Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Archanos 04-23-07, 04:53 PM	I made a rogue that gave me a 24d8+40 attack.It was a rogue7/shadowdancer1/deepwood sniper1/assassin1.I got the improved critical feat with the keen ability of the deepwood sniper and I had a +4 speed mighty+6 longbow and my other feat to do this was the improved sneak attack ability.giving me a 5d8 sneak attack and since i had a 22 strength score thanks to a belt of Frost Giant Strength +6.All you gotta do is flank and you got a 24d8 +40 attack with a 17-20 crit.
Mister_Sinister 04-23-07, 04:56 PM	Umm, correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't flank with a ranged weapon.
Einvaldurinn_mikli 04-23-07, 04:57 PM	I made a rogue that gave me a 24d8+40 attack.It was a rogue7/shadowdancer1/deepwood sniper1/assassin1.I got the improved critical feat with the keen ability of the deepwood sniper and I had a +4 speed mighty+6 longbow and my other feat to do this was the improved sneak attack ability.giving me a 5d8 sneak attack and since i had a 22 strength score thanks to a belt of Frost Giant Strength +6.All you gotta do is flank and you got a 24d8 +40 attack with a 17-20 crit. So? Are we supposed to be impressed or something? Also, no flanking with a ranged weapon.
LordPendragon 04-23-07, 05:15 PM	Actually, that's a 6D8+10 attack with 18-20 crit, which you can do 4 times on a full attack. You didn't mention that your BAB is only 6, either, and you're taking a -2 penalty for using Rapid Shot. Also, if you're going to brag about a build, you should check your options first. Assassin isn't needed in there at all, so you could either bring your Rogue level up, or go into Fighter for a 1 level dip and get a feat. Also, Greater Manyshot would be a big boon for a build like that, since it'd allow you to use your Hide in Plain Sight abiltiy to make sniping attacks.
AGM Illmater 04-23-07, 05:16 PM	When did they change the restriction on no stacking of Improved Crit and Keen? /end sarcasm
jadehawk 04-23-07, 05:17 PM	Also note you've got a level 10 character with a weapon that costs about 99,000 gold. I could look at the books after work I suppose, but do you mind breaking down the math so I can see how you got 24d8+40?
Aggrenox 04-23-07, 05:41 PM	D8 on the arrow and 23d8 "fairy magic pixie lala land damage" because sneak attack comes in d6's. Where the hell does "improved sneak attack" come from? Cuz thats effing rediculous. This character is not possible.
tui 04-23-07, 06:19 PM	Where the hell does "improved sneak attack" come from? Improved Sneak Attack is an Epic feat that adds +1d6 to the character’s sneak attack damage. The closest thing I can find is Sacred Strike, which makes sneak attacks deal D8s against evil creatures. But Sacred Strike is an Exalted feat, requiring any Good alignment... and Assassin requires any Evil alignment... so by RAW that wouldn't work. And even if you allowed a Good assassin, it would be hard to imagine an Exalted assassin.
Krusk 04-23-07, 07:23 PM	these are my favorite sort of thread. always get a laugh.
FreAkOuTRG 04-23-07, 07:28 PM	I'm trying to figure out if he's just a n00b or a bad troll... Ah well, who cares? Grab the torches! :fight!::mage::monk::elf:
TanglePython 04-23-07, 07:38 PM	k guys, u can flank with a ranged weapon, u just need to be within 30ft. If u couldnt flank with ranged that means u couldnt sneak attack with ranged. Read the sneak attack for a rouge.
Einvaldurinn_mikli 04-23-07, 07:44 PM	k guys, u can flank with a ranged weapon, u just need to be within 30ft. If u couldnt flank with ranged that means u couldnt sneak attack with ranged. Read the sneak attack for a rouge. You can't flank with a ranged weapon. This also means that it is quite a bit harder to Sneak Attack with a bow.
Aggrenox 04-23-07, 07:50 PM	Suprise round, and from hiding places right?
the_narrator 04-23-07, 08:20 PM	k guys, u can flank with a ranged weapon, u just need to be within 30ft. If u couldnt flank with ranged that means u couldnt sneak attack with ranged. Read the sneak attack for a rouge. Yeah, you're just straight-up wrong there. Not really any way around it. Also, spelling is your friend.
Einvaldurinn_mikli 04-23-07, 08:22 PM	Suprise round, and from hiding places right? Basically yeah. There are effects though that negate Dex but I can't seem to think of any, too sleepy.
LordPendragon 04-23-07, 08:44 PM	Basically yeah. There are effects though that negate Dex but I can't seem to think of any, too sleepy. Irresistible Dance :D
Aggrenox 04-23-07, 08:51 PM	Ranged Feignt? http://a340.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/7/l_da8996dcb1a549f8e0959c9bb705df3b.jpg
Screams_of_the_Oak 04-23-07, 09:32 PM	You can't flank with a ranged weapon. This also means that it is quite a bit harder to Sneak Attack with a bow. Yes, you can. However, the feat is a class ability used only (to the best of MY knowlege) by Order of the bow Initiates. This class is located inside Complete Warrior, along with some other usefull ranged feats (hello, mounted archery, throw anything, zen archery and sharpshooting).
Archanos 04-23-07, 10:09 PM	Ok improved sneak attack is a feat from the feats book that requires you to be 3rd level and have the sneak attack ability and it ups your sneak attack damage a die going from d6 to d8 and even if I was to switch it up to a dual weilding build with a longsword then it would deal 24d8 damage and the assassin level brings it up another sneak attack die.in other words 4 attacks at 6d8 which totals to 24d8.It's not really that complicated and if i was to take out the deepwood sniper I could go for the second level of shadowdancer or just go with another rogue prestige class that could give me another d8 of sneak attack damage giving me 28d8.Really it doesn't matter and isn't that terribly complicated.You guys just don't have the same source books I have and from screams of the oaks I could just do it with my bow giving me pretty much the same attack except I may not have the 17-20 crit which really isn't that essential to my character.Really assuming I'm a noob because you guys haven't read up on the rules as well as I have is stupid.
Psychoticpsymon 04-23-07, 10:14 PM	Yeah, troll. Stupid troll.
Krusk 04-23-07, 10:18 PM	you are using a 3rd party sourcebook. Meaning there is a good chance the book is not balanced to all of the WOTC stuff that has come out since that book.
LordPendragon 04-23-07, 10:27 PM	You guys just don't have the same source books I have and from screams of the oaks I could just do it with my bow giving me pretty much the same attack except I may not have the 17-20 crit which really isn't that essential to my character.Really assuming I'm a noob because you guys haven't read up on the rules as well as I have is stupid. First of all, most of us do have the sourcebooks you have. Secondly, 28D8+40 on an inaccurate, full-round action, Sneak Attack is not extremely good at level 10. It's decent, but nothing worth bragging about. Maybe if you had A) legibly documented your process in attaining said numbers, and B) known all the rules pertaining to your build, people would have taken you more seriously.
the_narrator 04-23-07, 10:38 PM	Archanos: Your build is based off of a feat from an un-named third-party source book which, as stated, is simply not ballanced against the core or even supplemental first-party material. Add that to your inability to flank with a ranged weapon as well as your use of gold far beyond your wealth-by-level among other things I'm probably missing, and this is just a waste of a post. Honestly, if you think this is good, go post it in the Character Optimization forums. They'll tear this crud apart like the folks up here never could.
Archanos 04-23-07, 10:39 PM	Well obviously I did know all the rules to my build which means I only had a 3rd party sourcebook which isn't such a big deal to me being I mostly just rp with my local dm's which allow me to use it.Besides anytime you're doing 24d8 damage with a sneak attack I think it's pretty good being not many other classes can do that.Plus the fact that you can do that repeatedly every round as long as you are flanking as many times as you want.I'd say it's not to bad for a person in a battle.Plus with my hide in plain sight ability I can easily get around most attackers and flank them.Not to mention my rogue is also rather needed in any non-combat situation since he has all the needed skills to do all the other various jobs rogues do.I know my classes pretty well and even without my 3rd party sourcebook i'd still have a rather hefty ammount of damage with a 4d8+20d6+40 damage attack.I don't know of many other builds that could take a level 10 at the same level.I mean I know it's a little hazy in some areas being I'm not playing with a sanctioned dm and it's more about fun.Even with the gold limit on my weapon I'd still have a rather powerful attack.
Krusk 04-23-07, 10:52 PM	here is a build that can take it pretty easily. necropolitian Barbarian level 10. But using 3rd party sourcebooks is usually not the best plan when your going to brag about your amazing build. Anyone can write one. Heck i could write one and put whatever feat i want in it, then take it and now my character wins. Also, i found a level 5 build on the threads that can easily destroy yours in one round. http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=491801 If you are going to brag about damage potential at least do it right.
LordPendragon 04-23-07, 11:02 PM	Plus the fact that you can do that repeatedly every round as long as you are flanking as many times as you want. You can not flank with a ranged weapon.
Archanos 04-24-07, 12:20 AM	Hmm so someone has created a supreme god build.Mine was just a random creation through a couple of hours of playing a week.I really only put thought into it while i was playing which couldn't of been more than 15 hours in total and most of that was filled up with me rping.I probably only spent an hour thinking of the build.The god build I can guarantee took someone a very long time to think of.I was only telling a simple build that I recently used.
Krusk 04-24-07, 01:35 AM	I was just saying, if you are going to say that you had the greatest rogue build ever that can combat anything. "I don't know of many other builds that could take a level 10 at the same level" and in my post i gave 3 examples of characters built that would give yours a hard time. ex1 undead barbarian ex2 any character i create using this super sweet 3rd party book i found, published by my buddy john. i took this feat granting immunity to damage, and it only has prereq of con 14. ex3 the link i sent. also as i think, plenty of spellcasters would be fine against this build as well. long story short, don't go on the internet brag about the power of a houseruled build that is "broken", make a challenge saying you can't think of many builds that could beat it, and then get upset when someone posts 3 builds that do.
