sneak attack optimization

[el minster]

If a rogue takes Exotic Weapon Proficiency ( Spiked Chain), Combat Reflexes, Vexing Flanker, and Adaptive Flanker he/she can automatically sneak attack a medium or smaller creature 5 feet away since he/she counts as on the oposite side of the creature and in his actual location for flanking.
has anyone else realized this?
Am I wrong?

[Rebel7284]

Whether or not it works depends on your DM, the rules for flanking clearly talk about needing two friendly creatures to flank.

Even if this works, remember, we are always our own worst critics (outside of a small set of narcissists) , so you have to remember to be kind to yourself otherwise you might not count as two FRIENDLY creatures. :smallwink:

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

The keywords to flanking (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm#flanking) are two friendly characters. If you're fighting a huge opponent and you're under that opponent, and it's occupying the spaces on opposite sides of you, it's not flanking you because it's not two creatures.

Also, Wild Cohort (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031118a) takes fewer feats.

[Cygnia]

Answered here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=13251204&postcount=12) way back when


Q: Can a character with the Adaptable Flanker feat (Player’s Handbook II, 73) and a spiked chain flank an enemy all by himself (since he can choose to count as occupying the square opposite the enemy as well as his own square)?
A: No. This feat doesn’t let you get around the basic rule of flanking, which is that you need an ally to accomplish it—it just lets you pretend to occupy an extra space when figuring out if you’re actually flanking an enemy with your ally.

[Khedrac]

And for those that don't think you need two people, the answer is still no - and here's why:

Adaptable flanker allows you to count as being in any square you threaten for the purposes of determining flank.

So the questions comes up, do you threaten the square directly opposite you across an opponent? - And the answer is No.

"But", you say "I have reach so of course I threaten it."

Err, no - you can attack it, yes, but you don't threaten it - there's a difference, you don't threaten squares which have cover from you, and reach weapons used the ranged rules for cover.

The rules are in the SRD under Cover in the Combat modifiers section:

To determine whether your target has cover from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover (+4 to AC).
When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from your square to the target’s square goes through a wall (including a low wall). When making a melee attack against a target that isn’t adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks.
Cover and Attacks of Opportunity: You can’t execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with cover relative to you.

So the entire question is moot - you don't threaten the square to trigger the question about whether you can grant yourself a flank.

Except the definition of Threatened Square seems to disagree.

Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your action.
However the entire SRD section on Attack of Opportunity makes no mention of things that block AoOs like cover, so on the surface you do actually threaten squares into which you cannot make an AoO...
In my opinion this is resolved by the "general versus specific" method of arbitrating rules conflicts with the rules on AoOs being the general and the rules on Cover being the specific; resulting in squares with cover not being threatened.