Flanking NERFS melee martials in D&D 5e!

Подписаться 114 тыс.

Просмотров 50 тыс.

50% 1

The Video is Sponsored by dScryb: dscryb.com/pac...
Please check them out and if you like what they do and want more stuff from them, use the coupon code PACKTACTICS (not case sensitive) for 10% off your first subscription!
Thank you very much dScryb for sponsoring this video!
Link to Know Your Options: 5E Variant Rules Guide article: tabletopbuilds...
Link to patreon, merch shop, discord and twitter:
www.patreon.co....
/ discord
/ pack_tacticss
my-store-c2bae...
Gator art by Drakeven: / drakeven1
Token Art by Mrako: / mrako_bulka
Kobold reading a scroll art by Novatonix:
www.youtube.co....

Опубликовано:

28 сен 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 442

@PackTactics Год назад

The Video is Sponsored by dScryb: dscryb.com/packtactics Please check them out and if you like what they do and want more stuff from them, use the coupon code PACKTACTICS (not case sensitive) for 10% off your first subscription! Thank you very much dScryb for sponsoring this video!

@99subetai Год назад

Kind of funny, I was trying to remember what the name of "dScryb" was? I found them earlier on...think it with Mr. Rhexx(?), but got distracted and didn't order it! Forgot about it and then had trouble finding it when I tried to go back! Until today! I just ordered it right away (no more dilly dallying and forgetting lol)! Thanks to you and them! Looking forward to it as a great campaign tool!

@LucanVaris Год назад

Another optional alteration to the optional rule: Only Rogues gain Flanking. That way, only Roguish enemies gain advantage against the party, Conjure Animals would only give advantage to the Rogue, etc. This becomes less of a lateral downgrade to melee martials, and just a minor direct buff to Rogues, who could honestly use the help in 5e. Sure, Rogues can gain advantage through other means, but... well... why not give them a bit of a freebie, on occasion?

@arnijulian6241 Год назад

@@LucanVaris I basically do the same at tables for rogues but rogues advantage from flanking can't work on player character to stop them annoyingly team sniping, how you been since last?

@Captaincory1 Год назад

if they bring back the 3.5 AoO rules they'd need to replace the Hold the Line feature for cavalier, since it would just be a shittier sentinel at 10th level. perhaps they could move the current subclass capstone to 10th level and place a significant boost to mounted combat at 18th, also flanking is a better alternative to Reckless Attack in melee, since RA gives all attacks against you advantage until your next turn. you can still reckless attack with thrown weapons for ranged advantage

@LucanVaris Год назад

@@arnijulian6241 Mostly just chilling around. Kinda surprised that you have team-sniping in your game, considering how most parties should be willing to work together.

@Mejeke Год назад

I’ve never run the DMG flanking. We still have flanking, but it’s a +2 for the players engaged in the tactic and then we do “surrounded” for advantage.

@general_shear Год назад

We do something similar but whoever is being flanked suffers a -2 to AC.

@philippebelisle8292 Год назад

My is to simply stack advantages, you are flanking using a reckless attack against a monster in Faerie Fire, roll 3 extra dices take the best one (lots of crits), It also fix some weird cases with disadvantages, likes, for stealth where plate user have no penalty running. or blinded archer not needing to disengage for shooting in melee.

@Mejeke Год назад

@@general_shear I used to do it as a -2 to ac, but in larger battles sometimes I’d forget about it. My players never forget a bonus though and, even though it works out the same, I enjoy letting my players feel like they do more instead of the enemies doing less.

@MagiofAsura Год назад

@@philippebelisle8292I use a modified version of this and add +2 for each additional instance of advantage. So in your example, the player would roll with advantage +4.

@nemohimself2580 Год назад

We do +2 for corner, +5 for knight move or better.

@TwilitbeingReboot Год назад

I run with the less popular Facing rules, typically tweaked a bit for each game depending on player feedback, which introduces some interesting opportunity cost to setting up the equivalent of a flank (which is technically just attacking while unseen, but without having to Hide first). 1. Circling an enemy at melee range absolutely _does_ provoke opportunity attacks as you move out of their field of view. 2. You can use a reaction to change your facing outside of your turn, so it takes a bit more work to actually get behind a target who's playing defensively. 3. Putting your back to a wall or an ally keeps you mostly protected.

@GravityAP Год назад

Yes. My bladesinger wizard only gets hit through my cloak of displacement because sometimes I get flanked.

@pourariane4064 Год назад

Blur.

@Owch- Год назад

Git gud

@astrogamer158 Год назад

Who was dumb enough to give a bladesinger a cloak of displacement lol

@alecwithac69 8 месяцев назад

We use flanking this way. There has to be at least 2 creatures next to the target. 1 has to be infront and 1 directly behind the target. Only the one that's behind gets advantage, but it's the DM's decision. For instance, if I've moved from infront of the target to behind it, the target would know that I was there, so flanking would not apply. If I came from behind, flanking would apply.

@JeaHSaren Год назад

I've been playing Pathfinder/DnD 5e for about 11 years now. We did allow the enemy to flank and for that reason I generally didn't like the optional rule. However, we made flanking only effect Melee Weapon Attacks, unarmed attacks, and natural attacks only. No ranged. No spells.

@demfrodegroot7596 4 месяца назад

On the topic of flanking only being available to players, I think making it a free class feature to rogues, rangers and fighters makes sense, specifically making it so they both get advantage, and give their allies advantage for flanking with them. It also means barbarians can benefit from flanking without it overshadowing their other options to get advantage when solo.

@tony_baloney6763 Год назад

The way I run it, is that every creature has an “occupancy score”. For wizards it’s 1, for rangers and such it’s 2, for fighter and monks it’s 3, and having a shield can up that number by 1. Most monsters have a 2 unless they are well trained battlers. Whenever a creature is surrounded by more creatures than its occupancy score, all of those creatures get a +2 to hit for every creature above that score. This is fun because it means the casters can get overwhelmed by 2-3 goblins, but the martials (who have limited AOE options) can deal with crowds easily. Also, if they ever successfully trap and surround a monster or boss, they get a good round of hits in before it tries to leave. Also, more than once, they have baited enemy casters and demolished them easily. Overall, it allows for traps and strategy for my players, and makes the martials feel like cool tanks. Note: We use alternate martial rules (Check out Laserllama’s stuff on GM Binder, so our martials are already more capable than base 5e martials.)

