-
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!
Flanking and Uncanny Dodge paradox
- Thread starter Zhure
- Start date
We were just discussing this Monday and we decide that:
The rogue that meets the requirements to flank the barbarian is flanking him and gets sneak attack damage.
The other rogue is not but still needs to be in position to allow the higher level rogue get the flanking bonus.
It seemed the fairest way.
The rogue that meets the requirements to flank the barbarian is flanking him and gets sneak attack damage.
The other rogue is not but still needs to be in position to allow the higher level rogue get the flanking bonus.
It seemed the fairest way.
CRGreathouse
Community Supporter
melkoriii said:
I disagree.
melkoriii said:
Except it doesn't say you give up all attacks for one round. It says you simply defend yourself and move during the round. On your action you don't attack or perform any other activity other than moving your speed. AoO's don't happen on your action, they happen in response to other people's actions.
Total Defense is a Standard Action that you can take instead of the Standard Attack Action. Nowhere does it state that it prevents you from threatening an area, it just means you chose to focus on defense instead of offense for that round.
If someone opens themselve up to you (i.e. provokes an AoO), it doesn't prevent you from making a reflexive attack in response. The PHB doesn't address this issue at all.
When the Sage was asked, he pointed out that Total Defense doesn't prevent you from threatening an area, and advised that they be allowed, but with the same -4 pealty on your attack roll that Fighting Defensively would give.
You can choose not to take his advice, but it seems very reasonable to me, especially in light of the fact that the Total Defense manuever in the PHB doesn't address this issue at all. It also makes perfect sense to me, as someone who has done exactly this when fencing: gone for total defense and only attacking when my opponent makes a mistake that opens themselves up.
AGGEMAM said:
PH p. 25: At 5th level, the barbarian can no longer be flanked; he can react to opponents on opposites sides of him as easily as he can react to a single attacker
The way I see it is like this. The barbarian his reacting to both opponents. So the 10th level rogue is skilled enough to take advantage of the little openings it offers, whereas the 1st level rogue isn't.
As noted by Hypersmurf, flanking is "To be directly on the other side of a character who is being threatened by another character."
So the 1st level rogue is technically flanking but uncanny dodge saves the barbarian's skin from SA (and flanking bonuses) on this side.
The 10th level rogue is flanking as well but uncanny dodge doesn't protect the barbarian in this case... So SA.
Finally, I think they would have said: The exception to this defense is that two (or more) rogues, each at least 4 levels higher than the barbarian... or something like that instead of a rogue of at least 4 levels or higher when they defined Uncanny dodge.
Caliban wrote:
------------------
Total Defense is a Standard Action that you can take instead of the Standard Attack Action. Nowhere does it state that it prevents you from threatening an area, it just means you chose to focus on defense instead of offense for that round.
When the Sage was asked, he pointed out that Total Defense doesn't prevent you from threatening an area, and advised that they be allowed, but with the same -4 pealty on your attack roll that Fighting Defensively would give.
------------------
Finally, a reasonable explanation of the effects of Total Defense. This issue (of threatening, AOOs and the associated attack penalty) has been bugging me for a while as it is a favourite tactic of my halfling Rogue.
My halfling typically wears creatures down by the 'death of a thousand cuts' special ability (prerequisites of small size, low strength and tiny weapon).
While he is devastating in a flank position against creatures susceptible to critical hits, he otherwise sucks in combat. So rather than whittle away at some elemental or undead hulk for 1d4+1 damage per strike, he'll simply throw himself into the middle and go on the Total Defense and boost his AC by 6 points (5+ ranks of Tumble) to absorb attacks from opponents to help out the not-so-well protected fighters.
Another use is to use it to boost AC while moving into a flank position - particularly while you wait for someone else to join you to form the flank.
Using these sort of tactics, I can quite often get him through a 5 hour session of play without taking a combat hit (spells are another matter, and with a lousy Will save against cultists, it gets a little hairy at times).
------------------
Total Defense is a Standard Action that you can take instead of the Standard Attack Action. Nowhere does it state that it prevents you from threatening an area, it just means you chose to focus on defense instead of offense for that round.
When the Sage was asked, he pointed out that Total Defense doesn't prevent you from threatening an area, and advised that they be allowed, but with the same -4 pealty on your attack roll that Fighting Defensively would give.
------------------
Finally, a reasonable explanation of the effects of Total Defense. This issue (of threatening, AOOs and the associated attack penalty) has been bugging me for a while as it is a favourite tactic of my halfling Rogue.
My halfling typically wears creatures down by the 'death of a thousand cuts' special ability (prerequisites of small size, low strength and tiny weapon).
While he is devastating in a flank position against creatures susceptible to critical hits, he otherwise sucks in combat. So rather than whittle away at some elemental or undead hulk for 1d4+1 damage per strike, he'll simply throw himself into the middle and go on the Total Defense and boost his AC by 6 points (5+ ranks of Tumble) to absorb attacks from opponents to help out the not-so-well protected fighters.
Another use is to use it to boost AC while moving into a flank position - particularly while you wait for someone else to join you to form the flank.
Using these sort of tactics, I can quite often get him through a 5 hour session of play without taking a combat hit (spells are another matter, and with a lousy Will save against cultists, it gets a little hairy at times).
Darklone
Registered User
SIGHS
As far as many of you cited: You flank an enemy if on the opposite site is someone who THREATENS him. Not one word that guy has to flank. Uncanny dodge does not help against AoOs or makes an enemy not threatening you if you are in his reach.
Btw: How do you handle sneak attacks from hiding? A rogue or barbarian with uncanny dodge cannot be sneak attacked at all? Or do you rule the 4 lvl difference too?
As far as many of you cited: You flank an enemy if on the opposite site is someone who THREATENS him. Not one word that guy has to flank. Uncanny dodge does not help against AoOs or makes an enemy not threatening you if you are in his reach.
Btw: How do you handle sneak attacks from hiding? A rogue or barbarian with uncanny dodge cannot be sneak attacked at all? Or do you rule the 4 lvl difference too?
well at 5th level the barbarian cannot be denied his Dex for being flatfoot or by invisible attackers. Then later he cannot be flanked unless they are 4 levels higher.
If a rogue used bluff and had success or was 4 levels higher level and flanked. I would think they could sneak attack. But just sneaking up would not be good enough.
If a rogue used bluff and had success or was 4 levels higher level and flanked. I would think they could sneak attack. But just sneaking up would not be good enough.
Similar Threads
