(PF) Snap Shot Feat in UC

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

SO this feat chain allows you to threaten squares around you (5 ft for snap shot, 10 ft for improved, 15ft for greater).

It seems obvious that, with Combat Reflexes, you could potentially make a lot of AoO's.

I am wondering though, since you "threaten" with a ranged weapon... Can you flank with a ranged weapon with this feat? Could, say, a Rogue deal Sneak Attack damage?

Thanks!

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

In order to flank you still have to make a melee attack, but you could help a melee buddy flank by threatening with your ranged weapon. That's the strict RAW, but if I was the DM I'd let you flank with it.

[Cieyrin]

Greater Snap Shot lets you do what Spiked Chains used to. Grats, you've graduated into battlefield control. :smallamused:

[Frosty]

Greater Snap Shot lets you do what Spiked Chains used to. Grats, you've graduated into battlefield control. :smallamused:Hmm...combine with Archer archetype for Fighter (who can use Maneuvers at range), and we CAN finally trip people at 10 feet as an AoO again :smallbiggrin:

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

So... yes? you can flank? if so, my idea for a ranged rogue just got so amazing...

[panaikhan]

There is a Ranger substitution ability in 3.5 that lets you 'flank' at a distance, so I see no problem with interpreting it this way.

[Larpus]

So... yes? you can flank? if so, my idea for a ranged rogue just got so amazing...
Check with your DM, by RAW it seems that you can threaten, but not flank (this is specifically a melee attack), however you do help other people flank.

But it's not incredibly broken or unreasonable to allow you to flank yourself, especially when you're burning 2-3 feats to not even be that far away.

Btw, in the SRD Greater (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/greater-snap-shot-combat) apparently doesn't add any distance, did you get your description from the book?

[grarrrg]

The Gang Up (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/gang-up-combat) feat lets you flank an opponent as long as "at least two of your allies are threatening that opponent, regardless of your actual positioning."

So if 3+ characters had this feat, they could all be "flanking" without having to even be near the enemy.

[Mustard]

Grarrrg, Paizo staff has stated that Gang Up only works for melee, though I believe that's still an unofficial statement, as it's not errata. My reading of the rules is consistent with yours; I'm just saying that intent is probably melee. I wish they'd been more specific, but they seem to think it's solidly "you have to use melee" without any doubt, and thus needs no clarification.

[Blisstake]

Grarrrg, Paizo staff has stated that Gang Up only works for melee, though I believe that's still an unofficial statement, as it's not errata. My reading of the rules is consistent with yours; I'm just saying that intent is probably melee. I wish they'd been more specific, but they seem to think it's solidly "you have to use melee" without any doubt, and thus needs no clarification.

Huh. Wouldn't that make the feat pretty much useless outside of the bonus teamwork feat for an archer inquisitor?

[Ravens_cry]

Not really, especially for attacking larger creatures. It now means your position for flanking, as long as you are in melee range, does not matter, which is really helpful with something like a huge or larger dragon or some such. Even as intended, it can be helpful for rogues, ninjas and other people who like flanking.

[Blisstake]

Not really, especially for attacking larger creatures. It now means your position for flanking, as long as you are in melee range, does not matter, which is really helpful with something like a huge or larger dragon or some such. Even as intended, it can be helpful for rogues, ninjas and other people who like flanking.

Yes, but it requires feat investments with 2 other party members who may be largely independent of flanking or who may need other feats a lot more.

[Frosty]

Huh. Wouldn't that make the feat pretty much useless outside of the bonus teamwork feat for an archer inquisitor?Or a Cavalier (who can grant the use of the feat to others).

But, I'm just going to ignore that FAQ suggestion by Paizo because it's cooler to allow it to work with Snap Shot.

[Ravens_cry]

Yes, but it requires feat investments with 2 other party members who may be largely independent of flanking or who may need other feats a lot more.
No it doesn't (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/gang-up-combat), it just needs them to be threatening.
I am assuming we are talking just about Gang Up here.

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

Btw, in the SRD Greater (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/greater-snap-shot-combat) apparently doesn't add any distance, did you get your description from the book?

oh, no, sorry. I saw that Improved Snap shot gave an additional 10 ft, (for a total of 15 ft) and recalled incorrectly that each feat gave you a 5ft increment. thanks for catching that.

EDIT: Also, is anyone aware of perhaps an official FAQ or forum posting or something about snap shot and flanking? Yes, by RAW it isnt a melee weapon and thus cant flank, but I would really love a definitive RAI.

Thanks for your input, everyone!

[Blisstake]

No it doesn't (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/gang-up-combat), it just needs them to be threatening.
I am assuming we are talking just about Gang Up here.

I'm thinking of something entirely different. My bad.

[Mustard]

EDIT: Also, is anyone aware of perhaps an official FAQ or forum posting or something about snap shot and flanking? Yes, by RAW it isnt a melee weapon and thus cant flank, but I would really love a definitive RAI.
Well, the Gang Up FAQ entry provides some RAI as to what "flanking" is, so I think that's sufficient RAI right there: you aren't considered flanking. It's a strong enough feat as it is. Also evidenced by the Gang Up response, ranged sneak attacks should not be as easy as 1 feat (this is a conclusion that I am interpolating).
EDIT: The relevant statement by Jason Bulmahn is "since flanking specifically refers to melee attacks" in regards to Gang Up. That's what I'm referring to: it can apply to Step Up. There's the intent right there. Hopefully, you're in a RAW group :smallwink:.
EDIT (again, sorry): FAQ link (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fn#v5748eaic9n87)

If you're a player, ask the GM about it, argue for it if you feel inclined, but if the answer is "no", you're still going to be all right. If you're a GM, I'd suggest defaulting to "no". In both cases, barring exceptional circumstances, of course: if the party is wizard, druid, cleric, rogue, then maybe the rogue could use a hand.

[Frosty]

If we are allowed to threaten, then RAI and logically speaking, I think having rhe Snap Shot feat should at least allow us to *provide* flanking to a melee ally.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

If we are allowed to threaten, then RAI and logically speaking, I think having rhe Snap Shot feat should at least allow us to *provide* flanking to a melee ally.That's true by RAW as well. The only problem is that, to actually flank and not just provide flanking, you have to make a melee attack.

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

Alright, thanks everyone. our group believes strongly in RAW, UNLESS you can find some instance where the designers think it should be otherwise, or there is some FAQ or errata that changes things.

For example, the Hexblade Fix. never was it written down, though the designer of the class said "here are some things you can do to fix it". OR the Invisible Blade PrC entry reqs. Designer person said "yeah, this and Master Thrower were one, ten level PRC. Some of the Feats make no sense. Heres a Fix."

Neither of these were ever "official" errata, but they were undoubtedly valid.

Thanks for the help, I now know that Snap Shot will not allow someone to Flank.