Flanking and Uncanny Dodge paradox

[Zhure]

Ok, maybe this is really simple and I'm overcomplicating it. Maybe I can't get my mind around it because I woke up stupider today.

R1 = 1st level Rogue
B6 = 6th level Barbarian
R10 = 10th level Rogue


R1 B6 R10

The Barbarian has Uncanny dodge and can't be flanked by R1, but he can be flanked by R10. My problem is, since R1 no longer flanks with R10...

... does R10 get a Sneak Attack since R1 isn't flanking?

... or does R1 get a Sneak Attack since R10 is flanking?

For some reason, I can't wrap my mind around this in a satisfactory manner and would like some input.

Greg

 

[MythandLore]

No one is flanking as far as I can tell. (It's 3am here)

X = R1
Y = B
z = R10

XYZ

Z can flank Y, But X can't Flank Y.
Since X can never flank, there is no flanking.
Since both Rs would need to flank the Barb to be "flanking" him.
So their just two normal attackers???

 

[hong]

It would be rather bizarre if the 1st level rogue got to sneak attack, but the 10th level rogue didn't. Also, note how the UD ability is phrased: "a rogue at least 4 levels higher ... can flank him (and thus sneak attack him)". This would indicate that flanking is a property granted to a character by an ally on the opposite side of the target. UD doesn't stop someone from flanking you; it stops them from taking advantage of that flanking to sneak attack you.

I would say that the 10th level rogue gets to SA, but not the 1st level one.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I think the 10th level rogue just needs "an ally" to flank someone with uncanny dodge.

By my reading, the R10 can get a sneak attack, but the R1 can't.

But it is murky.

-Hyp.

 

[Maddenus2]

not flanked and not cant be flanked

umm see if this makes sense to you.

The rogue R1 is on the opposite side of the barb B6 to R10

The barb is flanked but because of Uncanny dodge does not suffer any critical hit from the R1 rogue. because the R10 is 4 levels higher than B6 then he does get the flanking bonus.

take it as two meanins to flanking

flanking (a) = Flanking means two opponants stand either side of target.
Flanking (b) = Flanking as regards to the specific ability of the rogue.

If you dont allow for this interpretation then a rogue could never get flanking on another rogue unless both opponants are lvl higher and both rogues.

this would not equate to the intent of the writers.

English is a SOB of a language sometimes.

take read for example read read, read it yet that kind of thing

 

[Xahn'Tyr]

If a combatant is making a melee attack against an opponent, and an ally directly opposite the combatant is threatening the opponent, the combatant and the combatant's ally flank the opponent.
...
At 5th level, the barbarian can no longer be flanked. The exception to this defense is that a rogue at least four levels higher than the barbarian can still flank.

My best guess: the rogues are flanking the barbarian. The barbarian ability cancels out the flank for the lower level rogue, but not the higher level one. So R1 cannot sneak attack, but R10 can.

It doesn't say that in order for you to flank you have to have someone opposite you also flanking. It just says that you have to have someone opposite you threatening the opponent. Since R1 is threatening the barbarian, R10 is flanking.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Have you read the Glossary definition?

"To be directly on the other side of an enemy that is threatening the enemy the character is attacking."

I mean... what the hell? That makes no sense!

-Hyp.

[edit] Ah, here we go. It's in the PHB Clarifications PDF, not the PHB Errata PDF. "To be directly on the other side of a character who is being threatened by another character."

Well, that's still not what the combat section says. That says you flank if you're making a melee attack against someone who is threatened. Not if you're just standing there. [/edit]

 

[UofMDude]

Here's my guess:

The barbarian attacks the R1, killing him and cleaving into the R10 thus making the issue moot



UofMDude

 

[Crothian]

Here's my guess:

The barbarian attacks the R1, killing him and cleaving into the R10 thus making the issue moot



UofMDude

I think we have a winner!!

I say level 10 rogue gets sneak attack, level 1 rogue is on full defensive trying to make sure above suggestion doesn't happen.

 

[Uller]

A character can be flanked by one and not the other.

On R1's turn, he is flanking B6 because he has an ally opposite him who is threatening his target...but B6 is immune to being flanked by R1 so no flank, no sneak attack.

On R10's turn, he is flanking B6 because he has an ally opposite him who is threatening his target...Yes, B6 is immune to flanks from R1...but whether or not R1 is able to flank B6 has nothing to do with it at this point. So B6's immunity to flanks from R1 is irrelevant and R10 may sneak attack.