Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ankh-Morpork Guard" data-source="post: 1998541" data-attributes="member: 10079">The only thing about that is...where do you get that idea? I honestly don't see any reference to Flanking that defines it as anything but a +2 bonus in melee. Even the glossary definition mentions the +2.There just isn't any evidence that flanking is any different from the +2 bonus. They are the same. The melee requirement is there for the attack to be made. Reach is fine, but don't you think they would have specified an example with ranged? Especially considering there's one for reach AND large sized creatures.And of course, it also makes ranged weapons and Rogues much much more powerful.((Yes, I said I was backing out, but this is just getting to me. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />))</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ankh-Morpork Guard, post: 1998541, member: 10079"] The only thing about that is...where do you get that idea? I honestly don't see any reference to Flanking that defines it as anything but a +2 bonus in melee. Even the glossary definition mentions the +2. There just isn't any evidence that flanking is any different from the +2 bonus. They are the same. The melee requirement is there for the attack to be made. Reach is fine, but don't you think they would have specified an example with ranged? Especially considering there's one for reach AND large sized creatures. And of course, it also makes ranged weapons and Rogues much much more powerful. ((Yes, I said I was backing out, but this is just getting to me. :))) [/QUOTE]

Verification