Opportunist + Distracting Attack

[artimus261]

So I just read over opportunist and have a ranger with the distracting attack alternate class feature out of the phbii. So I gotta ask, I know that opportunist normally only triggers when an enemy is struck in melee but if my arrows are so Distracting that my targets are considered flanked by me shouldn't a rogue with opportunist be allowed to make his free AoO???

[Kaleph]

Mmmmm no, the enemy simply counts as flanked, a condition that does does trigger an attack of opportunity from the rogue. Space for an houserule, maybe, if you consider the description of opportunist too restrictive, but your scenario doesn't convince me either RAW or RAI.

[Necroticplague]

So ,I just read over Opportunist and have a ranger with the distracting attack alternate class feature out of the phbii. So I gotta ask, I know that opportunist normally only triggers when an enemy is struck in melee, but if my arrows are so distracting that my targets are considered flanked by me, then shouldn't a rogue with opportunist be allowed to make his free AoO???

No. Oppurtunist requires the enemy to be attacked in melee. Regardless of the enemy's status as flanked, a ranged attack never triggers Oppurtunist. Abilities do what they say, and not a thing more.

[artimus261]

I am well aware that RAW does what it says. I'm mainly asking if this would be a broken house rule. A melee attack, something that does not otherwise distract, impair, or impose any form of penalty is enough for a rogue to use his opportunist ability. So to me it seems that a ranged attack that is debilitating enough to impose an actual status should allow this as well. Again, would this be broken as a house rule?

[Kaleph]

I am well aware that RAW does what it says. I'm mainly asking if this would be a broken house rule. A melee attack, something that does not otherwise distract, impair, or impose any form of penalty is enough for a rogue to use his opportunist ability. So to me it seems that a ranged attack that is debilitating enough to impose an actual status should allow this as well. Again, would this be broken as a house rule?

No. But a house rule is normally an agreement between the player(s) and the master, so my opinion doesn't have a role here.

[artimus261]

Honestly it does! I'm the actual dm in this instance and the ranger is one of my players. He didn't even ask, I just thought it'd be a nice throw in since distracting attack, which he did pick up, didn't seem like a good enough trait to replace an animal companion, even if it is just the rangers.

[Kaleph]

Honestly it does! I'm the actual dm in this instance and the ranger is one of my players. He didn't even ask, I just thought it'd be a nice throw in since distracting attack, which he did pick up, didn't seem like a good enough trait to replace an animal companion, even if it is just the rangers.

So you have at least my Blessing :smile: It's also a small addition, so it doesn't alter the game balance.

[Necroticplague]

I am well aware that RAW does what it says. I'm mainly asking if this would be a broken house rule.
Ah, gotcha. I thought you were asking about the rules of the ability.

A melee attack, something that does not otherwise distract, impair, or impose any form of penalty is enough for a rogue to use his opportunist ability. So to me it seems that a ranged attack that is debilitating enough to impose an actual status should allow this as well. Again, would this be broken as a house rule?

Frankly, I don't think it would be horrifically broken to just say 'any attack against an enemy they threaten'. It still has the 1/round limitation, so it's not that big a deal. Making it easier to trigger doesn't increase it's overall power because of that limit, just it's consistency.

[artimus261]

Hehe sorry, I don't always say what I'm really getting at xD yeah that's kinda how I felt, would just make the rogue and ranger a brotp xD if they worked together properly they could really tear up a target, ranger readying as shot against the target the rogue moves to to apply flanked and give him a free AoO with his sneak attack damage. Would be beautiful. Do have one other touch up I'll ask about here while I'm at it. In the the this thing never gets better. It's solid but never goes anywhere so I feel like giving this last thing to it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. An enemy flanked by the rangers Distracting Attack suffers a -2 penalty to it's Reflex saves for the duration. Thoughts???