Ohhhh, you got Flanked!

[Goldmoon]

In the context of flanking, ranged attacks into a grapple are irrelevant, and so is a swarm.

I mentioned confusion as the only way I can think Goldmoon intended, but given the other thread, I rather think there is a fumble-houserule in play.

Edit: Dr. Rictus owes me a coke!

Yes, we have a critical fumble house rule. In the case of an accidental hit, does it count? The person who fumbled has to roll to determine if he can hit his buddy. Should he get a flanking bonus to that roll?

 

[IcyCool]

Yes, we have a critical fumble house rule. In the case of an accidental hit, does it count? The person who fumbled has to roll to determine if he can hit his buddy. Should he get a flanking bonus to that roll?

That would be up to whomever came up with the house rule.

 

[Goldmoon]

So there is no rule anywhere that covers that situation?

 

[IcyCool]

So there is no rule anywhere that covers that situation?

No, because the situation is caused by a made up rule. As was pointed out, it is likely that a Confused character would get the flanking bonus.

 

[Infiniti2000]

So there is no rule anywhere that covers that situation?

The fumble would not cause you to be flanked. Specifically: "When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by a character or creature friendly to you on the opponent’s opposite border or opposite corner. "

If the PC that fumbled is friendly to your opponent, then you would be flanked. However, unless he was confused or something similar, then that would not be the case. Note that if your ally was charmed by your opponent, then your ally would allow your opponent to flank you even though you don't consider your ally an opponent.

Come to think of it, maybe being confused isn't good enough because it doesn't make the confused character and your opponent friendly to each other.

 

[Goldmoon]

The fumble would not cause you to be flanked. Specifically: "When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by a character or creature friendly to you on the opponent’s opposite border or opposite corner. "

If the PC that fumbled is friendly to your opponent, then you would be flanked. However, unless he was confused or something similar, then that would not be the case. Note that if your ally was charmed by your opponent, then your ally would allow your opponent to flank you even though you don't consider your ally an opponent.

Come to think of it, maybe being confused isn't good enough because it doesn't make the confused character and your opponent friendly to each other.

That goes back to the two invisible characters who dont know about each other. In that case, if Im one of the invisible characters; is the enemy of my enemy really my friend?

 

[Infiniti2000]

That goes back to the two invisible characters who dont know about each other. In that case, is the enemy of my enemy really my friend?

Invisibility + flanking is the subject of long and heated debates. Invisibility, however, says nothing about being friendly, so you still need two characters that are friendly to each other.

When that is settled, you then need to make sure that the other character is threatening your opponent. The definition of threaten is:

threaten
To be able to attack in melee without moving from your current space. A creature typically threatens all squares within its natural reach, even when it is not its turn to take an action. For a Medium or Small creature this usually includes all squares adjacent to its space. Larger creatures threaten more squares, while smaller creatures may not threaten any squares except their own.

Clearly, even an invisible character threatens.

Please, for the sake of all sanity, don't bring up the idea of gaining a +2 bonus with a ranged weapon.

 

[Goldmoon]

Invisibility + flanking is the subject of long and heated debates. Invisibility, however, says nothing about being friendly, so you still need two characters that are friendly to each other.

When that is settled, you then need to make sure that the other character is threatening your opponent. The definition of threaten is:
Clearly, even an invisible character threatens.

Please, for the sake of all sanity, don't bring up the idea of gaining a +2 bonus with a ranged weapon.

Never would I bring up such a thing.

What I am trying to get at with the invisible characters is this: If I am going to attack the giant this round and the other invisible character is going to attack the giant this round and we both threaten him can we be flanking even thought we dont know about each other? We are working towards the same goal and the giant is an enemy of the both of us.

 

[Sir Brennen]

Really? What about if they're trying to hit someone you're grappling with, or attacking the swarm on you? Don't those involve miss chances that can result in your ally hitting you instead?

I believe you're thinking of the Bull Rush manuever:

Any attack of opportunity made by anyone other than the defender against you during a bull rush has a 25% chance of accidentally targeting the defender instead, and any attack of opportunity by anyone other than you against the defender likewise has a 25% chance of accidentally targeting you.

And footnote 3 for Grappling in the Ranged column (and only the Ranged column) of the Armor Class Modifiers table in the Favorable and Unfavorable conditions:

Roll randomly to see which grappling combatant you strike. That defender loses any Dexterity bonus to AC.

As for the invisibility, there was a highly debated Sage Advice on the subject (answer was "No, you can't flank with an invisible ally") but no set rules on it.

Note, though, that you're already getting +2 Attack for being invisible, and the target gets no Dex Bonus (meaning he can still be sneak attacked even without flanking.)

 

[mvincent]

As for the invisibility, there was a highly debated Sage Advice on the subject (answer was "No, you can't flank with an invisible ally") but no set rules on it.

Ah. Forgot about that. Thanks for the reminder. 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."

Now remember: this is for those people that can go either way on the issue and were merely asking for an official answer. If this isn't you (i.e. you have your mind already set) then of course please ignore. The answer should still be useable for 3.5 since the associated bits haven't significantly changed.