Vaelan 04-24-07, 01:40 AM	You can not flank with a ranged weapon. I don't see any rule in the PHB saying that. All that is required to flank is to have an opponent opposite you that threatens the opponent. No mention of what kind of weapon you wield.
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 01:53 AM	I don't see any rule in the PHB saying that. All that is required to flank is to have an opponent opposite you that threatens the opponent. No mention of what kind of weapon you wield. Did you not read the FIRST SENTENCE in the description of flanking in the player's handbook? It says, and I quote: "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 MAKING A MELEE ATTACK. You cannot flank with a ranged attack, period. You can flank with a reach weapon. You can even flank with a whip since it's considered a melee weapon with reach. Flanking states it must be a melee attack. Its not something that is debatable. Edit: This is from page 153 of the player's handbook, bottom of the page, to the left of the diagram.
Tevin Kevlak 04-24-07, 02:03 AM	I don't see any rule in the PHB saying that. All that is required to flank is to have an opponent opposite you that threatens the opponent. No mention of what kind of weapon you wield. You do not threaten any area with a ranged weapon and thus you cannot flank with a ranged weapon. Also, the Order of the Bow Initiate does not gain an ability to threaten areas with a bow, they do gain an ability that lets them make ranged attacks while threatened without provoking an attack of opportunity. It's called Close Combat Shot. Archanos, no, you clearly do not know your classes very well since you just said you could take another level of Shadowdancer to increase your sneak attack damage when the Shadowdancer does not give any increase in sneak attack damage... at all... ever. Taking 1 more level of Shadowdancer (making your shadowdancer level 2) would get you Evasion, Darkvision, and Uncanny Dodge... you should have at least 2 of these abilities, evasion from your second level of rogue, and uncanny dodge from your 4th level of rogue, so clearly this would be pretty much, a wasted level. Maybe you should put a little more thought into your build and actually make sure it's doable as per the rules before you come onto the boards and brag about how uber it is.
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 02:15 AM	More precisly, you must make a melee attack on an opponent who is threatened by an ally exactly opposite you. Obviously if you're able to make the attack you are threatening the enemy, but that's not listed in the PHB as a requirement.
Tevin Kevlak 04-24-07, 02:22 AM	No, that's not true. Threatening an enemy means that they are in a "threatened square" meaning that leaving said square with more than a 5-foot step or successful tumble check provokes an attack of opportunity, also casting a spell within a threatened square will provoke an attack of opportunity unless you cast defensively. The only way to threaten someone (thus creating a threatened square that they are within) is having a weapon ready to do such a thing, such as a melee weapon or natural attack. You do not threaten any area with a ranged weapon just as you do not threaten any area with a stored ray spell. The word threaten and the term threaten from the rules are two completely different things.
Vaelan 04-24-07, 02:30 AM	Did you not read the FIRST SENTENCE in the description of flanking in the player's handbook? I have, in fact, read all of the rules regarding flanking in the Player's Handbook. Have you? Also, cut the condescension. I have been on these boards longer than you and have seen discussions on this exact issue multiple times. It says, and I quote: "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 MAKING A MELEE ATTACK. You cannot flank with a ranged attack, period. Flanking is a state. When you are in this state, you can gain two separate benefits. 1. It gives you a +2 damage on melee attack rolls. 2. It allows you to deliver sneak attacks. You have shown that you do not gain the first benefit, which I never disputed. Now show that the state itself, and not just one of its benefits, otherwise known as the claim I was actually making, in any way requires you to wield a melee weapon. More precisly, you must make a melee attack on an opponent who is threatened by an ally exactly opposite you. At no points do the rules state that you have to make a melee attack to be considered flanking. In fact, the book explicitly defines flanking in the glossary and there is no mention of this widely-held, fictional requirement. You do not threaten any area with a ranged weapon and thus you cannot flank with a ranged weapon. The rules do not, in fact, require you to threaten to be considered flanking. They may require you to make a melee attack to gain one of two distinct benefits, but the second benefit and the state itself hold no such requirement.
Tevin Kevlak 04-24-07, 02:45 AM	I have, in fact, read all of the rules regarding flanking in the Player's Handbook. Have you? Also, cut the condescension. I have been on these boards longer than you and have seen discussions on this exact issue multiple times. Flanking is a state. When you are in this state, you can gain two separate benefits. 1. It gives you a +2 damage on melee attack rolls. 2. It allows you to deliver sneak attacks. You have shown that you do not gain the first benefit, which I never disputed. Now show that the state itself, and not just one of its benefits, otherwise known as the claim I was actually making, in any way requires you to wield a melee weapon. At no points do the rules state that you have to make a melee attack to be considered flanking. In fact, the book explicitly defines flanking in the glossary and there is no mention of this widely-held, fictional requirement. The rules do not, in fact, require you to threaten to be considered flanking. They may require you to make a melee attack to gain one of two distinct benefits, but the second benefit and the state itself hold no such requirement. Wow, ok maybe you need to take a look somewhere other than the summarized version of flanking in the glossary. Page 154 of the player's handbook covers the rules of flanking. THE VERY FIRST WORDS IN THE DESCRIPTION ON FLANKING ARE: "When making a melee attack...". If you are using a bow you are not making a melee attack, period. Also from the rules on flanking found on page 154: "Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus." Threaten: "To be able to attack in melee without moving from your current space. A creature typically threatens all squares within his natural reach, even when it is not his turn to take an action. For a Medium or Small creature this usually includes all squares adjacent to its space. Larger creatures threaten more squares, while smaller creatures may not threaten any squares except their own." - Page 314 of the Player's Handbook. You're wrong. Read the rules.
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 02:57 AM	You cannot be considered flanking an opponent when wielding a ranged weapon. I've found nothing at all that says you can do this, in fact the only thing I've seen in the player's handbook that discusses when you get a flanking bonus explicitly states that you must be making a melee attack. If you're not making a melee attack, you don't gain the benefit of flanking someone. I don't care if you've been on the boards longer, that doesn't somehow make you better or more knowledgable, only more arrogant. The fact that you even brought it up shows how petty you are. If you can point to a rule, example, official ruling, or any official source other than you and your buddies who have 'been on the boards longer than me' then please do so. NOTHING AT ALL in the rules that I have seen says you can flank with a ranged weapon, and the only examples I can find specifically use the words Melee Attack.
epifreak 04-24-07, 02:58 AM	Not to mention, you gain +2 to hit, not damage on a flanking attack.
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 03:03 AM	Okay I see the glossary is a bit vague. It describes flanking as "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 is flanking." I can see where you might interpret this broadly, but it is stated elsewhere much more specifically that you must be making a melee attack to gain the benefit of flanking. To prove this to you, I'll link you to an official source, an article from the WOTC website which discusses flanking and how it's used. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040302a Go there and check out the 3rd paragraph under "Defender Flanked" Here, I'll quote it for you. "You can flank with any melee weapon, including a reach weapon, but you cannot flank with a ranged weapon." In addition, you'll notice that NONE of the diagrams describing flanking include a ranged weapon, at all. You're wrong, deal with it. For someone who's been on the boards so long and seen all the arguments, you sure have some funny ideas about the rules. I guess just being here for more time doesn't automatically make you smarter, huh?
zuul88 04-24-07, 03:04 AM	:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: Wow At full flanked attack with such a KILLER attack bonus, My Full-Plated Shielded Dwarf w/armor & shield feats would be shaking so hard his plate would fall to pieces. Course that is the only way this numbnut is hitting an AC of 32(Fortification anyone:crazy: .) WOW some people take a lead paint chip eating habit and turn it into a full time occupation. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 03:07 AM	:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: Wow At full flanked attack with such a KILLER attack bonus, My Full-Plated Shielded Dwarf w/amomr & shield feats would be shaking so hard his plate would fall to pieces. Course that is the only way this numbnut is hitting an AC of 32(Fortification anyone:crazy: .) WOW some people take a lead paint chip eating habit and turn it into a full time occupation. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: So true, and he'll crap himself the first time he comes up against, oh say... a pair of ghasts. Or a mummy... or a ghost... or.. yeah this isn't that impressive of a build. Its fine to be proud of your character but don't come on a dnd forum and proclaim that its the best. Edit: I was just thinking about what my warforged juggernaut would think of that build... Even if he did hit, he'd do about as much damage as a wet burlap sack and then he'd get grappled and pinned while the warforged humps him for constant damage from the spikes, and 1d10 humiliation damage as he'd bent into pretzel position kissing his own feet.
zuul88 04-24-07, 03:44 AM	Edit: I was just thinking about what my warforged juggernaut would think of that build... Even if he did hit, he'd do about as much damage as a wet burlap sack and then he'd get grappled and pinned while the warforged humps him for constant damage from the spikes, and 1d10 humiliation damage as he'd bent into pretzel position kissing his own feet. Could armor spikes could get "precision damage" while he was in that position? :devil:
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 06:05 AM	Could armor spikes could get "precision damage" while he was in that position? :devil: I think so. Aren't grappled opponents denied their dex bonus? I bet a Warforged Ninja/Juggernaut would rock On another note: At the risk of being just as petty, I have to wonder if Vaelan is going to be man enough to admit he was wrong. I'm just glad I was able (with 20 seconds of googling) to find an official answer and link it in, putting the whole question to rest.
Tevin Kevlak 04-24-07, 03:24 PM	I think so. Aren't grappled opponents denied their dex bonus? I bet a Warforged Ninja/Juggernaut would rock On another note: At the risk of being just as petty, I have to wonder if Vaelan is going to be man enough to admit he was wrong. I'm just glad I was able (with 20 seconds of googling) to find an official answer and link it in, putting the whole question to rest. Grapplers lose their dexterity bonus to AC against anyone who their not grappling so in that situtation no, you couldn't get precision damage.
jadehawk 04-24-07, 04:01 PM	Its threads like this that get me thinking its not so petty after all to write down a list of people who post that aren't worth the time to argue with (just as a personal reminder)... On the other hand it is fun sometimes to poke them with the proverbial stick...
