Can I flank with a ranged attack?

[bensei]

Well, at least partly one can flank with ranged weapons, namely thrown weapons, e.g. daggers. A fighter specialized on throwing daggers (with quick draw), can flank a foe together with an ally (i.e. also the ally gets the +2 bonus), when he holds a dagger in his hand. So he is flanking with a weapon, he normally uses for ranged attacks only.

However, at the moment he throws the dagger, he receives an AoO from the flanked foe, and he should not get a sneak attack, if he throws at the flanked foe. Not completely sure about the last statement. Does anyone think he does?

 

[Morgruumsh Toothgrin]

When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by a character or creature friendly to you on the opponent's opposite border or opposite corner.

Back to Staffan's point . . . According to the rules you only receive the benefits of flanking when you make a "melee" attack . . . so it doesn't make any difference if you are threatening the target or not.

As soon as you opt to use a "ranged" attack you lose the benefit of a flank and you lose the sneak attack. It's as clear as mud.

 

[Rel]

I'll admit that I don't have the books directly in front of me, so there may be some turn of phrase that refutes what I'm about to say. But, as I understand things currently (under 3.0):

Flanking is not predicated on a particular attack. The proof for this is that you can have a setup like:

AEBE

Where A and B are two party members and the E's are enemies, it doesn't matter if both A and B attack the E between them, he's still flanked by virtue of the fact that they COULD attack him, if they so chose (i.e. he's Threatened by both of them).

Now, suppose that A is a Rogue armed with a pair of throwing axes. He opts to throw an axe at E (the one between him and B). Is E "Flanked" for purposes of whether A can Sneak Attack him with the thrown Axe? I'd say yes. He threatens that space with a Melee attack (his off hand throwing axe), B also threatens that space with a Melee attack, so E is flanked. The fact that A opts to use a ranged attack in that situation has no bearing on E's status as being flanked by A.

I might be a bit more reluctant to take that interpretation if this seemed like an unbalancing prospect, but (barring something that I can't foresee) it doesn't. First of all, E is going to get an AoO on A for making a ranged attack. Second, A is still only going to get one Sneak Attack because even if he's got Rapid Shot and wants to throw the other axe at E, as soon as he stops using that axe to threaten with a Melee attack, E is no longer threatened.

Going back to the example of an elven Rogue using a longbow and Improved Unarmed Strike to threaten a Melee attack with his feet, I can see ruling that he can't do that. But even then I don't see it as unbalancing. The Rogue has had to invest at least three feats to make this even remotely advantageous (Improved Unarmed Strike, Point Blank Shot and Rapid Shot). He still suffers an AoO as a result and at the end of the round, assuming that he doesn't kill his foe outright, he's left standing close enough to the fight that his enemies can probably get off a Full Attack on him and his AC and Hit Points are probably nothing to write home about.

Considering that for the same cost in feats he could Weapon Finesse a pair of Short Swords and avoid any rule controversy, I'd say that this is not an overpowered tactic.

YMMV

 

[jayaint]

I believe that this comes down to the definition of a melee attack. If a character is toe-to-toe with an enemy (adjacent squares) and attacks him, that would be a melee attack, correct? If an archer (who is not 2nd level Order of the Bow Initiate) fires on an enemy who is in an adjacent square, then he is making an attack "in melee" and will suffer the consequences of his actions (AoO, etc). Granted, it is a "ranged attack", but it is made "in melee". I understand the difference, and I understand what Morg-Tooth is saying.

HOWEVER, would the OTHER flanking character still get his flanking bonus (later in the same round) if the FIRST character decided to maked a "ranged attack" "in melee"?

If so, then the FIRST character is (by definition) still "flanking" the enemy, and should have received the flanking bonus (and if a rogue, the ability to add sneak attack dice).

If not, then the enemy in question could lead my battle force any day!! Because he gets to attack one of them AS THEY ATTACK HIM, and still receive his full armor class to the one he just turned his back on and forgot about while he AoO'd the "ranged attack" opponent.

 

[AuraSeer]

I believe that this comes down to the definition of a melee attack. If a character is toe-to-toe with an enemy (adjacent squares) and attacks him, that would be a melee attack, correct?

Only if he's using a melee weapon. If the character fires a bow or throws a dagger, it's a ranged attack, no matter how close the enemy is.

 

[jayaint]

Aura...

I responded to that in my post... I understand the difference between the two attacks... but what about my question for the OTHER flanker... does he or does he not get the flanking bonus when acting after the "ranged attack"er in the round???

 

[AuraSeer]

I responded to that in my post... I understand the difference between the two attacks... but what about my question for the OTHER flanker... does he or does he not get the flanking bonus when acting after the "ranged attack"er in the round???

For clarity, let's call the first guy "A" and the second "B".

The actions of A have no effect per se on B's flanking status. He could cast spells, fire arrows, make melee attacks, whatever-- it doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is who threatens the enemy during B's turn. Basically, that comes down to what A is holding at the end of his own turn.

If A is still holding the bow, or is empty handed, then he does not threaten an area. That means he cannot help B gain the flanking bonus.

However, A could fire a few arrows, then drop the bow and Quickdraw a sword (or other melee weapon) at the end of his turn. Or he could throw a weapon with one hand, while holding a dagger in the other. As long as he ends his turn wielding a melee weapon, that means he threatens the enemy. Thus when it comes around to B's turn, B gets flanking, because the enemy is threatened from two directions.

Again, A doesn't have to actually make any attacks. He could cast spells, or throw something into another part of the combat, or just stand there and pick his nose. As long as he threatens the enemy, he helps his allies flank.

 

[buchw001]

I would say yes... [3.0]

does he or does he not get the flanking bonus when acting after the "ranged attack"er in the round???

IF the second ally B is making a melee attack then he would get the +2 flanking bonus to his attack roll (and sneak damage if rogue) because the first ally A that foolishly made a ranged attack is still technically "threatening" (see* below) the foe (see ** below) and is directly across from his buddy.


*According to SRD under Flanking "If a character is making a melee attack against an opponent, and an ally directly opposite the character is threatening the opponent, the character and the character's ally flank the opponent.

This means threatening IS definitely a requirement in order to get the flanking bonus; however, when does threatening occur



**According to SRD under Threatened Area "A character threatens the area into which it can make a melee attack, even when it is not a character's action. "

This means character A (ranged attacker) is still threatening the foe because it is possible for him to make a melee attack into that square when it is his turn and hence character B (melee attacker) WILL get flanking bonus.

 

[AuraSeer]

Re: I would say yes... [3.0]

This means character A (ranged attacker) is still threatening the foe[...]

Once again, that is true only if A is wielding a melee weapon. If he is holding a ranged weapon or is empty handed, then he does not threaten an area.

 

[buchw001]

Re: Re: I would say yes... [3.0]

Once again, that is true only if A is wielding a melee weapon. If he is holding a ranged weapon or is empty handed, then he does not threaten an area.

WHY!!!

It clearly states that you threaten an area into which you CAN make a melee attack. That does NOT mean you have to have a melee weapon in you hand, or does it?

Just to add fuel to the fire... by the wording you don't even have to have a melee weapon to threaten an square according to the SRD.