I thought back stab was a full action?

[atom crash]

That's alright, because you don't threaten with a ranged weapon.

PHB pg. 153:

"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."

Note that it is melee only and that you cannot threaten with a ranged weapon.

The fighter does not get the flanking bonus, as the rogue doesn't threaten with a bow.

Exactly. Neither the fighter nor the rogue gets the flanking bonus, as neither satisfies the requirements for the flanking bonus (flanking + threatening).

But (here is the crux of my argument) the rogue with the ranged weapon satisfies the requirements for flanking even though he doesn't satisfy the requirements for the flanking bonus. Flanking can exist where there is no flanking bonus, though the flanking bonus cannot exist where there is no flanking.

Edit: What Patryn said. It was his cogent argument that converted me on this issue.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Ankh: Hyp and I went back and forth on this awhile back.

I remember And it IS one of the things you can go back and forth on if you get insanely nit-picky about the wording.

However, the text never actually says that you must be in melee yourself

But it does say you have to be maing a melee attack. First line of the Flanking definition.

But (here is the crux of my argument) the rogue with the ranged weapon satisfies the requirements for flanking even though he doesn't satisfy the requirements for the flanking bonus. Flanking can exist where there is no flanking bonus, though the flanking bonus cannot exist where there is no flanking.

Sneak Attack specifically states that the Rogue must be flanking. Flanking requires you to be making a melee attack. The whole requirement of it all is the melee portion.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

But it does say you have to be maing a melee attack. First line of the Flanking definition.

No, it doesn't. It says, literally, that you must make a melee attack in order to get a bonus on your attack roll from flanking.

Logically, you need to be flanking in order to get a flanking bonus. Equally as supported, however, is that you needn't get the bonus in order to be flanking. At least, not necessarily.

Thus, a Rogue 30' away from a spider could technically be considered as flanking the spider, so long as there was a Fighter on the other side of the spider. Note that, the way the rules are written, the Fighter doesn't even have to be threatening the spider.

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.

Note that the only place threatening the opponent enters into the equation is when determining whether or not you get a bonus on your to-hit roll, and even then it only requires that your ally be threatening - not that you must be (this is good, otherwise you wounldn't get a +2 when making an unarmed strike without the IUS feet).

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.

This, however, opens up the definition of flanking perhaps more than the designers might have wished; however, it might have opened it up exactly as far as they wished, since they *did* change the text in the 3.0 to 3.5 revision.

Sneak Attack specifically states that the Rogue must be flanking. Flanking requires you to be making a melee attack. The whole requirement of it all is the melee portion.

Used to require, actually. Now, it's less certain.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Used to require, actually. Now, it's less certain.

And obviously, our readings of the rules are fairly different on whether its certain or not. I'm not in the mood to go back and forth saying the same thing a different way over an over again. You won't convince me of your interpretation, and I won't convince you of mine.

Maybe Hyp will pop in and continue.

 

[atom crash]

And obviously, our readings of the rules are fairly different on whether its certain or not. I'm not in the mood to go back and forth saying the same thing a different way over an over again. You won't convince me of your interpretation, and I won't convince you of mine.

Maybe Hyp will pop in and continue.

You think Hyp will convince him this time? Or the other way around?

I see two vaild interpretations of a fuzzy point in the rules. I tend to err on the more forgiving side, allowing a character to flank even when he doesn't get a flanking bonus.

Note that, the way the rules are written, the Fighter doesn't even have to be threatening the spider.

If you take into consideration the glossary definition of flanking, the fighter must be threatening, but the rogue doesn't.

"Flank: To be directly on the other side of a character who is being threatened by another character. A flanking attacker gains a +2 flanking bonus on attack rolls against the defender. A rogue can sneak attack a defender that she is flanking."

 

[Thanee]

It's obvious enough that flanking is not meant to work from 30' apart... unless you have a lot of reach, that is.

To get a flanking bonus and to be flanking is one and the same. They are used synonymously.

Flanking only works in melee.

The first paragraph under the Flanking headline makes that part clear.

The second paragraph is only a clarification, if (usually through reach) you do not have the standard simple setup with both attackers being adjacent to the target and in directly opposite squares.

"When in doubt..." is not a phrase you start a rules definition with.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

If you take into consideration the glossary definition of flanking, the fighter must be threatening, but the rogue doesn't.

Or just the Flanking rule, which says...

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

Bye
Thanee

 

[Demoquin]

Ok then, how would a rogue get his sneak attack with a ranged weapon?? besides being first in the surprise round.

 

[Thanee]

BTW, if Patryn was right, then a large creature could get a flanking bonus from flanking with a ranged weapon (outside melee), but a medium-sized creature could not.

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

Ridiculous enough?

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Ok then, how would a rogue get his sneak attack with a ranged weapon?? besides being first in the surprise round.

Be invisible or blinking, or being first in the first round (unless the target could act in the surprise round, of course), first stun the target, etc.

Bye
Thanee