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 04:09 PM	Grapplers lose their dexterity bonus to AC against anyone who their not grappling so in that situtation no, you couldn't get precision damage. Is there a way to make your grappled opponent lose his dex bonus, perhaps by application of a skill like feint or a feat?
Tevin Kevlak 04-24-07, 04:23 PM	I'm sure you could use feint while grappling, I don't believe it's stated anywhere that you cannot.
crimsonwolf 04-24-07, 04:24 PM	should have tried halfing rouge varient mybe more effective :P
Archanos 04-24-07, 04:40 PM	Ok mister bright guy I didn't say that I'd take another level of shadowdancer to increase my sneak attack.Read closer and you'll see that I said i could take another level of a rogue prestige class to gain another bonus to my sneak attack.So obviously you must learn to read.Ok if you guys really want I can go all the way to my dm's house who currently has all my books and get them to read to you the rules about flanking since obviously only some of you are reading.If you need to consider also the other pages on rogue's sneak attacks if you'd like to look up using range sneak attacks.I don't quite remember where it describes them but I'm pretty sure it's either in the DM's guide or the PH.I mean seriously if you're gonna prove me wrong why don't you read all of the facts instead of only the few that actually support your claim.All of the facts would be looking it up under sneak attack and the rules thereof not just flanking.You also might want to look up using ranged sneak attacks.
crimsonwolf 04-24-07, 04:50 PM	wow i love these threads it remindes Me just when bbq seson starts. Ty archanos for becoming the first roasted spider I ever had.
Tectorman 04-24-07, 04:52 PM	Just to get rid of any loose ends, here's how you could threaten (and thus flank) with a ranged weapon. 1. Have your crossbow made from steel. Actually, I'm not sure which specific metal it is, but there's some kind of metal that you can make a crossbow from and use it like a club (I first saw this in an issue of Dragon magazine late last year). 2. Use an elvencraft bow. Please note that it's limited to the same reach and range as a quarterstaff and/or club. 3. Modify your bow or crossbow with a bow blade or bayonet from the Complete Scoundrel. Did you notice the common thread in all of these examples? While these are combination ranged/melee weapons, you have to use them as a melee weapon in order to threaten and flank. So if you're standing right next to the guy and have a crossbow with a bayonet attached, then you can flank them, sure. But it's only because the crossbow is doubly usable as a melee weapon. Are we clear?
kedi 04-24-07, 04:52 PM	k guys, u can flank with a ranged weapon, u just need to be within 30ft. If u couldnt flank with ranged that means u couldnt sneak attack with ranged. Read the sneak attack for a rouge.u guyz r idiotz his talkin bout the class rouge not rogue obvobvbvbvbv :rolleyes:
Tevin Kevlak 04-24-07, 04:54 PM	Ok mister bright guy I didn't say that I'd take another level of shadowdancer to increase my sneak attack.Read closer and you'll see that I said i could take another level of a rogue prestige class to gain another bonus to my sneak attack.So obviously you must learn to read.Ok if you guys really want I can go all the way to my dm's house who currently has all my books and get them to read to you the rules about flanking since obviously only some of you are reading.If you need to consider also the other pages on rogue's sneak attacks if you'd like to look up using range sneak attacks.I don't quite remember where it describes them but I'm pretty sure it's either in the DM's guide or the PH.I mean seriously if you're gonna prove me wrong why don't you read all of the facts instead of only the few that actually support your claim.All of the facts would be looking it up under sneak attack and the rules thereof not just flanking.You also might want to look up using ranged sneak attacks. You mean when you said this?: "It's not really that complicated and if i was to take out the deepwood sniper I could go for the second level of shadowdancer or just go with another rogue prestige class that could give me another d8 of sneak attack damage giving me 28d8." Owned. And the only rules on sneak attacks and flanking are in the PHB under the Sneak Attack ability in the Rogue class features section, and the Flanking rules in the Combat chapter (page 154 fyi). There is no "section" on ranged sneak attack, only what it says in the Rogue class features section under "Sneak Attack" and there's nothing there that states you can flank with a ranged weapon.
Archanos 04-24-07, 04:58 PM	Ahh whatever I just read all the rules on sneak attacking with a ranged weapon and from what I read it still alows me to do what i was doing because I always did something other than flanking to my opponent.One being hiding though i did encure a -20 to the check I still had a 7 or so bonus due to an item that boosted it some and since I have the hide in plain sight from being a shadowdancer i could effectively hide in the monsters i was battleing's shadows.As long as they don't know where I'm at I can continue to sneak attack them.Flanking was just something else I believed I could use as a back-up if something went wrong. Btw you do know you just proved one of my points dude and made yourself sound incompetent because you can't read.I mean it clearly says or take a level in a rogue prestige class that would give me another d8 of sneak attack.
crimsonwolf 04-24-07, 05:02 PM	you know what.... am going to send a examplar after you.
Archanos 04-24-07, 05:06 PM	Lol you guys just assumed to much about my character.I haven't even told you anything besides one of my attacks.I mean I was wrong about one thing.Shoot me about it why don't you I mean damn none of you guys are perfect either.I haven't spent all of my time reading every little rule because i do other things in my life.Shoot I've been playing D&D for like 7 years and I've never got around to getting on to one of these forums cause i haven't had time till now.You guys should really learn to chill out a little.
Tevin Kevlak 04-24-07, 05:11 PM	Ahh whatever I just read all the rules on sneak attacking with a ranged weapon and from what I read it still alows me to do what i was doing because I always did something other than flanking to my opponent.One being hiding though i did encure a -20 to the check I still had a 7 or so bonus due to an item that boosted it some and since I have the hide in plain sight from being a shadowdancer i could effectively hide in the monsters i was battleing's shadows.As long as they don't know where I'm at I can continue to sneak attack them.Flanking was just something else I believed I could use as a back-up if something went wrong. Btw you do know you just proved one of my points dude and made yourself sound incompetent because you can't read.I mean it clearly says or take a level in a rogue prestige class that would give me another d8 of sneak attack. Actually what you said was effectively (I'm going to clean it up a bit since you can't actually spell/use grammar) I could just take another level of Shadowdancer or another Rogue prestige class to increase my sneak attack damage by another d8. I think what you wanted to say was: I could just take another level of Shadowdancer, or I could take a level in another Rogue PrC that would give me another d8 sneak attack. There is a difference and if you can't see that it's not a failing on my reading abilities but yours. Edit: Also, on the sniping rule you're using that would let you make 1 attack since it is a move action to hide after firing. Meaning you get 1 attack with sneak attack applied which still isn't something to brag about even with d8's.
Archanos 04-24-07, 05:22 PM	Actually I said could give me another d8 to my sneak attack which would imply that I'm taking a level in a rogue prestige class that gives me a d8 to my sneak attack.Really it's not that terribly difficult for you to understand that.You changed my wording to make it imply what you thought but actually my wording was correct.I may not have used a comma but it really didn't matter to me at the time.You once again assume to much about what I'm talking about which happens to be a very bad habit.I mean dude this is a forum yoou're not supposed to think everybody is really gonna give a crap if you use completely proper english.So far the only difference in what i said and what you are saying is there is a comma.Honestly who gives a crap. Other thing is who said I was doing it all in the same turn.I never said i didn't take the full action to attack then go take some cover my next turn.Luckily my warrior does about the same damage as me with his attacks so I really don't have to worry about the monster coming back to me and attacking.Plus I could just be sitting in a tree out of reach of my attacker unless he decided to try to climb it giving my buddy an attack of opportunity on him.
jadehawk 04-24-07, 05:32 PM	*whoops, forgot to quote* "Lol you guys just assumed to much about my character.I haven't even told you anything besides one of my attacks.I mean I was wrong about one thing.Shoot me about it why don't you I mean damn none of you guys are perfect either.I haven't spent all of my time reading every little rule because i do other things in my life.Shoot I've been playing D&D for like 7 years and I've never got around to getting on to one of these forums cause i haven't had time till now.You guys should really learn to chill out a little." Come on Archanos; you haven't been very chill either though there seems to be signs of improvement. I think you are now on stage 3 of trolling, backpeddling. At least you got through boasting and premenstrating by page 2. You were wrong about more than one thing, and neglected other key points that should have been noted at first. The mistakes include, in what I consider order of priority: *Ranged Sneak *Stacking improved critical with keen *Using a third party source book as part of your argument without indication *Excessive Gear Value Now I may even be missing some hear, and I'm sure if I do someone will post about it promptly. Read through the thread, looking at each of these issues one by one, but also in full. That is, look through every post that talks about each topic individually and see what arguments prevail. Then calm down and let it go, unless at that point you've got a way to counter what is already posted, at which point I would choose my words carefully and use proper citation for the support I know you will have to provide...otherwise like I said let it go. That is stage 4, acceptance. Stage 5 is saying you're wrong on the public forum, admittance. *disclaimer, I just made up these stages and am in no way entitled to practice psychology...please don't blame me for the failings of my opinion in this matter, but do feel free to critique*
tui 04-24-07, 05:48 PM	My understanding is you can only sneak attack when: (a) your enemy is denied dex bonus to AC, or (b) you flank your enemy. So you can definitely sneak attack with a ranged weapon by doing things like attacking during the surprised round, feinting in combat, hiding, attacking from invisibility, and so on. As for flanking, as other people have mentioned, PHB pg 153 only refers to melee attacks. PHB pg 137 discusses threatened squares and clarifies that you only threaten with a melee/reach weapon. Both those excerpts make it sound like you can't flank with a ranged weapon. The glossary definition at PHB pg 308 seems to differentiate between the person who is benefiting from the flanking, and someone who is providing flanking for someone else... I think that's where the confusion is... do you get the benefits of flanking, even if you don't threaten the defender yourself? I think you could... for example if you're making an unarmed attack without IUS: If there is someone opposite you flanking your enemy, you'd get the flanking bonus even though your ally wouldn't (because you don't threaten the bad guy). But that doesn't necessarily mean you can flank with a ranged weapon... I'd say with the semi-clarity of pg 153, you'd need something pretty explicit to flank with a ranged weapon. And I can't find anything that supports that position... but there is a Rules of the Game article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040302a) on Sneak Attacks that says "You can flank with any melee weapon, including a reach weapon, but you cannot flank with a ranged weapon." And the Whisperknife PrC from Races of the Wild has a 9th level ability named Ranged Flank which does just that -- allow you to flank a foe by using a ranged weapon. So I'd say you can't sneak attack when in a flanking position with a bow. And just a note to Archanos, a lot of the animosity you received in this thread is due to the bragging that people perceived in your original post. If you had just ended it with something like "that seems pretty over-power; am I missing something?" or "is all that legal?" or something, I don't think you would have gotten the negative backlash.... folks on the Boards don't generally take too kindly to bragging.
