Under these circumstances, the Conga Line of Death makes sense from a mechanical standpoint, as every melee combatant wants to get advantage on their attack rolls. If this rule were in place, player characters as well as NPCs would understand the in-universe ramifications and probably try to get into a superior position every time, leading to the aforementioned Conga Line of Death.



Now my question is: How can I, as DM, avoid the Conga Line of Death occurring when implementing some form of flanking rule?



The obvious answer would be: “Don’t use the Flanking Variant Rule”. Well, I for one like to grant some form of advantage, when two combatants gang up on their opponent. And it kind of makes sense, that it is easier to hit somebody who has to avoid the attacks of two enemies. So I want to keep Flanking in my game, but like to prevent the Conga Line of Death.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




I’ve heard this phrase being thrown around sometimes on other game tables. Apparently, it describes a straight line of melee combatants on a grid, alternating between members of two opposing groups. This only occurs if the Flanking Variant Rule are used. Under these circumstances, the Conga Line of Death makes sense from a mechanical standpoint, as every melee combatant wants to get advantage on their attack rolls. If this rule were in place, player characters as well as NPCs would understand the in-universe ramifications and probably try to get into a superior position every time, leading to the aforementioned Conga Line of Death.



Now my question is: How can I, as DM, avoid the Conga Line of Death occurring when implementing some form of flanking rule?



The obvious answer would be: “Don’t use the Flanking Variant Rule”. Well, I for one like to grant some form of advantage, when two combatants gang up on their opponent. And it kind of makes sense, that it is easier to hit somebody who has to avoid the attacks of two enemies. So I want to keep Flanking in my game, but like to prevent the Conga Line of Death.







dnd-5e house-rules flanking






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 31 mins ago









V2Blast

25k383155




25k383155










asked 9 hours ago









hohenheimhohenheim

2,5891260




2,5891260







  • 13




    $begingroup$
    For those answering, please remember that this is not for idea generation. Answers should be supported by actual table experience on what things worked/didn't work/etc. Idea generation answers should be down voted.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    To clarify the last paragraph, are you looking for something that makes the Flanking rules, specifically, not result in the CLoD? Or is an alternative, which avoids the CLodD yet achieves the same effects you cite as reasons to keep Flanking, acceptable?
    $endgroup$
    – sevenbrokenbricks
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @sevenbrokenbricks The concept of Flanking makes sense to me and I would like to keep some form of beenfit resulting from it. But I am not married to the official Variant Flanking Rules. Feel free to suggest a better way if you have one.
    $endgroup$
    – hohenheim
    5 hours ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The Conga Line of Death should be a self-avoiding problem, because while every combatant is trying to maximize their own advantage, they are also trying to prevent their opponents from gaining any advantage.
    $endgroup$
    – asgallant
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    When asking for other flanking rules (per your comment above), are you looking for homebrew (TESTED!) variants or things to do instead of flanking? Whichever it is, please add it to your question.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    4 hours ago












  • 13




    $begingroup$
    For those answering, please remember that this is not for idea generation. Answers should be supported by actual table experience on what things worked/didn't work/etc. Idea generation answers should be down voted.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    To clarify the last paragraph, are you looking for something that makes the Flanking rules, specifically, not result in the CLoD? Or is an alternative, which avoids the CLodD yet achieves the same effects you cite as reasons to keep Flanking, acceptable?
    $endgroup$
    – sevenbrokenbricks
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @sevenbrokenbricks The concept of Flanking makes sense to me and I would like to keep some form of beenfit resulting from it. But I am not married to the official Variant Flanking Rules. Feel free to suggest a better way if you have one.
    $endgroup$
    – hohenheim
    5 hours ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The Conga Line of Death should be a self-avoiding problem, because while every combatant is trying to maximize their own advantage, they are also trying to prevent their opponents from gaining any advantage.
    $endgroup$
    – asgallant
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    When asking for other flanking rules (per your comment above), are you looking for homebrew (TESTED!) variants or things to do instead of flanking? Whichever it is, please add it to your question.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    4 hours ago







13




13




$begingroup$
For those answering, please remember that this is not for idea generation. Answers should be supported by actual table experience on what things worked/didn't work/etc. Idea generation answers should be down voted.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
8 hours ago




$begingroup$
For those answering, please remember that this is not for idea generation. Answers should be supported by actual table experience on what things worked/didn't work/etc. Idea generation answers should be down voted.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
8 hours ago












$begingroup$
To clarify the last paragraph, are you looking for something that makes the Flanking rules, specifically, not result in the CLoD? Or is an alternative, which avoids the CLodD yet achieves the same effects you cite as reasons to keep Flanking, acceptable?
$endgroup$
– sevenbrokenbricks
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
To clarify the last paragraph, are you looking for something that makes the Flanking rules, specifically, not result in the CLoD? Or is an alternative, which avoids the CLodD yet achieves the same effects you cite as reasons to keep Flanking, acceptable?
$endgroup$
– sevenbrokenbricks
5 hours ago












$begingroup$
@sevenbrokenbricks The concept of Flanking makes sense to me and I would like to keep some form of beenfit resulting from it. But I am not married to the official Variant Flanking Rules. Feel free to suggest a better way if you have one.
$endgroup$
– hohenheim
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
@sevenbrokenbricks The concept of Flanking makes sense to me and I would like to keep some form of beenfit resulting from it. But I am not married to the official Variant Flanking Rules. Feel free to suggest a better way if you have one.
$endgroup$
– hohenheim
5 hours ago




3




3




$begingroup$
The Conga Line of Death should be a self-avoiding problem, because while every combatant is trying to maximize their own advantage, they are also trying to prevent their opponents from gaining any advantage.
$endgroup$
– asgallant
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
The Conga Line of Death should be a self-avoiding problem, because while every combatant is trying to maximize their own advantage, they are also trying to prevent their opponents from gaining any advantage.
$endgroup$
– asgallant
4 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
When asking for other flanking rules (per your comment above), are you looking for homebrew (TESTED!) variants or things to do instead of flanking? Whichever it is, please add it to your question.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
When asking for other flanking rules (per your comment above), are you looking for homebrew (TESTED!) variants or things to do instead of flanking? Whichever it is, please add it to your question.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
4 hours ago










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















42












$begingroup$

Negation of Advantage



At our table we use the Variant Flanking rules, however we noticed the same problem as yourself, and added the corollary that you cannot gain Advantage from a Flank if you yourself are being Flanked. The thematic justification was that you are busy trying to cover your own back and can't put all of your attention onto exploiting the enemy's defensive gaps.



