-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Ignoring An Opponent?
- Thread starter Panask
- Start date
Scharlata
First Post
Panask said:
The most "official" rule for "turning a blind eye"
towards an enemy would be that your opponent [you are ignoring = lat. "do not know of being there"] is "invisible" and gets all benefits for being invisible whilst you are "blind" and suffer all penalties for being blind. So, no possibility to avoid sneak attacks - en contraire!
Kind regards
TheGogmagog
First Post
Scharlata said:The most "official" rule for "turning a blind eye"
So, no possibility to avoid sneak attacks - en contraire!
Kind regards
The objective would be to ignore the summoned badger, while giving full attention to the 15th level rogue on the other side. The answer above was correct, no there is not an official rule for ignoring an opponent.
You could close your eyes becoming blind and be denied your dex to both opponents, but if you were trying to avoid flanking this probably wouldn't be any more attractive.
Kazinsky
First Post
I agree with Scharlata. There's no officially stated rule to do this, but you can extract the necessary rules to support a character that wants to focus all of his attention on one his flankers, completely neglecting the other.
As you start to look at the pros & cons, you'll probably realize that it's best to just stick with the flanking effects... unless you are flanked by a wicked nasty creature and a small fluffy white de-clawed bunny.
As you start to look at the pros & cons, you'll probably realize that it's best to just stick with the flanking effects... unless you are flanked by a wicked nasty creature and a small fluffy white de-clawed bunny.
Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
This is presented as a rule in Skip Williams' Rules of the Game (though it's not supported by the actual rulebooks):
You get a flanking bonus from any ally your foe can see (and who is in the correct position to flank). If your foe can't see you, you don't provide a flanking bonus to any ally. You literally cannot flank a blind creature; however, a blind creature loses its Dexterity bonus to Armor Class against your attacks (so you can sneak attack it), and you get a +2 to attack it to boot. Creatures with the blindsight ability effectively "see" within blindsight range and can be flanked.
If you adopt this rule, then you can effectively ignore a flanker by using the Gaze Attack rules to turn your back on them, making them a creature you cannot see.
This is not presented as an official rule, but it's a designer's suggestion (again from Skip Williams):
A Totally Unofficial Rule for Dealing with Foes Trying to Flank You
Jonathan Tweet (co-designer of the D&D 3rd edition game) and I have had many opportunities to ponder the tactical aspects of flanking and what you might be able to do about it if you find yourself flanked. After one extended discussion not long ago, Jonathan proposed the basics of the following rule, and I present it here, with some tweaks:
You can disregard attacks from an opponent flanking you. When you do, that opponent doesn't get the +2 flanking bonus when attacking you and that opponent does not provide a flanking bonus to any of its allies. Ignoring a flanker, however, provokes an attack of opportunity from that flanker, and you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class against that flanker. You do, however, continue to threaten that flanker.
If the flanker is out of attacks of opportunity, you can ignore the flanker (and deny the flanking bonus) with impunity.
If you can't see (or locate) the flanker, you disregard the flanker by default, and you provoke the attack of opportunity.
You must make the decision to disregard a flanker as soon as the foe moves into a flanking position. You can change your decision as a free action on your turn. (You still must disregard a flanker you can't see.)
Designer's Notes: This rule gives certain creatures the option to ignore flankers when they don't pose any real danger to them. Lycanthropes facing foes that aren't armed with silver weapons, as well as characters with very high Armor Classes facing much weaker foes, can soften the effects of being surrounded. Many other creatures can use the rule to limit sneak attacks against them, but at the risk of extra attacks of opportunity from other foes. This rule also means that you often cannot provide a flanking bonus to your allies if you're out of attacks of opportunity (though foes may have a hard time determining exactly when that situation occurs).
So as people have noted, there's no official way to do it, but there are published ways to do it (either as unofficial house rules, or unofficial house rules masquerading as official rules).
-Hyp.
You get a flanking bonus from any ally your foe can see (and who is in the correct position to flank). If your foe can't see you, you don't provide a flanking bonus to any ally. You literally cannot flank a blind creature; however, a blind creature loses its Dexterity bonus to Armor Class against your attacks (so you can sneak attack it), and you get a +2 to attack it to boot. Creatures with the blindsight ability effectively "see" within blindsight range and can be flanked.
If you adopt this rule, then you can effectively ignore a flanker by using the Gaze Attack rules to turn your back on them, making them a creature you cannot see.
