Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Patryn of Elvenshae" data-source="post: 2114970" data-attributes="member: 23094">Well, that's nice, because I can't believe this thread is still going.  Arkhandus, you can flank with a ranged wearpon.  I can't believe you came up with some convoluted way of misinterpreting the rules when I posted the SRD quotes verbatim many, many more times than you have.  Now, I'll just waste my time shutting down your objections ... again.  You know, you could actually *read* what I've written before, before posting the same objections I've already addressed many, many times.I agree.  Notice, however, that the first paragraph also only applies:1. At the exact instant that I am making a melee attack, and2. Only discusses when you get a "flanking bonus" on your attack rolls.If you want to argue that this consitutes the definition of flanking, then Formians et al. are immune to flanking.  See my above posts for why.If you want to argue that this does not constitute the definition of flanking, then you need to read the 2nd paragraph.  The second paragraph says nothing about: threatening, range, melee, or attack.Therefore, any interpretation of the second paragraph which relies on any of those words is erronious.Again, there are many, many instances throughout the rules which say that in a particular situation you have a particular bonus or penalty, such as being invisible, prone, etc.  If you do not take the particular penalty, the situation is still extant.  Therefore, claiming you only get a flanking bonus when making a melee attack is a non-starter.  Of course you only get a "flanking bonus" when making a melee attack.  It says so right there in the first paragraph.What it does not say, however, is that you are flanking if and only if you are using that particular bonus.You might wish to read it as such, but it does not say that.In 3.0 it did.  In 3.0, I wouldn't be arguing this.In 3.5, it doesn't.  In 3.5, I will be arguing this.Again, no, it doesn't.  It says you only get a flanking bonus with melee attacks under certain circumstances.  I accept that, and do not argue that.I do not, however, believe that getting a flanking bonus on any particular attack is necessary and sufficient condition to be considered flanking.Because, if it is, then anything with a special ability that says "One is only flanked when all are flanked" is, actually, immune to flanking.In other words, you must first be flanking - as defined in the paragraph that talks about determining whether or not two creatures are flanking - in order to qualify for a flanking bonus.Agreed.  The first sentence takes precedence.  It, however, only applies to a very limited number of possible flanking situations - specifically, one in which someone is currently making a melee attack.  If someone is not currently making a melee attack, the second paragraph holds.You keep saying that, but I've shown you many, many places in which it does.  Therefore, some things in the Core Rules infer that you can flank with a ranged weapon.To make this short and sweet ...Can I flank someone when it is not currently my turn?</blockquote>

Verification