This is justified mechanically under the rules for gaining advantage and disadvantage:




The GM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant Advantage or impose Disadvantage as a result.




It led to players holding formations, covering each others back and using the terrain more to their advantage, using low walls and pillars to block enemy movement into the now more limited flanking positions.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This seems like a good solution, can you describe the effects it had on the table? Did players stop using this strategy?
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    7 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @Rubiksmoose, Done so, the general effect was basically using terrain and relying on one another for protection, not just to kill the enemy ASAP. I also really need to memorise the format for title lines...
    $endgroup$
    – Fifth_H0r5eman
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Hmm... under your house rule, does a flanked flanker still provide advantage for the other flanker on the opposite side of the enemy, or do both flankers lose the advantage if either of them is also flanked? That is, if we have a line like AXBY, where A and B are allies and X and Y are their enemies, do A and Y still have advantage on attacks against X and B respectively? (The way you've described the rule, it would seem that they do -- but wouldn't that still create an incentive to extend the conga line further?)
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    6 hours ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
    $endgroup$
    – Fifth_H0r5eman
    6 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Noted. I just didn't want you to have to explain that stuff again after the comments get cleaned up if the same curiosities/ambiguities arise again.
    $endgroup$
    – Bloodcinder
    3 hours ago


















10












$begingroup$

We have not experienced the conga line, it may not be as a big of a concern as you think



My tables have used the flanking rules on a grid for about 5 years and we're a heavily combat focused group - and I don't think we've ever gotten in a congo line. This may be a mix of our own playstyle just not wanting to conga line, but I think it's also in how we approach combat.



But why? That's one is a better harder to parse, but I think it's for a few reasons:



  1. Grouping together leads to possible Fireball Formations (everyone being caught in an Area Effect if cast)

  2. Enemies are a mix of melee and ranged attacks that forces the group to work together across the map

  3. Enemies have often come in waves which also forces us to be prepared. Keeping everyone centralized or in a line does not put us in a defensible position to cover each other.

The above are possible reasons why we haven't experienced it which makes me think maybe this isn't as much of a problem as you think it may be.



As a DM, you should be considering tactics. As players, we are aware of and concerned about Area Effect spells (including things that travel along a straight line) and if this tactic starts to become overused, you can counter with those types of spells and using creatures with resistance/immunity to the associated damage types to let your players know that this choice may not be the safest.



Given the above, I wouldn't make any changes/do anything different until you actually see a problem occurring at your table.



But utilizing some of the things I've noticed about our encounter designs may help reduce the odds if you do start to see your players lining up for you :)



Flanking does present another issue: More advantage triggered mechanics



The most 'problematic' thing I've seen with flanking is that minimizes the difficulty of getting advantage for many abilities that trigger off of that mechanic. It's much easier to get, which means those abilities trigger much more often (and other abilities become unnecessary because it's relatively easy to flank compared to the other advantage giving mechanics.)






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    #1 doesn't seem like as much of a countermeasure given that the "conga line of death" is a line alternating between the enemies and you/your allies, all in a line for the purposes of flanking. Thus, fireball would affect the other enemies as much as it does you/your allies, so enemies are unlikely to fireball the whole group (unless they're a third party opposed to both groups).
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    29 mins ago


















2












$begingroup$

Help!



Our table uses the Help action (use your action to grant advantage to an ally) to do this. If you use this instead of the capital-F Flanking rules to represent better manpower resulting in advantages, it does mean someone’s going to have to spend their action not attacking and this isn’t quite as powerful (for players or enemies), but it still allows the gang-up effect you’re wanting to preserve and, being usable from anywhere around the enemy, eliminates the Conga Line of Death.



So far at our table, it’s resulted in battle lines rather than conga lines, even with a rogue in the party.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    To be fair, the Help action is not a house rule (not that you specifically said it was).
    $endgroup$
    – Captain Man
    6 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
    $endgroup$
    – sevenbrokenbricks
    6 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    -1 because OP specifically asked for answers not to include "don't use flanking", which is what you're saying here.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
    $endgroup$
    – sevenbrokenbricks
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Kinda sorta. But they are using flanking - why would a character opt for the Help action when they can get the same effect and still have their action? WHat's the incentive?
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    4 hours ago


















0












$begingroup$

Noah Antwiler has a video about the Conga Line of Death. At ~29:52 into the video, he suggests using group initiative to prevent the Conga Line of Death forming in a combat encounter.



Although I haven't tried this rule, the Side Initiative option (page 270 in the 5e DMG) allows players to use group initiative. Since players & monsters are moving as a group rather than one by one, combatants would be encouraged to maintain a solid rank (shoulder to shoulder) to avoid being flanked.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    0












    $begingroup$

    If the benefit from flanking is significant enough that you'd be foolish to turn it down (and we can argue about that another time), then equally, being flanked imposes a penalty that you'd be foolish to accept. Given the premise, people should be stepping out of the conga line to avoid being flanked as often as they step into it to flank others. Which means that the conga line will never have an opportunity to form.





    share








    New contributor




    Ross Thompson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    $endgroup$




















      -3












      $begingroup$

      The monsters aren't stupid. A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight. So (if you're the DM) have the monsters pick a target and try to knock them unconscious before moving on to the next. This doesn't mean drawing attacks of opportunity - don't take more damage than you should.



      And now that I've mentioned attacks of opportunity: 5e is really bad for flanking. Why? It's because you can freely move around opponents without provoking attacks of opportunity, so flanking is essentially free. If you use the 3.5 rules attacks of opportunity, it works out better. To make it work, you also need the 5-foot step. The relevant changes:



      • Moving out of a threatened square provokes an AOO, even if you remain within the creature's reach.