Tevin Kevlak 04-24-07, 05:54 PM	Actually I said could give me another d8 to my sneak attack which would imply that I'm taking a level in a rogue prestige class that gives me a d8 to my sneak attack.Really it's not that terribly difficult for you to understand that.You changed my wording to make it imply what you thought but actually my wording was correct.I may not have used a comma but it really didn't matter to me at the time.You once again assume to much about what I'm talking about which happens to be a very bad habit.I mean dude this is a forum yoou're not supposed to think everybody is really gonna give a crap if you use completely proper english.So far the only difference in what i said and what you are saying is there is a comma.Honestly who gives a crap. Other thing is who said I was doing it all in the same turn.I never said i didn't take the full action to attack then go take some cover my next turn.Luckily my warrior does about the same damage as me with his attacks so I really don't have to worry about the monster coming back to me and attacking.Plus I could just be sitting in a tree out of reach of my attacker unless he decided to try to climb it giving my buddy an attack of opportunity on him. Then why would you even mention the -20 to your hide check? Because you were talking about sniping until you realized you were still wrong, so you backpeddled. The difference is more than a comma so this leads me to believe that you're the one having troubles reading and people on the forums expect people to use english well enough to convey what it is their trying to say. Since you clearly didn't do that since I could not discern what you meant the failing is on you, not me. Grammatically speaking the sentace you wrote indicates that another level of Shadowdancer, just as another level of another Rogue PrC, would give you a bonus sneak attack die. If you're done trying to prove how awesome your character is without a full grasp of the rules and while using rules outside of the actual rule set we can all just move along.
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 05:55 PM	The excessive value gear for his level, thats fine. It may have happened in the campaign and been legit. The stacking of keen and improved critical is completely illegal, and cannot be done unless your DM makes it a house rule. His main mistake was saying that he could sneak attack every round with his bow because he was flanking. That's completely untrue, and I provided an official link to prove that. Also, do you really get to add your sneak attack damage to every iterative attack or did I misread what he's saying? I don't play rogues often, so I'm not sure. Now on to ways that you could do what you want... See I can do constructive! You COULD craft a ring of improved invisibility and sneak attack all damn day with your bow, provided they have no way to see invisibility. You could also hide in plain sight and do the same thing, though you'd have to beat their spot checks each time. Would a ghost touch weapon allow you to strike from the ethereal plane? If so, that would also deny your opponent their dex bonus allowing you to sneak attack.
jadehawk 04-24-07, 06:04 PM	The excessive value gear for his level, thats fine. It may have happened in the campaign and been legit. The stacking of keen and improved critical is completely illegal, and cannot be done unless your DM makes it a house rule. His main mistake was saying that he could sneak attack every round with his bow because he was flanking. That's completely untrue, and I provided an official link to prove that. Also, do you really get to add your sneak attack damage to every iterative attack or did I misread what he's saying? I don't play rogues often, so I'm not sure. Now on to ways that you could do what you want... See I can do constructive! You COULD craft a ring of improved invisibility and sneak attack all damn day with your bow, provided they have no way to see invisibility. You could also hide in plain sight and do the same thing, though you'd have to beat their spot checks each time. Would a ghost touch weapon allow you to strike from the ethereal plane? If so, that would also deny your opponent their dex bonus allowing you to sneak attack. Well I wouldn't call excessive gear value fine, but I would call it potentially acceptable. That is why I placed it last in priority. It is like using the third party source book; it should have been indicated as an issue before giving someone a chance to counter it. If you want to design a character for comparison to see if anyone can beat you, you better design it to specs. That means don't brag about the incredible stats you rolled, the extra feat your DM gave you because you killed the lich king, or the artefact you've got in your back pocket. Now, none of these examples were actually a part of the original post, but they have the same unbalancing effect on comparison.
LordPendragon 04-24-07, 06:34 PM	Well... as long as we're correcting grammar... ... backpeddled. ... ... their ... Backpeddled - Definition unknown. Possibly referring to the previous act of selling something back to the person you bought it from. Their - Plural possessive pronoun. You may have meant "backpedaled" and "they're", respectively.
Tevin Kevlak 04-24-07, 06:37 PM	Well... as long as we're correcting grammar... Backpeddled - Definition unknown. Possibly referring to the previous act of selling something back to the person you bought it from. Their - Plural possessive pronoun. You may have meant "backpedaled" and "they're", respectively. Backpeddled isn't a grammatical error so you're not actually correcting my grammar. And for someone who chooses to use '...' instead of ',' I wouldn't rightly be talking either my friend. :D
Archanos 04-24-07, 06:37 PM	Well I know my prices were a lot over because I have a habit of taking a lot of stuff in the campaign and getting a greater part of the loot.Most of the stuff I had were with house rules and i didn't say that and I was planning on getting a ring of greater invisibility but currently most of my money has gone to my bow.Really most of the high-level encounters we've faced is because we're generally to powerful to fight the regular encounters for our level.Our group is exceptional at fighting but most of them aren't very good at everything else.Which is generally why my charcter has a high gold amount.I tend to take the gold and actually put it to good use for the things we might need to have during out of battle gameplay. Once again you still get a -20 to your hide check if you have threatened the target and he considers you a threat which even if most of his attention is on my fighter he will still put some on me just not enough to come running at me and get himself slashed in the back.Everything else about your statement that was different btw is just stuff that goes into more detail when more detail wasn't needed in the first place.I mean if I have to explain everything to explicit detail to you everytime then i just don't have the time to ever tell you anything cause you're not bright enough to get the right meaning from what i say.It's like saying when i say the sky is blue you argue that it's not blue because when clouds are in the sky it changes to white or because on some occasions it isn't quite blue because of other factors.When I just meant that the sky is generally blue because of the fact that the water vapor in the air refracts blue light better than all other light so it appears to be blue.It just gets tedious and I'm sure pretty much everyone else could get what I meant but you can't because I have to explain every little freakin detail which is retarded.
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 06:43 PM	Well I know my prices were a lot over because I have a habit of taking a lot of stuff in the campaign and getting a greater part of the loot.Most of the stuff I had were with house rules and i didn't say that and I was planning on getting a ring of greater invisibility but currently most of my money has gone to my bow.Really most of the high-level encounters we've faced is because we're generally to powerful to fight the regular encounters for our level.Our group is exceptional at fighting but most of them aren't very good at everything else.Which is generally why my charcter has a high gold amount.I tend to take the gold and actually put it to good use for the things we might need to have during out of battle gameplay. Once again you still get a -20 to your hide check if you have threatened the target and he considers you a threat which even if most of his attention is on my fighter he will still put some on me just not enough to come running at me and get himself slashed in the back.Everything else about your statement that was different btw is just stuff that goes into more detail when more detail wasn't needed in the first place.I mean if I have to explain everything to explicit detail to you everytime then i just don't have the time to ever tell you anything cause you're not bright enough to get the right meaning from what i say.It's like saying when i say the sky is blue you argue that it's not blue because when clouds are in the sky it changes to white or because on some occasions it isn't quite blue because of other factors.When I just meant that the sky is generally blue because of the fact that the water vapor in the air refracts blue light better than all other light so it appears to be blue.It just gets tedious and I'm sure pretty much everyone else could get what I meant but you can't because I have to explain every little freakin detail which is retarded. So just for the record, let me see if I have this right. You came on the board to brag about your rogue and that you didn't think many other level 10 characters could do that much damage, but you use crazy house rules and 3rd party books which most people don't use or even recognize as legit. Nice...
Tevin Kevlak 04-24-07, 06:44 PM	Well I know my prices were a lot over because I have a habit of taking a lot of stuff in the campaign and getting a greater part of the loot.Most of the stuff I had were with house rules and i didn't say that and I was planning on getting a ring of greater invisibility but currently most of my money has gone to my bow.Really most of the high-level encounters we've faced is because we're generally to powerful to fight the regular encounters for our level.Our group is exceptional at fighting but most of them aren't very good at everything else.Which is generally why my charcter has a high gold amount.I tend to take the gold and actually put it to good use for the things we might need to have during out of battle gameplay. Once again you still get a -20 to your hide check if you have threatened the target and he considers you a threat which even if most of his attention is on my fighter he will still put some on me just not enough to come running at me and get himself slashed in the back.Everything else about your statement that was different btw is just stuff that goes into more detail when more detail wasn't needed in the first place.I mean if I have to explain everything to explicit detail to you everytime then i just don't have the time to ever tell you anything cause you're not bright enough to get the right meaning from what i say.It's like saying when i say the sky is blue you argue that it's not blue because when clouds are in the sky it changes to white or because on some occasions it isn't quite blue because of other factors.When I just meant that the sky is generally blue because of the fact that the water vapor in the air refracts blue light better than all other light so it appears to be blue.It just gets tedious and I'm sure pretty much everyone else could get what I meant but you can't because I have to explain every little freakin detail which is retarded. It required no "extra explanation" at all. According to you actually, it only required a comma. If you think adding a comma to a sentance is so much work that it's not worth posting anything then go ahead and don't post. The extra explanation was just forming your sentance in a way that it conveys your actual meaning. If that's too much effort for you I suggest you communicate through a series of grunts and crude hand gestures instead, it might seem less complicated.