@fettbub92 Год назад

I adjust flank rules to allow for a bonus/adv when you are actually flanking (attacking from a different angle to a fellow attacker). Not from the front, but from the side.

@zero18000 Год назад

Just discovered this channel and seen a few videos, wish I had discovered you sooner. Here's an amulet of subscriber count + 1

@dt5101961Nelon 21 день назад

Here is how I rule flanking: Flanking Bond: Only players can flank. To flank an enemy, two or more players must both hit the same isolated enemy with melee attacks and declare they are forming a flanking bond. Each player can have only one flanking bond at a time. Keeping flanking bond: If a flanking player takes damage, they must pass a Constitution saving throw to keep the bond. The enemy must stay within your reach. Flanking Benefits: Once flanked, the enemy gets -2 AC, which benefits the entire party without overlapping advantage rules. This system emphasizes teamwork, encourages ranged characters to support melee fighters, and makes controlling enemy movement more valuable.

@d0v1d4realz2 Год назад

A good way to work around spellcasters getting the advantage would be for the flanking to not be applicable with summons/animated items but still enabling other creatures. EX. a summoned celestial and barbarian flank an enemy. The summoned celestial does not gain advantage, however it does provide advantage for the barbarian

@69... 11 месяцев назад

I have a dm where I am playing as a kobald Hexblade. The problem is that my dm thinks I'm too strong. For being a kobald just because of pack tactics even though I have a 6 in strength. What's worse is that my dm refuses to give me a rapier as I am "too weak" dnd already has a feature for this called heavy. Instead I get a 1d6 shortsword. My dm also uses flaking making me weaker than the rest of the party. Our ranger has a dual wielding 1d6 that they can use twice. And they have a 1d8+4 damage bow. I just don't think I should be so weak any tips?

@jonfall7941 Год назад

I use +2, but it can't be gained on top of advantage. Also, a creature that is adjacent to one of its allies cannot be flanked. This gives you a tactical boost, but doesn't make other features irrelevant. It also encourages realistic tactical play - allies watching each other's backs and fighting together. It's simple, effective, i like it

@aafuuu 5 месяцев назад

I juat made flanking a fighting style in my campaigns. Its then useful to that owrson who wants it but also prevents congo lines as not everyone has taken it.

@lordfangar5671 Год назад

Yeah, I've decided to just do a +1 for attack rolls when flanking

@AvangionQ Год назад

The problem with flanking is that when monsters come with minions, they can swarm the players and gain advantage more readily. Simple fix: only give +2 to hit & damage instead of advantage, and allow opportunity attacks for trying to strafe threatened squares.

@Funkin_Disher Год назад

A problem, yes agreed. Throwaway extras can provide a disproportionate boost to the real threats, regardless of how threatening they are to you

@johngillan4475 Год назад

Thank you for your information video

@supersmily5811 10 месяцев назад

I have a solution that technically works, but makes things a little weird: Have Flanking only work for PCs. Since Flanking is a melee buff only it would mean they get the benefits without the detriments; But if you think about the narrative flow it wouldn't make sense for NPCs to not have the option.

@Miranda17137 Год назад

Flanking does strike me as very flat because you can just buy a dog and have permanent Flanking from a Mastiff for 25g or until it dies and you need to buy a new dog. Or literally any kind of summon. You could argue that a Cleric's Spirit Weapon should grant you Flanking. If it were a Fighting Style or a class feature available to specific classes/subclasses that focus on a persistent minion (Beastmaster & Battlesmith come to mind) that would be sensible. I've just found myself finding very silly things like trying to get a ranged class to get into melee just to flank for the benefit of the Fighter.

@majorjohnson8001 Год назад

PF2 turning literally everything into Advantage was terrible (even if mechanically distinct from D&D). I think I counted 42 *different* ways to get advantage against an opponent in the core playtest rulebook. Some of them were super easy to have happen. Some of them were not. As flanking *was* one such way, and was relatively easy to achieve, it devalued all the others and resulted in boss fights basically being a "stack all the debuffs." Flank, Prone, Sick, Frightened, Blinded Whereupon you'd kick the downed enemy until they expired, like some kind of school yard bully. And you *needed* all of those stacked debuffs otherwise you basically couldn't hit and deal damage *at all.* The "exceed by 10 is an automatic crit" was another one that looked good on paper, but ended up being detrimental to players, as it either never came up, or it was against an enemy that having auto-crits against wasn't necessary, or the boss would crit a player on nearly every attack.

@PumaPants248 Год назад

Flanking should prevent the disengage action and give advantage on only Attacks of Opportunity, then other means of advantage still have their benefit and still give flanking a benefit

@archmagemc3561 Год назад

I always have Flanking give a +2 instead of advantage, IE the "Off Guard/Flat footed" system of PF2E. I even suggest this to all DMs that want flanking instead of advantage, stating the exact reason. "Whats the point of all these skils that give me advantage then?"

@TheCraftySam Год назад

I've actually never ran this rule because I knew it'd be too good against players and I argued with my own DM some of the same points here. but recently I've had another reason NOT to allow it - a class you missed was necromancer wizard. I've got one in my Princes of the Apocalypse campaign. They currently have twelve zoms - which ordinarily would have ALL the proficiencies they had in life I nerfed it to two, and it's still absurd to think of the level of bs twelve zombies can do for the action economy. The good thing is, zombies have low stats and prof modifiers, which means they'll struggle to hit things. Flanking would IMMEDIATELY make that necromancer so much more broken than they already are. Especially if they were to go to the upper limit of their level and grab something like 24-30 zombies.

@bahamutkaiser 4 месяца назад

This rule is why I sacrificed my Barbarian in a Westmarch and made a Warlock

@snakerattleroll6678 Год назад

Advantage can be cancelled out by Disadvantage, so if you're in a game that's using Flanking your best bet is to seek options that can give multiple enemies disadvantage. Unfortunately, every option I can think of involves some kind of spell. Or punching monsters sick as a Way of Mercy Monk. Polearm Master and Sentinel should help a bit with the running around. Unfortunately there are people who prefer to wield weapons besides Dave's Perfect Weapon.

@MalloonTarka Год назад

I feel conga lines would be less common if you give the enemy cover by way of your allies being in the way.

