Rogues flanking at range?

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I give up. Go ahead and make up new rules.

 

[Zaebos]

I give up. Go ahead and make up new rules.

You have failed to say what rule it is I am making up.

Point out the exact rule that I am changing. According to the strict wording, I can not find anything to suggest that indeed I am making new rules.

Infact you seem to agree with my assessment.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

You have failed to say what rule it is I am making up.

The actual rules on flanking follow:

FLANKING
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.

That's it. There's nothing else.

However, you claim that, in fact, there's another rule that they forgot to write in there:

FLANKING
You have to threaten in order to be considered flanking. 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.

Except, of course, that there's a problem with that. Putting that in there actually contradicts what the rules say elsewhere. Therefore, you say, what they actually forgot to write in the flanking rules was not merely the above, but also the exceptions to that rule.

FLANKING
You have to threaten in order to be considered flanking, except in the cases where you don't. 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.

Unfortunately, none of your additions are actually in the rules and, because of the way the rules are already written, they are needless complications that change the rules.

You aren't allowed to do that - at least, not in this forum.

Infact you seem to agree with my assessment.

I agree with your assessment that I can flank with my non-unarmed strike. Rather, you agree with mine, since I've been posting that in this thread longer than you have.

I don't need your additions to arrive at that conclusion, however. In fact, they get in the way. Therefore, your rules are superfluous and erroneous.

EDIT, To add:

What you've done is no different than:

FLANKING
You have to be colored blue be considered flanking, except in the cases where you don't. 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.

 

[atom crash]

Edit: Flank bonus and flanking only apply during an attack, so if you are flanking during an attack, the creature is considered flanked and you are considered flanking "When making a melee attack...", Flank is not a condition, but part of the action you are taking.

If this is true, then the Hive Mind ability of formians make them completely immune to flanking.

Hive Mind (Ex): All formians within 50 miles of their queen are in constant communication. If one is aware of a particular danger, they all are. If one in a group is not flatfooted, none of them are. No formian in a group is considered flanked unless all of them are.

If flanking only applies during an attack, then all formians can never be considered flanked. By the initiative rules of combat all combatants act one at a time, and at no time can more than one person be attacking simultaneously. If formians, by your logic, can only be considered flanked when they are attacked, then they can only be flanked one at a time, so therefore according to Hive Mind they cannot be flanked.

If this is the intent of the designers of that ability, then why does it not read thus: "...If one in a group is not flatfooted, none of them are. No formian in a group can be flanked."

Instead, the wording of that ability implies that it is possible for all formians in a group to be considered flanked, thus for them to be individually considered flanked. Therefore, your interpretation must be incorrect.

Zaebos, you seem to be confused. In post #168 you were arguing that you must threaten in order to flank. Then you claimed that attacking with a whip was an exception to the flanking rules. Now you're arguing otherwise.

Receiving a flanking bonus while attacking with a whip or an unarmed strike (of course, assuming that your ally who is in the correct position and threatens your opponent) is not an exception to any rule concerning flanking. It falls absolutely under the definiton of flanking.

Edited for spelling. Now I'm going home for a game. It's time to fireball things.

 

[Zaebos]

Good Grief...

I have not stated that

"You have to threaten in order to be considered flanking. 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.
"

All I have said that because you can melee attack, you threaten that square. That is part of the definition of threatening. There are execptions to threatening, pointed out elsewhere in the rulebook.

What you are saying is that because the flanking rule does not call out these exceptions (and likewise the threaten rule in regards to the whip) that the rules contradict themsleves. This is incorrect. They do not contradict themsleves, but provide clairity over the intended use of the particular rule.

You claim that I have altered the rules. I say that if you look at it in a logical flow, then you will realize that no additions have been made.

I have not violated forum rules either.

Can you get a flank bonus?
Step
1 - Determine if your ally threatens your target
1a - If yes, move to step 2
1b - If no, you do not gain a flank bonus
2 - Determine if your ally is on the targets opposite border or opposite corner
2a - If yes, move to step 3
2b - If no, you do not gain a flank bonus
3 - Are you making a melee attack?
3a - If yes, move to step 4
3b - If no, you do not gain a flank bonus
4 - attack with a flank bonus

Pretty simple.

 

[Zaebos]

I am not confused, all I said that if you were making a melee attack, you are threatening the square... then I clarified later with the exceptions.

Edit: You threaten when you melee attack, and if you melee attack you threaten.
Exceptions are if you attack with a whip (edit for grammer)or if you are unarmed.

Edit: ( I find it completely remarkable that people here are arguing semantics and grammar. Using an obscure interpretation of what I said instead of using what I said. Amazing. I know why I haven't been here for 3 years now.)

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Good Grief...

Now you know how I feel.

What you are saying is that because the flanking rule does not call out these exceptions (and likewise the threaten rule in regards to the whip) that the rules contradict themsleves. This is incorrect. They do not contradict themsleves, but provide clairity over the intended use of the particular rule.

No, the rules are perfectly non-contradictory. They're also complete, and therefore don't need your little addition.

I have not violated forum rules either.

Well, that's good to know. You are, however, adding to the rules.

Can you get a flank bonus?
Step
1 - Determine if your ally threatens your target
1a - If yes, move to step 2
1b - If no, you do not gain a flank bonus
2 - Determine if your ally is on the targets opposite border or opposite corner
2a - If yes, move to step 3
2b - If no, you do not gain a flank bonus
3 - Are you making a melee attack?
3a - If yes, move to step 4
3b - If no, you do not gain a flank bonus
4 - attack with a flank bonus

Agreed. Now, where in that logic flow was the step "Do you threaten your target?"

It wasn't there. So stop trying to add it. It is not needed.

 

[Zaebos]

I have never stipulated that you NEED to threaten your target in order to get a flanking bonus, just I was pointing out that normally, if you can make a melee attack against target, you threaten your target, with the above exceptions noted.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I have never stipulated that you NEED to threaten your target in order to get a flanking bonus,

Oh, well, in that case ... Waitaminute ...

You have to threaten in order to be considered flanking.

Ah! You did! See why I'm confused, now?

just I was pointing out that normally, if you can make a melee attack against target, you threaten your target, with the above exceptions noted.

And I agree with that statement. I do not agree with the "Earlier" statement.

Understand my confusion now?

 

[Zaebos]

I can see why your confused, and I should have been more clear... typically, you do have to threaten a target to get your flank bonus.

The way I look at it is that that you need to threaten a target to gain your bonus.
Melee attack and threaten are interchangeable, with the noted exceptions... it's just an easier way to look at the situation, since that is the way threaten is written.

"You threaten all squares in which you can make a melee attack..." If you can't make a melee attack you don't threaten the square, if you don't threaten a square, you can't make a melee attack (with the noted exceptions of course).

So like I said, we have been arguing over semantics, but the outcome is still the same.

(Edit: For Grammer)

EDIT: Quick comment as well

just to reiterate... it is just an easier way to look at it. By strict definition, to gain a flank bonus you must be able to melee attack your target, and by default, you must threaten your target. Noted exceptions are with the whip and unarmed attack, where you do not threaten the target, but are still able to make a melee attack, and therefore able to get a flank bonus should the other criteria be met for flanking.

These situations are fairly rare, and infact, since 3.0 and 3.5 have come out, to date, no one has used a whip in my games. It is just easier to use the word threaten when explaining the game to novice players and DM's, since most of them wont face this situation very often.

Again, threaten and melee attack are 2 different things, but one and the same in most cases.