      • Once a turn, if you make no other movement during the turn, you may move 5 feet without provoking an attack of opportunity for free.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        Have you tried flanking with these rules and experienced these 'really bad' issues? 5e and 3.5e are different rulesets, saying variant rules are bad compared to another system isn't necessarily a fair comparison - especially if you haven't actually used these rules at your table. If you have, please add that.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        7 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @NautArch Yes, I have. The problem isn't a playability thing. It's really bad from a game design perspective; having flanking with 5e's AoO rules leads to a degenerate combat system, where the answer to "How to fight in melee" is always "flank", which doesn't occur in 3.5. It's bad because the design goals of the system are different - 5e is less a miniatures combat game than 3.5 is. That's not to say you can't play it that way (and enjoy it!), but it's two parts of a system working against each other. I'm happy to wax eloquent on my game design theory thoughts, but instead I summarized.
        $endgroup$
        – Spitemaster
        6 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        "A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight" - I don't think anyone (monster or players) takes a Conga line formation on purpose. It happens unintentionally, because both players and enemies are trying to do what you're suggesting - focus on one opponent at a time.
        $endgroup$
        – dwizum
        27 mins ago










      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
      );
      );
      , "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "122"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143441%2fhow-can-i-as-dm-avoid-the-conga-line-of-death-occurring-when-implementing-some%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      6 Answers
      6






      active

      oldest

      votes








      6 Answers
      6






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      42












      $begingroup$

      Negation of Advantage



      At our table we use the Variant Flanking rules, however we noticed the same problem as yourself, and added the corollary that you cannot gain Advantage from a Flank if you yourself are being Flanked. The thematic justification was that you are busy trying to cover your own back and can't put all of your attention onto exploiting the enemy's defensive gaps.



      This is justified mechanically under the rules for gaining advantage and disadvantage:




      The GM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant Advantage or impose Disadvantage as a result.




      It led to players holding formations, covering each others back and using the terrain more to their advantage, using low walls and pillars to block enemy movement into the now more limited flanking positions.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        This seems like a good solution, can you describe the effects it had on the table? Did players stop using this strategy?
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        7 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @Rubiksmoose, Done so, the general effect was basically using terrain and relying on one another for protection, not just to kill the enemy ASAP. I also really need to memorise the format for title lines...
        $endgroup$
        – Fifth_H0r5eman
        7 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Hmm... under your house rule, does a flanked flanker still provide advantage for the other flanker on the opposite side of the enemy, or do both flankers lose the advantage if either of them is also flanked? That is, if we have a line like AXBY, where A and B are allies and X and Y are their enemies, do A and Y still have advantage on attacks against X and B respectively? (The way you've described the rule, it would seem that they do -- but wouldn't that still create an incentive to extend the conga line further?)
        $endgroup$
        – Ilmari Karonen
        6 hours ago







      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
        $endgroup$
        – Fifth_H0r5eman
        6 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        Noted. I just didn't want you to have to explain that stuff again after the comments get cleaned up if the same curiosities/ambiguities arise again.
        $endgroup$
        – Bloodcinder
        3 hours ago















      42












      $begingroup$

      Negation of Advantage



      At our table we use the Variant Flanking rules, however we noticed the same problem as yourself, and added the corollary that you cannot gain Advantage from a Flank if you yourself are being Flanked. The thematic justification was that you are busy trying to cover your own back and can't put all of your attention onto exploiting the enemy's defensive gaps.



      This is justified mechanically under the rules for gaining advantage and disadvantage:




      The GM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant Advantage or impose Disadvantage as a result.




      It led to players holding formations, covering each others back and using the terrain more to their advantage, using low walls and pillars to block enemy movement into the now more limited flanking positions.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        This seems like a good solution, can you describe the effects it had on the table? Did players stop using this strategy?
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        7 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @Rubiksmoose, Done so, the general effect was basically using terrain and relying on one another for protection, not just to kill the enemy ASAP. I also really need to memorise the format for title lines...
        $endgroup$
        – Fifth_H0r5eman
        7 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Hmm... under your house rule, does a flanked flanker still provide advantage for the other flanker on the opposite side of the enemy, or do both flankers lose the advantage if either of them is also flanked? That is, if we have a line like AXBY, where A and B are allies and X and Y are their enemies, do A and Y still have advantage on attacks against X and B respectively? (The way you've described the rule, it would seem that they do -- but wouldn't that still create an incentive to extend the conga line further?)
        $endgroup$
        – Ilmari Karonen
        6 hours ago







      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
        $endgroup$
        – Fifth_H0r5eman
        6 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        Noted. I just didn't want you to have to explain that stuff again after the comments get cleaned up if the same curiosities/ambiguities arise again.
        $endgroup$
        – Bloodcinder
        3 hours ago













      42












      42








      42





      $begingroup$

      Negation of Advantage



      At our table we use the Variant Flanking rules, however we noticed the same problem as yourself, and added the corollary that you cannot gain Advantage from a Flank if you yourself are being Flanked. The thematic justification was that you are busy trying to cover your own back and can't put all of your attention onto exploiting the enemy's defensive gaps.



      This is justified mechanically under the rules for gaining advantage and disadvantage:




      The GM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant Advantage or impose Disadvantage as a result.




      It led to players holding formations, covering each others back and using the terrain more to their advantage, using low walls and pillars to block enemy movement into the now more limited flanking positions.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      Negation of Advantage



      At our table we use the Variant Flanking rules, however we noticed the same problem as yourself, and added the corollary that you cannot gain Advantage from a Flank if you yourself are being Flanked. The thematic justification was that you are busy trying to cover your own back and can't put all of your attention onto exploiting the enemy's defensive gaps.



      This is justified mechanically under the rules for gaining advantage and disadvantage:




      The GM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant Advantage or impose Disadvantage as a result.




      It led to players holding formations, covering each others back and using the terrain more to their advantage, using low walls and pillars to block enemy movement into the now more limited flanking positions.







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 4 hours ago

























      answered 8 hours ago









      Fifth_H0r5emanFifth_H0r5eman

      5791414




      5791414











      • $begingroup$
        This seems like a good solution, can you describe the effects it had on the table? Did players stop using this strategy?
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        7 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @Rubiksmoose, Done so, the general effect was basically using terrain and relying on one another for protection, not just to kill the enemy ASAP. I also really need to memorise the format for title lines...
        $endgroup$
        – Fifth_H0r5eman
        7 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Hmm... under your house rule, does a flanked flanker still provide advantage for the other flanker on the opposite side of the enemy, or do both flankers lose the advantage if either of them is also flanked? That is, if we have a line like AXBY, where A and B are allies and X and Y are their enemies, do A and Y still have advantage on attacks against X and B respectively? (The way you've described the rule, it would seem that they do -- but wouldn't that still create an incentive to extend the conga line further?)
        $endgroup$
        – Ilmari Karonen
        6 hours ago







      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
        $endgroup$
        – Fifth_H0r5eman
        6 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        Noted. I just didn't want you to have to explain that stuff again after the comments get cleaned up if the same curiosities/ambiguities arise again.
        $endgroup$
        – Bloodcinder
        3 hours ago
















