Can I Ignore An Opponent?

[Storm Raven]

So, do you then rule that you are helpless before an invisible opponent? What about an opponent you are not aware of, such as a sniper hiding in the trees?

You are not actively ignoring those types of foes. One assumes a certain level of readiness, even when one is dealing with an invisible foe, or when one is flat-footed. To completely ignore an opponent only works if you completely ignore them, which puts you in no position to monitor or even react to their actions. If you can react in any way to things they do, you are not ignoring them for the purpose of avoiding being flanked.

 

[Sravoff]

I would rule that to while ignoring an opponent you give him these benefits.

1) As a full round action, the "ignoree" may deall full damage to you. No attak roll nesassary. Any weapon damage dice are considererd to roll their max.
2) When attacking, your opponent is considered flanked and flat footed. In addition, any hits you succed on scoring are considered crits. As per normal rules, if you roll another crit, increase the damage multiplyer by one.
3) Any spell cast by a ignored opponent is considered maximized. All reflex saves are automatically failed, and fort and Ref saves have a -2 penalty. This includes wands staffs and rods.

Looks good to me.

-Sravoff

 

[Raven Crowking]

I would rule that to while ignoring an opponent you give him these benefits.

1) As a full round action, the "ignoree" may deall full damage to you. No attak roll nesassary. Any weapon damage dice are considererd to roll their max.

In other words, you are easier to hit when moving in combat by someone you are not trying to avoid than you are when you are standing still and not trying to avoid anyone?

Despite Storm Raven's assertations, ignoring a foe is not the same thing as actively aiding the foe to hit you. You are still a moving target. A coup de grace assumes that the attacker has the leisure to pick his spot on an immobile foe. This clearly applies more when you are standing around and an invisible creature -- or a sniper in the trees -- attacks you unexpectedly than it does when you are simply not paying attention to an insignificant foe.

When you are fighting and an ally is standing next to you, does the ally give your attacker a flanking bonus? Obviously not. Why? Because you may ignore the threat posed by your ally. On the other hand, does ignoring that threat mean that you are "in no position to monitor or even react to their actions"? Again, clearly not. You can react to the actions of your allies.

From what I understand, if I were a player in Storm Raven's game fighting side-by-side with another PC, and I decided to attack the PC (perhaps I was charmed, or confused), if the PC didn't know the attack was coming, it would automatically be a coup de grace. And, since I give that other PC no flanking penalty, he cannot monitor or react to my change in actions as the charm takes effect.

Meanwhile, under the same circumstances in Sravoff's campaign, I would simply deal full damage with no attack roll necessary....on top of other possible benefits.

Is this actually what would occur?

RC

 

[Storm Raven]

In other words, you are easier to hit when moving in combat by someone you are not trying to avoid than you are when you are standing still and not trying to avoid anyone?

But if you are ignoring them, you are not reacting to anything they do. Once you start reacting in any way, like you do when you are attacked by someone even when you are initiaslly unaware, you are no longer ignoring them. Hence, you cannot ignore an opponent to avoid flanking unless you completely ignore them. And completly ignoring them makes you helpless with respect to the ignored foe.

Despite Storm Raven's assertations, ignoring a foe is not the same thing as actively aiding the foe to hit you. You are still a moving target. A coup de grace assumes that the attacker has the leisure to pick his spot on an immobile foe. This clearly applies more when you are standing around and an invisible creature -- or a sniper in the trees -- attacks you unexpectedly than it does when you are simply not paying attention to an insignificant foe.

But against those foes there is a level of reaction implied in the attacks. You may not know the attack is coming initially, but you roll with it, react to it, and otherwise deal with it. If you are doing that with respect to an "ignored" opponent, then you are not really ignoring them, and they should get flanking bonuses against you. To ginore them, you have to not let their actions affect your other actions in any way, and that requires you to totally tune them out - making you helpless against them.

When you are fighting and an ally is standing next to you, does the ally give your attacker a flanking bonus? Obviously not. Why? Because you may ignore the threat posed by your ally.

No, because you are not being threatened by your ally, and may discount the distractions he might cause you in combat. Should he turn on you, then he would get flanking bonuses.

From what I understand, if I were a player in Storm Raven's game fighting side-by-side with another PC, and I decided to attack the PC (perhaps I was charmed, or confused), if the PC didn't know the attack was coming, it would automatically be a coup de grace.

No, because you are not entirely tuning out their actions, like you have to do in order to effectively ignore a foe.

The rule is punitive. It is meant to be. Nerfing an entire class' primary combat ability should have a huge risk associated with it.

