do both attackers have to be attacking the monster to get the bonus ? or would it also work if I was attacking the bear and the player on the other side was next to the bear but attacking another creature. im a newish dm and have been lead to believe by players its the latter, which sounds weird to me as i think both should be on the same beast to get it. thanks for any help.
I believe the players are correct. It's not the attack that causes them to be flanked but the proximity to the foe and threat of an attack. I can hit the 2nd foe but still potentially use a bonus action or a reaction to hit the bear. It has no idea my intentions but I am in a threatening position to it so it must be aware and wary of myself and my fellow adventurer.
First of all, flanking is explicitly an optional rule, so if you're not comfortable with it, you absolutely do not have to use it. That said, if you are going to use the rule, the only criteria are the other flanker's presence on the opposite side of the target and that they be conscious.
Just to second Saga's comment. Flanking is an optional rule. I personally find that it makes advantage far too easy to obtain which tends to overshadow some character abilities like a barbarian's reckless attack or a rogue's steady aim and in addition makes abilities like sharpshooter and great weapon master much more effective.
However, if it works for your group that's fine. Just remember to apply it for all of the monsters and NPCs too. The character that is flanking the bear while attacking something else is also flanked and both the NPCs might decide to attack that character because they are surrounded and more vulnerable.
do both attackers have to be attacking the monster to get the bonus ? or would it also work if I was attacking the bear and the player on the other side was next to the bear but attacking another creature. im a newish dm and have been lead to believe by players its the latter, which sounds weird to me as i think both should be on the same beast to get it. thanks for any help.
You don't need to attack to flank an enemy, only to position on opposite side of it and not be incapacitated or unable to see it.
Plaguescarred has it. As long as you are in a threatening position, it doesn't matter if you are attacking it or something else or even just standing there taking the dodge action. The enemy is occupied with you in their face and if your ally comes up behind them, they get advantage.
going to throw in a +1 on the "don't use flanking" vote. It makes advantage very easy to get, and whilst sometimes it makes sense, in other times it really doesn't - for example, "flanking" the tarrasque, as if it's going to care that the tiny person is behind it.
Lots of things in the game can give you advantage for somewhat more of a cost (Feats, giving advantage against you, spending levels to get it) and making "but my friend is stood there too" another reason for it is a little too much. I might consider reflavoring "Flanking" into a simple +1 to hit, which would make it stack and make hordes much more concerning...
The actual rule RaW has already been fleshed out, but I wanted to chime in on how our group uses it (including our DM)
We get advantage for flanking as stated above, simply being on opposite sides of the foe does the trick. However, in our games, the monsters get this benefit much more often than we do, with intelligent enemies actually flanking their allies to prevent us from getting that alignment, and positioning themselves (and minions) in place to grant THEM the advantage. I understand some who say it's too easy, but honestly, it's only too easy if the DM allows it. It's also a great tool for the DM to employ against a powerful party to better balance things. I wouldn't (and don't, when I DM) avoid using it, but as I say, we of the group who DM make sure our forces employ it too. This applies to all the "tricks" PC's use in encounters. If the PC can do it, so can my monster.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
going to throw in a +1 on the "don't use flanking" vote. It makes advantage very easy to get, and whilst sometimes it makes sense, in other times it really doesn't - for example, "flanking" the tarrasque, as if it's going to care that the tiny person is behind it.
Lots of things in the game can give you advantage for somewhat more of a cost (Feats, giving advantage against you, spending levels to get it) and making "but my friend is stood there too" another reason for it is a little too much. I might consider reflavoring "Flanking" into a simple +1 to hit, which would make it stack and make hordes much more concerning...
hmmm...
Basically, agree with Thoruk on this, except I would modify it slightly to the creatures causing the Flank each get a +1 unless either creature already has advantage on their attack roll. That prevents the +1 from stacking with advantage gained by other sources.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
do both attackers have to be attacking the monster to get the bonus ? or would it also work if I was attacking the bear and the player on the other side was next to the bear but attacking another creature. im a newish dm and have been lead to believe by players its the latter, which sounds weird to me as i think both should be on the same beast to get it. thanks for any help.
I believe the players are correct. It's not the attack that causes them to be flanked but the proximity to the foe and threat of an attack. I can hit the 2nd foe but still potentially use a bonus action or a reaction to hit the bear. It has no idea my intentions but I am in a threatening position to it so it must be aware and wary of myself and my fellow adventurer.
First of all, flanking is explicitly an optional rule, so if you're not comfortable with it, you absolutely do not have to use it. That said, if you are going to use the rule, the only criteria are the other flanker's presence on the opposite side of the target and that they be conscious.
cheers for clearing that up for me. :-)
Glad to help
Just to second Saga's comment. Flanking is an optional rule. I personally find that it makes advantage far too easy to obtain which tends to overshadow some character abilities like a barbarian's reckless attack or a rogue's steady aim and in addition makes abilities like sharpshooter and great weapon master much more effective.
However, if it works for your group that's fine. Just remember to apply it for all of the monsters and NPCs too. The character that is flanking the bear while attacking something else is also flanked and both the NPCs might decide to attack that character because they are surrounded and more vulnerable.
You don't need to attack to flank an enemy, only to position on opposite side of it and not be incapacitated or unable to see it.
Plaguescarred has it. As long as you are in a threatening position, it doesn't matter if you are attacking it or something else or even just standing there taking the dodge action. The enemy is occupied with you in their face and if your ally comes up behind them, they get advantage.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
going to throw in a +1 on the "don't use flanking" vote. It makes advantage very easy to get, and whilst sometimes it makes sense, in other times it really doesn't - for example, "flanking" the tarrasque, as if it's going to care that the tiny person is behind it.
Lots of things in the game can give you advantage for somewhat more of a cost (Feats, giving advantage against you, spending levels to get it) and making "but my friend is stood there too" another reason for it is a little too much. I might consider reflavoring "Flanking" into a simple +1 to hit, which would make it stack and make hordes much more concerning...
hmmm...
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
The actual rule RaW has already been fleshed out, but I wanted to chime in on how our group uses it (including our DM)
We get advantage for flanking as stated above, simply being on opposite sides of the foe does the trick. However, in our games, the monsters get this benefit much more often than we do, with intelligent enemies actually flanking their allies to prevent us from getting that alignment, and positioning themselves (and minions) in place to grant THEM the advantage. I understand some who say it's too easy, but honestly, it's only too easy if the DM allows it. It's also a great tool for the DM to employ against a powerful party to better balance things. I wouldn't (and don't, when I DM) avoid using it, but as I say, we of the group who DM make sure our forces employ it too. This applies to all the "tricks" PC's use in encounters. If the PC can do it, so can my monster.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Basically, agree with Thoruk on this, except I would modify it slightly to the creatures causing the Flank each get a +1 unless either creature already has advantage on their attack roll. That prevents the +1 from stacking with advantage gained by other sources.