Archanos 04-24-07, 06:48 PM	Well from what i can tell the only person who wouldn't understand is you and being I don't give a crap what you think I don't think i care.You can go on thinking whatever it is you want because from what I've ever known my English has always been good.My english scores on any test have always been way above average and the stories and anything else I've ever written have always gotten perfect scores.I believe the reason I didn't care is because I figured.Hey this is a simple forum that noone could possibly be dimwitted enough not to understand something so simple but i guess I was wrong. Actually the only thing I used different from yours was basically some stats i rolled that weren't that terribly great and a single feat from a 3rd party sourcebook.Ohh and I had a high gold amount because I happened to get it more than your average party member cause I like to steal a lot.
volcomguy 04-24-07, 06:50 PM	your DM should be lashed for encouraging this
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 06:53 PM	Well from what i can tell the only person who wouldn't understand is you and being I don't give a crap what you think I don't think i care.You can go on thinking whatever it is you want because from what I've ever known my English has always been good.My english scores on any test have always been way above average and the stories and anything else I've ever written have always gotten perfect scores.I believe the reason I didn't care is because I figured.Hey this is a simple forum that noone could possibly be dimwitted enough not to understand something so simple but i guess I was wrong. The thing you don't seem to understand is that people tend to judge you based on the way you communicate. If you obviously took time writing your post, and used correct grammar and spelling, then people recognize that. If you throw words together haphazardly and use them incorrectly, people tend to think you're a blithering idiot not worth the time to read, much less respond to. And before you continue to make a fool of yourself, getting good marks in grade-school english isn't exactly something to brag about. your DM should be lashed for encouraging this I disagree. A DM's job is to make the game fun for the players and himself. If they really enjoy running high level/high powered campaigns thats fine. If they wanna make crazy rules that break the game, that's fine. Just don't come on the forums and BRAG about using illegal rules.
Archanos 04-24-07, 06:55 PM	Lol probably but he does a good job with creating plots and running a campaign from simple creativity when most dm's these days use books and precreated campaigns instead.He also never thought that the feat i took would ever get to be unbalanced because he didn't think i would do all the stuff I did.It's not his fault he didn't predict I would constantly rob people anytime I was in a town and that he has tried many times to kill my character off but I happen to always get lucky and survive.I mean he's even randomly struck me with lightning before battles just cause it was storming. Plus i wasn't talking about in grade school.I mostly slept through that.I'm more about the fact i scored over a 30 on the ACT'S when I fell asleep 3 times during the test and that's just the english part.Not to mention I've wrote essays for my brother in college and got perfect marks when I'm still just in high school.
LordPendragon 04-24-07, 06:57 PM	Backpeddled isn't a grammatical error so you're not actually correcting my grammar. And for someone who chooses to use '...' instead of ',' I wouldn't rightly be talking either my friend. :D True, but explaining actual grammatical errors is usually a lot more work, and less people will understand what I say. You'll notice I didn't point out your obvious typos - just the ones that looked like legitimate mistakes. I choose to use "..." instead of "," in some cases for stylistic reasons. The "..." denotes a longer, more meaningful pause, and I'm not sure if it's technically correct, but I like it anyways :D The only reason I posted was because anyone who corrects someone on their grammar (no matter how bad it sucks) needs to have impeccable grammar. That said, though, I completely agree with what you were saying.
Archanos 04-24-07, 07:06 PM	Personally I still think you have way to much time on your hands to worry about simple grammar mistakes.I mean judging people about their grammar is childish in most ways.Especially about english because for most people english is a second language and it's probably the hardest one to learn no matter who you are.I talk to a bunch of other cultures and they may not know how to speak english perfectly but they probably know a great deal more than I do about a lot of other subjects and I know that.I choose to speak about the normal level of people because I don't really care and it makes people more comfortable around you.it gives them a relaxed state of mind and they tend to be more open and more friendly towards you.People who walk around and use perfect grammar and act all high and mighty about it tend not to be the most popular ones unless they have a lot of money in which case most people still think they're annoying.
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 07:15 PM	Personally I still think you have way to much time on your hands to worry about simple grammar mistakes.I mean judging people about their grammar is childish in most ways.Especially about english because for most people english is a second language and it's probably the hardest one to learn no matter who you are.I talk to a bunch of other cultures and they may not know how to speak english perfectly but they probably know a great deal more than I do about a lot of other subjects and I know that.I choose to speak about the normal level of people because I don't really care and it makes people more comfortable around you.it gives them a relaxed state of mind and they tend to be more open and more friendly towards you.People who walk around and use perfect grammar and act all high and mighty about it tend not to be the most popular ones unless they have a lot of money in which case most people still think they're annoying. Its not as if its a conscious decision. Its sort of automatic.. if your post is hard to read due to grammar, spelling, and logical mistakes then people automatically percieve you as less intelligent or not worth the time it would take to decipher.
Archanos 04-24-07, 07:17 PM	Which would be why I stay about average and make it generally easy to read.The only people who actually have trouble disciphering it are people who are obsessed with exact grammar.
Vaelan 04-24-07, 08:13 PM	Wow, ok maybe you need to take a look somewhere other than the summarized version of flanking in the glossary. Actually, I shouldn't. The glossary describes the state of flanking. The rules you cite describe one of the benefits of flanking. Since my argument goes to the state of flanking and not that particular benefit of flanking, as I have stated before, the glossary is, in fact, the correct place to look. Also from the rules on flanking found on page 154: "Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus." This doesn't contradict my claim. The flanking rules state that another person needs to threaten for you to be flanking. Conversely, for your presence to help another person flank, you have to threaten. Your mistaken assumption is that flanking has to affect two attackers at the same time. The rules allow for a situation in which that is not the case. I can see where you might interpret this broadly... I appreciate that you can see it. Many people find themselves unable to do even this. ...but it is stated elsewhere much more specifically that you must be making a melee attack to gain the benefit of flanking. It is stated elsewhere within the rules that you must be making a melee attack to gain one of the benefits of flanking. Flanking, however, has two distinct benefits that are described about 75 pages apart. This other benefit and the state itself carry no such qualifiers. To prove this to you, I'll link you to an official source, an article from the WOTC website which discusses flanking and how it's used. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040302a Go there and check out the 3rd paragraph under "Defender Flanked" Here, I'll quote it for you. "You can flank with any melee weapon, including a reach weapon, but you cannot flank with a ranged weapon." I was aware of this article when I made my first post. I usually address it in the first post when making that particular statement. I apologize for not having done so. I would like to note, however, that my claim has always been that there is nothing within the rules to prohibit it. That article's comments are not represented in the rules and, as such, using them to refute my statement doesn't really work. In addition, you'll notice that NONE of the diagrams describing flanking include a ranged weapon, at all. The diagrams show the basic concept. They also do not make any mention of weapons at all. You're wrong, deal with it. I accept that room exists to interpret the rules differently, but no argument made from the rules can show, irrefutably, that I am incorrect. For someone who's been on the boards so long and seen all the arguments, you sure have some funny ideas about the rules. Considering that having some funny ideas about the rules means not agreeing with the common interpretation, I think you'll find that many people have some funny ideas about the rules. I guess just being here for more time doesn't automatically make you smarter, huh? I never claimed to be smarter, I claimed to be more knowledgeable of the rules in question, on the basis that I have been on these forums longer and have thus seen this exact discussion more often, which I believe I have shown.
leomunds_assistant 04-24-07, 08:58 PM	Boy am I glad I got to read this, very funny. And I know that I just joined recently, but I hope he didn't join just to tell us that, that would be pretty sad.
wal9000 04-24-07, 09:03 PM	You know what's annoying? Arguing with people who won't admit that they've been wrong the whole time. On a side note: Lol i made a character once who was a wizard sorceror druid fighter and killed everything in one hit because he had a ring of meteorswarming +20 and he was first level so everything died LOL hes better than your characters one time he got angry and killed pun pun. OMG he was so LEET that he had for classes as a LVL1 charachchter. ;) As I see it, this comes down to is that this character is the same as any other rogue but with an overpowered 3rd party feat, some rules breaking to stack keen, and a lot more weapon money than most people have. Nothing to see here, move along.
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 09:52 PM	@Vaelan Keep in mind I'm not arguing with you for the sake of arguing, I'm just trying to clarify this. So by your own admission, your entire argument rests on the fact that since the rules in the book do not explicitly state you may not flank with ranged weapons, you're going to assume that you can. And you make this assumption despite all evidence in the book as to the intent of the rule, and despite the explicit statement that you cannot flank with a ranged weapon in an official article. You also have decided that flanking is a state, like blindness or shaken. I don't understand where you get that. I haven't seen anything stating that flanking is a state independant from the flanking bonus you can gain as stated in the rules. As far as I know, you are only considered flanking when you gain the flanking bonus. And you only gain that bonus when making a melee attack. I also know that an official source dealing with ambiguous rules has stated explicitly that you cannot flank with a ranged weapon. Please point me to the paragraph in the player's handbook which says you can gain the state of flanking with a ranged weapon despite not gaining the flanking bonus per the rules, which can only be gained by making a melee attack. And THEN please explain to me why there is a class who's class ability allows you to flank someone with a ranged weapon. Why would that ability be there if you could already do so?