      • $begingroup$
        This seems like a good solution, can you describe the effects it had on the table? Did players stop using this strategy?
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        7 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @Rubiksmoose, Done so, the general effect was basically using terrain and relying on one another for protection, not just to kill the enemy ASAP. I also really need to memorise the format for title lines...
        $endgroup$
        – Fifth_H0r5eman
        7 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Hmm... under your house rule, does a flanked flanker still provide advantage for the other flanker on the opposite side of the enemy, or do both flankers lose the advantage if either of them is also flanked? That is, if we have a line like AXBY, where A and B are allies and X and Y are their enemies, do A and Y still have advantage on attacks against X and B respectively? (The way you've described the rule, it would seem that they do -- but wouldn't that still create an incentive to extend the conga line further?)
        $endgroup$
        – Ilmari Karonen
        6 hours ago







      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
        $endgroup$
        – Fifth_H0r5eman
        6 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        Noted. I just didn't want you to have to explain that stuff again after the comments get cleaned up if the same curiosities/ambiguities arise again.
        $endgroup$
        – Bloodcinder
        3 hours ago















      $begingroup$
      This seems like a good solution, can you describe the effects it had on the table? Did players stop using this strategy?
      $endgroup$
      – Rubiksmoose
      7 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      This seems like a good solution, can you describe the effects it had on the table? Did players stop using this strategy?
      $endgroup$
      – Rubiksmoose
      7 hours ago




      2




      2




      $begingroup$
      @Rubiksmoose, Done so, the general effect was basically using terrain and relying on one another for protection, not just to kill the enemy ASAP. I also really need to memorise the format for title lines...
      $endgroup$
      – Fifth_H0r5eman
      7 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      @Rubiksmoose, Done so, the general effect was basically using terrain and relying on one another for protection, not just to kill the enemy ASAP. I also really need to memorise the format for title lines...
      $endgroup$
      – Fifth_H0r5eman
      7 hours ago












      $begingroup$
      Hmm... under your house rule, does a flanked flanker still provide advantage for the other flanker on the opposite side of the enemy, or do both flankers lose the advantage if either of them is also flanked? That is, if we have a line like AXBY, where A and B are allies and X and Y are their enemies, do A and Y still have advantage on attacks against X and B respectively? (The way you've described the rule, it would seem that they do -- but wouldn't that still create an incentive to extend the conga line further?)
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      6 hours ago





      $begingroup$
      Hmm... under your house rule, does a flanked flanker still provide advantage for the other flanker on the opposite side of the enemy, or do both flankers lose the advantage if either of them is also flanked? That is, if we have a line like AXBY, where A and B are allies and X and Y are their enemies, do A and Y still have advantage on attacks against X and B respectively? (The way you've described the rule, it would seem that they do -- but wouldn't that still create an incentive to extend the conga line further?)
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      6 hours ago





      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
      $endgroup$
      – Fifth_H0r5eman
      6 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
      $endgroup$
      – Fifth_H0r5eman
      6 hours ago




      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      Noted. I just didn't want you to have to explain that stuff again after the comments get cleaned up if the same curiosities/ambiguities arise again.
      $endgroup$
      – Bloodcinder
      3 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      Noted. I just didn't want you to have to explain that stuff again after the comments get cleaned up if the same curiosities/ambiguities arise again.
      $endgroup$
      – Bloodcinder
      3 hours ago













      10












      $begingroup$

      We have not experienced the conga line, it may not be as a big of a concern as you think



      My tables have used the flanking rules on a grid for about 5 years and we're a heavily combat focused group - and I don't think we've ever gotten in a congo line. This may be a mix of our own playstyle just not wanting to conga line, but I think it's also in how we approach combat.



      But why? That's one is a better harder to parse, but I think it's for a few reasons:



      1. Grouping together leads to possible Fireball Formations (everyone being caught in an Area Effect if cast)

      2. Enemies are a mix of melee and ranged attacks that forces the group to work together across the map

      3. Enemies have often come in waves which also forces us to be prepared. Keeping everyone centralized or in a line does not put us in a defensible position to cover each other.

      The above are possible reasons why we haven't experienced it which makes me think maybe this isn't as much of a problem as you think it may be.



      As a DM, you should be considering tactics. As players, we are aware of and concerned about Area Effect spells (including things that travel along a straight line) and if this tactic starts to become overused, you can counter with those types of spells and using creatures with resistance/immunity to the associated damage types to let your players know that this choice may not be the safest.



      Given the above, I wouldn't make any changes/do anything different until you actually see a problem occurring at your table.



      But utilizing some of the things I've noticed about our encounter designs may help reduce the odds if you do start to see your players lining up for you :)



      Flanking does present another issue: More advantage triggered mechanics



      The most 'problematic' thing I've seen with flanking is that minimizes the difficulty of getting advantage for many abilities that trigger off of that mechanic. It's much easier to get, which means those abilities trigger much more often (and other abilities become unnecessary because it's relatively easy to flank compared to the other advantage giving mechanics.)






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        #1 doesn't seem like as much of a countermeasure given that the "conga line of death" is a line alternating between the enemies and you/your allies, all in a line for the purposes of flanking. Thus, fireball would affect the other enemies as much as it does you/your allies, so enemies are unlikely to fireball the whole group (unless they're a third party opposed to both groups).
        $endgroup$
        – V2Blast
        29 mins ago















      10












      $begingroup$

      We have not experienced the conga line, it may not be as a big of a concern as you think



      My tables have used the flanking rules on a grid for about 5 years and we're a heavily combat focused group - and I don't think we've ever gotten in a congo line. This may be a mix of our own playstyle just not wanting to conga line, but I think it's also in how we approach combat.



      But why? That's one is a better harder to parse, but I think it's for a few reasons:



      1. Grouping together leads to possible Fireball Formations (everyone being caught in an Area Effect if cast)

      2. Enemies are a mix of melee and ranged attacks that forces the group to work together across the map

      3. Enemies have often come in waves which also forces us to be prepared. Keeping everyone centralized or in a line does not put us in a defensible position to cover each other.

      The above are possible reasons why we haven't experienced it which makes me think maybe this isn't as much of a problem as you think it may be.



      As a DM, you should be considering tactics. As players, we are aware of and concerned about Area Effect spells (including things that travel along a straight line) and if this tactic starts to become overused, you can counter with those types of spells and using creatures with resistance/immunity to the associated damage types to let your players know that this choice may not be the safest.



