|
I was asked, If two characters are invisible, and flanking the enemy can they get both the flat-footed bonus and invisible bonus?
My response was that if the players depended upon whether the player pre-planed the invisible flanking attack, since they are invisible how are they identifying to each other of flanking in order to receive the flanking bonus, when they don't know were each other is at...
Besides, as soon as one person attacks the enemy they then become visible again.
Therefore, I would allow them to receive the invisible bonus for the first attack, and the flanking bonus for the second and thereafter attacks, but NOT both flanking and invisible for the initial attack since it would be almost impossible to guarantee where the invisible people were to be from each other without giving their exact position away.
Any other suggestions or Input?
Unfortunately you are trying to quantify something in an abstract combat system. RAW, flanking just requires two creatures who are capable of threatening the same creature in a specific position. There is no need for them to see each other.
They both would definitely get the bonuses and the target the appropriate penalties due to their being invisible, which includes the target losing their Dexterity bonus to AC (which is not flat-footedness; flat-footedness is another but separate condition wherein one of the penalties inflicted is loss of Dex to AC).
For flanking, especially by RAW as Skylancer4 notes, yes they get the flanking bonus. I would justify this in interpretation by noting that it's more that the target itself is compromised by having two foes on either side of it and thus is quite exposed.
BUT... I would also question the players assuming they can enter a flanking position if they DON'T know where their ally is. Like, if they say, "I'm going to flank with Bob," I am going to ask, "How do you know where Bob is?"
I might in fact have them make appropriate Perception checks or otherwise perhaps rely upon luck--if there's multiple squares to choose from, roll randomly to pick the one they enter in hopes of flanking. But IF they manage to either pinpoint their ally's location or get lucky and are in fact flanking, I will give them the bonus.
And in situations where the party has planned for this, and can perhaps, say, see each other via see invisible or are communicating via a message spell or have simply planned where they are going to stand before acting, or otherwise find a way they can guarantee they can flank, then I see no problem with that.
To follow up with what DeathQuaker said, I think it's a good idea when one (or more) PC runs into melee invisible, to have that player stop moving his figure on the battlemap and start privately telling the DM where he goes, so that only he and the DM know his exact location.
Won't be long before they're not getting 2x invisible flankers (especially since anythint INT of about 3 or higher will move out of all flanking whenever it can). Won't be long before spellcasters unwilling to blast fireballs, color sprays, grease, or any other Area of Effect spell into those melee situations because they can't find their ally. Pretty soon the party will be relying on See Invisible spells or items just to pull off their tactics, in which case, at least they're paying in resources for it.
Having responded with advice that I find useful to me and therefore hopefully useful to others, now I respond with a complaint, not just for the OP but for the entire world of internet forum users:
Please, for everyone's convenience, create useful thread titles. If everyone's title just said "I have a question" (more or less) then nobody could simply scan the threads looking for places they want to respond.
For example, this title could have (and really should have) been "Question about invisible flankers".
Thanks, and sorry for the mini-rant.
I had a pair of players do exactly this not long ago. I ruled that they got the invisible bonus first round and flanking bonus afterwards. Since both things just make the subject flat-footed, I don't think the bonuses stack anyway, correct?
Invisible denies the opponent their DEX mod, which also benefits sneak attackers. It also grants a +2 to hit which stacks with Flanking for a total of +4 to hit a no-DEX target.
And Flanking does NOT cause flat-footed to happen. It's just a flat +2 mod, Joex.
Oops, my bad.
Didn't really matter in their case anyway, since they both managed to pull off crits, and combined with sneak attack and teamwork feat precision damage, did a one-round takedown of their target. Cool for them, but annoying for me.
On the other hand, I can completely flavor it to make sense.
During the 6-second round, both invisible guys take up their flanking position somehow (I will grant that they can). The flanked opponent doesn't have facing, but hey, Flanking only works because nobody can watch two opposite directions, so facing is at least a little bit of it. Both invisible guys are looking for the right opening to strike (represented by getting +4 to attack and the opponent having no DEX mod). As with any round, they weave their blade, step side to side in their space, maybe even make quick little feints (not a full-on Bluff check feint) trying to find the right instant to strike. The flanked opponent hears a blade whistle past his head or a light step from one invisible guy (can't use Stealth while attacking) and for one instant his attention snaps to that direction as he begins to react when the second invisible guy sees his opening and strikes the unprepared flanked opponent. He reacts to that unexpected attack, creating the opening for the first invisible guy to strike.
He never really perceives the attackers, he just reacts to attacks as they come, each time creating an opening for the other attacker.
Yes, that all happens in a couple seconds, way faster than I wrote it or you read it. With iteratives, it's just repeat the above (assuming Greater Invisibility), each guy striking as the opponent reels from the unexpected (or expected but unstoppable) attack from the opposite direction.
Anything can be fluffed into a semblance of plausibility.
they get +2 for invisible, and target loses dex bonus to ac, but they can't flank the target. unless they had see invisibility up maybe. being invisible lowers target ac by alot usually so it really doesnt matter if you flank. since you can do sneak attack damage anyhow
Just...what? Flank is about position and the ability to threaten the target. There is absolutely nothing about 'being aware' that comes into the equation.
