Thrown Daggers, are they Ranged Weapons?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 217 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

I seem to have opened a can of worm and can only hope that I'm missing something rather glaring.

First let's start with the definition of Ranged Weapon:

PRD wrote:
Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee.

This means that Daggers aren't Ranged Weapons. However, this causes an avalanche of problems.

-Daggers can be thrown without penalty while prone.

Rule:
PRD wrote:
A prone attacker has a –4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow)

Because this is ranged attack roll we don't suffer the -4 penalty, and because daggers aren't ranged weapons they can be thrown.

-Daggers can be thrown into melee without penalty.

Rule:
PRD wrote:
If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll

Again because daggers aren't a ranged weapon this rule doesn't apply.

-No penalty throwing a dagger while mounted.

Rule:
PRD wrote:
You can use ranged weapons while your mount is taking a double move, but at a –4 penalty on the attack roll. You can use ranged weapons while your mount is running (quadruple speed) at a –8 penalty.

Again, they aren't a ranged weapon so they don't suffer from this penalty.

-Point-Blank Shot doesn't work, even though Charging Hurler does?

Inconsistent:
Granted this one isn't a rule, but it is odd that Charging Hurler has Point-Blank Shot as a prerequisite even though more than half of the weapons Charging Hurler works on doesn't work on Point-Blank Shot (Some still would, sling, net, etc).

There are a number of more issues, Returning enchant may not work on a dagger. The Superscript for the enchant says it only works on thrown ranged weapons. You threaten AoO, but can only make a melee attack when one is provoked. You can technically flank the opponent and get a sneak attack from a thrown dagger. And the list goes on...

Edit: This post talks about daggers specifically, but this applies to all melee weapons with a ranged increment.

Sczarni

This isn't an issue if you make a distinction between a held dagger, and a thrown dagger.

- A thrown dagger is not effective in melee. Obviously, because you just threw it away. It is no longer being held.

- A held dagger is not a ranged weapon, but it has the potential to become one when thrown.

Basically a melee weapon that has a ranged increment is by design a ranged weapon only when it is thrown.

I believe there are other feats/abilities that allow characters to throw melee weapons that do not otherwise have ranged increments; such as greatswords or what have you. But I've never played one of those so I'm not really up to speed on how that all works...


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps Subscriber
Ssyvan wrote:
PRD wrote:
Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee.
This means that Daggers aren't Ranged Weapons.

You're parsing that sentence incorrectly.

Ranged weapons include thrown weapons.
Ranged weapons include projection weapons that are not effective in melee.

The clause "that are not effective in melee" modifies only the subject "projectile weapons", not both thrown weapons AND projectile weapons due to the use of the conjunction "or".

(Edit: Yes, I had to diagram sentences in grade school. You got a problem with that ?)


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes, daggers can be ranged weapons. No issues.

Edit: *giggle* "Sorry, you take a -4 for firing into combat." "But I'm stabbing with my dagger!?" "Sorry, it can be a ranged weapon..."


SlimGauge wrote:
Ssyvan wrote:
PRD wrote:
Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee.
This means that Daggers aren't Ranged Weapons.

You're parsing that sentence incorrectly.

Ranged weapons include thrown weapons.
Ranged weapons include projection weapons that are not effective in melee.

The clause "that are not effective in melee" modifies only the subject "projectile weapons", not both thrown weapons AND projectile weapons due to the use of the conjunction "or".

(Edit: Yes, I had to diagram sentences in grade school. You got a problem with that ?)

I had thought that too initially, but what projectile weapon *is* effective in melee? If you read it that way then the clause is superfluous.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber

The superflouocity (I made a word !) of the clause doesn't change how the sentence diagrams. Superfluousness ? I'm too lazy to look it up.

Rifles with bayonets come to mind for projectile weapons effective in melee.


Ssyvan wrote:


I had thought that too initially, but what projectile weapon *is* effective in melee? If you read it that way then the clause is superfluous.

It being superfluous doesn't change the meaning of the sentence.


Those weird firearms with melee weapons attached to them?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Melee and Ranged Weapons: Melee weapons are used for making melee attacks, though some of them can be thrown as well. Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee.

A dagger is a melee weapon when used in melee and becomes a ranged weapon when thrown.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber

Or you can wield rifles as a two-handed club ! Wait, that's a different rules argument.


Okay, thanks everyone for clearing that up! So that means I could use Two-Weapon Fighting, Rapid Shot, and Quick Draw to throw three daggers in a round?


Ssyvan wrote:
SlimGauge wrote:
Ssyvan wrote:
PRD wrote:
Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee.
This means that Daggers aren't Ranged Weapons.

You're parsing that sentence incorrectly.

Ranged weapons include thrown weapons.
Ranged weapons include projection weapons that are not effective in melee.

The clause "that are not effective in melee" modifies only the subject "projectile weapons", not both thrown weapons AND projectile weapons due to the use of the conjunction "or".

(Edit: Yes, I had to diagram sentences in grade school. You got a problem with that ?)

I had thought that too initially, but what projectile weapon *is* effective in melee? If you read it that way then the clause is superfluous.

Arrows can be used to stab like a dagger, but drawing and firing in melee would be a challenge to say the least

Sovereign Court

SlimGauge wrote:

The superflouocity (I made a word !) of the clause doesn't change how the sentence diagrams. Superfluousness ? I'm too lazy to look it up.

Rifles with bayonets come to mind for projectile weapons effective in melee.

It's actually one of my favorite words: superfluity.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Zhayne wrote:
Those weird firearms with melee weapons attached to them?

Pistol Cane Dagger?

What they need to stat, is the Duckfoot Pistol.


