The Illogic of Flight

[Psientist]

That might be interesting... if flyers could be given that partial benefit against tramplers, it would be useful then to have an attack order of "Attack Tramplers"!

[MaxWilson]

I'd oppose that for the same reason I'd oppose "Attack Mages": Units shouldn't be able to identify whether something is a trampler from looking at it. "Attack Large Monsters" does pretty much the same job and is something units could reasonably be ordered to do.

-Max

[Archonsod]

MaxWilson said:
I'd oppose that for the same reason I'd oppose "Attack Mages": Units shouldn't be able to identify whether something is a trampler from looking at it.

You know, when you think about that, it makes no sense. Surely it would be somewhat easy to spot a trampler - it's the big guy running straight at you

[PyroStock]

Archonsod said:
You know, when you think about that, it makes no sense. Surely it would be somewhat easy to spot a trampler - it's the big guy running straight at you

Not all big guys running straight at you have trample.

[thejeff]

Yeah, Elephants would be obvious, but what about Minotaurs?
Attack Large Monsters is likely to get the same results.

[Fate]

Ok, here is the way trampling works:

When a unit gets trampled, they make a defense check. If they fail, they take 8 + 2xSize AP damage (I assume the trampling units size). If they succeed, they only take 1 damage point. Either way, there is a minimum of 1 damage point.

Fliers could simply not take the minimum damage on a successful check.

The assumption is that the advantage of flight is already accounted for in the defense (their ability to realize "Elephant! Fly up now!"). A flier which avoids has flown completely out of the way (vertically or otherwise), and so doesn't take the minimum 1 damage.

I believe that isn't too complicated, and gives credence to this issue?

[lch]

It's the difference in size of trampler and victim.