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?

Does capillary rise violate hydrostatic paradox?

What is the purpose of using a decision tree?

Connection Between Knot Theory and Number Theory

I keep switching characters, how do I stop?

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

Pre-Employment Background Check With Consent For Future Checks

Why do Radio Buttons not fill the entire outer circle?

"Marked down as someone wanting to sell shares." What does that mean?

How to get directions in deep space?

How do you justify more code being written by following clean code practices?

Has the laser at Magurele, Romania reached the tenth of the Sun power?

What should be the ideal length of sentences in a blog post for ease of reading?

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

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

Offset in split text content

Boss fired me and is begging for me to come back - how much of a raise is reasonable?

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

Error in master's thesis, I do not know what to do

C++ lambda syntax

PTIJ: Which Dr. Seuss books should one obtain?

Can creatures abilities target that creature itself?

Extract substring according to regexp with sed or grep

Is there a distance limit for minecart tracks?

Writing in a Christian voice



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?













21












$begingroup$


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.






dnd-5e house-rules flanking







share|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 14




    $begingroup$
    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
    9 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
    6 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
    6 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
    5 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
    5 hours ago















21












$begingroup$


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.






dnd-5e house-rules flanking







share|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 14




    $begingroup$
    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
    9 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
    6 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
    6 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
    5 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
    5 hours ago













21












21








21


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.






dnd-5e house-rules flanking







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




dnd-5e house-rules flanking






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 1 hour ago









V2Blast

25k383155




25k383155










asked 10 hours ago









hohenheimhohenheim

2,5991260




2,5991260







  • 14




    $begingroup$
    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
    9 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
    6 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
    6 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
    5 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
    5 hours ago












  • 14




    $begingroup$
    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
    9 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
    6 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
    6 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
    5 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
    5 hours ago







14




14




$begingroup$
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
9 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
9 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
6 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
6 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
6 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
6 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
5 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
5 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
5 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
5 hours ago










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















46












$begingroup$

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
    9 hours ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @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
    8 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
    7 hours ago







  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
    $endgroup$
    – Fifth_H0r5eman
    7 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
    5 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
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    @V2Blast Unless the enemies have resistance/immunity to whatever the AoE is. But again, I'm listing things that we consider when engaging in combat and what might affect our decisions. We've been...burned...by grouping together in the past (enemies nearby or not.)
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    1 hour 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
    7 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
    $endgroup$
    – sevenbrokenbricks
    7 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
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
    $endgroup$
    – sevenbrokenbricks
    6 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
    6 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











$endgroup$




















    -2












    $begingroup$

    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|improve this answer








    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.






    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
      $endgroup$
      – V2Blast
      1 hour ago










    • $begingroup$
      This answer as it is seems purely theoretical. Is this something that you have seen happen in practice?
      $endgroup$
      – Sdjz
      1 hour 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
      8 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
      7 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
      1 hour 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









    46












    $begingroup$

    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
      9 hours ago






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @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
      8 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
      7 hours ago







    • 2




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
      $endgroup$
      – Fifth_H0r5eman
      7 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
      5 hours ago















    46












    $begingroup$

    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
      9 hours ago






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @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
      8 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
      7 hours ago







    • 2




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
      $endgroup$
      – Fifth_H0r5eman
      7 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
      5 hours ago













    46












    46








    46





    $begingroup$

    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 5 hours ago

























    answered 9 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
      9 hours ago






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @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
      8 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
      7 hours ago







    • 2




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
      $endgroup$
      – Fifth_H0r5eman
      7 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
      5 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
      9 hours ago






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      @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
      8 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
      7 hours ago







    • 2




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
      $endgroup$
      – Fifth_H0r5eman
      7 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
      5 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
    9 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
    9 hours ago




    3




    3




    $begingroup$
    @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
    8 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
    8 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
    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
    7 hours ago





    2




    2




    $begingroup$
    @CaptainMan, Exactly, they're focusing more on defending themselves from two opponents than capitalising on the openings in defenses
    $endgroup$
    – Fifth_H0r5eman
    7 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
    7 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
    5 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
    5 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
      1 hour ago










    • $begingroup$
      @V2Blast Unless the enemies have resistance/immunity to whatever the AoE is. But again, I'm listing things that we consider when engaging in combat and what might affect our decisions. We've been...burned...by grouping together in the past (enemies nearby or not.)
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      1 hour 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
      1 hour ago










