D&D 5E Flanking - Do you use it, and if so how?

[hawkeyefan]

I'm curious if people use any flanking rules, and if so - which rules do you use?

I like having flanking in my games. It has such a historic role that the game feels like it is missing something, to me, if it does not have flanking. However, I find that granting advantage using the DMG optional rule for flanking is too much of a benefit. It is too easy to flank - I find that giving advantage for flanking means giving advantage on almost all melee attack rolls. Unless you're playing a barbarian, that is too strong.

As a DM, I settled upon a house rule where a creature that is flanked provokes OAs when it moves (unless disengaging), even if it does not leave the reach of the attackers. This allows PCs to lock down an enemy to an extent by flanking it, but doesn't mean they get advantage all the time. It works pretty well.

What are the thoughts on flanking these days?

My game doesn't use flanking at all, currently. Advantage is just too big of a payoff for it, in my opinion, and I don't want to go back to the days of tracking even more bonuses to hit.

However, I do like your house rule. I generally find it to easy for people to avoid attacks of opportunity, and I think your rule might add a tactical element without adding anything to track. I think I may give it a try.

Thanks!

 

[Hawk Diesel]

I don't use it simply because I tend to run games using theater of the mind. Uses like flanking really need to be played with minis on a grid, otherwise everyone is just gonna say they are flanking the minute they engage an enemy with a buddy.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

I do, but not the way everybody else does. It's based on street fighting, and the way a gang gets the advantage. Movement is constant in my campaign (it's not tied to your turn), and even when using miniatures, my combat doesn't look or feel like a game of freeze tag. Most of my games are TotM at this point though.

Flanking
There is great tactical advantage to ganging up on an enemy. But unless there is some means of restricting their movement, it is difficult for two creatures to flank a target. The target can simply circle around one of the creatures to ensure the other one is also in front of them. In order for two creatures to flank a third, it requires some way to restrict their movement, such as a hallway. If you can get past them, you and your ally can flank them.

In an open space, three or more working together are required to flank a target.

Each creature surrounding a target in this way gains advantage on their attacks. The target can negate that advantage for any target it decides to face (attack). If they are using a shield, it grants all of its normal benefits to the front and left side (right if left-handed), but unless the target decides to face those opponents, they still have advantage on their attacks.

Note that the expectation is that the flanked character is still moving around as much as they can, to prevent somebody from getting a true rear attack. They are still aware of everybody there.

 

[Eubani]

If I used flanking the pay off would be +2 damage instead of advantage and I would also rule that you cannot flank if you are as well.

 

[Li Shenron]

I'm curious if people use any flanking rules, and if so - which rules do you use?

Personally I have never used flanking rules.

I think they could be interesting to try out, but I have always been largely skeptical that would work well within the rest of combat rules. My expectation would be that the attackers will always reposition themselves to get the best flanking benefits, which should make combat more mobile, in theory a good thing but I am not convinced it would stay interesting for a long time.

 

[Caliburn101]

Flanking works fine as is in my opinion, at least mechanically.

As for it being 'too easy' to get - that's because most GMs don't have their monsters fight tactically. Ultimately, if you aren't in a shield wall or protecting your flanks you get your ass handed to you. Any number of historical battles show this to be a hard fact.

Hell, I've done enough medieval re-enactment and LARP to know that getting flanked gets you dead in short order if you don't respond.

The one problem that is caused by use of the rule is when running solo monsters. These get flanked and can do little about it unless they are ultra-fast and can withdraw as part of their movement easily. The already significantly underpowered-encounter CR system is made worse for these types of monsters when they are getting hit more each round - they go down far too fast.

So the rule is good, but game balance on solo's is made worse. It's a bit of an issue.

To deal with this, I typically run my solo monsters (which are typically large or bigger) as having 'all round defence' and being unflankable by anything within their combat reach which is smaller than they are - their sheer bulk and powerful movements being too disruptive to putting in a precise blow.

The fact is, random rabbles of goblins SHOULD get ripped to shreds when they are flanked, but so should reckless adventurers...

... and ultimately, if you don't use the flanking rules, then when a horde of monsters surround a party, they don't actually need to go back to back in a ring to defend themselves.

That seems counterintuitive to me...

 

[ScaleyBob]

I use Flanking in the game I run. It didn't even cross my mind to not use it when I started running it, more as a holdover from 4E than anything else. We play on a grid, with figures and terrain, so it's fairly easy to adjudicate.

What I have found is it doesn't seem to overpowered, at least with group I run. The group is more ranged than anything, and the main melee warriors (a Champion, and a Paladin) are often either side by side as a bulwark, or spread out over the battlefield. The Rogue uses it from time to time, but mostly he prefers hiding and shooting, rather than getting stuck it.

As the group's gone up in level, and the number of Monsters they face has increased, their opponents get more use out of it than they do. When they get surrounded by a dozen Gnolls, then it really comes into play. With the increase in PC Armor Class as they get better equipment or Items or spells, then the Monster's getting Flanking can be quite important. A +4 to +6 attack modifier can be quite hard pressed to hit an AC of over 18, and Flanking really helps.

I would think long and hard about whether I'd use Flanking again if I started another game.

 

[Imaculata]

I play 3rd edition, so flanking is part of the combat. But I allow my monsters to make use of it as well.

 

[kagayaku]

A couple of my players requested flanking and facing on our last game. I decided that facing only makes sense if you are hidden or at the very least sneaking, and that the advantage based flanking rules nerf too many other fun abilities that would usually need to be used to gain advantage.

Next game we're going to try out:
flanking: +1 to hit for flanking (flankers must be active threats to targets but needn't be friendly to each other)
overwhelming: +[number of threats surrounding target]/2 to hit (rounded down, capped at +4) to hit
neither bonus applies if the attacking creature is also flanked/overwhelmed

We also already use laxer opportunity attack rules - anything that narratively lowers your guard grants attack of opportunity, (similarly to your rule, jgsugden, moving between 2 enemies qualifies for this.) but only if the attacker would narratively be in a position to do it (so usually not if they are overwhelmed for example, unless they in some kind of uncontrollable rage). Annnd we use the hitting cover rules from DMG, but with a second attack roll required to actually do damage to a character that caught fire while acting as cover. Annnnnnd we going to try using a really situational version of facing, on an if it makes sense basis. The facing direction of the mini is unimportant, only the facing of the character in the narrative matters. It will usually require a successful Stealth check, and may require being already hidden. Successfully attacking from behind grants advantage and ignores AC from shields.

All combined, the 6PCs working together could all get +4 to hit (+3 for overwhelming, +1 for flanking) and one of them might even get Advantage on top, and ignore shield AC - essentially getting them +6 to hit and Advantage - but I think it's pretty unlikely. I'm looking forward to seeing how it works out

I really like the simplicity and tactical merit of the 'moving while flanked grants advantage' rule though... if our current plan doesn't work out I may just go for that xD

 

[Mac McAnally]

Bonus Help?!

I like the idea of using a bonus action to use the Help action for flanking allies.