Can you flank with a ranged weapon?

[Hypersmurf]

If you assume that the diagrams on pages 152-153 of the PHB cover all situations in which it is possible to flank in the RAW (which only makes sense...why leave out a situation and make the rule difficult) instead of assuming that they only cover a limited group of situations...

Huh? So I can't flank unless I'm a hobgoblin with 10 foot reach, an orc, an ogre, or a troll?

-Hyp.

 

[unleashed]

Huh? So I can't flank unless I'm a hobgoblin with 10 foot reach, an orc, an ogre, or a troll?

-Hyp.

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, I said situations depicted...not specific creatures. Apparently then you also can't flank unless your Lidda, Redgar, or Tordek if you're going to be that way about it...so we can't use the flanking rules at all in 99.9% of situations.

All creatures in the examples that gain or provide a flanking bonus are also threatening the creature, therefore it's not too much of a stretch to assume that must apply to all flanking situations...thus both creatures must threaten.

Edit: So just to lay it out so it's clear from the diagrams.

1) You can flank if you threaten with a melee weapon and a friendly creature threatens on the opposite border or corner.

2) You can flank if you threaten with a reach weapon and a friendly creature threatens on the opposite border or corner.

3) You can flank if you threaten with natural reach and a friendly creature threatens on the opposite border or corner.

 

[Hypersmurf]

All creatures in the examples that gain or provide a flanking bonus are also threatening the creature...

All the creatures that provide a flanking bonus threaten the creature.

All the creatures that gain a flanking bonus happen to threaten the creature, but this is not required by the rules. The rules require a melee attack, but do not require threatening. It's just that in most cases, someone who can make a melee attack is threatening.

-Hyp.

 

[unleashed]

All the creatures that provide a flanking bonus threaten the creature.

All the creatures that gain a flanking bonus happen to threaten the creature, but this is not required by the rules. The rules require a melee attack, but do not require threatening. It's just that in most cases, someone who can make a melee attack is threatening.

-Hyp.

Not exactly right...you are correct the text doesn't require threatening, but the diagrams do require threatening. To me you're still looking at the text in isolation from the diagrams and with the rewite from 3.0 to 3.5 the diagrams seem to be the primary source with the text helping to clarify if there are any doubts about whether you're lined up exactly right and lists any exceptions that apply, along with what bonus you receive if you attack a creature that you are flanking.

Hmm, guess we'll just have to agree to disagree then.

 

[Hypersmurf]

To me you're still looking at the text in isolation from the diagrams and with the rewite from 3.0 to 3.5 the diagrams seem to be the primary source with the text helping to clarify if there are any doubts about whether you're lined up exactly right and lists any exceptions that apply, along with what bonus you receive if you attack a creature that you are flanking.

Are you including the wording on the diagrams as part of the diagram? Or not?

If you're not, then there isn't enough information there to tell you how flanking works.

If you are including the wording on the diagram, it clearly says "If you're making a melee attack", not "If you threaten".

Diagrams provide visual aids and examples, but to know what the rules are, you still need to read the text.

-Hyp.

 

[unleashed]

Are you including the wording on the diagrams as part of the diagram? Or not?

If you're not, then there isn't enough information there to tell you how flanking works.

If you are including the wording on the diagram, it clearly says "If you're making a melee attack", not "If you threaten".

Diagrams provide visual aids and examples, but to know what the rules are, you still need to read the text.

-Hyp.

Yes I'm including the text. Of course the text apart from that which describes why creatures are flanking specifically in the examples is just a reprint of the separate text so that shows very little.

If they provide visual aids and examples, why then isn't there an example of a character flanking while not threatening if it is at all possible? It seems only prudent to show how that works too...my theory is because it isn't possible, as it would have been very easy to include said example in one of the three diagrams provided. After all these diagrams weren't in the 3.0 rulebook they were specifically added to the 3.5 rulebook along with the change in the text.

 

[glass]

So, is that a wrap on this one? It seems that way to me. No ranged flank attacks, period.

Seems that way. Well done TheEvil and ConspiracyAngel!

BTW, the new argument doesn't rely on the 'when making a melee attack...' bit, does it? So the Formian problem disappears too, right?

EDIT: I've just realised, I voted 'Yes' and there's no way to change it to 'No', AFAIK. Maybe we need a new poll.


glass.

 

[Infiniti2000]

EDIT: I've just realised, I voted 'Yes' and there's no way to change it to 'No', AFAIK. Maybe we need a new poll.

Nah. Stick a fork in it, Jerry, it's done.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If they provide visual aids and examples, why then isn't there an example of a character flanking while not threatening if it is at all possible? It seems only prudent to show how that works too...my theory is because it isn't possible, as it would have been very easy to include said example in one of the three diagrams provided.

They show an example of a hobgoblin attacking with 10 foot reach. They don't show an example of a hobgoblin attacking with 5 foot reach, or an orc attacking with 10 foot reach. The examples are not exhaustive.

But what we do have is an example of a creature flanking by making a melee attack with a reach weapon when his ally threatens (hobgoblin gets a +2 bonus). This example does just fine for illustrating how the hobgoblin can gain a bonus by attacking with a whip when the orc threatens.

We also have an example of someone not getting a flanking bonus because their ally (Tordek) is stunned and does not threaten. This example does just fine for illustrating how the orc would not get a flanking bonus if the hobgoblin is armed with a whip, since the hobgoblin does not threaten.

The fact that the attackers do threaten in all the examples is incidental. There's no example showing someone flanking with a whip, and there's no example showing a bugbear flanking; nevertheless, someone with a whip can flank, and a bugbear can flank. The diagrams are illustrative, not exhaustive.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

BTW, the new argument doesn't rely on the 'when making a melee attack...' bit, does it? So the Formian problem disappears too, right?

The table evidence only tells us that when you are making a ranged attack, you are not flanking. It tells us that when you are making a melee attack, it's possible to be flanking.

It doesn't give us any information about when you aren't attacking, so the table evidence doesn't actually help with the formian problem.

-Hyp.