A Flanker of One

[Andor]

It means the answer to your question is no. Unless you think Adaptable Flanker makes you two different characters.

It certainly seems to.

As a swift action, you designate a single opponent as the target of this feat. When you are adjacent to the chosen target, you can choose to count as occupying any other square you threaten for purposes of determining flanking bonuses for you and your allies. You also occupy your current square for flanking your opponent.

Effectively you are in two places at once, and may be treated as two characters.

A question that comes up here is "What does it mean, to threaten?", or, more specifically, "Do you threaten a square if you can't make an AoO into it?"

Since you can't make an AoO against a creature with cover, and the opponent provides soft cover for the square directly opposite you, you can't make an AoO against a creature in the square directly opposite you.

If this means that you do not threaten that square, then it's not a valid square to designate as your Adaptable Flanker position.

There's argument over whether you can threaten a square you can't make an AoO into.

There is some definite ambiguity in the rules as written. "You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your action."

If that comma wasn't there the trick would not work, but depending on how you interpret the meaning of that comma, it might. Ask the GM time.

 

[Andor]

Here's what the Sage says.

Hmmm. That seem definite, but frankly I'd have more faith in the sage if he didn't directly contradict himself quite so often....

 

[Hypersmurf]

Effectively you are in two places at once, and may be treated as two characters.

Well, no - effectively you're in two places at once, but you're still only one character.

Let's say you're south of the orc, and your ally is west of the orc. You use Adaptable Flanker to 'occupy' the square east of the orc.

Now you are considered flanking - since east and west threaten - and your ally is considered flanking - since east and west threaten. Thus, the feat is determining flanking bonuses for you and your allies.

The phrase "for you" doesn't imply that you can flank with yourself; it's just saying that you can benefit from the bonus if your ally is directly opposite your 'occupied' square, as well as him benefiting.

You're still only one creature, despite apparently occupying two squares, and can't meet the "two friendly characters" criterion by yourself.

-Hyp.

 

[Elethiomel]

I think the "two friendly characters" line is a legacy of nobody having thought of the Adaptable Flanker feat while writing the flanking rules.
I think Adaptable Flanker should have been written much more clearly.
I don't think the Sage is a reliable source of rule information.

So from my point of view, changing the "two friendly characters" requirement could be a question of rules interpretation with regards to intent.

 

[VanRichten]

Yeah I would have to consider thinking of being able to flank with yourself make any character with Sneak Attack overpowered. Thus I would believe that reading it as such would be either reading too much from it or even completely ignoring the intent of this feat.

Also in respect the effect of having a Long Spear and Spiked Gauntlet. You do threat all squares you can reach. You threaten 10' out of you with the long spear, and 5' out from you with the gauntlet. Simply because you can hold a long spear with one hand you just can't fight with it that way.

 

[Nifft]

There is a one-handed chain-like Reach weapon in the DMG, but even that won't help, since you can't flank with yourself.

Cheers, -- N

 

[jaelis]

I don't think the Sage is a reliable source of rule information.

Yes, between the Sage and Hyp., we really don't have much to go on here.

 

[Will]

I've gone back and forth on this, but I'm going to side with the 'yes, you can flank with yourself,' provided you get Exotic Weapon Master ability that lets you ignore soft cover and are using an exotic reach weapon (spiked chain being the most likely).

Threatening space is intricately tied to AoO, so the inability to make AoOs with reach weapons through soft cover is a fairly solid indication that you can't normally threaten the square on an opponent's flank.

 

[the Jester]

To those of you supporting the "flank with yourself" approach, let me ask you this.

Do you really want to fight a giant rogue with adaptable flanker that can flank anyone that threatens it by itself? Because if I was the dm and my players tried this trick (and I fell for it), I would certainly throw out a bunch of them, or other similar abusive "flank with myself" combos.

Bad idea.

 

[Will]

The Jester:
Except you don't threaten squares that have soft cover, so the giant rogue would also need an exotic reach weapon and Exotic Weapon Master allowing him to do so, at least how I see it.

Now, mind you, if you have a giant rogue WITH those things, more power to you; but you are definitely designing hard to get to that point.