Can you flank with a ranged weapon?

[TheEvil]

Simple question: Without feats, spells, or class abilities, can you flank with a ranged weapon?

Unlike some of my previous polls, feel free to argue as much as you like. Just keep it civil, and no patryning others.

 

[atom crash]

It seems appropriate to link to the discussion that spawned this poll.

 

[Krelios]

This isn't really a subject for debate or opinion...

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.

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

Exception: If a flanker takes up more than 1 square, it gets the flanking bonus if any square it occupies counts for flanking.

Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.

Creatures with a reach of 0 feet can’t flank an opponent.

You cannot flank with a ranged weapon.

 

[TheEvil]

This isn't really a subject for debate or opinion...
You cannot flank with a ranged weapon.

Whereas I don't disagree with you, I like to put up the polls to get some perspective on the debates which usually become endurance contests.

 

[TheEvil]

For the record, you will notice the cited text doesn't actually SAY that the attacker has to threaten. I think the confusion for some people comes from not linking the two paragraphs as the transitive sentence seems to indicate. Only by reading the second paragraph in isolation do I see any room for debate.

 

[Infiniti2000]

This isn't really a subject for debate or opinion...
You cannot flank with a ranged weapon.

The funny part of your comment is -- that's your opinion. This actually is a subject for debate and opinion, as you've just proven.

 

[atom crash]

The rules are crystal clear on when you receive a flanking bonus. That is not under debate. What is left murky by the rules are the conditions under which flanking occurs. Are you only flanking when you receive a flanking bonus, or can you be considered flanking when you do not receive a flanking bonus but satisfy the line test?

If you believe that flanking only occurs when you receive a flanking bonus, that creates a bit of wonkiness, such that formians become impossible to flank rather than merely difficult.

If you believe that flanking occurs when you satisfy the line test, that leads to some wonkiness such that you can flank with a ranged weapon.

Edit: It occurs to me that probably a third of my total posts at this site are concerning this topic.

 

[runtime]

For the record, you will notice the cited text doesn't actually SAY that the attacker has to threaten. I think the confusion for some people comes from not linking the two paragraphs as the transitive sentence seems to indicate. Only by reading the second paragraph in isolation do I see any room for debate.

The attacker must threaten the defender. How else can the attacker make a *melee* attack against the defender?

 

[atom crash]

The attacker must threaten the defender. How else can the attacker make a *melee* attack against the defender?

unarmed strike

 

[Artoomis]

For the record, you will notice the cited text doesn't actually SAY that the attacker has to threaten. I think the confusion for some people comes from not linking the two paragraphs as the transitive sentence seems to indicate. Only by reading the second paragraph in isolation do I see any room for debate.

Right, but it does say the attacker must make a melee attack, so an unarmed attack would get the +2 flanking bonus.

As for ranged weapons, the "When in doubt..." sentence is clearly intended to help out in explaning when the first sentence applies and when it does not, and so applies to making melee attacks only.

I do admit that the second sentence, when taken entirely on it's own, would not prohibit a ranged flanking attack. Of course, it does not stand on it's own but must be taken in the context of an explantory remark on the first sentence.