This was just the first time that the situation had occurred in the campaign. No-one was using it as a house rule or anything like that. I just wanted to double check and clarify the rule before next session in case it came up again. The Rogue did enough damage without adding in sneak attack damage to kill the guy anyway. That's why I started this thread, to see if there was a rule somewhere that I was missing, or a page reference that I had missed. However I have found in 3.5E that sometimes there is an obscure reference on some other page that says otherwise. I therefore assumed that, because it didn't state explicitly that you were flat-footed, it meant that you weren't. If no characters are aware of the opponents then no surprise round occurs if they are not aware are not they surprised and why if all are surprised then why are they flatfooted and can move or take actions but if part are surprised they cannot move or take actions. When I actually looked up the definition of prone I was surprised that it didn't mention that you were or weren't considered flat-footed. It just seemed logical and reasonable as Dross suggested. My initial reaction was that "of course if you are on the ground you're flat-footed". I actually happened to be a player last session (I'm normally the DM) but not the player that this rule affected (the Rogue was attacking someone on the ground). It had never actually come up in our game before last night's session.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |