Can You Flank With a Ranged Weapon?

[Olaf the Stout]

I'm sure this question has been answered before but I can't seem to find it. Can you flank with a ranged weapon? My first thought was no but I've been wrong many time before. If you can do you have to be within a certain distance of the target to count?

Olaf the Stout

 

[Crothian]

Nope

 

[Olaf the Stout]

Nope

Care to elaborate or point to where it says this in the PHB.

Thanks,

Olaf the Stout

 

[Moon-Lancer]

becuse you dont threaten any suqares, thus you dont flank. If they do threaten, why is it not in the melee catagory of weapons? Now you can fix this if you get an elven whatchamacallit. I think they are on wizards website, and races of the wild. It turns bows into makeshift clubs or something. Or if you get armor spikes, spiked guantlits, or boot blades. Then you can flank.

"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."

 

[Olaf the Stout]

becuse you dont threaten any suqares, thus you dont flank. If they do threaten, why is it not in the melee catagory of weapons? Now you can fix this if you get an elven whatchamacallit. I think they are on wizards website, and races of the wild. It turns bows into makeshift clubs or something. Or if you get armor spikes, spiked guantlits, or boot blades. Then you can flank.

"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."

Is someone with a arrow pointed at your back not threatening. I'm not talking about using the bow as a club. I'm talking about using it as a bow!

Just playing the devil's advocate at the moment. I actually think that they shouldn't but I can see how someone would argue that they should.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Sejs]

Ranged weapons that are not also melee weapons (that is, not daggers, throwing axes, etc) do not threaten an area.

Thus you cannot flank with them, and you cannot take AoOs with them.

 

[Hypersmurf]

'Threaten' is a defined term; you threaten a square into which you can make a melee attack, generally.

Apart from the Peerless Archer (3E PrC from the FR Silver Marches sourcebook), it's not possible to threaten with a ranged weapon. You also don't threaten with certain melee weapons - namely the whip and unarmed strike.

Note, however, that it is not necessary to threaten in order to gain a flanking bonus. (The RotG article claims otherwise, but this contradicts the rules.) It is only necessary for you to be making a melee attack; it is your ally who must threaten in order to grant the bonus.

So if your ally has a longsword, and you have a whip, you can gain a flanking bonus; your ally threatens, and you are making a melee attack. When he attacks, he does not gain the bonus; he is making a melee attack, but you are not threatening (since a whip does not threaten an area).

Now if we switch the whip for a longbow, your ally still receives no bonus; he is making a melee attack, but you do not threaten an area with your longbow. Neither, now, do you gain a bonus; your ally threatens, but you are making a ranged attack, not a melee attack.

(The Peerless Archer has the opposite problem to the whip - he can grant a flanking bonus (since he threatens) but he cannot gain one (since he can't make a melee attack).)

-Hyp.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

The answer to this question is, it depends on how you read the rules.

In 3.0, you could not flank with a ranged weapon.

In 3.5, the rules text that specifically prohibited this was removed.

In 3.0, you were flanking specifically when you were making a melee attack against an opponent that was threatened by an ally.

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 is an important change in the rules because, all else being equal, it allowed you to be considered flanking outside of your own turn. For instance, consider a feat that appeared in a recent Dragon magazine:

Pack Tactics: When you are flanking an opponent, your allies that are not flanking the same opponent receives a +1 bonus to their melee attacks against that opponent. Your flanking allies retain their normal +2 bonus.

In 3.0, a feat similarly worded would be almost useless. During my attack (the only time I'm considered flanking), my allies would gain an attack bonus - which they couldn't benefit from, because, generally speaking, they can't attack during my attack.

Similarly, any ability that said "When an opponent you are flanking does X ..." would be useless - because, when the opponent does X, I'm not usually in the process of making an attack, and therefore am not flanking him, and can't benefit from the feat.

So, how did the definition of flanking change in 3.5? The method for determing wheter or not something was flanking was rewritten as what I call the "line test."

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.

Notice how, in this section, it says nothing about "in melee," "threatening," etc.

Where are those types of words mentioned?

In the previous section, which talks about when you get a flanking bonus on attack rolls:

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.

So, yes, you obviously only get flanking bonuses to attack rolls when making melee attacks.

The question you need to answer is, what defines flanking? Am I flanking only when I get the bonus on my attack roll (in which case you have 3.0 problems)? Or, are you flanking whenever you pass "the line test" (which [likely accidentally] allows ranged flanking)?

I agree that, in all likelyhood, the designers wanted flanking to be a close-combat-only thing. However, try as hard as I can, I can't think of any rules language that specifically limits it to that without, simultaneously, resulting in other undesirable issues.

For instance, f you limit it to "when you are in melee with an opponent," then it means a rogue, with his monk friend appropriately placed, hitting a bar patron in bar brawl can't sneak attack his opponent with a punch - unless his opponent pulls a knife, in which case, the rogue can kidney-punch him.

EDIT: Hyp also brings up an important point. The only person who needs to threaten anyone in order to grant a flanking bonus is your friend - not you.

 

[Hypersmurf]

In 3.0, a feat similarly worded would be almost useless.

Out of curiosity... what do you feel "Your flanking allies retain their normal +2 bonus" does, if your 'flanking allies' are using ranged weapons?

Do my friends in the living room gain a +1 bonus to attack the opponent in the living room, if I'm asleep in the bedroom, my friend Bob's in the kitchen, and a line drawn between Bob and my centres passes through opposite borders of the opponent's square?

-Hyp.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Another quick aside, regarding the "Line Test":

Consider the following situation:

D=Dragon (Q=Dragon's center)
X=Hobgoblin
F=Fighter

DDDXF
DQD
DDD

Here, we have a huge dragon - with claws - in melee with a hobgoblin, who is in melee with a longsword-wielding fighter.

Now, according to the line test, we draw a line from the center of Q to the center of F. If it passes through opposite sides of the hobbo, the dragon and the fighter are flanking.

You'll notice that, in this case, it doesn't - the line passes through the bottom of X and the right side of X. Thus, the dragon and the fighter aren't flanking the hobbo, unless the dragon steps one square north.

Odd, eh?