      Given the above, I wouldn't make any changes/do anything different until you actually see a problem occurring at your table.



      But utilizing some of the things I've noticed about our encounter designs may help reduce the odds if you do start to see your players lining up for you :)



      Flanking does present another issue: More advantage triggered mechanics



      The most 'problematic' thing I've seen with flanking is that minimizes the difficulty of getting advantage for many abilities that trigger off of that mechanic. It's much easier to get, which means those abilities trigger much more often (and other abilities become unnecessary because it's relatively easy to flank compared to the other advantage giving mechanics.)






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        #1 doesn't seem like as much of a countermeasure given that the "conga line of death" is a line alternating between the enemies and you/your allies, all in a line for the purposes of flanking. Thus, fireball would affect the other enemies as much as it does you/your allies, so enemies are unlikely to fireball the whole group (unless they're a third party opposed to both groups).
        $endgroup$
        – V2Blast
        29 mins ago













      10












      10








      10





      $begingroup$

      We have not experienced the conga line, it may not be as a big of a concern as you think



      My tables have used the flanking rules on a grid for about 5 years and we're a heavily combat focused group - and I don't think we've ever gotten in a congo line. This may be a mix of our own playstyle just not wanting to conga line, but I think it's also in how we approach combat.



      But why? That's one is a better harder to parse, but I think it's for a few reasons:



      1. Grouping together leads to possible Fireball Formations (everyone being caught in an Area Effect if cast)

      2. Enemies are a mix of melee and ranged attacks that forces the group to work together across the map

      3. Enemies have often come in waves which also forces us to be prepared. Keeping everyone centralized or in a line does not put us in a defensible position to cover each other.

      The above are possible reasons why we haven't experienced it which makes me think maybe this isn't as much of a problem as you think it may be.



      As a DM, you should be considering tactics. As players, we are aware of and concerned about Area Effect spells (including things that travel along a straight line) and if this tactic starts to become overused, you can counter with those types of spells and using creatures with resistance/immunity to the associated damage types to let your players know that this choice may not be the safest.



      Given the above, I wouldn't make any changes/do anything different until you actually see a problem occurring at your table.



      But utilizing some of the things I've noticed about our encounter designs may help reduce the odds if you do start to see your players lining up for you :)



      Flanking does present another issue: More advantage triggered mechanics



      The most 'problematic' thing I've seen with flanking is that minimizes the difficulty of getting advantage for many abilities that trigger off of that mechanic. It's much easier to get, which means those abilities trigger much more often (and other abilities become unnecessary because it's relatively easy to flank compared to the other advantage giving mechanics.)






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      We have not experienced the conga line, it may not be as a big of a concern as you think



      My tables have used the flanking rules on a grid for about 5 years and we're a heavily combat focused group - and I don't think we've ever gotten in a congo line. This may be a mix of our own playstyle just not wanting to conga line, but I think it's also in how we approach combat.



      But why? That's one is a better harder to parse, but I think it's for a few reasons:



      1. Grouping together leads to possible Fireball Formations (everyone being caught in an Area Effect if cast)

      2. Enemies are a mix of melee and ranged attacks that forces the group to work together across the map

      3. Enemies have often come in waves which also forces us to be prepared. Keeping everyone centralized or in a line does not put us in a defensible position to cover each other.

      The above are possible reasons why we haven't experienced it which makes me think maybe this isn't as much of a problem as you think it may be.



      As a DM, you should be considering tactics. As players, we are aware of and concerned about Area Effect spells (including things that travel along a straight line) and if this tactic starts to become overused, you can counter with those types of spells and using creatures with resistance/immunity to the associated damage types to let your players know that this choice may not be the safest.



      Given the above, I wouldn't make any changes/do anything different until you actually see a problem occurring at your table.



      But utilizing some of the things I've noticed about our encounter designs may help reduce the odds if you do start to see your players lining up for you :)



      Flanking does present another issue: More advantage triggered mechanics



      The most 'problematic' thing I've seen with flanking is that minimizes the difficulty of getting advantage for many abilities that trigger off of that mechanic. It's much easier to get, which means those abilities trigger much more often (and other abilities become unnecessary because it's relatively easy to flank compared to the other advantage giving mechanics.)







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 7 hours ago

























      answered 7 hours ago









      NautArchNautArch

      60.3k8217401




      60.3k8217401











      • $begingroup$
        #1 doesn't seem like as much of a countermeasure given that the "conga line of death" is a line alternating between the enemies and you/your allies, all in a line for the purposes of flanking. Thus, fireball would affect the other enemies as much as it does you/your allies, so enemies are unlikely to fireball the whole group (unless they're a third party opposed to both groups).
        $endgroup$
        – V2Blast
        29 mins ago
















      • $begingroup$
        #1 doesn't seem like as much of a countermeasure given that the "conga line of death" is a line alternating between the enemies and you/your allies, all in a line for the purposes of flanking. Thus, fireball would affect the other enemies as much as it does you/your allies, so enemies are unlikely to fireball the whole group (unless they're a third party opposed to both groups).
        $endgroup$
        – V2Blast
        29 mins ago















      $begingroup$
      #1 doesn't seem like as much of a countermeasure given that the "conga line of death" is a line alternating between the enemies and you/your allies, all in a line for the purposes of flanking. Thus, fireball would affect the other enemies as much as it does you/your allies, so enemies are unlikely to fireball the whole group (unless they're a third party opposed to both groups).
      $endgroup$
      – V2Blast
      29 mins ago




      $begingroup$
      #1 doesn't seem like as much of a countermeasure given that the "conga line of death" is a line alternating between the enemies and you/your allies, all in a line for the purposes of flanking. Thus, fireball would affect the other enemies as much as it does you/your allies, so enemies are unlikely to fireball the whole group (unless they're a third party opposed to both groups).
      $endgroup$
      – V2Blast
      29 mins ago











      2












      $begingroup$

      Help!



      Our table uses the Help action (use your action to grant advantage to an ally) to do this. If you use this instead of the capital-F Flanking rules to represent better manpower resulting in advantages, it does mean someone’s going to have to spend their action not attacking and this isn’t quite as powerful (for players or enemies), but it still allows the gang-up effect you’re wanting to preserve and, being usable from anywhere around the enemy, eliminates the Conga Line of Death.



