Possible Ranged Flanking?

[Ravens_cry]

This feat (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/gang-up-combat) has me a bit confused. It seems to potentially allow ranged flanking, which would be awesome sauce for a ranged rogue in a large group.
Or maybe not, hence why I am starting this thread.

[Lisselys]

It does but only if you threaten with your bow

[Feytalist]

It does but only if you threaten with your bow

Not as I read it.


Benefit: You are considered to be flanking an opponent if at least two of your allies are threatening that opponent, regardless of your actual positioning.

Emphasis mine. Says explicitly it doesn't matter where you are. In fact, even your allies don't need to actually flank the target.

The wording is extremely loose though. On purpose, perhaps?

[Defiant]

Ally is in front of the enemy. Second ally is directly behind this ally, using a reach weapon. You are directly behind this second ally, using your bow and this feat. You are flanking the enemy.

[panaikhan]

There is a Ranger substitution ability somewhere, that states that if you hit an opponent with a ranged weapon, it is considered "flanked" until it is struck again, or the start of your next turn.

Not sure if this would work well for a ranger/rogue multiclass and full attack sequence, because I don't have any books to hand.
If it does...

1st Hit = flanked. 2nd hit = sneak attack / flanked, 3rd.... well, you get the idea.

[ArcanistSupreme]

Flanking

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.

When in doubt about whether two characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two attackers' centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent's space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.

Source. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Flanking)

Emphasis mine. I can't find anything else that says you can be considered flanking without getting that flanking bonus, so I'm inclined to believe that RAW means no ranged flanking.

[Feytalist]

Source. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Flanking)

Emphasis mine. I can't find anything else that says you can be considered flanking without getting that flanking bonus, so I'm inclined to believe that RAW means no ranged flanking.

Ah, I see what you mean. So you can flank someone without getting the flanking bonus, even if you attack him (with a ranged weapon, in this case).

It's still clear though that, with this feat, you are considered "flanking" the enemy even if you are 30 feet away with a bow.

Like I said, loose wording.

[LordBlades]

Source. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Flanking)

Emphasis mine. I can't find anything else that says you can be considered flanking without getting that flanking bonus, so I'm inclined to believe that RAW means no ranged flanking.

Flanking is a state. The first sentence of your quote refers to what happens when you make a melee attack while flanking. there is no implication (that I can see) in that quote that you're not flanking if you don't make a melee attack.

The second sentence specifies how to determine whether two character flank an opponent, and they only need to be on opposite sides of him (not even threatening him is mandatory by RAW, just being there). If you meet that condition you're flanking regardless of what you do. If you decide to shoot a bow, you won't be getting the +2 bonus (because it only applies to melee attacks and it requires your buddy to threaten the enemy) but sneak attack would still trigger because it only requires you to be flanking.

[Ravens_cry]

Well, on the plus side, I am happy to know I am not the only one confused by this. On the other hand, I am not the only one confused by this!

[Feytalist]

If you meet that condition you're flanking regardless of what you do. If you decide to shoot a bow, you won't be getting the +2 bonus (because it only applies to melee attacks and it requires your buddy to threaten the enemy) but sneak attack would still trigger because it only requires you to be flanking.

This was what I was aiming for. My explain-fu is weak, it seems.

[ArcanistSupreme]

Flanking is a state. The first sentence of your quote refers to what happens when you make a melee attack while flanking. there is no implication (that I can see) in that quote that you're not flanking if you don't make a melee attack.

The second sentence specifies how to determine whether two character flank an opponent, and they only need to be on opposite sides of him (not even threatening him is mandatory by RAW, just being there). If you meet that condition you're flanking regardless of what you do. If you decide to shoot a bow, you won't be getting the +2 bonus (because it only applies to melee attacks and it requires your buddy to threaten the enemy) but sneak attack would still trigger because it only requires you to be flanking.

Actually, threatening is necessary by RAW, I just forgot to include it because it was below the explanatory pictures. I will concede that this feat seems to allow flanking without threatening from any range, although again you won't be getting that +2 bonus without making a melee attack. Now I want to make a whip sneak attack build...

[panaikhan]

With the ranger ability I mentioned earlier, you don't need to threaten - just hit.
The target is given the 'flanked' condition, and for a rogue's sneak attack, that's all he needs.

[ArcanistSupreme]

With the ranger ability I mentioned earlier, you don't need to threaten - just hit.
The target is given the 'flanked' condition, and for a rogue's sneak attack, that's all he needs.

I just discovered what I think is some very awkward RAW:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/rogue#TOC-Sneak-Attack)
(Emphasis mine)

And if you read the flanking (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Flanking) rules, only creatures that are flanking get the +2 bonus.

So unless I'm missing something, a target being considered flanked means absolutely nothing, which makes spells like phantom threat completely worthless, and may invalidate the Ranger substitution level if it is similarly worded.

[Feytalist]

This seems to be two different statuses (statii?), namely flanking and being flanked. Especially with the inclusion of the feat being discussed.

Sneak attack works both against a creature being flanked, and for a creature (rogue) doing the flanking. In the above feat, the character (let's assume again it's a rogue) is considered flanking, and receives the SA bonus. This is my reading of the feat, anyway.

