Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rel" data-source="post: 1089016" data-attributes="member: 99">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:AEBEWhere 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</blockquote>

Verification