    • $begingroup$
      @V2Blast Unless the enemies have resistance/immunity to whatever the AoE is. But again, I'm listing things that we consider when engaging in combat and what might affect our decisions. We've been...burned...by grouping together in the past (enemies nearby or not.)
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      1 hour 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 8 hours ago

























    answered 8 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
      1 hour ago










    • $begingroup$
      @V2Blast Unless the enemies have resistance/immunity to whatever the AoE is. But again, I'm listing things that we consider when engaging in combat and what might affect our decisions. We've been...burned...by grouping together in the past (enemies nearby or not.)
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      1 hour 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
      1 hour ago










    • $begingroup$
      @V2Blast Unless the enemies have resistance/immunity to whatever the AoE is. But again, I'm listing things that we consider when engaging in combat and what might affect our decisions. We've been...burned...by grouping together in the past (enemies nearby or not.)
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      1 hour 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
    1 hour 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
    1 hour ago












    $begingroup$
    @V2Blast Unless the enemies have resistance/immunity to whatever the AoE is. But again, I'm listing things that we consider when engaging in combat and what might affect our decisions. We've been...burned...by grouping together in the past (enemies nearby or not.)
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    1 hour ago




    $begingroup$
    @V2Blast Unless the enemies have resistance/immunity to whatever the AoE is. But again, I'm listing things that we consider when engaging in combat and what might affect our decisions. We've been...burned...by grouping together in the past (enemies nearby or not.)
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    1 hour 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
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      7 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
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      6 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
      6 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
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      7 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
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      6 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
      6 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 5 hours ago

























    answered 9 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
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      7 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
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      6 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
      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
      7 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      7 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
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
      $endgroup$
      – sevenbrokenbricks
      6 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
      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
    7 hours ago




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




    1




    1




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




    $begingroup$
    @CaptainMan Edited to better reflect this, thank you
    $endgroup$
    – sevenbrokenbricks
    7 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
    7 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
    7 hours ago












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




    $begingroup$
    @NautArch on further clarification this isn’t strictly so
    $endgroup$
    – sevenbrokenbricks
    6 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
    6 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
    6 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 1 hour ago









        V2Blast

        25k383155




        25k383155










        answered 5 hours ago









        RobertFRobertF

        3,27912041




        3,27912041





















            -2












            $begingroup$

            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|improve this answer








            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.






            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
              $endgroup$
              – V2Blast
              1 hour ago










            • $begingroup$
              This answer as it is seems purely theoretical. Is this something that you have seen happen in practice?
              $endgroup$
              – Sdjz
              1 hour ago















            -2












            $begingroup$

            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|improve this answer








            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.






            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
              $endgroup$
              – V2Blast
              1 hour ago










            • $begingroup$
              This answer as it is seems purely theoretical. Is this something that you have seen happen in practice?
              $endgroup$
              – Sdjz
              1 hour ago













            -2












            -2








            -2





            $begingroup$

            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|improve this answer








            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|improve this answer








            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|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer






            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 1 hour ago









            Ross ThompsonRoss Thompson

            97




            97




            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.











            • $begingroup$
              Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
              $endgroup$
              – V2Blast
              1 hour ago










            • $begingroup$
              This answer as it is seems purely theoretical. Is this something that you have seen happen in practice?
              $endgroup$
              – Sdjz
              1 hour ago
















            • $begingroup$
              Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
              $endgroup$
              – V2Blast
              1 hour ago










            • $begingroup$
              This answer as it is seems purely theoretical. Is this something that you have seen happen in practice?
              $endgroup$
              – Sdjz
              1 hour ago















            $begingroup$
            Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
            $endgroup$
            – V2Blast
            1 hour ago




            $begingroup$
            Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
            $endgroup$
            – V2Blast
            1 hour ago












            $begingroup$
            This answer as it is seems purely theoretical. Is this something that you have seen happen in practice?
            $endgroup$
            – Sdjz
            1 hour ago




            $begingroup$
            This answer as it is seems purely theoretical. Is this something that you have seen happen in practice?
            $endgroup$
            – Sdjz
            1 hour 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
              8 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
              7 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
              1 hour 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
              8 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
              7 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
              1 hour 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 8 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
              8 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
              7 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
              1 hour 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
              8 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
              7 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
              1 hour 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
            8 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
            8 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
            7 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
            7 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
            1 hour 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
            1 hour 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

