Houserule: Rejecting a Flank

Hieronymous Rex · Post by **Hieronymous Rex** » Fri Dec 31, 2010 4:15 pm

D20 SRD wrote:When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by a character or creature friendly to you on the opponent’s opposite border or opposite corner.

This produces a few problems:

1. "Friendly"? Are we going to get into a similar problem 4e Dark Sun had with Defilers, where allies were "green dots"? For instance, if I'm fighting an behir and the NPC rogue I hired back in town comes up behind me and tries to remove his employer's spine, should he get a flanking bonus? By RAW, he would not, but it would seem that flanking represents the defenders inability to keep tabs on both sides of him; hence why 360° Vision negates the modifier for flanking.

2. When should a character or creature count? Certainly that flea standing behind me is my enemy, but should it provide a flanking bonus for the Balor on the opposite side? If I'm fighting with my back to a table, which, unbeknownst to me, has an animate lampstand who hasn't moved yet, should the lampstand count for flanking?

My attempted resolution: Rejecting a Flank.

At any time you may choose to reject the flank of something, causing them to no longer count towards flanking, but if they do attack you, they are treated as Invisible (denying you your Dexterity bonus to AC) to you, since you were ignoring them.

By default, you are rejecting the flank of anything that is not obviously and enemy, including inanimate object and party memebers. You could choose to watch them more closely, but this has a cost: if you watch your back against that NPC rogue from before, the behir would receive a flanking bonus (but at least you wouldn't lose your Dex against the traitor).

Leress · Post by **Leress** » Fri Dec 31, 2010 6:18 pm

In the first scenario the rogue would get the bonus, since you know he is trying to kill you and friendly people just don't do that.

Also your resolution is not good at all. Why would anyone take an option that puts them in an even worse position then before? I rather have enemies get a +2 than count as invisible which can lead to even worse outcomes.

It doesn't even solve your second scenario because you are not even aware of the lampstand can attack you, so you can't reject something that you don't know exists.

Red_Rob · Post by **Red_Rob** » Fri Dec 31, 2010 6:19 pm

This reminds me of something I read once.

Ice9 · Post by **Ice9** » Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:25 pm

Why would anyone take an option that puts them in an even worse position then before? I rather have enemies get a +2 than count as invisible which can lead to even worse outcomes.

Actually, this would be a good move in a number of situations; if anything, it could make flanking rather ineffective.

Obvious Example: On one side of you is a high-level Rogue. On the other side is a Celestial Badger from Summon Monster I. Would you rather take ~4 damage, or ~216 damage?

Heck, even setting SA aside, flanking for a Balor is a lot more dangerous than invisibility for a Lemure.

Leress · Post by **Leress** » Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:48 pm

Ice9 wrote:Actually, this would be a good move in a number of situations; if anything, it could make flanking rather ineffective.

Obvious Example: On one side of you is a high-level Rogue. On the other side is a Celestial Badger from Summon Monster I. Would you rather take ~4 damage, or ~216 damage?

I kill the Badger problem solved.

Ice9 · Post by **Ice9** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 12:49 am

Sure, assuming you have an immediate action attack and unlimited immediate actions a round. Otherwise you lose to some minions with wands.

For that matter, let's say a 15th level Rogue and a 15th level Barbarian move in to flank you. The Barbarian is going to hit you anyway, unless you have some kind of "Objection!" defense. You'd be better off taking one huge pile of damage than two.

For Valor · Post by **For Valor** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 5:37 am

well, Ice9, a rogue isn't dumb enough to flank at level 15, but I see what you're thinking of here.

At low levels, where flanking is actually used to get SA damage, this mechanic would be quite useful. I think it would need to be balanced by a greater repercussion if the guy in the barbarian's spot gets more of an advantage than being invisible, like... well, actually, I have no suggestions.

Ice9 · Post by **Ice9** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 6:47 am

Flanking works just fine. You get Pounce, charge in to a flanking position, shank them repeatedly, then use an swift-action movement to get away. Solves the problem of enemies with True Seeing.

And if the target is dead from the shanking, which many foes will be, then you don't even need the "get away" step.

Fuchs · Post by **Fuchs** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:39 am

I think the question was: If you betray your employer, who is fighting a dire bear, and backstab him, do you get a flanking bonus since if the bear is not friendly to you but will attack you next?