      So far at our table, it’s resulted in battle lines rather than conga lines, even with a rogue in the party.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        To be fair, the Help action is not a house rule (not that you specifically said it was).
        $endgroup$
        – Captain Man
        6 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
        $endgroup$
        – sevenbrokenbricks
        6 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        -1 because OP specifically asked for answers not to include "don't use flanking", which is what you're saying here.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        5 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
        $endgroup$
        – sevenbrokenbricks
        5 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Kinda sorta. But they are using flanking - why would a character opt for the Help action when they can get the same effect and still have their action? WHat's the incentive?
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago















      2












      $begingroup$

      Help!



      Our table uses the Help action (use your action to grant advantage to an ally) to do this. If you use this instead of the capital-F Flanking rules to represent better manpower resulting in advantages, it does mean someone’s going to have to spend their action not attacking and this isn’t quite as powerful (for players or enemies), but it still allows the gang-up effect you’re wanting to preserve and, being usable from anywhere around the enemy, eliminates the Conga Line of Death.



      So far at our table, it’s resulted in battle lines rather than conga lines, even with a rogue in the party.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$












      • $begingroup$
        To be fair, the Help action is not a house rule (not that you specifically said it was).
        $endgroup$
        – Captain Man
        6 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
        $endgroup$
        – sevenbrokenbricks
        6 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        -1 because OP specifically asked for answers not to include "don't use flanking", which is what you're saying here.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        5 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
        $endgroup$
        – sevenbrokenbricks
        5 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Kinda sorta. But they are using flanking - why would a character opt for the Help action when they can get the same effect and still have their action? WHat's the incentive?
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago













      2












      2








      2





      $begingroup$

      Help!



      Our table uses the Help action (use your action to grant advantage to an ally) to do this. If you use this instead of the capital-F Flanking rules to represent better manpower resulting in advantages, it does mean someone’s going to have to spend their action not attacking and this isn’t quite as powerful (for players or enemies), but it still allows the gang-up effect you’re wanting to preserve and, being usable from anywhere around the enemy, eliminates the Conga Line of Death.



      So far at our table, it’s resulted in battle lines rather than conga lines, even with a rogue in the party.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      Help!



      Our table uses the Help action (use your action to grant advantage to an ally) to do this. If you use this instead of the capital-F Flanking rules to represent better manpower resulting in advantages, it does mean someone’s going to have to spend their action not attacking and this isn’t quite as powerful (for players or enemies), but it still allows the gang-up effect you’re wanting to preserve and, being usable from anywhere around the enemy, eliminates the Conga Line of Death.



      So far at our table, it’s resulted in battle lines rather than conga lines, even with a rogue in the party.







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 4 hours ago

























      answered 8 hours ago









      sevenbrokenbrickssevenbrokenbricks

      2,747826




      2,747826











      • $begingroup$
        To be fair, the Help action is not a house rule (not that you specifically said it was).
        $endgroup$
        – Captain Man
        6 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
        $endgroup$
        – sevenbrokenbricks
        6 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        -1 because OP specifically asked for answers not to include "don't use flanking", which is what you're saying here.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        5 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
        $endgroup$
        – sevenbrokenbricks
        5 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Kinda sorta. But they are using flanking - why would a character opt for the Help action when they can get the same effect and still have their action? WHat's the incentive?
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago
















      • $begingroup$
        To be fair, the Help action is not a house rule (not that you specifically said it was).
        $endgroup$
        – Captain Man
        6 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
        $endgroup$
        – sevenbrokenbricks
        6 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        -1 because OP specifically asked for answers not to include "don't use flanking", which is what you're saying here.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        5 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
        $endgroup$
        – sevenbrokenbricks
        5 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Kinda sorta. But they are using flanking - why would a character opt for the Help action when they can get the same effect and still have their action? WHat's the incentive?
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago















      $begingroup$
      To be fair, the Help action is not a house rule (not that you specifically said it was).
      $endgroup$
      – Captain Man
      6 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      To be fair, the Help action is not a house rule (not that you specifically said it was).
      $endgroup$
      – Captain Man
      6 hours ago




      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      6 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      6 hours ago












      $begingroup$
      -1 because OP specifically asked for answers not to include "don't use flanking", which is what you're saying here.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      5 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      -1 because OP specifically asked for answers not to include "don't use flanking", which is what you're saying here.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      5 hours ago












      $begingroup$
      @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      5 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      5 hours ago












      $begingroup$
      Kinda sorta. But they are using flanking - why would a character opt for the Help action when they can get the same effect and still have their action? WHat's the incentive?
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      4 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      Kinda sorta. But they are using flanking - why would a character opt for the Help action when they can get the same effect and still have their action? WHat's the incentive?
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      4 hours ago











      0












      $begingroup$

      Noah Antwiler has a video about the Conga Line of Death. At ~29:52 into the video, he suggests using group initiative to prevent the Conga Line of Death forming in a combat encounter.



      Although I haven't tried this rule, the Side Initiative option (page 270 in the 5e DMG) allows players to use group initiative. Since players & monsters are moving as a group rather than one by one, combatants would be encouraged to maintain a solid rank (shoulder to shoulder) to avoid being flanked.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$

















        0












        $begingroup$

        Noah Antwiler has a video about the Conga Line of Death. At ~29:52 into the video, he suggests using group initiative to prevent the Conga Line of Death forming in a combat encounter.



        Although I haven't tried this rule, the Side Initiative option (page 270 in the 5e DMG) allows players to use group initiative. Since players & monsters are moving as a group rather than one by one, combatants would be encouraged to maintain a solid rank (shoulder to shoulder) to avoid being flanked.






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$















          0












          0








          0





          $begingroup$

          Noah Antwiler has a video about the Conga Line of Death. At ~29:52 into the video, he suggests using group initiative to prevent the Conga Line of Death forming in a combat encounter.



          Although I haven't tried this rule, the Side Initiative option (page 270 in the 5e DMG) allows players to use group initiative. Since players & monsters are moving as a group rather than one by one, combatants would be encouraged to maintain a solid rank (shoulder to shoulder) to avoid being flanked.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Noah Antwiler has a video about the Conga Line of Death. At ~29:52 into the video, he suggests using group initiative to prevent the Conga Line of Death forming in a combat encounter.



