Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Patryn of Elvenshae" data-source="post: 1846352" data-attributes="member: 23094">Yes, in 3.0 it was pretty clear that you were only flanking when you attacked.  However, this makes it impossible in 3.0 to ever flank a formian (no two people can attack at the same time, so all formians in combat can never be flanked simultaneously).We are not, however, discussing the 3.0 rules at the moment, and therefore the text of the rule in 3.0 doesn't really matter, because it was *changed*.So, were the changes *oversight* or *deliberate*?Incorrect.  The 3.0 version specifically calls out that you are flanking *only* when making a melee attack.The 3.5 version specifically calls out that you only get a +2 bonus on your attack roll when making a melee attack.Notice the subtle, yet important, difference?The "logical conclusion" you state does not flow from the rules.It *does* flow from the 3.0 rules.  It does not flow from the 3.5 rules. And nowhere in the 3.5 rules does it say you need to make a melee attack in order to flank.It does, however, say that if you are making a melee attack while flanking, you get a bonus on your attack roll.Again, notice the difference between the two rulesets? Not true.  One or the other must threaten the target to grant a flanking bonus - and the only "flanking bonus" defined is a +2 on melee attack rolls.Nowhere do the 3.5 rules state that you must threaten someone in order to flank them.Note that in both cases - 3.0 and 3.5 - it is completely impossible for two grigs (a type of tiny fey) to flank a third under any circumstances.So sayeth you.  The rules do not specify this, however - at least, not in 3.5. There is no problem with my line of reasoning, as your rebuttal is flawed.If a character is flanking, then they are flanking, and if that character does decide to make a melee attack then they get a +2 flanking bonus as a modifier to their attack roll.  This is exactly the same with being prone.  I've never said you were only prone when you receive the -4 penalty, what I have said is that if you attack a creature while prone, you receive a -4 penalty, which is, again, a situational modifier.The two logic flows are in parallel.If prone, then -4 on melee attacks, even if you don't make any melee attacks.If flanking, then +2 on melee attacks, even if you don't make any melee attacks.In neither case is the status - flanking or prone - dependent upon the attack roll modifiers.You are prone when you are knocked onto the ground (or drop willingly).You are flanking when a line ... etc. - excepting that you are are a creature with reach 0, since they are specifically excluded from flanking (even against other reach 0 creatures, in both 3.0 and 3.5)). Exactly.  Specifically, the bonus only applies against a creature YOU attack in melee.Thus, you can flank without gaining the +2 flanking bonus, and my point is accepted by you.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />They are no immaterial because the don't represent my viewpoint, they are immaterial because they are *not* an exhaustive, comprehensive list of occasions in which flanking can occur, just as the AoO diagrams are not an exhaustive, comprehensive list of occasions in which an AoO can occur.The are select examples.  They are a subset of all possible occurrences. Awwww...  Gonna take your ball and go home, huh?  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

Verification