@Elohist2009 Год назад

I know I’m about to give a spicy take, but I think a lot of the problems with flanking have to do with battlefield design. It’s easy to flank in wide open areas, but much less often in tight enclosures, heavy forests or cluttered rooms. I’m not saying open spaces should be eliminated or even less common, but flanking if allowed, is a strong option for units that can’t otherwise gain advantage. Allowing enemy units to flank also makes combat scaling easier, since you won’t have to raise the stakes with higher powered enemies, just make them fight smarter. It’s ironic that the argument against the martial/caster divide is brought up here, as quite a few arguments against flanking are in defense of various spells that grant advantage. Flat, static map designs make combat stale, not optional mechanics that incentivize movement and battle positioning. If you’re worried about how your miniatures look while they’re flanking each other, it can’t really be helped if the battle map facilitates it. Just because flanking makes groups of enemies potentially more challenging, and particular spells or abilities slightly less optimal, doesn’t mean a nerf for martials. Melee combat shouldn’t be as easy as slinging a mind blasting spell, or sniping from a safe, hidden distance, but flanking makes it more fun if you’re always aware of yours and your opponent’s positioning. What makes combat more lame as a martial is having to rely on a caster to help me hit a target.

@Moleje1337 Год назад

Please make some Balder's Gate 3 content, detailing all the rules that are different between the game and 5e.

@dragonicstarblade2049 Год назад

all you have to do is change up HOW flanking works. when they wrote 5e they weren't thinking right and did RAW/RAI (Rules as Intended) over just playing it rails out...

@franklyanogre00000 Год назад

AC - (½ of (# of attackers -1) round up)

@KirkjaGrobbi Год назад

At our table we use a hex map and facing rules, at the end of your turn you declare your facing, and can lock onto a creature as a minor action. Flanking does not exist, instead a cone behind a creature we call the "backstab zone" which gives you advantage to hit. A creature about to be hit from behind can however use a reaction to alter their facing if they are aware that you are there, negating the advantage. Works nicely honestly, and means that my rogue is constantly looking too attack enemies who are being overwhelmed, instead of just enemies already fighting.

@JaredHight-g4e 7 месяцев назад

In one of the games I was in the dm ran flanking, but instead of advantage it was +1d4 like bless, and I believe it’s only for players but I’m not one to peak around the screen. Honestly it wasn’t that impactful, nice when it saved a roll but but it didn’t make the game more tactical and half our builds don’t need it

@kclubok Год назад

I totally disagree with you on this. I run flanking in my games, and the melee martials love it. Yes, they sometimes get flanked, but they are situationally aware enough that they will either move out of the flanking position or focus fire on the flanking enemy to remove the danger. There are plenty of situations when flanking an enemy is impractical, so the other ways to get advantage are still relevant. I also play in a game which uses the flat adjustment instead of advantage. The unintended consequence here is that now somebody can get both benefits, for example by combining Reckless Attack with flanking. The players don't mind, but it does break bounded accuracy, making the Great Weapon Master penalty a joke.

@Michael-fd1gx Год назад

My group uses flanking without miniatures.

@Maximilian_Romus 4 месяца назад

The best version of flanking is not playing with flanking. I will die on that hill.

@KobeEscalante Год назад

As always, if D&D has a problem, Pathfinder has a solution.

@Capt.Fail. Год назад

I’ll be the first to say that I think advantage flanking isn’t great and that I much prefer a flat +2. However, the argument that it invalidates features could just as easily be applied to both Pack Tactics (invalidates most sources of advantage) and Steady Aim (negates a Rogue’s need to Hide if they’re in at a safe distance or your DM allows the mount thing), yet I never hear anyone complain about either. I also think the MCDM Flee, Mortals! rules for minions where minions make one collective attack and the damage/to hit bonus scales with creatures contributing would mostly solve the issue of combats with many creatures. Creatures tougher than minion level probably shouldn’t have so many of them in a fight anyways (regardless of balance, just for the sake of time/enjoyability). Finally, just ban Conjure Animals and Animate Objects already, lol. Clearly problematic spells and there’s no need to hold other things back on their behalf

@user-jo7qw3lj3g Год назад

@Packtactics considering all of the videos and the appreciation of 4e, have you played Pathfinder 1e? If you haven't, this seems more up your alley in game mechanics.

@magmapagliaesopravvalutato6838 Год назад

I made so only rogues can flank in my games, because they struggle if they can’t reliably hit their only attack per turn

@deanofett Год назад

This is why I run "Back to back" flanking in my games, it functions mostly the same but if you are adjacent to an ally, you are safe from being flanked. It makes combat more dynamic while also not making it centralized around flanking, combined with cleaving and Melee starts to look pretty fun.

@jonfall7941 Год назад

I do exactly this, but give flanking a +2 that you can only get if you don't have advantage from other means. So advantage-granting spells and conditions aren't made obsolete either

@sodasaintcommentaries4054 Год назад

Ooh. Mind if I snag this for my games?

@deanofett Год назад

@@sodasaintcommentaries4054 go right ahead.

@sodasaintcommentaries4054 Год назад

@@deanofett Thank you!

@oOPPHOo Год назад

This doesn't really solve the problem that enemies usually outnumber the party and therefor benefit even more from flanking with how they have more allies to enable their own flanking and disable your flanking. In fact, it worsens that problem.

@renatocorvaro6924 Год назад

Flanking works a lot better if you use the AoO rules from 3.5, because then the movement required becomes potentially dangerous.

@Brandenfascher Год назад

True, mostly. I think a problem with that is that other 5e rules will probably need to be modified as well, because technically anyone could simply use 5e's "disengage" action to avoid any AAO's to set themselves up in a flank position. If we decide to nerf or get rid of disengage, we might as well also bring back the 5-foot step rules to replace it. At this point there's likely a ripple effect of other rules or abilities conflicting or making less sense anymore, and... maybe we should just be playing 3.5 lol

@Captaincory1 Год назад

@@Brandenfascher the cavalier fighter's Hold the Line feature would need to be replaced since then it would just be sentinel but worse at 10th level, I left a reply on Pact Tactics' pinned comment with my idea of what to do about it.

@5AMACE Год назад

@@Brandenfascher then go back to it and shut up already

@5AMACE Год назад

That would only make combat more boring, as it encourages you to just stand still and not even move. At that point, just don't have a battlemap or movement speed or grappling or shoving at all.