          Although I haven't tried this rule, the Side Initiative option (page 270 in the 5e DMG) allows players to use group initiative. Since players & monsters are moving as a group rather than one by one, combatants would be encouraged to maintain a solid rank (shoulder to shoulder) to avoid being flanked.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 23 mins ago









          V2Blast

          25k383155




          25k383155










          answered 4 hours ago









          RobertFRobertF

          3,27912041




          3,27912041





















              0












              $begingroup$

              If the benefit from flanking is significant enough that you'd be foolish to turn it down (and we can argue about that another time), then equally, being flanked imposes a penalty that you'd be foolish to accept. Given the premise, people should be stepping out of the conga line to avoid being flanked as often as they step into it to flank others. Which means that the conga line will never have an opportunity to form.





              share








              New contributor




              Ross Thompson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.






              $endgroup$

















                0












                $begingroup$

                If the benefit from flanking is significant enough that you'd be foolish to turn it down (and we can argue about that another time), then equally, being flanked imposes a penalty that you'd be foolish to accept. Given the premise, people should be stepping out of the conga line to avoid being flanked as often as they step into it to flank others. Which means that the conga line will never have an opportunity to form.





                share








                New contributor




                Ross Thompson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.






                $endgroup$















                  0












                  0








                  0





                  $begingroup$

                  If the benefit from flanking is significant enough that you'd be foolish to turn it down (and we can argue about that another time), then equally, being flanked imposes a penalty that you'd be foolish to accept. Given the premise, people should be stepping out of the conga line to avoid being flanked as often as they step into it to flank others. Which means that the conga line will never have an opportunity to form.





                  share








                  New contributor




                  Ross Thompson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.






                  $endgroup$



                  If the benefit from flanking is significant enough that you'd be foolish to turn it down (and we can argue about that another time), then equally, being flanked imposes a penalty that you'd be foolish to accept. Given the premise, people should be stepping out of the conga line to avoid being flanked as often as they step into it to flank others. Which means that the conga line will never have an opportunity to form.






                  share








                  New contributor




                  Ross Thompson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.








                  share


                  share






                  New contributor




                  Ross Thompson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.









                  answered 7 mins ago









                  Ross ThompsonRoss Thompson

                  101




                  101




                  New contributor




                  Ross Thompson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.





                  New contributor





                  Ross Thompson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.






                  Ross Thompson is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.





















                      -3












                      $begingroup$

                      The monsters aren't stupid. A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight. So (if you're the DM) have the monsters pick a target and try to knock them unconscious before moving on to the next. This doesn't mean drawing attacks of opportunity - don't take more damage than you should.



                      And now that I've mentioned attacks of opportunity: 5e is really bad for flanking. Why? It's because you can freely move around opponents without provoking attacks of opportunity, so flanking is essentially free. If you use the 3.5 rules attacks of opportunity, it works out better. To make it work, you also need the 5-foot step. The relevant changes:



                      • Moving out of a threatened square provokes an AOO, even if you remain within the creature's reach.


                      • Once a turn, if you make no other movement during the turn, you may move 5 feet without provoking an attack of opportunity for free.






                      share|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$












                      • $begingroup$
                        Have you tried flanking with these rules and experienced these 'really bad' issues? 5e and 3.5e are different rulesets, saying variant rules are bad compared to another system isn't necessarily a fair comparison - especially if you haven't actually used these rules at your table. If you have, please add that.
                        $endgroup$
                        – NautArch
                        7 hours ago






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        @NautArch Yes, I have. The problem isn't a playability thing. It's really bad from a game design perspective; having flanking with 5e's AoO rules leads to a degenerate combat system, where the answer to "How to fight in melee" is always "flank", which doesn't occur in 3.5. It's bad because the design goals of the system are different - 5e is less a miniatures combat game than 3.5 is. That's not to say you can't play it that way (and enjoy it!), but it's two parts of a system working against each other. I'm happy to wax eloquent on my game design theory thoughts, but instead I summarized.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Spitemaster
                        6 hours ago






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        "A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight" - I don't think anyone (monster or players) takes a Conga line formation on purpose. It happens unintentionally, because both players and enemies are trying to do what you're suggesting - focus on one opponent at a time.
                        $endgroup$
                        – dwizum
                        27 mins ago















                      -3












                      $begingroup$

                      The monsters aren't stupid. A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight. So (if you're the DM) have the monsters pick a target and try to knock them unconscious before moving on to the next. This doesn't mean drawing attacks of opportunity - don't take more damage than you should.



                      And now that I've mentioned attacks of opportunity: 5e is really bad for flanking. Why? It's because you can freely move around opponents without provoking attacks of opportunity, so flanking is essentially free. If you use the 3.5 rules attacks of opportunity, it works out better. To make it work, you also need the 5-foot step. The relevant changes:



                      • Moving out of a threatened square provokes an AOO, even if you remain within the creature's reach.


                      • Once a turn, if you make no other movement during the turn, you may move 5 feet without provoking an attack of opportunity for free.






                      share|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$












                      • $begingroup$
                        Have you tried flanking with these rules and experienced these 'really bad' issues? 5e and 3.5e are different rulesets, saying variant rules are bad compared to another system isn't necessarily a fair comparison - especially if you haven't actually used these rules at your table. If you have, please add that.
                        $endgroup$
                        – NautArch
                        7 hours ago






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        @NautArch Yes, I have. The problem isn't a playability thing. It's really bad from a game design perspective; having flanking with 5e's AoO rules leads to a degenerate combat system, where the answer to "How to fight in melee" is always "flank", which doesn't occur in 3.5. It's bad because the design goals of the system are different - 5e is less a miniatures combat game than 3.5 is. That's not to say you can't play it that way (and enjoy it!), but it's two parts of a system working against each other. I'm happy to wax eloquent on my game design theory thoughts, but instead I summarized.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Spitemaster
                        6 hours ago






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        "A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight" - I don't think anyone (monster or players) takes a Conga line formation on purpose. It happens unintentionally, because both players and enemies are trying to do what you're suggesting - focus on one opponent at a time.
                        $endgroup$
                        – dwizum
                        27 mins ago













                      -3












                      -3








                      -3





                      $begingroup$

                      The monsters aren't stupid. A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight. So (if you're the DM) have the monsters pick a target and try to knock them unconscious before moving on to the next. This doesn't mean drawing attacks of opportunity - don't take more damage than you should.



                      And now that I've mentioned attacks of opportunity: 5e is really bad for flanking. Why? It's because you can freely move around opponents without provoking attacks of opportunity, so flanking is essentially free. If you use the 3.5 rules attacks of opportunity, it works out better. To make it work, you also need the 5-foot step. The relevant changes:



                      • Moving out of a threatened square provokes an AOO, even if you remain within the creature's reach.


