| 7 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
You befuddle the target's mind. The target has difficulty telling friend from foe for a short period of time. The subject is considered your ally and not your enemies' ally while determining flanking. The subject takes no other hostile action against your enemies due to this spell's effect.
So: BARD ORC GOBLIN
bard casts on goblin, bard is now flanking orc (for all the good it does)and: ORC BARD GOBLIN
bard casts on goblin, bard is no longer flanked
but: BARD DWARF ORC GOBLIN
bard casts on goblin, is orc now flanked for friendly dwarf attack?
|
You befuddle the target's mind. The target has difficulty telling friend from foe for a short period of time. The subject is considered your ally and not your enemies' ally while determining flanking. The subject takes no other hostile action against your enemies due to this spell's effect.So: BARD ORC GOBLIN
bard casts on goblin, bard is now flanking orc (for all the good it does)and: ORC BARD GOBLIN
bard casts on goblin, bard is no longer flankedbut: BARD DWARF ORC GOBLIN
bard casts on goblin, is orc now flanked for friendly dwarf attack?
I wish they would stop using the term ally in spell descriptions, as it is undefined.
You can flank if your target is threatened by an enemy in certain geometrical configurations. The spell makes him your ally; it does not make him his buddy's enemy.
In BOG above, goblin is your ally. He isn't orc's enemy he doesn't provide you flank.
In OBG, G is your ally, he is not your enemy, orc doesn't get flank.
In BDOG, G is your ally. He is not Dwarf's ally. He is not Orc's enemy. He provides no flank.
Note, I don't think this is intended. I think it is intended that BOG gives you flank, that OBG removes the flank, and that BDOG does not give D a flank.
You can flank if your target is threatened by an enemy in certain geometrical configurations. The spell makes him your ally; it does not make him his buddy's enemy.
Fortunately flanking doesn't say anything about an "enemy" -- it's about having a character "friendly to you" in the right position. So I think the spell does as intended.
And I do think the creature is considered "friendly to" your allies too, for the purpose of calculating flanking.
Fortunately flanking doesn't say anything about an "enemy" -- it's about having a character "friendly to you" in the right position.
Not really:
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.
...
Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.
So the Unwitting Ally spell just makes one creature not give a flanking bonus against you for one round. It doesn't grant flanking to you or your other allies, and it still threatens you, and still can provide flanking bonus for attacks against anyone but you. Meh.
|
|
You can flank if your target is threatened by an enemy in certain geometrical configurations. The spell makes him your ally; it does not make him his buddy's enemy.Fortunately flanking doesn't say anything about an "enemy" -- it's about having a character "friendly to you" in the right position. So I think the spell does as intended.
And I do think the creature is considered "friendly to" your allies too, for the purpose of calculating flanking.
You might want to re-read flanking. Grick has provided the text. :)
So the Unwitting Ally spell just makes one creature not give a flanking bonus against you for one round. It doesn't grant flanking to you or your other allies, and it still threatens you, and still can provide flanking bonus for attacks against anyone but you. Meh.
Not much benefit, but then again, it is a 0-level spell. Probably the best use is to negate flanking to avoid sneak-attack damage. Otherwise, of marginal situational use, IMHO.
You might want to re-read flanking. Grick has provided the text. :)
You're right. Believe it or not, I managed to look up the 3.5 SRD text rather than the PF SRD text: "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."
Interesting change.
Not much benefit, but then again, it is a 0-level spell. Probably the best use is to negate flanking to avoid sneak-attack damage. Otherwise, of marginal situational use, IMHO.
Yeah, it went from "Wow what a great cantrip" to "hrm, I guess a situation could arise where casting this might be slightly better than taking some other kind of action" which puts it right about inline with how free spells are supposed to be I think. If you could get a friend out of a bad flank instead of just yourself it would be worth learning, but I think I'll take Mage Hand and just move out of flank if I need to. (Or die tragically, like Bards should)
...but: BARD DWARF ORC GOBLIN
bard casts on goblin, is orc now flanked for friendly dwarf attack?...
Yes, but the Dwarf would also be flanked by you would have casted it on the Orc :)
Uuh ? Sorry I still don't understand... If there's :
BODG : cast on Gob, the Gob is no longer an ally of the Orc right ? So no flanking on the Dwarf ?
In fact the Gob become your ally for one round and lost the "ally" (non defined) condition for the Orc... Does it mean that he is friendly towards you but he won't threatened the orc ?
Still in need of comprehension on this one... ;)
Uuh ? Sorry I still don't understand... If there's :
BODG : cast on Gob, the Gob is no longer an ally of the Orc right ? So no flanking on the Dwarf ?
In fact the Gob become your ally for one round and lost the "ally" (non defined) condition for the Orc... Does it mean that he is friendly towards you but he won't threatened the orc ?
Still in need of comprehension on this one... ;)
I think you have it right. Goblin won't flank the Dwarf in this case, although he's still free to attack him (or the Bard if he moves). He's only considered an ally for purposes of flanking, but not for anything else.
I think you have it right. Goblin won't flank the Dwarf in this case, although he's still free to attack him (or the Bard if he moves). He's only considered an ally for purposes of flanking, but not for anything else.
Thank you :)
Well... Not that bad for a cantrip...
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Goblin won't flank the Dwarf in this case, although he's still free to attack him (or the Bard if he moves). He's only considered an ally for purposes of flanking, but not for anything else.
