Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Retardical_Sam 11-06-05, 09:56 PM	Ok, so here's the situation - my DM says that a character with a spiked chain can choose which of the squares he touches to flank from. Example: 000X00 000000 000A00 Y0000Z 000000 X, Y, Z all have spiked chains. DM says that X can choose to "flank from" the square opposite Z, which is next to X (one up and left from A). He also says Z can choose to flank from the square one down and one right from A, so Z and X are flanking A. By the same logic, Y can "flank from" one square up and to the right (two left from A), and Z can flank from one up (two right from A) and Y and Z can flank him. X and Y are the only two that can't flank him. The way I read it is that any line from the center of any of X, Y, Z bases doesn't pass through A going to any other character. Alternatively, by the PHB, any line from any of X, Y, Z to another doesn't pinch A from opposite sides. Another interpretation is that a line from the center of Y to A hits A's left side, and a line from the center of Z hits A's right side, so they flank. Can anyone clear this up for me, preferably with written stuff? Thanks a bunch!
tarkin 11-06-05, 10:38 PM	(Correction to incorrect information) Your DM is making a major House Rule that increases the power of the Spiked Chain beyond what the core rules say (and the Spiked chain is already one of the more powerfull weapons). (I.E. He is wrong, but being DM, he gets to be right no matter how foolish he is.) There is NO different rule for flanking for people with reach/spiked chain weapons than without. You must still be DIRECTLY opposite regular people. There is no written thing saying this, just as there is no written rule saying that people with the name 'Tarkin' can not automatically hit everyone they can see. You have to get your DM to show you where in the book it says the stuff he made up, he can't do it. What he is most likely doing is reading the rules about attacking larger than 5x5 people and think they are special because of reach. That is false. They special cause the creatures are larger than one square. And what he is saying still contradicts those rules, (they are set up only to deal with problems realating to taking up more than one square, not having to do with reach at all.)
Retardical_Sam 11-06-05, 10:44 PM	Thanks for the quick reply. By your judgment, does that mean that none of X, Y, or Z could flank A?
tarkin 11-06-05, 10:47 PM	Correct, none of those people could flank A. ---------- The rule he is quoting shows that the following situation: 000000000 000010000 0000AA000 0000AA000 000023000 000045600 In this case, because of ally 1, people 2,3,4,5,6 are all flanking Ogre A (assuming 4,5,6 have reach)
Nom 11-07-05, 05:10 AM	I think that's incorrect, Tarkin. By the diagram on PH pg 153, only 3,4,7,8,9 would flank. The diagram explicitly says that 5 doesn't, and by extension we can see that 6,B,C also will not.
tarkin 11-07-05, 10:48 AM	I was wrong. Correction applied.
Talon Stormwarden 11-07-05, 11:11 AM	I believe Nom is correct here Tarkin. The exception for large creatures applies to large FLANKERS, not large FLANKED creatures. The diagram clearly shows your example above to be incorrect. a BB BB cde The diagram states that a, d and d flank creature B but e does not. I'm looking at page 153 PHB. The rule you seem to be quoting reads: If a flanker takes up more than 1 space, it gets the flanking bonus if any square it occupies counts for flanking. You seem to be saying instead: If any square a creature occupies is flanked,the creature is flanked. The diagram doesn't explicitly refute this, but since the rule isn't stated and creature e doesn't flank, I don't see how it could be argued that creatures further right do.
Retardical_Sam 11-08-05, 05:03 PM	Great discussion on the large flanker topic, would I be able to get one or two more opinions on whether the fighters X,Y,Z in the original diagram can flank A with spiked chains? Thanks!
Nom 11-08-05, 09:28 PM	Great discussion on the large flanker topic, would I be able to get one or two more opinions on whether the fighters X,Y,Z in the original diagram can flank A with spiked chains?Maybe, but since Tarkin's opinion (on that) is completely correct any other opinions would be wrong. I don't see the benefit in multiple viewpoints when there is a provably correct answer.
Retardical_Sam 11-09-05, 11:42 AM	Because my DM believes that they could, and the more people I can show him that argue that they can't, the stronger argument it is for me (in my belief). That said, thank you for your opinion. =)
Crash01234567890 11-09-05, 01:31 PM	By RAW your DM is both wrong and right (that whole always being right due to DMness thing) so it's his opinion you should worry about not ours.
tarkin 11-09-05, 01:54 PM	Here is what the SRD says about Flanking: Flanking 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. When in doubt about whether two friendly characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two friendly characters’ centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent’s space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked. Exception: If a flanker takes up more than 1 square, it gets the flanking bonus if any square it occupies counts for flanking. Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus. Creatures with a reach of 0 feet can’t flank an opponent. You can go there by clicking http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm#flanking The only thing in the book about reach have to do with creatures with 0' reach, not creatures with 10' reach. 10' reach is treated no differently than normal reach, unless your DM house rules a lot.