 

[Aus_Snow]

The rule is punitive. It is meant to be. Nerfing an entire class' primary combat ability should have a huge risk associated with it.

Exactly.

I agree. Coup de grace away, O ignored ones.



edit --- In fact, the PHB even states that the coup de grace action can be taken against those "otherwise at your mercy" (otherwise than sleeping, paralyzed etc.) I would certainly say that someone ignoring an opponent is 'at their mercy'.

 

[Raven Crowking]

But if you are ignoring them, you are not reacting to anything they do. Once you start reacting in any way, like you do when you are attacked by someone even when you are initiaslly unaware, you are no longer ignoring them. Hence, you cannot ignore an opponent to avoid flanking unless you completely ignore them. And completly ignoring them makes you helpless with respect to the ignored foe.

The fact that you can have an ally on your flank, and that ally does not provide flanking bonus to your enemies, is ample proof that flanking bonus has nothing to do with whether or not you completely ignore a foe. It has only to do with the significance you accord to a creature in that position. In other words, it is not that "you are not being threatened by your ally" but that you don't view your ally as a threat. Or, as you put it, you feel you "may discount the distractions he might cause you in combat".

Clearly, even you agree that you do not have to entirely tune out a creature in a flanking position in order to ignore them enough to avoid the flanking penalty. Whether or not you "totally ignore them" is beside the point. If this is the basis of your argument, then your argument collapses right at the start.

Likewise, despite your assertation, there is no "level of reaction implied in the attacks" of a creature whose attack you are completely unaware of. The "flat-footed" condition exists to allow for attacks that (1) you are not ready for, and therefore cannot react to, and (2) where a chance for a miss exists because, although you are not aware of the potential attack, you are not incapable of motion.

The fact that cartain abilities allow you to react while flat-footed (i.e., retain Dex bonus) is, again, demonstrable proof that normally a character who is flat-footed cannot react. So is the fact that a flat-footed character does not get most "reaction" effects, such as AoOs.

Yes, there are other things that being flat-footed pertains to, such as conditions that severely impede your motion, but the above is pretty well what the condition encapsulates.

Simply put, you are not helpless because you "totally tune them out" -- you are helpless because you are not actively defending and they have the ability to choose the place where their attack will land. You do not have that ability against a moving target (although this is, in part, what sneak attack grants -- and I would certainly agree that a rogue may sneak attack anyone who is ignoring him!).

The rule is punitive. It is meant to be. Nerfing an entire class' primary combat ability should have a huge risk associated with it.

Standing with your back to a wall doesn't "nerf" sneak attack, and neither does allowing a 20th level fighter to ignore a mouse standing near that wall behind him....even if that mouse might later turn out to be a Ravening Mouse of Chaos.

Likewise, if I have DR 50/silver and only one character has silver weapons, I can ignore the other characters if I like. In my parlance, this makes me flat-footed against them (which might be my undoing, if they are rogues and can now get past my DR with their extra damage, or if they are clever and grapple me so that I really am helpless). In other words, if you can ignore a foe without being utterly screwed over by so doing, you can probably ignore that foe because it is insignificant.


RC

 

[Cheiromancer]

My main worry is that if an enemy is being flanked by a fighter and a rogue, the enemy could ignore the fighter and thereby deny the rogue any SA dice. Not being able to take AoOs against the fighter and being treated as flat footed wrt him- I don't know, but it seems like it nerfs the rogue.

If the flanking characters are cooperating to better take down their enemy, then the rogue would still get SA damage no matter who the enemy is trying to ignore. I guess it depends on how you think flanking work- does it work by the enemy being distracted, or by the attackers cooperating?

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I was on the side of allowing this option, but disagree with the text Raven Crowking posted, mainly because Flat-Footed is a condition that only exists on the first round of combat prior to your first action. I am also in with Firelance.. so my version looks like:

In some cases, you may feel that an opponent is completely unable to harm you, or that whatever harm that opponent can do is relatively meaningless. As a free action at the start of your turn, you can make a Concentration check (DC 10 + any damage that opponent has given you since your last turn) to ignore that opponent. An ignored opponent doesn’t count when determining whether or not you are flanked and can not successfully use the Aid Another action to help another combatant’s attack against you. An ignored opponent is treated as if invisible in respect to you, and all actions you take may draw Attacks of Opportunity from that opponent. You may not take any action against the ignored opponent. Ignoring an opponent is active until the start of your next turn or until you attempt to move into that opponents space.You may ignore multiple opponents, each requires a seperate Concentration Checks.

Forgot to mention.. this means the opponent you ignore gains the flanking bonus and the bonus to hit from being invisible..and you are denied Dex to AC.... Odds are they will hit you more often than not. Add in the AoO from your actions....
Not really a good idea to ignore someone, even if they don't have SA ability.
I think it can be a good tactical choice in certain circumstances, but normally not a choice that would be made.