However, the creature is not considered flanked, so the two allies do not get the +2 bonus.

Does this even make sense?

[ArcanistSupreme]

Sneak attack works both against a creature being flanked

Not true by RAW. Nowhere in the SA description is the "flanked" condition mentioned.


and for a creature (rogue) doing the flanking. In the above feat, the character (let's assume again it's a rogue) is considered flanking, and receives the SA bonus. This is my reading of the feat, anyway.

However, the creature is not considered flanked, so the two allies do not get the +2 bonus.

Does this even make sense?

Possible, but not necessarily the case. If the two allies are not flanking with each other or the rogue, then yes, it seems that the rogue will be flanking but the creature will not be flanked. Which makes me wonder if a creature that is immune to being flanked can still be sneak attacked by a rogue that is flanking it.

[Feytalist]

Not true by RAW. Nowhere in the SA description is the "flanked" condition mentioned.

Perhaps not explicitly stated, but generally when a SA user is flanking a creature, that creature is considered flanked, and SA applies regardless. It's only when the Gang-Up Combat feat is introduced that the two gets separated.

Heh, this is really confusing. I have to constantly reread the wording to see if what I imagine makes sense.

[ArcanistSupreme]

But read the phantom threat spell in the SpC. It gives the target the "flanked" condition, which is not defined anywhere that I can find. The SA ability explicitly states that the rogue must be participating in the flanking to trigger sneak attack. I think we need to get an expert opinion in here.

[Feytalist]

But read the phantom threat spell in the SpC. It gives the target the "flanked" condition, which is not defined anywhere that I can find. The SA ability explicitly states that the rogue must be participating in the flanking to trigger sneak attack. I think we need to get an expert opinion in here.

Agreed. My head hurts :/

[Occasional Sage]

If RAW fails, why not revert to RAI?

[pilvento]

You can allways play a WhisperKnife (PrC Races of the Wild) :smallwink:

[Feytalist]

If RAW fails, why not revert to RAI?

Because it's fun to catalogue all the discrepancies in the Core books :smallbiggrin:

Also, there seems to be some differences in RAI reading in this particular case as well. Hence our (my) confusion.

[Occasional Sage]

Because it's fun to catalogue all the discrepancies in the Core books :smallbiggrin:


Who has that much spare time? :smallfrown:



Also, there seems to be some differences in RAI reading in this particular case as well. Hence our (my) confusion.


Sure, but the range of interpretations isn't too great and a consensus reading can be reached. Loads faster than trying to make square-and-round fit together with RAW.

[riddles]

I don't understand where the confusion is here. When 2 of your allies threaten a creature, you are considered to be flanking it. This is enough to activate sneak attack. If you are flanking an enemy, you get +2 to hit. This is relatively straightforward.

You are considered your own ally, so as long as you and someone else threaten, you are considered flanking - like the vexing flanker feat.

This requires a lot of party synergy to pull off, but would be made easier by a rogue with wild cohort and certainly helps thrower builds get sneak attack without huge amounts of tricks. Its better for thrower builds than bow builds as you can use daggers in melee.

[faceroll]

This requires a lot of party synergy to pull off

Hardly any, really. You hand out in the back, lancer mcstabsalot is using a polearm, and cleric bashington is up there clubbing. You're in the back, and, whatever foes are being threatened by both mcstabsalot and bashington, you are considered flanking. Pretty straightforward, really. In my experience, most parties have about 50% of the members melee combatants.

[Zaranthan]

Is it just me, or does "flanking" no longer seem like a real word after reading this topic?

[ArcanistSupreme]

I don't understand where the confusion is here. When 2 of your allies threaten a creature, you are considered to be flanking it. This is enough to activate sneak attack. If you are flanking an enemy, you get +2 to hit. This is relatively straightforward.

You are considered your own ally, so as long as you and someone else threaten, you are considered flanking - like the vexing flanker feat.

This requires a lot of party synergy to pull off, but would be made easier by a rogue with wild cohort and certainly helps thrower builds get sneak attack without huge amounts of tricks. Its better for thrower builds than bow builds as you can use daggers in melee.

But it's not that simple. A rogue must be participating in flanking to trigger sneak attack, and spells such as phantom threat give a target the "flanked" condition, but says nothing about how you are involved in the flanking, and thus by RAW doesn't really do anything as far as I can tell. Which makes me question if "flanking" and "flanked" are two separate and distinct conditions by RAW.

[Slipperychicken]

Is it just me, or does "flanking" no longer seem like a real word after reading this topic?

Yeah, I know what you mean. Personally, I get that feeling whenever a specific word and its derivatives are used too often in a particular conversation. Even commonly used words like food... Jus' letting you know you aren't alone.

[Feytalist]

But it's not that simple. A rogue must be participating in flanking to trigger sneak attack, and spells such as phantom threat give a target the "flanked" condition, but says nothing about how you are involved in the flanking, and thus by RAW doesn't really do anything as far as I can tell. Which makes me question if "flanking" and "flanked" are two separate and distinct conditions by RAW.

This is my issue with it as well. Usually, there is no problem, with "normal" two-person-one-on-each-side flanking, but when it comes to feats like this or phantom threat, the two are seperated.