The_Shaman 04-24-07, 10:06 PM	Hola, mind if I hijack the thread a little? I noticed that you were discussing flanking with reach weapons a few posts back, and something clicked in that old mothballed brainbox of mine. Remember the Peerless archer? Mr. or Ms Hi-may-I-put-a-Power-attack-arrow-in-your-throat? At some point they get an ability that allows them to threaten with their bow as if they were using a reach weapon. Would that imply that they can flank with it - and if yes, could they add their ranged SA damage dice to the damage? Sure, technically it's not a melee attack - but technically, you only threaten with melee attacks, too.
wal9000 04-24-07, 10:14 PM	@Vaelan You also have decided that flanking is a state, like blindness or shaken. I don't understand where you get that. I haven't seen anything stating that flanking is a state independant from the flanking bonus you can gain as stated in the rules. I to am confused about this. Neither flanked or flaking is listed in the DMG's condition summary (Page 300-301). I also fail to see the point of this argument. Everyone (else) agrees that when you flank you get the flanking bonus, and if you aren't flanking you don't get the flanking bonus. If you don't get the flanking bonus you aren't flanking. If someone has improved uncanny dodge he, she, or it can't be flanked. It is impossible to flank with ranged weapons. Is he just trying to make a point?
forsaken1111 04-24-07, 10:14 PM	Hola, mind if I hijack the thread a little? I noticed that you were discussing flanking with reach weapons a few posts back, and something clicked in that old mothballed brainbox of mine. Remember the Peerless archer? Mr. or Ms Hi-may-I-put-a-Power-attack-arrow-in-your-throat? At some point they get an ability that allows them to threaten with their bow as if they were using a reach weapon. Would that imply that they can flank with it - and if yes, could they add their ranged SA damage dice to the damage? Sure, technically it's not a melee attack - but technically, you only threaten with melee attacks, too. If a class ability specifically says you may flank with a ranged weapon then that overrides the rule saying it must be a melee attack. There is a class like this, which was pointed out earlier. If the class ability says you can threaten with your ranged weapon, that just means you may make attacks of opportunity with the ranged weapon when someone in your threatened area provokes one.
wal9000 04-24-07, 10:21 PM	Hola, mind if I hijack the thread a little? I noticed that you were discussing flanking with reach weapons a few posts back, and something clicked in that old mothballed brainbox of mine. Remember the Peerless archer? Mr. or Ms Hi-may-I-put-a-Power-attack-arrow-in-your-throat? At some point they get an ability that allows them to threaten with their bow as if they were using a reach weapon. Would that imply that they can flank with it - and if yes, could they add their ranged SA damage dice to the damage? Sure, technically it's not a melee attack - but technically, you only threaten with melee attacks, too. RAW, perhaps not. I'd certainly allow it, as it's within the spirit of the rules. The paragraph about flanking was obviously written without taking that ability in to account, and assumes that squares can only be threatened with melee weapons. Vaelan would probably rule that you can flank and do SA damage, but wouldn't receive the +2 bonus on attack rolls. That might be correct as written, but it's not how anyone interprets it. Not to start a rules as written versus rules as they were meant to be but accidentally were worded weirdly, but in my opinion if you analyze every single rule down to the placement of commas you might as well be playing Neverwinter Nights. It has better graphics anyway.
Otto the Bugbear 04-24-07, 10:24 PM	That's not an amazing rogue This is an amazing rogue (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=297776), being able to automatically steal everything from you as a free action, with no chance of failure!
SirGeshko 04-24-07, 10:57 PM	Exactly. Forsaken and the Shaman basically end the discussion about ranged flanking/sneak attacks. Look at this for a moment, and tumble it around your brain for a few minutes before posting. (underlines mine) Peerless Archer Lvl 1: Ranged Sneak Attack (Ex): [...] a peerless archer gains the ability to execute a ranged sneak attack if she catches an opponent unable to defend himself from attack. Any time the peerless archer's opponent would be denied his Dex. bonus [...] ranged attack deals +1d6 points of extra damage. [...] If the peerless archer gets a sneak attack bonus from another source (such as rogue levels), the bonuses to damage stack. Lvl 8: Threaten: [...]gains the ability to threaten nearby areas with her bow as if she were wielding a melee weapon Whisperknife Lvl 9: Ranged Flank (Ex): [...] You must be within 10 feet of the enemy in question, and you flank as if you were wielding a reach weapon. You do not threaten the foe and may not make attacks of opportunity against the foe unless you are actually adjacent to the foe and armed with a melee weapon. Why would there be class abilities granting specific abilities (threatening and flanking) to ranged attacks if they already possessed those qualities? :confused: If that doesn't make you reconsider, how about this: Why would the Whisperknife's Ranged Flank TAKE AWAY the ability to threaten (which is normally a prerequisite for flanking). Doesn't sound like much of a class feature!!
forsaken1111 04-25-07, 12:34 AM	Exactly. Forsaken and the Shaman basically end the discussion about ranged flanking/sneak attacks. Look at this for a moment, and tumble it around your brain for a few minutes before posting. (underlines mine) Why would there be class abilities granting specific abilities (threatening and flanking) to ranged attacks if they already possessed those qualities? :confused: If that doesn't make you reconsider, how about this: Why would the Whisperknife's Ranged Flank TAKE AWAY the ability to threaten (which is normally a prerequisite for flanking). Doesn't sound like much of a class feature!! I agree with you. If you were able to flank and, via flanking, sneak attack with a bow normally there wouldn't be a prestige class which gives that ability as a class ability.
epifreak 04-25-07, 09:42 AM	Wait, what's the final word on this build? What mechanism is he currently using to grab the 24d8 damage? When I first looked, it was flanking with a ranged weapon, but I'm getting the impression that he's using something different now, and where are the d8 sneak attacks coming from? I'm having trouble processing three pages of posts showing a tenuous-at-best grasp on the English language.
the_narrator 04-25-07, 10:06 AM	This thread is useless, and is now about waffles. (#)
RobbyPants 04-25-07, 10:16 AM	I made a rogue that gave me a 24d8+40 attack.It was a rogue7/shadowdancer1/deepwood sniper1/assassin1.I got the improved critical feat <snip> Improved Critical has a BAB requirement of 8+. With all that fancy multiclassing you did there you end up with (Rog +5, ShDn + 0, DwSn + 1, Asn +0) +6. You're still two short of the prereqs... This thread is useless, and is now about waffles. (#) Mmmmmmmmmmmm.... Waffffffllllllessss..... http://biology.clc.uc.edu/graphics/maple/waffle.jpg
The_Shaman 04-25-07, 11:24 AM	Chocolate, powder sugar or jam? I am for chocolate.
forsaken1111 04-25-07, 12:59 PM	Wait, what's the final word on this build? What mechanism is he currently using to grab the 24d8 damage? When I first looked, it was flanking with a ranged weapon, but I'm getting the impression that he's using something different now, and where are the d8 sneak attacks coming from? I'm having trouble processing three pages of posts showing a tenuous-at-best grasp on the English language. The final word is this: Although he originally said he was sneak attacking with the bow constantly due to being flanked. When we proved that you cannot flank with ranged weapons he called us idiots, said we weren't reading the rules, and then said he's sneak attacking from being hidden via hide in plain sight instead and that we don't know what we're talking about. He also claimed he would walk to his DM's house and read the rules to us. I'm not sure why he would do that, I have the same books here. Maybe he felt bad? When he said his level 10 could take any other level 10, and we provided several builds which could bend his over and spank it like a small child, he got very quiet on the subject and didn't speak of it again. His DM allowed a custom house rule to stack improved critical with keen. That same custom house rule must also lower the requirement for improved critical because he doesn't meet it. His entire build is based around an unbalanced feat he found in some 3rd party book which isn't even semi-official. I'd love to be able to use those, because I'd have my brother publish a book with a feat giving mages d12 hitdice and fighter BAB progression. Hey it was in a book... In post 55 he mentioned something about how we assume too much, and he hasn't told us everything about the character. I suppose he has a mysterious special ability from the god of archers which lets him sneak attack the rules and break the game, but shhh... don't tell anyone. We all argued about grammar. That was fun. The build, as posted, had way more money value than a 10th level character could have. And... waffles are awesome.
Asurya 04-25-07, 01:37 PM	I dont know if its the right thread to argue on this, but I saw "If someone has improved uncanny dodge he, she, or it can't be flanked." earlier in the posts. My understanding of the I.UncannyDodge is that a Rogue who is of less level than (yours+4) cannot Sneak Attack you while flanking you, no more (that is he/she still gets the +2 to hit flanking bonus... and all) please correct me if I'm wrong
SirGeshko 04-25-07, 01:38 PM	waffles are awesome. Seconded!! Good recap, Forsaken! :w00t: Also, Asurya: Improved Uncanny Dodge (Ex): At 5th level and higher, a barbarian can no longer be flanked. This defense denies a rogue the ability to sneak attack the barbarian by flanking him, unless the attacker has at least four more rogue levels than the target has barbarian levels. Basically, a barbarian can't be flanked. A rogue 4 levels or higher than the barbarian's level still cannot flank him, but can sneak attack him as if he was flanking.
Tectorman 04-25-07, 02:20 PM	Improved Critical has a BAB requirement of 8+. With all that fancy multiclassing you did there you end up with (Rog +5, ShDn + 0, DwSn + 1, Asn +0) +6. You're still two short of the prereqs... This is me playing the Devil's Advocate. In Unearthed Arcana, there is a fractional base attack bonus alternative rule. If he were using this rule (hey, he's got way out there 3rd party books, he just might have this book), then 7 levels of Rogue grant +5 1/4, 1 level of Shadowdancer grants +3/4, 1 level of Deepwood Sniper grants +1, and 1 level of Assassin grants +3/4. This comes to a grand total of +7 3/4 (effectively, still only +7). So even throwing him a bone like this, he still doesn't meet the prereqs (maybe his DM was being extraordinarily nice). Wow, some advocate I am... Just thought I'd throw that in there (I'd just love to see him quote this and say "Oh, yeah, that's what I was doing all along").
forsaken1111 04-25-07, 02:32 PM	The fact remains that his build as posted is illegal in at least 3 ways and as such is not really in any position to be bragged about.
RobbyPants 04-25-07, 02:41 PM	This is me playing the Devil's Advocate. In Unearthed Arcana, there is a fractional base attack bonus alternative rule. If he were using this rule (hey, he's got way out there 3rd party books, he just might have this book), then 7 levels of Rogue grant +5 1/4, 1 level of Shadowdancer grants +3/4, 1 level of Deepwood Sniper grants +1, and 1 level of Assassin grants +3/4. This comes to a grand total of +7 3/4 (effectively, still only +7). So even throwing him a bone like this, he still doesn't meet the prereqs (maybe his DM was being extraordinarily nice). Wow, some advocate I am... Just thought I'd throw that in there (I'd just love to see him quote this and say "Oh, yeah, that's what I was doing all along"). :rofl: I didn't even think about that varient. I love how it still doesn't work! The fact remains that his build as posted is illegal in at least 3 ways and as such is not really in any position to be bragged about. No kidding. Now I'll post my half-elf commoner 5 build that can do 20d6 damage per round!