@Brandenfascher Год назад

@@5AMACE ignoring the 5e disengage action, I'd agree. I have to say though, when using the 3.5/pathfinder1e rules as a whole, rarely have I seen anyone standing still engaged in melee combat with the 5 foot step rule. In those systems it also made any group of basic melee characters far more menacing and dangerous to escape from (which I consider a great benefit for martials as an inherent control feature). In 5e, the disengage action makes escaping a basic group of melee combatants easy and worry free no matter their positioning, making the sentinel feat or specialization in grappling a requirement for melee combatants to reliably threaten and control within their reach

@ryanschmidt3319 Год назад

Flanking can be fun if 1. Your party has multiple melee martials and 2. It is something that can be denied. Setting up something where two or three MM's deny a horde of enemies flanking is incredibly fun for the players (particularly if they are something the players can then rip through- minions or low level monsters for example)

@Team_Orchid Год назад

Flanking giving advantage instead of a numerical bonus in 5E always baffled me.

@zwidowca1 Год назад

Legit go have a mock battle with a few friends. Have one stand on your side and one stand in front of you. You will quickly learn why it gives advantage lol

@GamerKiwi Год назад

@@zwidowca1 the issue is advantage doesn't stack so a lot of martial abilities (like reckless attack) or strategies (shoving enemies prone) are basically redundant.

@vlscgcoih963 Год назад

@@zwidowca1 I've got a crazy prospect for you. DnD, and real life, are different. *dun dun dunnnnnnnn* @team_orchid Mostly, it's because everything that doesn't just give a +1 or something, gives advantage and disadvantage.

@zwidowca1 Год назад

@@vlscgcoih963 I've got another prospect for you. I've made a point and you did not. Your comment added nothing. It stated a fact, which had 0 bearing on the conversation. The point is if you have any factual experience in melee your POV on tabletop combat is different. Especially if you get to fighting in formations. Your opinion does not impact what reality is. And FYI real life experience can be applied almost directly to tabletop if the context/situation is right. Being an ignorant does not do you any credit...

@zwidowca1 Год назад

@@GamerKiwi I'm not saying it is flawless but it just kinda makes sense. And the redundancy can be blamed on the fact that... well if you already massively ountnumber and outflank and outdo your enemy is various ways, you just cannot gain any more benefits in a fighting scenario. It is logical. Sooner or later you'll have such a crowd around the enemy that you won't be able to swing your weapon. It just is what it is. It is shit design but it does mimic reality to an extent. And i am not defending it btw.

@EvanGadol Год назад

Use my rule - flanking works inverse to cover. If two allies are on opposite sides, you give -2 to ac on the enemy. If 3 allies make a triangle around the enemy, you give -5.

@somedutchguy2265 Год назад

I rule flanking as that all allies get a +bonus equal to the amount of allies attacking the enemy. Same counts for the enemies. It makes a lot more abilities good combined with flanking

@bludfyre Год назад

If you are really that concerned about this one tactic, maybe change up the boss battles? Instead of 1 big enemy, have the enemy also have a few other people for the party to fight in the room. Boom, flanking "problem" solved. Now martial fighter 1 is dealing with threat 1, martial fighter 2 is dealing with threat 2, and the other players are trying to deal with threat 3, or threat 3 and 4. I understand some enemies, like a dragon, are probably by themselves. But if before and after that fight the players are confronted with more than one enemy, it won't feel the same way.

@rylog8 Год назад

My concern with this is that it can super swing in favor of monsters. One character gets surrounded by 9 wolves is dealing with way harder odds than one wolf surrounded by a party of 5 players.

@PedroHISilva Год назад

We extensively used flanking with: advantage, +2 bonus, and +1 bonus . After years, the three groups I play (or used to play) adopted the +1 rule. It gives enough incentive to flank without being a mandatory position, which would become another minigame.

@BugMagnet Год назад

Flanking boosting casters is something I learned early as a GM. I was/am a total noob and my two player party was murdering everything. Well the monk was because I had no idea how to prevent him from short resting between fights. Enter the lizard shaman that cast circle of jaws around him (conjure animals, 4 crocs, all advantage, grapple on hit.) luckily the ranger broke the caster's concentration or it would have been a tpk We gained a lot of story fun out of it though. Monk has a fear/hate for scaled things now and very gnawed legs.

@monsieurdorgat6864 Год назад

Flanking removes more tactical strategies than it adds. So many abilities and options down the drain for such an easy criteria!

@senrith_ Год назад

That's why I make it just a +2 instead of ADV

@5AMACE Год назад

the "so many" is like 5 actually and 3 are barely used anyway and the other 2 either only last for 1 attack or puts your character in quite the pickle if you use it regularly

@tamasdukan1495 Год назад

Does it though? This is my problem with this video. I don't have a lot a of DnD experience, and definitely don't have statistics about what is in this video, but nor does the creator when it comes to statistics. So he relies on his own experience which can be biased. So a lot of what he says can be countered the same way, and the rest seems flat out wrong. For example your point and his first point regarding tactical advantages: He only considers it as a tactical advantage when moving a little bit to the side and that is your only choice. But it is not, he just doesn't consider all the other, the real tactical benefits. He just didn't think it throught, nor do you what benefits this can give, and how it works. And the part about devalueing certain spells and abilities, what is not considered, that it improves many others. Every situation devalues some spells and abilities and improves others. And if some spells and abilities become more worthless because of this it doesn't necessarily means that flanking is bad, but maybe those spells and abilities are bad, and need to be buffed. Secondly he says that this is negative addition for melee martials, but the reasons that he brings up doesn't support this, instead it reveals the real tactical benefit behind this, and what flanking really nerfs and buffs: He says that it benefits those that are more numerous than their enemies! This is what it really does!!! It doesn't nerf melee at all! You could have all ranged heroes, and the enemy could get close and flank you. What it buffs is number advantage for melee martials. Will this buff monsters more often than the players? Yes, as there are usually very few players. But really, it depends on what campain the DM runs. But as i've mentioned, it buffs a lot of abilites that can slow, displace, restrain, or in other ways can shift the numbers advantage in your favor. This is the true tactical benefit! Now if you separate one or two enemies of a larger group, you can get rid of them faster, which means a bigger benefit for such tactics. Also makes tanks more valuable, which is more likely to benefit players than monsters. (And also this is why it is problematic, when people instead want to give ATK bonus, because for high AC characters that is worse to fight against) Really this feature is there to make fights more realistic, as all rules in D&D is really there to create a simplified framework for reality, instead of using calculus gradients and vectors. It won't be perfect, but it will be more realistic, and that will feel better, because it feels more genuine, and more familiar, that you can understand on an instictual level. If you get surrounded in real life by multiple enemies, you are F-d! But this is why i also like one of Pack Tactics homebrew advice in the end, that if you are flanking someone, and you are flanked, then they cancel each other out. This would make it even more realistic, and could maybe get rid of the "conga lines" apparently plagueing D&D battlefields all over the world! :)

@manofrutifero4129 Год назад

@@tamasdukan1495I was simply destroyed by a crowd of enemies in a campaign that I'm playing. I am the tank of the party and I don't feel like a tank, and the reason is a rule that banalize the advantage.