Well that's the question. The spell says "your ally" not "one of your allies" So the Goblin isn't going to flank YOU, the bard, but it's unclear if he would flank the Dwarf.
So the target of the spell will help provide you with flanking against one of his (former) buddies: otherwise the spell wouldn't say "The subject takes no other hostile action against your enemies" (emphasis mine) implying that he is taking some kind of hostile action (threatening them for purposes of your flank) but nothing else (will not attack or AoO his former buddies).
O B G -- Goblin no longer grants Orc flanking vs Bard. Yes.
B O G -- Goblin grants Bard flanking vs Orc. (If the Goblin did not grant flank, what would the "hostile action" be?) Yes.
O D G -- Does the Goblin being my ally stop him from granting flank to my buddy the Dwarf? (My ally would not threaten my other ally) Not Sure.
D O G -- Does the Goblin being my ally grant flank to my buddy the Dwarf? (My ally would threaten his former ally) Probably not?
Well that's the question. The spell says "your ally" not "one of your allies" So the Goblin isn't going to flank YOU, the bard, but it's unclear if he would flank the Dwarf.
The subject is considered your ally and not your enemies' ally while determining flanking.
Since the subject is no longer considered to be the ally of your enemies, he won't flank you or any of your allies with mutual enemies.
O B G -- Goblin no longer grants Orc flanking vs Bard. Yes.B O G -- Goblin grants Bard flanking vs Orc. (If the Goblin did not grant flank, what would the "hostile action" be?) Yes.
O D G -- Does the Goblin being my ally stop him from granting flank to my buddy the Dwarf? (My ally would not threaten my other ally) Not Sure.
D O G -- Does the Goblin being my ally grant flank to my buddy the Dwarf? (My ally would threaten his former ally) Probably not?
OBG - No flank for Orc
BOG - Bard now flanks Orc (but only useful if he casts Unwitting Ally as a swift action or the Orc draws an AoO)ODG - Goblin is no longer the ally of the Orc, so no flank.
DOG - Goblin is not the ally of the Dwarf, so no flank.
At least that's how I read it.
Guys, keep in mind the Pathfinder "flanking" only uses the term 'enemy', whereas it's the 3.5 "flanking" that defines by 'ally'. Long story short, they're defining by negation in this spell and leaving a lot to ambiguous implication, but~ as has been pointed out, the last phrase clearly concludes that this temp ally IS flanking the other bogey. By Pathfinder RAW, if flanking is occurring on a target, it occurs for anyone else indiscriminately, since its "flanking" definition uses the term 'enemy' and does not use the term 'ally'.
This is, unless they have the 3.5 wording in mind while they write out this spell, which would account for the inconsistency in wording; but there's not much to do about that, at least we have a definitive RAW interpretation here. Although, they explicitly say 'considered ally... while determining flanking', which makes me think more that they really DO have the 3.5 wording in mind, which is kinda f$@%ed up as it directly contradicts their new take on "flanking" in the Pathfinder definition.
Also, DOES THIS SPELL KEEP THE TARGET FROM ATTACKING YOUR PARTY IN HIS NEXT TURN?!? I mean Hell! It lasts a whole round, and he is affected such that he STOPS flanking you and goes and FLANKS his teammate -- does he, in that state, carry on attacking you?! It hasn't been addressed but the possibility kinda stands out here. It would be odd for the text not to mention it if it was the case that they didn't attack you -- but it's odd either way. But they still threaten your friends, I suppose. So they don't attack their teammate; I can't much see them attacking you if they don't even flank you; I suppose they attack your mates as usual. But if you're the only one in range, maybe they couldn't attack?
Also, DOES THIS SPELL KEEP THE TARGET FROM ATTACKING YOUR PARTY IN HIS NEXT TURN?!? I mean Hell! It lasts a whole round, and he is affected such that he STOPS flanking you and goes and FLANKS his teammate -- does he, in that state, carry on attacking you?! It hasn't been addressed but the possibility kinda stands out here. It would be odd for the text not to mention it if it was the case that they didn't attack you -- but it's odd either way. But they still threaten your friends, I suppose. So they don't attack their teammate; I can't much see them attacking you if they don't even flank you; I suppose they attack your mates as usual. But if you're the only one in range, maybe they couldn't attack?
I think the text is pretty clear.
You befuddle the target's mind. The target has difficulty telling friend from foe for a short period of time. The subject is considered your ally and not your enemies' ally while determining flanking. The subject takes no other hostile action against your enemies due to this spell's effect.
It only affects flanking. You treat the target as an ally, so you can flank with the target. However, the bad guys or your friends, cannot. For 1 round, you are the only "ally" for the target for flanking purposes. It doesn't change the target's behavior beyond that. They still attack as per normal, so the target can attack you or your allies, and will not attack your opponents.
It's a 0-level spell, so its power is quite limited.
Aye when I think about it, sometimes you want to create a limited effect that may end up with some unintentional conceptual awkwardness, but which is nonetheless what it is ultimately 'supposed to be'.
Aye when I think about it, sometimes you want to create a limited effect that may end up with some unintentional conceptual awkwardness, but which is nonetheless what it is ultimately 'supposed to be'.
Yup. I think this is one you chalk up to "it's magic", and move on.
Aye when I think about it, sometimes you want to create a limited effect that may end up with some unintentional conceptual awkwardness, but which is nonetheless what it is ultimately 'supposed to be'.Yup. I think this is one you chalk up to "it's magic", and move on.
lol :D