Nom 11-09-05, 08:27 PM	It's possible that your DM is confused by "If a flanker takes up more than 1 square, it gets the flanking bonus if any square it occupies counts for flanking", and is interpreting that (wrongly) as saying that a creature with reach gets flanking if any square that it can reach counts for flanking, or something equally bizarre.
Retardical_Sam 11-09-05, 09:03 PM	I don't think he's muddled up reading the rules, I think that he started playing with other people, and they taught him this system of doing things, which he's then continuing to play by, as that's what he learned. Either way, I thank everyone for their input.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-09-05, 09:50 PM	in 3.0, you could flank from 10' away with a reach weapon. I beleive it said as such in one of the splatbooks. (Either Sword and Fist or Song and Silence, I forget which one.) Personally, I don't see a problem. Core wizards and druids are breaking the game fifteen times before breakfast, I don't see how giving a fighter +2 bonus to hit does anything meaningful.
Retardical_Sam 11-11-05, 03:31 PM	In the case in my game, it was rogues using the spiked chains, and flanking gave them sneak attack damage. So not only was it +2 to hit, it was also +2d6 to damage for each of the three of them. =P
tarkin 11-11-05, 05:30 PM	Count, we are not saying you can't flank from reach, we are saying you still must fit the definition of flanking. No "triangular flanking" merely because you happen to have a reach weapon. And as R. Sam said, flanking is not a Fighter thing, but a Rogue thing, so it ALWAYS is a powerfull damage add on.
NightScreamer20 11-11-05, 06:10 PM	Following Examples, A, B, and C are all Medium or Small Rogues with Spiked Chains, X is a Medium or Small Target. Ex. 1 Ex. 2 Ex. 3 O O A O O O O A O O A O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O X O O B O X O C B O X O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O C None Yes. B and C Yes. A and C Would this be correct when dealing with Reach weapons?
RisingZan 11-11-05, 06:28 PM	In Response to the original post: No, under the RAW, none of them flank A (just a whild guess, were your opponents Kytons (aka Chain Devils)?. There is the possible exception of some class abilities. I can't recall if its in the miniatures handbook or CW, but there are some classes that can designated any square within 5 feet of them as the square they flank from, but even that class ability may say something about having to be within 5 feet of the enemy. As for flanking goes, figuring out when you have a valid flank is pretty easy. I recently wrote up a really detailed list of things to go through on a discussion with Rogues, but I'll give a shortened version here: 1) Start at the points in the center of the two attackers squares. If either of the attackers is large, you can pick any single 1" square that the creature occupies (and in cases like this you pick the most beneficial, so if any square would give flank, it flanks). 2) Draw a line between the two center points. String or a stick comes in handy if using miniatures if you aren't good at doing this mentally 3) If the line passes through two opposite side of the target or exactly through two opposite corners, you have flank AS LONG AS, both "attacking" creatures threaten the targeted creature. I won't get into those details here. If the line passes along an edge of the target, then there's no flank. If the line passes through one corner and out an edge not containing a corner, then you have flank (see second example below) Examples with reach weapons: 001006000 1 and 4 flank A if 1 has a reach weapon 000020000 2 and 5 flank A if 5 has a reach weapon 0000A0000 3 flanks with no one 000304000 000050000 000000000 The following probably gets the most people because the 000001000 000000000 Assuming 1, 2 and 4 all have reach weapons. 0000A0000 1 and 3 have flank, but units 2 and 4 do not flank with 1, at least by my 000230000 geometry. The line from 1 to 3 passes exactly through the top right corner & 000040000 out the bottom edge. From 1 to 4 is the right and bottom side. From 1 to 2 is 000000000 top and left side. See PHB 153, at the top shows the situation with 1 and 3 using a hobgoblin and an orc For large creatures: 000000000 1 flanks with all but 4 000010WY0 7 (with a reach weapon) Flanks with X(w/reach) Y(w/reach) and Z, 0000AAZX0 but not W or V, at least not by a literal reading of RAW 0000AAV00 007023400 000005600 For large attacking creatures: 0AA0BB000 Assume creatures A and B have reach 10, all four creatures are large. 0AA0BB000 C provides flank to both A and B. C's top left square flanks with B 000000000 C's top right square flanks with A 0000X0000 00DDCC000 D also flanks with B, through D's bottom right square to B's bottom right 00DDCC000
RisingZan 11-11-05, 06:48 PM	Following Examples, A, B, and C are all Medium or Small Rogues with Spiked Chains, X is a Medium or Small Target. Ex. 1 Ex. 2 Ex. 3 O O A O O O O A O O A O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O X O O B O X O C B O X O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O C None Yes. B and C Yes. A and C Would this be correct when dealing with Reach weapons? Yes that would be correct with reach weapons. Spiked chains simply add the complication that they do threaten from within 5 feet. So if we had the following diagrams: Ex. 1 Ex. 2 Ex. 3 O O A O O O O A O O A O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O X O O O B X O C B O X O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O None Yes. B and C Yes. A and C - with spiked chains No one has flank in the 3 above drawings if they are using reach weapons other than spiked chains, like longspears.