@tamasdukan1495 Год назад

@@manofrutifero4129 Have you tried running away?

@CountOfMonteFisto Год назад

The demonstration at 2:30 makes me think the solution might be to grant opportunity attacks whenever a creature leaves a threatened square, like they did in 3.5e... that would make it more difficult and/or have a cost for characters to move into the flanking position

@tomraineofmagigor3499 Год назад

That will just reinforce the idea of boring combat with them just standing around

@Captaincory1 Год назад

@@tomraineofmagigor3499 it would also make the cavalier fighter feature Hold the Line redundant, which Pact Tactics complained flanking did for Reckless Attack

@tomraineofmagigor3499 Год назад

@@Captaincory1 advantage being the ONE thing to be given out for boosting rolls really does limit design space

@caurd Год назад

No, he does not do it. Quite the opposite. That rule makes correct positioning important, picking the right square to attack the enemy without cornering yourself. And the current AoO rules of 5 don't incentivize movement either, it doesn't matter that you can move around the enemy without provoking opportunity attacks if you have no reason to. And no, the flanking rule isn't a reason for it, because you only have to move once.@@tomraineofmagigor3499

@epicazeroth Год назад

I was scared BG3 would include flanking but luckily it's only a feature of specific subclasses not a general rule

@eatingtheleaf4659 Год назад

Which subclasses?

@kaikash Год назад

Omg thanks. I've been flanking and felt i was just unlucky missing still.

@xxxsnippzzxxx9355 Год назад

@@eatingtheleaf4659trickster cleric and wolf heart Barb

@christhiancosta1844 Год назад

Yeah, PF2e gives flanking a good risk/cost-reward ratio because of action costs and OA risk 5e doesn't have enough depth to properly allow flank

@Krushhk Год назад

I've been thinking of trying flanking as giving a +1 bonus for each ally adjacent to the target, to a max of +3. I've also considered limiting opportunity attacks to only characters that specifically have something that gives it (either a feat like sentinel or war caster, or a class ability, and perhaps some martial classes like fighter and Monk) still requires some testing though.

@Michael-fd1gx Год назад

Flanking gives advantage, sneak attack requires advantage.

@texteel Год назад

I really hate konga lines. It completely destroys immersion for me. And it makes placing aoe spells without friendly fire practically impossible

@gabrielrussell5531 Год назад

"A flanked creature not being able to flank prevents the conga line." Not really, people will still conga to protect themselves from flanking enemies.

@hart-of-gold Год назад

I use a slightly homebrewed marking rule. A when a character makes their last melee attack on their turn, for their bonus action they can mark that target. On the target's turn, to break the mark they must first either attack the character marking them or disengage. If they try anything before attacking or disengaging, including bonus actions, the marker makes an AoO with advantage. The the action economy are the same as the optional marking rule in the DMG. Think of it like the character pressing their attack, the target can fight or flee, or be stuck.

@josephpotter5766 Год назад

So, once more, hacking the actual good ideas that filled 4e into 5th in a frantic attempt to give it some depth. Why is it like this! Why is it continually this way! Congrats btw, sincerely, for putting in a good houserule that the game really benefits from, but why the heck aren't more people playing 4e when such a huge amount of the 'houserules' and alternate rule stuff people are doing in 5th literally just putting back in stuff that was thrown out in the transition from 4-5 for no good reason. The last nine years has basically seemed to consist of people frantically trying to reinvent the wheel!

@hart-of-gold Год назад

@@josephpotter5766 never played 4e only started playing D&D this year and have only DMed once but used this rule and it worked.

@kevindaniel1337 Год назад

I've tried the optional flanking rule, and i will not be using it again in the future, I don't like it how it affects gameplay.

@Smucklz 16 дней назад

Flanking makes certain subclasses way less good. In my first game of dnd i played a samurai fighter, but because of flanking like half of my kit was completely redundant. My current character is a paladin and flanking is the sole reason that I picked oathbof conquest over oath of vengeance. (That and the fact that im a githyanki so i don't care about the misty step from oath of vengeance since i already get it)

@PsyrenXY Год назад

I definitely favor the +2 rule instead of advantage

@lordmars2387 Год назад

You essentially quoted what I said to my players about flanking a few years back. That makes you %200 right and the most correct RU-vidr.

@leoa7927 Год назад

My biggest issue with flanking is that it is ALREADY a superior strategy that doesn’t need to be further rewarded. It is always better to focus down one enemy rather than spread the pain because it means one less attack and thus less damage for the party in the next round. It would be like granting an attack roll bonus when using a damage type that an enemy is Vulnerable to.

@murderousintent7838 Год назад

It also makes every advantage granting martial ability effectively worthless provided there is more than one of you

@Talarue Год назад

I have adopted a "reverse cover" system for flanking. +2 for being at a 90 degree angle. +5 for complete flank. Yes this is a more significant change than the common +2 homebrew that people use but I think it makes sense and if cover doesn't break banded accuracy than this should be fine too. I also add the conditional of you can only get the bonus to flanking if you are within 2 sizes of the creature you are attacking (both up and down). IE a gnome can't get flanked by or flank a size huge creature.

@alfonsovallejo2665 Год назад

Flanking is a terrible and unbalanced rule.

@victorholmes7075 Год назад

Haven't had the opportunity to try it, but I would like to try giving flanking an additional proficiency bonus to attack rolls instead of advantage. That way it scales with level and allows advantage to stack.

@that1cooldog826 Год назад

I tried to do this, called it striker expertise. Kinda broke the value of ac on monsters and had to resort to hp bloat, not my brightest move

@yuvalgabay1023 Год назад

Just give a +1/+2 to flanking. Alot of tables do it. I do it.also add if the monster/player has high enough pass perc /the monster doesnt have really sides(like beholder whit his 20 million eyes or jellys) you /him are immunin to it

@victorholmes7075 Год назад

@@yuvalgabay1023 that’s where I got the idea for +proficiency because at lower levels they’re both +2.

@victorholmes7075 Год назад

@@that1cooldog826 good to keep in mind, thanks!