                      • Once a turn, if you make no other movement during the turn, you may move 5 feet without provoking an attack of opportunity for free.






                      share|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$



                      The monsters aren't stupid. A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight. So (if you're the DM) have the monsters pick a target and try to knock them unconscious before moving on to the next. This doesn't mean drawing attacks of opportunity - don't take more damage than you should.



                      And now that I've mentioned attacks of opportunity: 5e is really bad for flanking. Why? It's because you can freely move around opponents without provoking attacks of opportunity, so flanking is essentially free. If you use the 3.5 rules attacks of opportunity, it works out better. To make it work, you also need the 5-foot step. The relevant changes:



                      • Moving out of a threatened square provokes an AOO, even if you remain within the creature's reach.


                      • Once a turn, if you make no other movement during the turn, you may move 5 feet without provoking an attack of opportunity for free.







                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered 7 hours ago









                      SpitemasterSpitemaster

                      2433




                      2433











                      • $begingroup$
                        Have you tried flanking with these rules and experienced these 'really bad' issues? 5e and 3.5e are different rulesets, saying variant rules are bad compared to another system isn't necessarily a fair comparison - especially if you haven't actually used these rules at your table. If you have, please add that.
                        $endgroup$
                        – NautArch
                        7 hours ago






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        @NautArch Yes, I have. The problem isn't a playability thing. It's really bad from a game design perspective; having flanking with 5e's AoO rules leads to a degenerate combat system, where the answer to "How to fight in melee" is always "flank", which doesn't occur in 3.5. It's bad because the design goals of the system are different - 5e is less a miniatures combat game than 3.5 is. That's not to say you can't play it that way (and enjoy it!), but it's two parts of a system working against each other. I'm happy to wax eloquent on my game design theory thoughts, but instead I summarized.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Spitemaster
                        6 hours ago






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        "A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight" - I don't think anyone (monster or players) takes a Conga line formation on purpose. It happens unintentionally, because both players and enemies are trying to do what you're suggesting - focus on one opponent at a time.
                        $endgroup$
                        – dwizum
                        27 mins ago
















                      • $begingroup$
                        Have you tried flanking with these rules and experienced these 'really bad' issues? 5e and 3.5e are different rulesets, saying variant rules are bad compared to another system isn't necessarily a fair comparison - especially if you haven't actually used these rules at your table. If you have, please add that.
                        $endgroup$
                        – NautArch
                        7 hours ago






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        @NautArch Yes, I have. The problem isn't a playability thing. It's really bad from a game design perspective; having flanking with 5e's AoO rules leads to a degenerate combat system, where the answer to "How to fight in melee" is always "flank", which doesn't occur in 3.5. It's bad because the design goals of the system are different - 5e is less a miniatures combat game than 3.5 is. That's not to say you can't play it that way (and enjoy it!), but it's two parts of a system working against each other. I'm happy to wax eloquent on my game design theory thoughts, but instead I summarized.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Spitemaster
                        6 hours ago






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        "A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight" - I don't think anyone (monster or players) takes a Conga line formation on purpose. It happens unintentionally, because both players and enemies are trying to do what you're suggesting - focus on one opponent at a time.
                        $endgroup$
                        – dwizum
                        27 mins ago















                      $begingroup$
                      Have you tried flanking with these rules and experienced these 'really bad' issues? 5e and 3.5e are different rulesets, saying variant rules are bad compared to another system isn't necessarily a fair comparison - especially if you haven't actually used these rules at your table. If you have, please add that.
                      $endgroup$
                      – NautArch
                      7 hours ago




                      $begingroup$
                      Have you tried flanking with these rules and experienced these 'really bad' issues? 5e and 3.5e are different rulesets, saying variant rules are bad compared to another system isn't necessarily a fair comparison - especially if you haven't actually used these rules at your table. If you have, please add that.
                      $endgroup$
                      – NautArch
                      7 hours ago




                      1




                      1




                      $begingroup$
                      @NautArch Yes, I have. The problem isn't a playability thing. It's really bad from a game design perspective; having flanking with 5e's AoO rules leads to a degenerate combat system, where the answer to "How to fight in melee" is always "flank", which doesn't occur in 3.5. It's bad because the design goals of the system are different - 5e is less a miniatures combat game than 3.5 is. That's not to say you can't play it that way (and enjoy it!), but it's two parts of a system working against each other. I'm happy to wax eloquent on my game design theory thoughts, but instead I summarized.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Spitemaster
                      6 hours ago




                      $begingroup$
                      @NautArch Yes, I have. The problem isn't a playability thing. It's really bad from a game design perspective; having flanking with 5e's AoO rules leads to a degenerate combat system, where the answer to "How to fight in melee" is always "flank", which doesn't occur in 3.5. It's bad because the design goals of the system are different - 5e is less a miniatures combat game than 3.5 is. That's not to say you can't play it that way (and enjoy it!), but it's two parts of a system working against each other. I'm happy to wax eloquent on my game design theory thoughts, but instead I summarized.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Spitemaster
                      6 hours ago




                      1




                      1




                      $begingroup$
                      "A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight" - I don't think anyone (monster or players) takes a Conga line formation on purpose. It happens unintentionally, because both players and enemies are trying to do what you're suggesting - focus on one opponent at a time.
                      $endgroup$
                      – dwizum
                      27 mins ago




                      $begingroup$
                      "A "Conga line" is actually a bad tactic - ideally, you'd take down one enemy at a time, preventing them from doing damage for the rest of the fight" - I don't think anyone (monster or players) takes a Conga line formation on purpose. It happens unintentionally, because both players and enemies are trying to do what you're suggesting - focus on one opponent at a time.
                      $endgroup$
                      – dwizum
                      27 mins ago

















                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143441%2fhow-can-i-as-dm-avoid-the-conga-line-of-death-occurring-when-implementing-some%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Saint-André (Pyrenaeus Orientalis) Nexus interni Nexus externi | Tabula navigationisOpenStreetMapGeoNames66168De hoc commune apud cassini.ehess.frHuius communis pagina interretialisAmplifica

                      Constantinus Vanšenkin Nexus externi | Tabula navigationisБольшая российская энциклопедияAmplifica

                      Montigny (Ligerula) Nexus interni Nexus externi | Tabula navigationisGeoNames45214Amplifica