FACING for Prone figures

[Skarg]

Hcobb has mentioned (in his own way) several times over the past months that (to paraphrase in a way that makes more sense to me) the rules don't explain facing for prone figures, which is important because prone figures can cast spells and use ranged attacks.

(I didn't bother to answer this before, because I thought he was just making silly side-comments about the letter of the rules, which seemed to me not worth the effort to address, but it recently threadjacked the other "Prone figures" question thread and seems to be causing confusion, so I started this new thread.)

Seems to me it's extremely easy to handle: Have prone figures declare a facing, which determines which way they are looking, and gives them a 180-degree field of view for spells, ranged attacks, and other acts of observation etc.

Hcobb's point that the rules say prone figures have no front hexes is irrelevant, it seems to me, because front hexes do not apply to most spells or ranged attacks anyway - the 180-degree field of view has always determined that, so there is no real issue to make confusing remarks about.

[Helborn]

Prone figures obviously face a specific direction. I believe the rules specify that they have no facing for the purpose of engaging. (My interpretation). Also, they are a 2 hex figure when prone. So the front hexes are the same as for any 2 hex figure for firing purposes. However, since they are prone any thrown weapon gains the +4 DX adjustment for rear hexes as well as any melee weapon. Missile weapons are specifically excluded from the +4 DX adjustment.

[Scintillant]

Originally Posted by Helborn

However, since they are prone any thrown weapon gains the +4 DX adjustment for rear hexes as well as any melee weapon. Missile weapons are specifically excluded from the +4 DX adjustment.

Thanks Helborn. I see the rule now re: missile weapons not benefiting from the facing of the target, but I don't see anything in this regard re: thrown weapons. I suppose that in the absence of such a RAW you expect these are handled the same as melee weapons. Is that correct?

[Helborn]

Originally Posted by Scintillant

Thanks Helborn. I see the rule now re: missile weapons not benefiting from the facing of the target, but I don't see anything in this regard re: thrown weapons. I suppose that in the absence of such a RAW you expect these are handled the same as melee weapons. Is that correct?

Correct. See pgs 106 to 108 and 114. It does say that a thrown weapon attack is treated exactly as regular weapon attack. Since there is no exception for thrown weapons and facing, it seems to me that the facing rules apply. E.g. A prone character gives +4 DX to all non-missile attacks.

[Skarg]

I agree with you on this part:

Originally Posted by Helborn

Prone figures obviously face a specific direction. I believe the rules specify that they have no facing for the purpose of engaging. (My interpretation).

But not on this part (unless you mean a house rule you use):

Originally Posted by Helborn

Also, they are a 2 hex figure when prone. So the front hexes are the same as for any 2 hex figure for firing purposes.

GURPS has 2-hex bodies, but TFT never did. There was not even a 2-hex figure facing diagram published until Death Test 2 and SJ's ITL/AM/AW errata article in The Space Gamer, and it was for horses and giant lizards, not fallen humanoid bodies.


Nor on this part:

Originally Posted by Helborn

However, since they are prone any thrown weapon gains the +4 DX adjustment for rear hexes as well as any melee weapon. Missile weapons are specifically excluded from the +4 DX adjustment.

We never thought of having facing DX mods applied to thrown weapon attacks. I don't think that was ever the intention, or it would be called out somewhere. I think the lines you've mentioned about Thrown Weapons being like normal attacks is just an unfortunate wording attempting to explain to new players that they roll 3d6 to hit. And I think the wording about Missile Weapons not using facing was not meant to imply that Thrown Weapons do use facing DX adjustments. If being that literal about it, then I'd point to the line about Thrown Spells that says they're "exactly" like Thrown Weapons, which would imply you could cast Thrown Spells at a bonus for target facing, which seems even less likely to be the intention.

Also, I would point out that the rules for facing benefits say "attacking from a side hex" or "from a rear hex" and those hexes are defined as hexes adjacent to the figure, so even if those modifiers apply, they're only about attacks from an adjacent hex.

[hcobb]

Thrown weapons are at -4 against prone targets behind cover. See page 116.

[Helborn]

Originally Posted by Skarg

And I think the wording about Missile Weapons not using facing was not meant to imply that Thrown Weapons do use facing DX adjustments. If being that literal about it, then I'd point to the line about Thrown Spells that says they're "exactly" like Thrown Weapons, which would imply you could cast Thrown Spells at a bonus for target facing, which seems even less likely to be the intention.

Also, I would point out that the rules for facing benefits say "attacking from a side hex" or "from a rear hex" and those hexes are defined as hexes adjacent to the figure, so even if those modifiers apply, they're only about attacks from an adjacent hex.

This where we will have to disagree. Keep in mind that a thrown SPELL can be aimed at any adjacent hex including rear and side ones. So, not exactly like thrown weapons. Also pg 115 says that they are TARGETED like thrown weapons.

What do you mean there are no 2 hex figures? What about horses (pg 130) and wyverns to just name two? A 6 foot individual will definitely occupy 2 hexes when prone. A Dwarf or other humanoid won't.

[Helborn]

Originally Posted by hcobb

Thrown weapons are at -4 against prone targets behind cover. See page 116.

We're not talking about behind cover. That's a special situation.

[hcobb]

Originally Posted by Helborn

We're not talking about behind cover. That's a special situation.

If you throw from an adjacent hex then cover applies, but if you smash down with a wielded hammer then it doesn't.

[Helborn]

For the sake of uniformity, I would suggest that ALL prone figures - even of small humanoids - occupy 2 hexes. Especially with hcobb's preoccupation with cover, a prone figure behind cover would definitely be at least 2 if not even 3 hexes. I think SJ simplified by having bodies occupy only 1 hex.

BTW, I would also note that the attack roll is a composite which includes defenses. Facing makes some attacks easier since it eliminates some defenses. In this sense, the roll is similar to D&D which also has no separate defensive roll (unlike GURPS).

With that understanding, I would argue that a thrown weapon from the back should get bonuses since the target has less opportunity to defend. But I would also argue that missile weapons should get the same facing benefits because of lessened defenses.

Perhaps the distinction should be long range vs. short range missile fire (there are no long range thrown weapons) with long range getting no facing bonuses and short range getting the facing bonuses. It is, after all, harder to avoid an attack you don't see coming. It is, also, harder to avoid an attack when your mobility is restricted by being prone. You don't get to dodge and weave when prone (I'm not talking about the "Dodge" option).