@lucaslepesteur7846 Год назад

@@victorholmes7075 But at later levels it scales to +4, even +6 if you go really far, considering they are already adding their proficiency to their attack rolls, it becomes +8 - +12 to hit before adding their modifier, enemy AC usually goes as high as 19 - 20. So +12 (from 2*prof) + 5 (from main atribute) + any magic item ( probably +2) = 19 meaning they auto hit anything from any roll of 2-20 on the d20, so 95% chance to hit, which stacks with advantage.

@5daboz 2 месяца назад

Nice video, but this is kind of the first time I understand why people would have issue with you (you once mentioned it). You sound like a MMO player. I do not know if you also play like one, but I can imagine how this would make people extremely worried, agitated or defensive xD , value system sounds broken, it is a value system of a MMO player. Anyway, have fun :)

@eliasvernieri Год назад

i have a personal homebrew Flanking, instead of adding advantage, adds +1 to the attack roll for each additional creature capable of attacking the enemy creature in melee range. with a top of +5

@40Found Год назад

There's a reason Larian didn't put flanking in BG3

@shapeinexplicavel6508 Год назад

I think its because it would be funky as hell

@PackTactics Год назад

They do have the high/low ground rules. I might make a video about that.

@epicazeroth Год назад

@@PackTactics That's just a numerical bonus though, much better than advantage. Also easier to do in a game.

@StudioSerinn 4 месяца назад

How to fix flanking. "A creature cannot gain the benefit of flanking if they are themselves the potential target of a current flanking maneuver." Now in your example of the conga line, only the outer characters have flanking advantage, which may mean players avoid the stupidity of a conga line in the first place.

@OneKnightGaming Год назад

I look at Flanking like I would the other mentioned options, but without saving throws or barbarian needed. I would struggle with Great Weapon Master fighter without flanking, but I could see it slightly adjusted. As another comment here said, avoiding flanking by being 5ft from an ally could help a bit.

@rylog8 Год назад

I use the +2 attack flanking in my game. Rarely do we get conga lines. I think that has to do a lot with the map and the enemies in play. Pack Tactics still allows advantage from any angle, same with Sneak Attack proccing on amy angle. My players are about even in terms of range and melee (including a crossbow expert), and we've had some solid talks about positioning during combat. I might use the PF opportunity attacks rule more for the monsters than anything. The melee players still rush into combat and the +2 allows them to hit more often than the ranged characters (which most casters are ranged focused by necessity from hit points and armor)

@CrownedFalcon00 4 месяца назад

The way I deal with flanking is to just make it a +2 bonus and I dont allow minions (as in MCDM minions) to benefit or create flanking situations. Its healther game design and allows some weaker monsters to punch above their weight when they gang up on players or for players to surround a critical enemy to take it down quickly. My players are level 12 and have a lot of Armor or ways to dodge attacks via feats. That extra +2 is super helpful when using lower power level creatures that I want my players to hack through but still feel risk.

@JacqueK-im9kc Год назад

"A creature which is itself flanked does not count for the purposes of determining if a target is flanked." There, I fixed the conga line complaint with one sentence. GROUNDBREAKING! And gave faerie fire, reckless attack, hide and the other myriad ways to grant advantage back their apparently (not convinced but w/e) use cases since they're not dependent. Also, fighting back to back with a party member, or with your back to a wall, effectively prevents flanking in most cases. I usually love your videos but this one was disappointingly low effort.

@josephpotter5766 Год назад

you know what system flanking really works well in? 4e. Flanking offers a +2 bonus on attacks (stacking benefits), flanked creatures cannot flank (no conga lines), moving within the enemies threatened area invokes the risk of attacks unless you move only 5ft (no dancing), and spell-casters are more or less unable to benefit from it. *once again* we're basically in a place where the 'idea' of a rule was imported from 4e to 5th in such a way as to make it either worthless or actively bad, and all the fixes amount to: Lets go back to doing it the 4e way. **I KNOW** that almost every video ends up with me putting a comment to this effect, I know, but it happens so absurdly often!

@ObatongoSensei 4 месяца назад

As you correctly pointed out, flanking doesn't really work unless you also have attacks of opportunity in play, no matter what kind of benefit it bestows. It's not just being adjacent and opposite to an ally, but mostly being able to threaten the flanked foe. The other problem is that it doesn't really affect ranged martials or casters at all, since it doesn't hamper the flanked character's offensive capabilities. Someone who is outnumbered and surrounded in combat should have a hard time landing effective attacks or casting spells. Attacks of opportunity, again, solved this issue well enough in the past, but maybe also adding some penalties to the offensive capabilities of the flanked creature would help. Add to it that 5e doesn't really give bonuses and penalties, but instead uses advantage/disadvantage for everything, and that's how many special abilities become useless when introducing flanking as it is. Giving a generic way to gain advantage that everyone can easily achieve is a really dumb idea. So, my suggestion is simple: if you add flanking, then also add attacks of opportunity and give disadvantage to all the flanked creature's attack rolls, from any source. When a spellcaster is flanked, all saves against his spells are rolled with advantage. To balance melee special abilities that make use of advantage as a benefit, make so that if they already get advantage from some other circumstance, they add their proficiency bonus to damage instead (or double it if they already do). By the way, this would make so that going against large groups of enemies without some clear defensive measures would be a really bad idea, as it is in real life, since being outnumbered and surrounded would be rather deadly. Which is not bad at all, in my opinion.

@KodeeDentares 4 месяца назад

I have never seen the "conga line" before; probably because I always advocate for a kind of "facing" ruling. You can't flank someone you're not actively threatening. I also agree with the +2 over advantage.

@foolwise4703 4 месяца назад

I set up a house-rule system once to deal with these issues and make tactical positioning interesting. In short, even just ganging up on one character gives a bonus to attack, being on the back even dealing extra backstabbing bonus. To deal with the run-around issue, I introduced the "intercept"-reaction which lets you move 5 ft into an enemies path and end their movement. Martial characters above level 3 get an additional reaction per round. I have to admit though that my players are more into narrative play and thus did not engage with these rules enough to make them relevant/worth the hassle of remembering them. In the end, DnD as a system is just not the best to depict tactical weapons combat. Fireball + misty step > group formation :-P

@michaelturner2806 7 месяцев назад

I often consider different rules for different classes of creatures. Well, not that kind of class. But classify enemies into boss level, named lieutenant type, mostly unnamed typical types, and a return of one-hit minions. I classify PCs on the same level of lieutenants being exceptional heroes, and most town NPCs as typical unnamed. (And yes, I still carry minions forward from 4e, I liked that they were just bodies on a field and only dangerous in numbers, and really useful as a speed bump to gum up tactical situations or as a clump to make sure the wizard who prepared fireball one massively satisfying turn.) If I were to do flanking, I think I'd give the ability to PCs, enemy lieutenants and above, and possibly the occasional unnamed enemies if they have lore that they're particularly militaristic or tactical. Though those tend to already have an ability that works better like Pack Tactics.