            Are there any AGPL-style licences that require source code modifications to be public? Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Force derivative works to be publicAre there any GPL like licenses for Apple App Store?Do you violate the GPL if you provide source code that cannot be compiled?GPL - is it distribution to use libraries in an appliance loaned to customers?Distributing App for free which uses GPL'ed codeModifications of server software under GPL, with web/CLI interfaceDoes using an AGPLv3-licensed library prevent me from dual-licensing my own source code?Can I publish only select code under GPLv3 from a private project?Is there published precedent regarding the scope of covered work that uses AGPL software?If MIT licensed code links to GPL licensed code what should be the license of the resulting binary program?If I use a public API endpoint that has its source code licensed under AGPL in my app, do I need to disclose my source?

            Image
            Flight departed from the gate 5 min before scheduled departure time. Refund options How to show a density matrix is in a pure/mixed state? Can we cancel the equality mark here? How to ask rejected full-time candidates to apply to teach individual courses? Are there any AGPL-style licences that require source code modifications to be public? Why did Israel vote against lifting the American embargo on Cuba? What should one know about term logic before studying propositional and predicate logic? Why is Rajasthan pro BJP in the LS elections but not in the state elections? New Order #6: Easter Egg Question on Gÿongy' lemma proof How to resize main filesystem Is it OK if I do not take the receipt in Germany? My mentor says to set image to Fine instead of RAW — how is this different from JPG? Can I feed enough spin up electron to a black hole to affect it's angular momentum? How do I find my Spellcasting Ability for my D&D character? Is my guitar...
            Read more

            2013 GY136 Descoberta | Órbita | Referências Menu de navegação«List Of Centaurs and Scattered-Disk Objects»«List of Known Trans-Neptunian Objects»

            Image
            Objetos do disco dispersoObjetos transnetunianos objeto transnetunianodisco dispersoSistema Solarcorpo celesteressonância orbitalplanetaplanetamagnitude absolutadiâmetro9 de abril2013Outer Solar System Origins Surveyórbitaexcentricidadesemieixo maiorUAperiélioSolafélio 2013 GY136 Data da descoberta 9 de abril de 2013 Descoberto por Outer Solar System Origins Survey Categoria Transnetuniano Objeto do disco disperso Elementos orbitais Semieixo maior 55,961 UA Perélio 32,595 UA Afélio 79,327 UA Excentricidade 0,418 Inclinação 10,9° Características físicas Dimensões 133 km Magnitude absoluta 7,6 ver 2013 GY 136 , também escrito como 2013 GY136 , é um objeto transnetuniano que está localizado no disco disperso, uma região do Sistema Solar. Este corpo celeste está em uma ressonância orbital de 2:5 com o planeta planeta. Ele possui uma magnitude absoluta de 7,6 [ 1 ] e tem um diâmetro estimad...
            Read more

            Metrô de Los Teques Índice Linhas | Estações | Ver também | Referências Ligações externas | Menu de navegação«INSTITUCIÓN»«Mapa de rutas»originalMetrô de Los TequesC.A. Metro Los Teques |Alcaldía de Guaicaipuro – Sitio OficialGobernacion de Mirandaeeeeeee

            Image
            Metrô de Los TequesFundações na Venezuela em 2006 metropolitanoLos TequesGuaicaipuroMirandaGoverno da VenezuelaLinha 1Linha 2estaçõesLinha 1Linha 2IndependenciaSan AntonioLinha 3GuaicaipuroLibertadorEstação Las AdjuntasMetrô de Caracasalgarismocorestaçõesnomecorestaçõesestações Metrô de Los Teques Uma das composições que operam no sistema. Informações Proprietário Governo da Venezuela Local [[ Los Teques, Miranda]] País variant = Tipo de transporte Metropolitano Número de linhas 2 Número de estações 5 Website [1] Funcionamento Início de funcionamento 3 de novembro de 2006 (12 anos) [ 1 ] Operadora(s) C. A. Metro Los Teques Dados técnicos Extensão do sistema 11,2 km Bitola Bitola padrão (1435 mm) Velocidade máxima 80 km/h ...
            Read more