 

[Raven Crowking]

My main worry is that if an enemy is being flanked by a fighter and a rogue, the enemy could ignore the fighter and thereby deny the rogue any SA dice. Not being able to take AoOs against the fighter and being treated as flat footed wrt him- I don't know, but it seems like it nerfs the rogue.

If the flanking characters are cooperating to better take down their enemy, then the rogue would still get SA damage no matter who the enemy is trying to ignore. I guess it depends on how you think flanking work- does it work by the enemy being distracted, or by the attackers cooperating?

If the attackers are cooperating, one gains a +2 bonus to hit due to the Aid Another action.

I would say that there is a combination of distraction and cooperation involved, which is why I demanded a Concentration check to ignore an opponent. Note that the rogue can still Feint in order to make an enemy flat-footed with respect to his next attack; the mechanics already prevent the enemy from easily "nerfing" sneak attack.

If the fighter really is so insignificant that the enemy can ignore him, then why would you not allow it? IMC, there are very few circumstances under which ignoring an opponent would be a good idea. Of course, I also allow the Marking and Opponent rules from Tournements & Fairs...another set of rules that uses the "flat-footed" rules to allow you to pay more attention to a specific opponent (flanked or not). Again, there are a few circumstances where this would be a smart move, and many more where it would not be.

In your example, the fighter would be facing a flat-footed opponent. Initiating a grapple, or tripping the opponent, would be good means to aid the rogue with his sneak attack, even in those cases where the opponent is ignoring the fighter because he feels safe in his DR. Assuming reasonably apt tactics on the part of all combatants, you can allow a character to ignore an opponent (using the Concentration check/flat-footed rule I cited above) without having to worry that it will unbalance the game or nerf anyone.

Moreover, doing so makes good use of the RAW and is a reasonable extrapolation therefrom. Making a combatant "helpless" is not.


RC


EDIT: I do like Primitive Screwhead's "treat as invisible"....although I note that there are other conditions that can make a character effectively flat-footed.

RC

 

[Storm Raven]

Clearly, even you agree that you do not have to entirely tune out a creature in a flanking position in order to ignore them enough to avoid the flanking penalty. Whether or not you "totally ignore them" is beside the point. If this is the basis of your argument, then your argument collapses right at the start.

Yes, you do. Otherwise he is enough of a distraction that you are treated as being flanked. I'm not sure how much clearer this can be. If you react to the "ignored" opponent in any way, you are not actually ignoring them sufficiently to avoid them gaining a flanking bonus against you.

Likewise, despite your assertation, there is no "level of reaction implied in the attacks" of a creature whose attack you are completely unaware of. The "flat-footed" condition exists to allow for attacks that (1) you are not ready for, and therefore cannot react to, and (2) where a chance for a miss exists because, although you are not aware of the potential attack, you are not incapable of motion.

Yes, there is. Your Dexterity is not reduced to 0 for those attacks for example. If you were completely unable to react to an opponent in any fashion, then it would be. Therefore, you must be reacting in some way to the attack. If you ignore an opponent, then you are not, and intentionally so.

Simply put, you are not helpless because you "totally tune them out" -- you are helpless because you are not actively defending and they have the ability to choose the place where their attack will land. You do not have that ability against a moving target (although this is, in part, what sneak attack grants -- and I would certainly agree that a rogue may sneak attack anyone who is ignoring him!).

Yes, you do have the ability to be treated as helpless, even a moving opponent can be under such a condition under certain circumstances. "A helpless opponent is someone who is bound, sleeping, paralyzed, unconscious, or otherwise at your mercy." An individual completely ignoring you is almost certainly "otherwise at your mercy".

Likewise, if I have DR 50/silver and only one character has silver weapons, I can ignore the other characters if I like. In my parlance, this makes me flat-footed against them (which might be my undoing, if they are rogues and can now get past my DR with their extra damage, or if they are clever and grapple me so that I really am helpless). In other words, if you can ignore a foe without being utterly screwed over by so doing, you can probably ignore that foe because it is insignificant.

This is a silly argument, and you know it. People won't ignore the rogues under your proposed rule, because the bonus gained by their other opponents pales in comparison. The entire purpose of the "ignore an opponent" rules is to be able to prevent rogues from being able to flank and get sneak attack damage. Trying to make any other kind of argument is just dishonest.

You can ignore and opponent. The level of ignoring them sufficient to avoid being flanked is sufficient to treat you as a helpless opponent with respect to the ignored opponent.