FreAkOuTRG 04-25-07, 03:51 PM	Chocolate, powder sugar or jam? I am for chocolate. My arteries are clogging as we speak. Don't they throw bacon at katana threads? Breakfast solves everything.
Archanos 04-25-07, 05:06 PM	Lol now it was a weird summary but I suppose it was close enough.Besides the easiest thing to suggest for a character that could beat me would just be a plain level 10 rogue which i couldn't sneak attack just like a barbarian but of course my character also does good damage without sneak attacking.It was just something I liked to do.Kinda like stealing.Now I'm playing a bard anyway so it doesn't really matter about my rogue.After all bard's are just not meant to do damage.
FreAkOuTRG 04-25-07, 05:35 PM	Lol now it was a weird summary but I suppose it was close enough.Besides the easiest thing to suggest for a character that could beat me would just be a plain level 10 rogue which i couldn't sneak attack just like a barbarian but of course my character also does good damage without sneak attacking.It was just something I liked to do.Kinda like stealing.Now I'm playing a bard anyway so it doesn't really matter about my rogue.After all bard's are just not meant to do damage. Whatever they're meant to do matters little. With the right splat books you can make a perfectly acceptable/really good combat build with a bard. They can make good primary casters too.
The_Shaman 04-25-07, 05:40 PM	Actually, most mages can do a very good job protecting themselves as well - all it takes is a bit of concealment and precision damage stops applying. Fighters and the like have it a bit harder, but your attack bonus is a bit... well, tricky. Even if you're usually aiming for their flat-footed AC, by then they can have quite a bit of it. So, everything included, the build had decent SA damage, but couldn't hit very often. As for bards, well, the not dealing damage part is optional. Hang around the CharOp boards for a while asking them to make your bard good in a fight and you might just be able to beat your group's primary melee specialist in 5 rounds.
Archanos 04-25-07, 05:43 PM	Well when i said supposed to do I meant that I'm obviously gonna use the bard as the traditional leader and diplomatic member of the party since most of my party members aren't capable of anything besides violence.So in essence my bard is gonna be all about non-combat situations.Since I've specialized him in that I just decided that I wouldn't care about combat situations and let them take care of the general when i just sit back and add some support.
inspectr88 04-25-07, 06:04 PM	I'm not sure if this has been covered. Correct me if I'm wrong here. If someone is flanked, if you can shoot into the combat, the target is vulnerable for sneak-attack. I know you can't flank with a weapon, but let's say that 2 of your buddies are flanking, and you shoot in, assuming this "be all end all rogue build" can pick and choose from any version of D&D it so chooses, could it pull off the 20-something d8 sneak attack it claims? So, my question, I suppose, is can you sneak attack a flanked person, if he's already being flanked?
Tevin Kevlak 04-25-07, 08:36 PM	I'm not sure if this has been covered. Correct me if I'm wrong here. If someone is flanked, if you can shoot into the combat, the target is vulnerable for sneak-attack. I know you can't flank with a weapon, but let's say that 2 of your buddies are flanking, and you shoot in, assuming this "be all end all rogue build" can pick and choose from any version of D&D it so chooses, could it pull off the 20-something d8 sneak attack it claims? So, my question, I suppose, is can you sneak attack a flanked person, if he's already being flanked? No, it says in the Sneak attack description that the rogue must be flanking the target. You cannot flank with a bow, despite what Vaelan will try and have you believe, so you cannot apply sneak attack.
the_narrator 04-25-07, 08:51 PM	Waffles: traditional or Belgian?
leomunds_assistant 04-25-07, 08:53 PM	Don't go to waffle house, it gives you the squirts. I like eggo's what do you guys like?
forsaken1111 04-25-07, 08:55 PM	I'm not sure if this has been covered. Correct me if I'm wrong here. If someone is flanked, if you can shoot into the combat, the target is vulnerable for sneak-attack. I know you can't flank with a weapon, but let's say that 2 of your buddies are flanking, and you shoot in, assuming this "be all end all rogue build" can pick and choose from any version of D&D it so chooses, could it pull off the 20-something d8 sneak attack it claims? So, my question, I suppose, is can you sneak attack a flanked person, if he's already being flanked? Unless you have a super special class ability (Two classes so far have been pointed out) that says you can flank with a bow, you cannot sneak attack via flanking with a bow. You CAN sneak attack with a bow if a target within 30ft is denied his dex bonus for any reason. Like you being invisible... or him being tied up helpless on the floor.
Epilepticemu 04-25-07, 09:12 PM	omg now this is the knd of player we need to see more of he made a pwnzr build and ddindnt even need to t hink about it for more than 15 hours total over a rlly lng time and most of u nbs just sit here and read the furms and probably never even get to play cus yur all at work all day long and cmon this guys build is frikn sweet he has that sweet move where you can hide in plain site, you know, when you combine that with shrinking yourself and hopping in the guys pocket and flanking his peepee with my deepwood bow, wow, that's like 49d10 atleast on a bad da y. just cmon guys. you rnt even serious.
LordPendragon 04-25-07, 09:36 PM	Waffles: traditional or Belgian? Belgian FTW
fknretard 04-26-07, 02:36 AM	YOU CANNOT FLANK WITH A RANGED WEAPON!!!!!!!!!! You must be THREATENING the opponent to flank it.
ProdigalMadness 04-26-07, 03:30 AM	So it's been proven he's wrong for how long now...and people are STILL posting to repeatedly smash on him about being wrong? He's not touching my game, nor yours, so why not allow him his delusions, and IGNORE this thread? I'm tired of seeing it on Page 1.
DarkRhystar 04-26-07, 03:43 AM	That's not an amazing rogue This is an amazing rogue (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=297776), being able to automatically steal everything from you as a free action, with no chance of failure! Snow's Stripper? It's been a long time since I saw that build. It is pretty awesome though. PS: No flanking for ranged weapon users; D&D doesn't work that way.
forsaken1111 04-26-07, 03:44 AM	So it's been proven he's wrong for how long now...and people are STILL posting to repeatedly smash on him about being wrong? He's not touching my game, nor yours, so why not allow him his delusions, and IGNORE this thread? I'm tired of seeing it on Page 1. Look at the name of the guy who posted just before you and you'll understand why he did so, apparently without reading anything in the thread.
Odinn 04-26-07, 02:52 PM	Damn You!!! Me Wants Waffles!!!
Repeekluos 04-26-07, 03:11 PM	Edit: I dont know if anyone even cares, but.... End Edit: I haven't read every post in this (I stopped around the end of the 2nd page), so I dont know if this has been mentioned. You can actually flank with a ranged weapon. If you are a halfling, and if you have ten levels in the PrC "Whisperknife". You can also make AoO', and threaten if you have enough sources available:)
FreAkOuTRG 04-26-07, 03:31 PM	You can also make AoO', and threaten if you have enough sources available:)You can do anything with enough sources available.
Repeekluos 04-26-07, 03:43 PM	You can do anything with enough sources available. I know, and I love it:D
Guan 04-26-07, 03:55 PM	I'm not sure if Forsaken is mentally handicaped or a certified genius... BTW: Even if you do "snipe" to get your sneak attack... you only get it on one attack that round, the first. You do not threaten with a ranged weapon and thus cannot get more then one attack of sneak damage per round. I do recall seeing that "increase sneak attack damage to D8's" in that sourcebook in the store. I remember as that was the first reason I didn't buy it! Horrible, rules breaking build. Anyone wanna take a look at his Bard! Forsaken, post your Bard!
tui 04-26-07, 04:04 PM	I'm not sure if Forsaken is mentally handicaped or a certified genius... Just to clarify, Archanos is the OP; Forsaken has been rather insightful throughout this discussion.
Aggrenox 04-26-07, 04:19 PM	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. YOU DO NOT FLANK. FLANKING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACKER. IT HAS TO DO WITH YOUR ALLY. You don't have to threaten. Your ally does. Also it has to be a melee attack.
Guan 04-26-07, 04:39 PM	Just to clarify, Archanos is the OP; Forsaken has been rather insightful throughout this discussion. Oh my... I humbly appologize to Forsaken for mixing up your name with one such as Archanos. I would not even think of intentionaly calling someone an Archanos unless they had responded as such throughout this thread. Please accept my appologies Forsaken.
Archanos 04-26-07, 04:54 PM	Well actually my bard is straight forward charisma and pretty much nothing else and I used a point-by-system.He has like 7 skills I believe and all of them are somewhat like Diplomacy,Perform,and the like.I mean it's a level one bard with a masterwork instrument and skill focus(string instrument).The only thing special is I have a high perform.Otherwise it's just the way I play the character.I like to hone my skills on ever part of the game.So Throughout my period of playing D&D I've played pretty much every class and that rogue was my first to play before.Since we happened to not have a wizard in the group i couldn't just get him to use greater invisibility on me and just sneak attack that way so I used hiding and cover. Ohh and about the comment the guy made about only sneak attacking on your first shot it clearly states that as long as you take a full-action attacking you can apply your sneak attack to all of your attacks.
forsaken1111 04-26-07, 05:10 PM	Edit: I dont know if anyone even cares, but.... End Edit: I haven't read every post in this (I stopped around the end of the 2nd page), so I dont know if this has been mentioned. You can actually flank with a ranged weapon. If you are a halfling, and if you have ten levels in the PrC "Whisperknife". You can also make AoO', and threaten if you have enough sources available:) Yep, we've pointed out that certain prestige class abilitied allow you to bypass that restriction. Our main point was that you cannot, by default, flank or sneak attack via flanking. Oh my... I humbly appologize to Forsaken for mixing up your name with one such as Archanos. I would not even think of intentionaly calling someone an Archanos unless they had responded as such throughout this thread. Please accept my appologies Forsaken. No worries, I understand the confusion. Apology accepted. :)
Silverthumb128 04-26-07, 05:15 PM	So I made this amazing Rogue that did 44d6+44 damage. I mean, it wasn't in one round, but he did it, by crikey.
forsaken1111 04-26-07, 05:35 PM	<snip> Ohh and about the comment the guy made about only sneak attacking on your first shot it clearly states that as long as you take a full-action attacking you can apply your sneak attack to all of your attacks. Where does it specifically state this? I'm not calling you a liar, I just want to know where it says it.
jadehawk 04-26-07, 05:45 PM	You get sneak attack damage on any attack that meets the sneak requirements (flanking or denying dex on a target with a discernible anatomy). So if a guy is being magically held and you full round attack him, each successful attack deals sneak damage. Having said that I believe sniping is a standard action, so you cannot full round snipe...correct me if I'm wrong; it should be in the PHB under the hide skill.
forsaken1111 04-26-07, 05:54 PM	You get sneak attack damage on any attack that meets the sneak requirements (flanking or denying dex on a target with a discernible anatomy). So if a guy is being magically held and you full round attack him, each successful attack deals sneak damage. Having said that I believe sniping is a standard action, so you cannot full round snipe...correct me if I'm wrong; it should be in the PHB under the hide skill. I believe you I just never realized you could add sneak attack to every iterative attack when doing a full attack. Good to know, as I'm contemplating a soulbow type character right now and adding a sneak attack sounds juicy.