@the_wake_ Год назад

I've been running Flanking for years, and using the +2 variant due to the issues you noted, it's been OK. Not super tactical with the lax Opportunity Attack rules and lack of the 5-foot step etc., but a net plus IMO. What this really made me think, apart from missing Pathfinder-style area control and movement, was that maybe Flanking (with some retooling) should have been baked into a martial feature. It feels like a thing martials should be able to exploit, and since most NPCs wouldn't get it, it doesn't overpower them / nullify Pack-Tactics-Like features. I'm not sure you'd want to give it out at 1 because Fighter dip is already so powerful, but maybe around 3 or something when kits start to come online. And then some kits could interact with flanking in different ways.

@AuthoritativeNewsNetwork 4 месяца назад

Bit lost on why Flanking would be considered a detriment to for Reckless. Sure you're not getting an AoO with Adv, but you're able to swing with Adv without the enemy doing so back to you, assuming no conga line. 🤔

@modtyrant1784 Год назад

TL;DR - For a more realistic game the DM shouldn't be trying to copy the players and squeezing out optimization like that. The conga line only happens if everyone is trying to gain that advantage , which is unrealistic. Disclaimer - If your group likes flanking and the conga line stuff, there is nothing wrong with that This would only happen if the DM is playing its Monsters/NPCs like they would a player. Flanking shouldn't be some thing the DM uses unless its trained soldiers or warriors ( hunter tribes ). You could probably throw rogues into the mix but they'd also maybe use traps and defiantly try to prevent people from getting behind them. Those who wouldn't do that might be less intelligent/stupid or cautious/smart enemies that wouldn't jump straight into the conga line, the latter would keep its distance ( like mages, archers etc ). That also doesn't take into account enemies who may have honor and the DM has them actively attack from the front, even some lowly gangsters/ruffians might have this.

@dwgautier Год назад

my core group of gaming buddies is filled with some of the most power hungry min maxing nobgoblins... but EVEN THEY thought that the flank for advantage rules was STUPID overpowered. We go for the +1 to hit with flank.

@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462 Год назад

Advantage is just way too powerfull. A +1 or +2 works but it's kind of boring. Maybe have flanking critical hits on 19s or if we're using fumbles (which I don't recommend but it's another almost obligatory houserule) make flanking part of the risk/reward.

@FourthRulerEntity Год назад

I always respect the perspective of other. I have to hard disagree on here. Flanking adds another level of combat fluidity that allows to open up enemies (on both sides) to other abilities and spells. Example 1: Battle Master and Barbarian wombo combo. Flanking against an enemy allows both of these guys the bonus. This way Barbarian DOESNT have to take damage from higher chances of being hit. They’re MAKING attacks thus rage isn’t lost. Battle master has better chances of getting their features off. Movement order and issue? Ready action the attack action. Problem solved. Example 2: focus firing enemies in smaller areas. Flanking here makes attacks land more often thus removing threats faster. Yes the conga line is really silly but an organized party can easily prevent this. Plus enemies will huddle making this harder but recall, any orientation around the flanked creature works it doesn’t have to be up and down or left to right. Example 3: Double opportunity Should a flanked creature try to leave it will need to be hit by at least 1 of the flanking creatures. Thus flanking is a free of charge lockdown. Not for action economy but to prevent enemies from retreating and saving their health resource. Which is arguably the most important. Example 4: No real fourth just teamwork makes the dream work and marital having this level or co-op in battle builds them up. I agree martials need a buff but taking features that give them a clear advantage isn’t the way. Dnd should work with the “spell slot” system and make a resource that martials can pull from using these points. Battle Master is a great start. Things they can do to augment their attacks and reactions to help their allies

@BramLastname Год назад

So while I decided to ditch flanking in my games, I do recommend using a rule that allows you to get a +2 bonus rather than advantage. My players found that the (dis)advantage rules, while realistic, feel bad when used RAW. Instead we decided to add everything that gives advantage and subtract the amount of things that give disadvantage, Then if the result is positive they can roll with advantage and add +2 for every "wasted" advantage, The drawback being that if it is negative they also get a -2 penalty for ever source of disadvantage that would've been otherwise ignored. Note that any advantage that gets stacked with a disadvantage cancels each other and removes both from the equation, Thus having 5 sources of disadvantage and 1 source of advantage results in disadvantage with a -6 penalty. As 1-5=-4 = 1*disavantage + 3*(-2)

@XperimentorEES Год назад

This highlights why I say the oversimplification of 5th edition was a willful mistake of laziness. In 3rd edition different factors of a given situation, both in and out of combat, would adjust your roll (or rarely the AC/DC instead) differently and they could stack! For example flaking gave both melee allies a +2 to all their attack rolls, attacking a prone target granted a +10 to all attacks done in arms reach, but half cover would incite a -4 to all rolls not originating from behind the cover, and so on with spells applying their own adjustments. It was more mathy to be sure, but it wasn't nearly so boringly bipolar as the (dis)advantage system of 5th edition. I homebrew my campaigns to use both, so my players have the opportunity cost of how much resources and strategy they want to invest for how much benefit they get out of their rolls.

@Demolitiondude Год назад

Holy crap. The one time you don't use magic, and it's just use a choke point. Spear and shield. Use the spear as a sword. No flanking.

