I think I'm understanding this correctly but want to make absolutely certain before I bring it to the table:

If a PC is grabbed by, in this case, a bear, and he has an ally on the other side of the bear, the two PCs are flanking the bear. In other words, even though the grabbed PC is immobilized, he can still attack the bear and therefore the bear grants combat advantage to both the PC and his ally. Am I reading that correctly?




The grabbedDDI condition doesn't prevent you from attacking the grabber, so you can flank it if your ally is in the right position.

Grabbed. While a creature is grabbed, it is immobilized. Maintaining this condition on the creature occupies whatever appendage, object, or effect the grabber used to initiate the grab. This condition ends immediately on the creature if the grabber is subjected to an effect that prevents it from taking actions, or if the creature ends up outside the range of the grabbing power or effect.

Immobilized. When a creature is immobilized, it can’t move, unless it teleports or is pulled, pushed, or slid.

As you noticed the only condition that prevents flankingDDI is when either a flanker or the other is unable to attack (e.g.: lack of line-of-effect or impossibility to take actions).

Flanking. [...] Must Be Able to Attack: You and your ally must be able to attack the enemy, whether you’re armed or unarmed. If there’s no line of effect between your enemy and either you or your ally, you don’t flank. If you’re affected by an effect that prevents you from taking actions, you don’t flank. [...]

  • \$\begingroup\$ Even though I agree that the non-grabbed ally should be granted combat advantage, I doubt a grabbed character could attack with the same ease his grabber. Example: Mark is grabbed by a Bugbear and Lesley moves on the other side of the Bugbear. The Bugbear is flanked by Mark and Lesley but the Bugbear grants combat advantage only to Lesley. I support this by stating that Mark has most of the attention on the Bugbear (flanking is based on the assumption that a flanked character, divides his attention on the flankers) and thus cannot surprise the Bugbear. \$\endgroup\$ – Kostas May 20 '12 at 12:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ Nothing prevents Mark from attacking the bugbear at full force: the immobilized condition only prevents him from walking around. 4th edition grab is not the 3.5th edition grapple. Therefore, the bugbear is seriously threatened by Mark and Lesley and his attention is divided between the two. So, both Mark and Lesley get combat advantage over the goblinoid. \$\endgroup\$ – Erik Burigo May 21 '12 at 8:22
  • \$\begingroup\$ I believe it depends on how you imagine the Bugbear to make the grab. Even if it means "grabbing Mark's arm to prevent him from moving away", then the question of what happens with Mark's held arm arises. I doubt Mark would be able to use take advantage of the Bugbear's combat advantage as easily as Lesley would. In other words, I believe that a grab other than a purely magical one, fails to simply immobilize someone and has an impact in his/her actions other than moving. \$\endgroup\$ – Kostas May 21 '12 at 12:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ However, these are not the rules as written: your description models a personal interpretation only. 4th edition is not about simulation: it's about simplicity. A grabbed character can still flank. An interpretation like yours could be quite fine and right, but enters the realm of house rules. \$\endgroup\$ – Erik Burigo May 21 '12 at 13:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.