Aggrenox 04-26-07, 05:59 PM	<stuff> ...it should be in the PHB under the hide skill. Hide (Dex; Armor Check Penalty) Check Your Hide check is opposed by the Spot check of anyone who might see you. You can move up to one-half your normal speed and hide at no penalty. When moving at a speed greater than one-half but less than your normal speed, you take a -5 penalty. It’s practically impossible (-20 penalty) to hide while attacking, running or charging. A creature larger or smaller than Medium takes a size bonus or penalty on Hide checks depending on its size category: Fine +16, Diminutive +12, Tiny +8, Small +4, Large -4, Huge -8, Gargantuan -12, Colossal -16. You need cover or concealment in order to attempt a Hide check. Total cover or total concealment usually (but not always; see Special, below) obviates the need for a Hide check, since nothing can see you anyway. If people are observing you, even casually, you can’t hide. You can run around a corner or behind cover so that you’re out of sight and then hide, but the others then know at least where you went. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check; see below), though, you can attempt to hide. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Hide check if you can get to a hiding place of some kind. (As a general guideline, the hiding place has to be within 1 foot per rank you have in Hide.) This check, however, is made at a -10 penalty because you have to move fast. Sniping If you’ve already successfully hidden at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again. You take a -20 penalty on your Hide check to conceal yourself after the shot. Creating a Diversion to Hide You can use Bluff to help you hide. A successful Bluff check can give you the momentary diversion you need to attempt a Hide check while people are aware of you. See also: epic usages of Hide. Action Usually none. Normally, you make a Hide check as part of movement, so it doesn’t take a separate action. However, hiding immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action. Special If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Hide checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Hide checks if you’re moving. If you have the Stealthy feat, you get a +2 bonus on Hide checks. A 13th-level ranger can attempt a Hide check in any sort of natural terrain, even if it doesn’t grant cover or concealment. A 17th-level ranger can do this even while being observed. Here you go.
jadehawk 04-26-07, 06:08 PM	Thank you. So it doesn't say standard action, but it says you may make ONE ranged attack, so basically a standard action...but then again you could incorporate manyshot or the likes...methinks you only apply sneak attack once with manyshot though...never mind
FreAkOuTRG 04-26-07, 06:50 PM	YOU DO NOT FLANK. FLANKING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACKER. IT HAS TO DO WITH YOUR ALLY. You don't have to threaten. Your ally does. Also it has to be a melee attack. If you can make a melee attack against the creature, you threaten. So you do have to threaten the creature.
forsaken1111 04-26-07, 07:00 PM	If you can make a melee attack against the creature, you threaten. So you do have to threaten the creature. Technically the rules say nothing about you threatening, thus if you find a way to melee attack a person you don't threaten then you can still flank/sneak attack. Spring Attack would be a good example. You DO NOT threaten the creature since you started quite a ways away, but you still attack as you run by gaining the flanking if you qualify and sneak attacking if you can.
Tectorman 04-26-07, 07:34 PM	If you can make a melee attack against the creature, you threaten. So you do have to threaten the creature. If you use an unarmed strike without any levels in Monk or Kundala and without the Improved Unarmed Strike feat (don't know why someone would do that, but...), then you are making a melee attack. You are not threatening them, though. This is me, the Nitpicky Devil's Advocate.
Archanos 04-26-07, 07:50 PM	Number of Sneak Attacks Provided it is possible for you to make a sneak attack at all, you can make multiple sneak attacks when you use the full attack action. For example, if you have a higher initiative result at the beginning of an encounter, your foe is flat-footed and every attack you make is a sneak attack. The same is true if you flank your foe. Anything that allows you to make extra attacks during the full attack action gets you extra sneak attacks as well: fighting with two weapons, the haste spell, and the monk's flurry of blows are the most common ways of getting extra attacks. Remember the earlier note about invisibility effects, however. If you're relying on invisibility to set up a sneak attack, you'll only have the effect for the first attack you make during your turn. You'll still get all your extra attacks, but only the first will be a sneak attack. You don't have this problem if you're using a greaterinvisibility effect. I believe this should take care of your question.
Batou_StandAlone 04-26-07, 08:42 PM	http://www.acc.umu.se/~zqad/cats/1168702253-1167572904128.jpg
forsaken1111 04-26-07, 09:14 PM	http://www.acc.umu.se/~zqad/cats/1168702253-1167572904128.jpg That's a really fat and ugly cat, but thanks for the award! What did we do to deserve such prestige?
epifreak 04-26-07, 09:19 PM	I saw mention of a level one commoner at some point in the thread. Perhaps it's like a trojan horse, and this seemingly innocuous kitty is really Fluffy in disguise.
The_Shaman 04-26-07, 09:24 PM	That's a really fat and ugly cat, but thanks for the award! What did we do to deserve such prestige? Don't look a gift cat in the tummy, you know. Especially when it can have a hat of disguise (a multicolored ribbon? please).
calprinicus 04-26-07, 10:18 PM	what sort of fudged (because they won't allow profanity) up DM didn't check this guy and would allow this. I think the DM is sadder than the rogue. and the rogue is pitiful.
inspectr88 04-26-07, 10:26 PM	I had Belgian waffles a while ago, but it called for like half a pound of butter. They were good, but I wouldn't make them very often.
Aggrenox 04-27-07, 12:25 PM	If you can make a melee attack against the creature, you threaten. So you do have to threaten the creature. But, flanking does not require that you threaten them, thus a creature with a small reach (Does not threaten) can still gain flanking benifits! though the person who helps them flank, does not.
calprinicus 04-27-07, 01:28 PM	right but a bow doesn't have reach, it has range
Aggrenox 04-27-07, 03:27 PM	Yes the point is even though you don't need to threaten, you must make a MELEE attack.
Psychoticpsymon 05-06-07, 03:43 PM	Yep, we've pointed out that certain prestige class abilitied allow you to bypass that restriction. Our main point was that you cannot, by default, flank or sneak attack via flanking. You can't flank by flanking? And YES, you CAN sneak attack while flanking. In fact, that is specifically stated in the SRD. Good job dessiminating incorrect information. Sneak Attack: If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage. The rogue's attack deals extra damage any time her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and it increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter. Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied. Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the target is within 30 feet. Now, the point about ranged attacks provoking AOO's might be from the last sentance I quoted. I can see why people might get confused.
Kerin 05-06-07, 04:38 PM	Hmm so someone has created a supreme god build.Mine was just a random creation through a couple of hours of playing a week.I really only put thought into it while i was playing which couldn't of been more than 15 hours in total and most of that was filled up with me rping.I probably only spent an hour thinking of the build.The god build I can guarantee took someone a very long time to think of.I was only telling a simple build that I recently used. And yet you completely lost it when somebody criticized the horrible, horrible errors in it. I really think this only serves to prove everyone else's point: you didn't put any thought or time into this, so don't post it here. Although for the record, let me show you this amazing fighter build I made using third-party feats (my own!) that only took FIVE MINUTES to make: Mikey the Destroyer Human Level 1 Fighter HP: 86,274 BAB: +1 Attack Bonus: +1000 AC: 90,000 Feats: Totally Great Parry, Awesome Attack, Ridiculous Stamina Kerin's Excellent Third-Party Feats: Totally Great Parry Prerequisites: Character named "Mikey the Destroyer" Benefit: Anytime anyone attacks you (as many times per turn as you like) you may totally parry the attack and hit the opponent for 80,000 damage. Gain a permanent 80,990 bonus to Armor Class. Awesome Attack Prerequisites: Character named "Mikey the Destroyer" Benefit: You gain +9999 to your Base Attack Bonus and melee attack damage. Ridiculous Stamina Prerequisites: Character named "Mikey the Destroyer" Benefit: Hit Points increase by 86,284 And by your logic (a DM will allow it in a local game) this is totally valid, since I'm letting my cat play it in a game I just now started. Hooah!
Psychoticpsymon 05-06-07, 05:02 PM	Mikey the Destroyer Human Level 1 Fighter HP: 86,274 BAB: +1 Attack Bonus: +1000 AC: 90,000 Feats: Totally Great Parry, Awesome Attack, Ridiculous Stamina Kerin's Excellent Third-Party Feats: Totally Great Parry Prerequisites: Character named "Mikey the Destroyer" Benefit: Anytime anyone attacks you (as many times per turn as you like) you may totally parry the attack and hit the opponent for 80,000 damage. Gain a permanent 80,990 bonus to Armor Class. Awesome Attack Prerequisites: Character named "Mikey the Destroyer" Benefit: You gain +9999 to your Base Attack Bonus and melee attack damage. Ridiculous Stamina Prerequisites: Character named "Mikey the Destroyer" Benefit: Hit Points increase by 86,284 YuR AtAk BaNnIs S RoNg