Elusive Target and Being Flank-proof

[Three_Haligonians]

The elusive target feat from Complete Warrior has an option called "diverting defence": "to use this manuver, you must be flanked and you must designate one of the flanking attackers to be affected by your dodge feat (dodge is a pre-requisite for the feat) the first attack of the round from the designated attacker automatically misses you and may strike the other flanking foe instead; the attacking creature makes an attack roll normally, and its ally is considered flat-footed. If the designated attacker is making a full attack against you, its second and subsequent attacks funtion normally."

Improved Uncanny Dodge, however, states that the character who has the feat can no longer be flanked. Does this mean that a person with improved uncanny dodge can no longer use the diverting defence option of the elusive target feat? Literally interpreting the rules would have us leaning toward saying yes, but common sense has us saying no. Any thoughts on this subject, anything we may be missing?

Thanks, folks

T and J from Three Haligonians

 

[RigaMortus]

I would say the Barb COULD take advantage of diverting defense. It looks like either they did a bad job of describing Improved Uncanny Dodge when it comes to Flanking OR they did a bad job of describing flanking (or both).

Regarding Flanking (from the SRD):

When in doubt about whether two friendly characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two friendly characters’ centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent’s space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.

Regarding Improved Uncanny Dodge (from the SRD):

At 5th level and higher, a barbarian can no longer be flanked.

If we took the wording of these litterally, that would mean a creature with IUD could never be (physically) surrounded. If your ally was on the opposite side of a Barbarian with IUD, you would somehow (perhaps magically?) be prevented from approaching the Barbarian from the opposite side.

I think they meant to say if you have IUD, nobody gets the usual flanking bonuses against you (including sneak attacks and the like).

 

[sledged]

If we took the wording of these litterally, that would mean a creature with IUD could never be (physically) surrounded. If your ally was on the opposite side of a Barbarian with IUD, you would somehow (perhaps magically?) be prevented from approaching the Barbarian from the opposite side.

Imagine if it really worked that way. The most enemies that could attack you at one time would be 4 opponents.

 

[Squire James]

I'd rule that someone can supress their Improved Uncanny Dodge as a free action on their turn. Then they can be flanked, and thus benefit from the tactical feat. The character is acknowledging the risk that backstabbing rogues are around, but he's willing to take that risk to gain the benefits of the feat.

 

[The Souljourner]

You don't need to suppress improved uncanny dodge.... you're still flanked, there's just no benefit for the flankers. Saying "you can't be flanked" is just easier than saying "people who flank you do not gain the benefits of flanking". Whenever you have two people on opposite sides of you, you're being flanked, whether they are friends, enemies, or rocks. It's a term that specifies positional relationships. In D&D there are bonuses for being in this positional relationship. Improved Uncanny dodge can remove the bonuses, but it can't prevent the positional relationship.

-The Souljourner

 

[Hypersmurf]

Whenever you have two people on opposite sides of you, you're being flanked, whether they are friends, enemies, or rocks.

Only if one of them is making a melee attack, and the other one is threatening you and is an ally to the first.

-Hyp.

 

[The Souljourner]

Thanks, I had some nits that needed picking

Yes, in D&D there is a specific set of requirements... but I still stand by my assertion that IUD doesn't interfere with the Elusive target. That would be just foolish.

-The Souljourner