This is not presented as an official rule, but it's a designer's suggestion (again from Skip Williams):
A Totally Unofficial Rule for Dealing with Foes Trying to Flank You
Jonathan Tweet (co-designer of the D&D 3rd edition game) and I have had many opportunities to ponder the tactical aspects of flanking and what you might be able to do about it if you find yourself flanked. After one extended discussion not long ago, Jonathan proposed the basics of the following rule, and I present it here, with some tweaks:
You can disregard attacks from an opponent flanking you. When you do, that opponent doesn't get the +2 flanking bonus when attacking you and that opponent does not provide a flanking bonus to any of its allies. Ignoring a flanker, however, provokes an attack of opportunity from that flanker, and you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class against that flanker. You do, however, continue to threaten that flanker.
If the flanker is out of attacks of opportunity, you can ignore the flanker (and deny the flanking bonus) with impunity.
If you can't see (or locate) the flanker, you disregard the flanker by default, and you provoke the attack of opportunity.
You must make the decision to disregard a flanker as soon as the foe moves into a flanking position. You can change your decision as a free action on your turn. (You still must disregard a flanker you can't see.)
Designer's Notes: This rule gives certain creatures the option to ignore flankers when they don't pose any real danger to them. Lycanthropes facing foes that aren't armed with silver weapons, as well as characters with very high Armor Classes facing much weaker foes, can soften the effects of being surrounded. Many other creatures can use the rule to limit sneak attacks against them, but at the risk of extra attacks of opportunity from other foes. This rule also means that you often cannot provide a flanking bonus to your allies if you're out of attacks of opportunity (though foes may have a hard time determining exactly when that situation occurs).
So as people have noted, there's no official way to do it, but there are published ways to do it (either as unofficial house rules, or unofficial house rules masquerading as official rules).
-Hyp.
PrinceZane
First Post
Hmm, I don't know if I like that avoid flanking rule suggestion.
I mean, its cool in some sense, but in another it kills the major SA opportunity for the rogue, almost forcing them to focus on feinting for the SA instead of having a few options. Least that is my first thought.
However, if it provokes an AoO from a fighter that power attacks its head off, that could be just as good.
Verdict: Hung Jury, but leaning towards the don't like it
I mean, its cool in some sense, but in another it kills the major SA opportunity for the rogue, almost forcing them to focus on feinting for the SA instead of having a few options. Least that is my first thought.
However, if it provokes an AoO from a fighter that power attacks its head off, that could be just as good.
Verdict: Hung Jury, but leaning towards the don't like it
Lord Pendragon
First Post
I've never had PCs try this or ask about trying it. If they did, I'd probably allow them to treat one foe as invisible to deny flanking to the other.
Then, in their next battle, I'd pit them against two rogues, one using a hat of disguise to look like a dog. The dog would move to flank him, the PC would ignore the dog to concentrate on the obvious rogue, and the disguised (higher level) rogue would rip him a new one.![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
Then, in their next battle, I'd pit them against two rogues, one using a hat of disguise to look like a dog. The dog would move to flank him, the PC would ignore the dog to concentrate on the obvious rogue, and the disguised (higher level) rogue would rip him a new one.
wedgeski
Adventurer
This was raised a couple of times in our group in the early days. At the risk of annoying Andargor I will describe what we tried once, which was that the flanking bonus to hit only applied to the flanker with the lowest BAB, leaving all other flanking rules (sneak attacks, etc.) applying as normal. This prevented higher-level opponents from attracting a bonus to hit against a foe being harried by a creature that had no, or very little chance of actually hitting (due to DR or whatever), much like the lycanthrope example. It didn't seem to pose any problems but has been sort of left by the wayside over the years. We now use the flanking RAW.
I will describe what we tried once, which was that the flanking bonus to hit only applied to the flanker with the lowest BAB, leaving all other flanking rules (sneak attacks, etc.) applying as normal. This prevented higher-level opponents from attracting a bonus to hit against a foe being harried by a creature that had no, or very little chance of actually hitting (due to DR or whatever), much like the lycanthrope example. It didn't seem to pose any problems but has been sort of left by the wayside over the years. We now use the flanking RAW.never had it come up, but I would definitely make it much ruder for the defender getting attacked by the ignored attacker.
1. Flat-footed against ignored attacker
2. Does not threaten ignored attacker
3. Ignored attacker gets +2 flanking bonus.
4. Ignored attacker gets +2 Invisibility Bonus
Ignoring a flanking attacker can be deadly to you. OK so you are ignoring the cute fluffy bunny that the wizard just polymorphed into a wolfm which trips you and then rips your throat out....
1. Flat-footed against ignored attacker
2. Does not threaten ignored attacker
3. Ignored attacker gets +2 flanking bonus.
4. Ignored attacker gets +2 Invisibility Bonus
Ignoring a flanking attacker can be deadly to you. OK so you are ignoring the cute fluffy bunny that the wizard just polymorphed into a wolfm which trips you and then rips your throat out....
Similar Threads
