Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Bolorhaig 08-27-07, 03:13 AM	howdy all i distinctly remember reading an optional rule for ranged attackers whereby they can gain flanking benefits vs a target IF the ranged attacker has a flanking ally in melee on the other side of the target. BUT I CAN'T FIND IT!!!!! plz help me locate this rule. it was prob in a 3.0 publication, and it was definitely in an official book. plz don't bother directing my attention to the optional ranger flanking ability from PHB2. that's not it. bolorhaig
Tempest Stormwind 08-27-07, 03:21 AM	howdy all i distinctly remember reading an optional rule for ranged attackers whereby they can gain flanking benefits vs a target IF the ranged attacker has a flanking ally in melee on the other side of the target. BUT I CAN'T FIND IT!!!!! plz help me locate this rule. it was prob in a 3.0 publication, and it was definitely in an official book. plz don't bother directing my attention to the optional ranger flanking ability from PHB2. that's not it. bolorhaig 1) This isn't a challenge. It's a question. 2) The closest thing in 3.5 is the ranger's Distracting Strike variant, PHB2.
Bolorhaig 08-27-07, 04:34 AM	LOL apparently it is a challenge, since you can't find it either! :p bolorhaig
gixanthrax 08-27-07, 07:37 AM	I'm quite sure that i once read somethinglike this on the wiz. page. They gave an example of two rogues using light crossbows standing 60 feet apart with an opponent in the middle, thus both of them in some flanking position and able to Sneak Attack him...
Tempest Stormwind 08-27-07, 10:28 AM	LOL apparently it is a challenge, since you can't find it either! :p bolorhaig No, it isn't. There's no contest, no guidelines, no goal, and no reward. You're asking a question, and we're answering. Now, as I said, the closest thing in 3.5 is the ranger's variant ability, which lets him provide flanking bonuses with a bow in exchange for his animal companion.
tarkin 08-27-07, 11:02 AM	This is a Prestige Class ability. One of the Archer ones. Not sure which one. Maybe Order of the Bow. Could be Peerless Archer.
Bolorhaig 08-27-07, 03:22 PM	hmm, how unfortunate that i keep getting directed to the alternate ranger in PHB2 that i specifically mentioned wasn't what i wanted. the PrC is an interesting way to GET this ability. however, what i'm looking for is the ruling, that i once read some time ago and i'm pretty sure was in 3.0, that allows anyone making a ranged attack to gain flanking benefits if they have a melee ally on the other side of the target. it may have been some kind of errata, or back-of-the-book insert like they put into some of the 3.0 PHB and DMG. anyways, i'm still looking. thnx for your help one and all. bolorhaig
NobodyRemembersThis 08-27-07, 03:50 PM	There was no such ruling. If an opponent was flanked in melee, a rogue could sneak attack at range. Big difference.
Bolorhaig 08-27-07, 06:19 PM	thank you for your reply. so my next question is, where is the ruling? i can't find it in 3.0 PHB or DMG, nor in any of the class supplements (sword n fist, song n silence, etc). bolorhaig
Salla 08-27-07, 06:26 PM	Sneak attack requires a rogue to be flanking the target, or the target to be denied his DEX bonus to AC. Flanking can only be performed with melee attacks. With the exception of a handful of spells or prestige class abilities, it is simply not possible to flank with a ranged weapon.
Tempest Stormwind 08-27-07, 07:20 PM	There was no such ruling. If an opponent was flanked in melee, a rogue could sneak attack at range. Big difference. Close, but not quite. The conditions for sneak attack are: (Opponent denied Dexterity bonus against rogue's attack) || (The Rogue flanks the target), not "the target is flanked". Subtle, but significant. (Oh, and that's logical-OR, not exclusive-OR; both conditions can be met and it's still fine). It's quite possible to have the first condition -- denied Dex bonus -- without the second. If you're attacking while invisible against most targets, for instance, you get sneak attack damage -- if you're within 30' of the target. Sneak attack requires a rogue to be flanking the target, or the target to be denied his DEX bonus to AC. Correct. Flanking can only be performed with melee attacks. With the exception of a handful of spells or prestige class abilities, it is simply not possible to flank with a ranged weapon. Not quite. See above.
jaelis 08-27-07, 08:21 PM	The 3.0 rule I see is this: Flanking If a character is making a melee attack against an opponent, and an ally directly opposite the character is threatening the opponent, the character and the character's ally flank the opponent. A character gains a +2 flanking bonus on the attack roll. A rogue in this position can also sneak attack the target. The ally must be on the other side of the opponent, so that the opponent is directly between the character and the ally. This indicates that even in 3.0, you couldn't get ranged flanking. So if your memory is correct, it is a variant rule you're talking about. And if it's a variant rule, why do you need to find it? It would be a house rule anyway, so just house rule it.
NobodyRemembersThis 08-28-07, 12:24 AM	Whoops, I got the rule wrong. I couldn't remember if that was a house rule that came about from misreading it in 3.0 or not. Thankfully, it got dropped in the most recent campaign. :)
Bolorhaig 08-28-07, 02:08 AM	i'm actually very interested in locating this rule and not so much in discussing my reasons for wanting to find it. if you have any ideas that might point me in the right direction, i'd appreciate hearing them. the fact that this rule didn't make a later edition of the game is irrelevant to my search, as is the actual current ruling on flanking and/or sneak attack. i invite anyone, w/information or an opinion pertinent to my search, to offer their thoughts. kindly save other concerns for another thread. bolorhaig
dknight100 08-28-07, 02:41 AM	So people stating that the rule doesn't exist, and showing the rules from the edition of the game you referenced that illustrate that the rule doesn't exist, isn't welcome in this thread because it doesn't help you find the rule?