Invisibility and Flanking

[Beckett]

Some questions about Invisibility and how it works with flanking came up in my game last night.

The rogue had a Greater Invisibility cast on her, then moved around behind a monster. One of the fighters then moved up on the monster, placing him opposite of the rogue. I ruled the fighter did not gain the benefits of flanking, as he was unaware of the rogue's position. In character he knew she had headed over that way, and may have even surmised that she moved around the creature, but without knowing her exact position, how could he claim flanking.

The player then realized he still had Trueseeing active, so could see the rogue. I ruled that he was then able to use the flanking bonus. After the fact, I started to think that I had made the wrong call; after all, the monster couldn't see the rogue, so why would it react as though it were flanked when it couldn't see one of the flankers?

I realize a strict reading of the rules might be against me (and the player who was told he couldn't flank with an invisible partner certainly was), but both my initial ruling and my thoughts on the monster not acknowledging an invisible character seemed like common sense rulings. I'm open to rule quotes and opinions.

 

[pawsplay]

My opinion is that flanking is flanking. Even though the fighter may have been unaware, the invisible character was not, and undoubtedly provided an advantage. Flanking is not dependent on awareness, it is situational, and is defined by the position of characters and their threatened areas. The round system is, to some extent, an abstraction, and if the invisible character sneak attacks the next round, it can be supposed that everyone was attacking at roughly the same time.

Further, the fighter could make a pressing attack, knowing that wherever the invisible character was, the creature would be vulnerable if it ignored them.

Would you rather be flanked by two invisible opponents, or one visible opponent and one invisible opponent? Do you think you would have an easier time keeping your defense knowing where the second opponent was, or not knowing?

 

[frankthedm]

this is going to be an amusing topic

 

[billd91]

By the RAW, no awareness is necessary, whether from either of the flankers or from the target.

So I toss out the RAW. If the target fails the DC 20 spot check to realize there's an invisible creature in the vicinity, he's not going to act as if flanked and neither potential flanker gets the bonus. The way I play it, the target has to be aware of threats from both directions for his defense to be compromised.

 

[Hypersmurf]

By the rules, if a/ you are making a melee attack, and b/ your ally directly opposite threatens your target, you and your ally are flanking and you get a +2 bonus. Whether the ally can see you, whether your target can see you, whether you can see your ally, whether you can see your target, whether your target is conscious, whatever.

According to Skip Williams in the 3E Main FAQ and the Rules of the Game articles, only an ally who can be seen can grant a flanking bonus. Skip's answer is not supported, mentioned, or even implied anywhere in the rules, however.

-Hyp.

 

[mikebr99]

According to Skip Williams in the 3E Main FAQ and the Rules of the Game articles, only an ally who can be seen can grant a flanking bonus. Skip's answer is not supported, mentioned, or even implied anywhere in the rules, however.

-Hyp.

To be fair... he DID say that it was totally unofficial:

A Totally Unofficial Rule for Dealing with Foes Trying to Flank You

Jonathan Tweet (co-designer of the D&D 3rd edition game) and I have had many opportunities to ponder the tactical aspects of flanking and what you might be able to do about it if you find yourself flanked. After one extended discussion not long ago, Jonathan proposed the basics of the following rule, and I present it here, with some tweaks:

You can disregard attacks from an opponent flanking you. When you do, that opponent doesn't get the +2 flanking bonus when attacking you and that opponent does not provide a flanking bonus to any of its allies. Ignoring a flanker, however, provokes an attack of opportunity from that flanker, and you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class against that flanker. You do, however, continue to threaten that flanker.

If the flanker is out of attacks of opportunity, you can ignore the flanker (and deny the flanking bonus) with impunity.

If you can't see (or locate) the flanker, you disregard the flanker by default, and you provoke the attack of opportunity.

You must make the decision to disregard a flanker as soon as the foe moves into a flanking position. You can change your decision as a free action on your turn. (You still must disregard a flanker you can't see.)

Designer's Notes: This rule gives certain creatures the option to ignore flankers when they don't pose any real danger to them. Lycanthropes facing foes that aren't armed with silver weapons, as well as characters with very high Armor Classes facing much weaker foes, can soften the effects of being surrounded. Many other creatures can use the rule to limit sneak attacks against them, but at the risk of extra attacks of opportunity from other foes. This rule also means that you often cannot provide a flanking bonus to your allies if you're out of attacks of opportunity (though foes may have a hard time determining exactly when that situation occurs).

Mike

 

[Hypersmurf]

To be fair... he DID say that it was totally unofficial:

No, he didn't. He said a rule to ignore someone flanking you was unofficial. He presented "An invisible ally cannot grant a flanking bonus" and "A blind opponent cannot be flanked" as if they were actually rules.

-Hyp.

 

[Dracorat]

Once again why I love using the combat facing rules variant =) Stuff like this never happens.

 

[mvincent]

From the 3.0 FAQ:
"You get a flanking bonus from any ally your foe can see (and
who is in the correct position to flank). If your foe can’t see
you, you don’t provide a flanking bonus to any ally.
Sharp readers will note that this means you cannot flank a
blind creature; however, truly blind creatures are effectively
flanked already (they can’t use their Dexterity bonus to AC and
you a +2 bonus to attack them). Creatures with the blindsight
ability effectively “see” within blindsight range and can be
flanked."

 

[Hypersmurf]

From the 3.0 FAQ:

Exactly. Now find anything in the rules to support it, in either edition.

Skip Williams put that in the 3E FAQ. It wasn't in the 3E rules. It isn't in the 3.5 rules. And then he put in in his RotG article. But it's still nowhere in the rules.

-Hyp.