@ofgas4039 Год назад

In my games the one player who is on the back of the target gets advantage. And I decide that by putting myself in the creature's place, thinking who would I focus on. But even if I let the optional rule play without any additions, I don't see your point. You see the "everybody is on a line" thing happens in cramped up spaces, indoor fights. On outdoors or even big dungeons, the players can risk an opportunity attack to take a few steps back to not to get flanked on the next turn. Or a barbarian would be reluctant to jump in a horde of enemies even if it's a totem warrior. Above that, you said that monsters usually get to use it more. Maybe that is true but statistically a player character can deal much more damage with their attacks. A paladin would save a 3rd level divine smite for example and when it's dire for them to hit it, they could consider flanking and take position accordingly. Maybe risk some other monsters coming from his back but he'd have a much higher chance to hit. This might be a little controversial but I like the fact that Conjure Animals and Animate Objects gets buffed. I don't like those spells because you can do WAY MORE with 3rd or 5th level spells. Yes the additional miniatures tank some damage maybe help with flanking but they die way too quickly and they are mostly a disappointment for the caster (or at least that's what I saw as a player and from players around me). Overall I think this lets the players *think* where they would put their characters. Instead they don't just go "uhh I guess I'll move there it doesn't matter". P.S: I am not trying to come off aggressive and I'm sorry if it came out that way. It's just my opinion and I wanted to share it.

@letstec 7 месяцев назад

While I see the problem with everyone having advantage now I disagree with the point of flanking devalueing other features. If my party gets surrounded by Goblins I would rather get advantage through the Paladin on the opposite site of Goblin 1 than using Reckless Attack and then get hit by 5+ goblins both from melee and ranged attacks. Also knocking the target prone is stupid depending on the party as only you and the other martial gets advantage while the Rogue, Ranger and Warlock now have disadvantage, so knocking the enemy prone so that you have advantage is really selfish and hurts the group. Fearie Fire still works wonders considering you still get advantage when opportunity attacks are triggered, if you move up to the enemy for the first time and the enemy cant turn invisible.

@desmondnomad5319 Год назад

See this is another reason why Pathfinder 2e rules are superior. 1. Flanking only inflicts the flatfooted condition (- penalty to ac) on the flanked creature against the flankers. 2. While attack of opportunity is much more rare to come by, it works the way Kobold said, where it can be triggered just by someone moving within reach, and if you critically hit with aoo as a fighter, it stops their movement, so setting up flanking is much harder for the enemy. 3. Certain classes are even immune to being flanked by lower level enemies with deny advantage. But that's only a fraction of the things Pf2e does better than 5e, as someone who was mainly 5e focused before deciding to jump ship to Pf2e, I'd highly recommend you all check it out or at least give it a second chance if you already did.

@matthewlenard8346 Год назад

Home brew mechanics, First I hit an enemy with ferry fire, Seconds 2 martial classes run up on that enemy and surround it on either side, The 2 martial classes not only have advantage but they get a plus 4 To their attack bonus And the enemy has Disadvantage On blocking Attacks. This is both fun and letha, but At the tables I play at the ruling is tactics that are use agents the DM can be used agents the players. My DM that runs mostly HB campaigns Explains to everyone at the table I will give you ultimate God like powers, But you have to remember this, These powers you've obtained Come from a living breathing world that I have created, The enemies that you face will be able to match you in the mastery of combat If not more God like .

@nystagohod Год назад

I never really enjoyed the advantage flanking 5e presented and ageee the 3.5e and pf1e versions worked better. One of my DM's changed it to a to hit bonus equql to half your proficiency bonus rounded down, and I've never looked back. While it still favors monsters in the nunbet of combatant side of things, it now stacks with all existing forms of advantage which makes it now very good with the barbarian reckless attack and similar features. Having it acale with half prof also gives w nice sense of power progression I've also combined this with a hoembrew power atack tuke, that allows those making melee wrapon attacks/attacks with melee weapons the ability to trade in half prof to hit for double that penalty in bonus damage. Which pairs well together. Finally, ive been looking into changing opportunity attacks to trigger more like 3.5e and pf1e. When leaving a threatened space, even if wnrerinf anogher ine, provokes an opportunity attack. To avoid this you can spend an action to disengage, half your movement to attempt to tumble, or all of your movement and a free action to 5ft step. This part is still being worked out some, bur the rest has been proven quite beneficial to the game.

@koboldsage9112 3 месяца назад

I run 3.5, which supposedly has similar problems with the congaline of death, yet I have never actually seen it. It would nit be that big a stretch in either system to just say an individual can only participate in one flank at a time.

@angryguy3000 Год назад

One time a player asked why I didn’t use the “optional advantage while flanking rule” in my games bc he thought that most DMs used it. I explained how it nerfs Pack Tactics out of existence and could get really nasty for the PCs if they got surrounded. He said that “most DMs just use it for the players not monsters and npcs” 😒😂

@jacobburton7613 Год назад

I like flanking. I think the argument about mobs being "too strong" with the flanking bonus is not solid. imo, when mobs surround a character, it's supposed to feel extremely overwhelming. it's not like it's a movie where only one enemy swings and waits for the next to die before they engage the hero. they should all stab at the same time, like it would be IRL. if you allow yourself to be surrounded, you should pay the consequences. it makes positioning more important, and makes ranged and spell casters have to help MM more, instead of just hanging back.

@eraz0rhead Год назад

Agreed. Flanking is a terrible mechanic in 5e. 3rd edition (for all it's faults) did it better, since moving _through_ threatened squares was actually dangerous. I would also want to see something like "facing" rules for extra verisimilitude before I'd consider using it (and frankly, I don't want that much work to do.. so it's much easier to just jettison the whole thing).

@chazzerine7650 7 месяцев назад

In our games, we simply allow advantage to stack. If you have two ways to get advantage (such as flanking + pack tactics) then you have double advantage, and roll 3d20 on your attack roll instead of 2. There haven't been any major issues with this, as flanking no longer removes other options. The general consensus of the group is that if the players get to do something, the enemies can do it as well.

@magicelemental Год назад

I like flanking in Pathfinder 2e. You don't get advantage when a target is flat-footed(off-guard). You get a +2 to hit. Of course if you hit 10 over their AC it is a crit. Also only some characters and monsters have Attacks of Opportunity. Barbarians and Paladins can choose to pick up Attack of Opportunity as class feat at level 6. Our GM will use one action to move a monster in position then use 2 actions for that monster to set a reaction to attack when another monster in flanking. Then the second monster moves into position and you get attacked by two monster who are flanking you at once. It's mean. Of course we can do that too. Or when a character or monster with high acrobatics skill tumbles through an enemy space to get into flanking.

@MattRumm Год назад

I play advantage if a character attacks an enemy that is in combat with another character. Animals (such as from conjour animals) can't do this unless they have pack tactics (like wolves). Humanoid enemy npcs do get the same advantage, allowing the pcs to be potentially overrun by weaker enemies (like the fellowship in Moria, or Gandalf in the goblin town). Just makes sense.