Thrown weapons, by default, are weapons that are otherwise effective in melee. Some exceptions apply (ie. Shuriken). Projectile weapons not effective in melee is to include all other ranged weapons; they have no "melee" use. Hybrid ranged/melee weapons are, effectively, treated as double weapons; you can use it either as a melee weapon (using appropriate weapon stats) or as a ranged weapon for a given attack.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ssyvan wrote:
Okay, thanks everyone for clearing that up! So that means I could use Two-Weapon Fighting, Rapid Shot, and Quick Draw to throw three daggers in a round?

Yes absolutely - but you do take the TWF penalties and the Rapid Shot penalties. So if we assume a Fighter level 6 with the feats you listed and Impr. TWF, he could make 5 attacks at BAB +6/+6/+6/+1/+1, but with the penalties it would be +2/+2/+2/-3/-3

None of those numbers factor in ability modifiers, weapon focus, Point Blank Shot, Deadly Aim, or anything else; just -2 for TWF & -2 for Rapid Shot


Not to derail this post too much, but how does thrown melee weapons and flanking work in conjunction with sneak attack? (bolding is my own)

PRD wrote:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime 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
PRD wrote:

When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

When in doubt about whether two characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two attackers' centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent's space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.

PRD wrote:
Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.

It sounds as though, I can threaten the opponent and flank them with my off-hand. Throw my main hand as a ranged attack and deal sneak attack damage because they're flanked, but I wouldn't get the +2 flank bonus for a melee attack. With Quick Draw, I should always be able to keep a weapon in hand, thus continuing to threaten the target. Did I interpret that correctly?


Krodjin wrote:
Ssyvan wrote:
Okay, thanks everyone for clearing that up! So that means I could use Two-Weapon Fighting, Rapid Shot, and Quick Draw to throw three daggers in a round?

Yes absolutely - but you do take the TWF penalties and the Rapid Shot penalties. So if we assume a Fighter level 6 with the feats you listed and Impr. TWF, he could make 5 attacks at BAB +6/+6/+6/+1/+1, but with the penalties it would be +2/+2/+2/-3/-3

None of those numbers factor in ability modifiers, weapon focus, Point Blank Shot, Deadly Aim, or anything else; just -2 for TWF & -2 for Rapid Shot

Thanks Krodjin! I was really hoping that was the case.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
Those weird firearms with melee weapons attached to them?

Pistol Cane Dagger?

What they need to stat, is the Duckfoot Pistol.

For the gentleman who has absolutely no g~$@$+n clue what he's doing.


Ssyvan wrote:
Okay, thanks everyone for clearing that up! So that means I could use Two-Weapon Fighting, Rapid Shot, and Quick Draw to throw three daggers in a round?

Yes, then you get into the throwing build question, can you TWF with one dagger and a blinkback belt?

Silver Crusade

cnetarian wrote:

Melee and Ranged Weapons: Melee weapons are used for making melee attacks, though some of them can be thrown as well. Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee.

A dagger is a melee weapon when used in melee and becomes a ranged weapon when thrown.

This line from the equipment chapter is explaining the various parts of the weapons tables.

It's saying that the weapons which lie under the 'melee weapons' part of the table 'are used for making melee attacks, though some of them can be thrown as well'.

It then goes on to explain that the weapons which lie under the 'ranged weapons' part of the table are separated from the melee weapons because they are either projectile weapons or they are thrown weapons which are not effective in melee, like darts (as opposed to thrown weapons which are effective in melee, like daggers, which lie under the melee weapon part of the table).

Basically, if a weapon is both a melee and a thrown weapon it lies under the melee weapon heading and has a range increment. Only those weapons which are not designed to be used in melee lie under the ranged weapon heading.

It's not trying to say that if it's not under the ranged weapon heading then it's not a ranged weapon, it's saying that if it's under the ranged heading then it's not a melee weapon.

So daggers are both melee AND ranged weapons. : )


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Why do so many players insist on rolling a Profession (lawyer) check to interpret the CRB?

The rules aren't always 100% clear or even consistent; just go with what makes sense

; _ ;


1. Open your rule book
2. Go to the weapon tables
3. Search for the weapon you want
Range Weapon: Go to 6
Melee weapon: Go to 5
5. You can throw your melee weapon (without 'Throw anything') if there is a 'Range' entry
6. Go to the weapon description and look for special rules that allow melee/range attacks under some circumstances or with penalties

As example take a look at the 'Javelin'


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber
Eridan wrote:

1. Open your rule book

2. Go to the weapon tables
3. Search for the weapon you want
Range Weapon: Go to 6
Melee weapon: Go to 5
5. You can throw your melee weapon (without 'Throw anything') if there is a 'Range' entry
6. Go to the weapon description and look for special rules that allow melee/range attacks under some circumstances or with penalties

7. ???????

8. PROFIT

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kudaku wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
Those weird firearms with melee weapons attached to them?

Pistol Cane Dagger?

What they need to stat, is the Duckfoot Pistol.

For the gentleman who has absolutely no g*$!&+n clue what he's doing.

exactly what I thought when I saw it....although I would love to have one just to hang it on the wall and say "WTF were they thinking!"

The Exchange

SlimGauge wrote:
Eridan wrote:

1. Open your rule book

2. Go to the weapon tables
3. Search for the weapon you want
Range Weapon: Go to 6
Melee weapon: Go to 5
5. You can throw your melee weapon (without 'Throw anything') if there is a 'Range' entry
6. Go to the weapon description and look for special rules that allow melee/range attacks under some circumstances or with penalties

7. ???????

8. PROFIT

Did I miss 4? Maybe 4 is "go into stealth mode" and I just didn't see it? Maybe 4 was a punk and is hiding?


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber

It's for moments like this where one man stands down a small mob.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Ssyvan wrote:

Not to derail this post too much, but how does thrown melee weapons and flanking work in conjunction with sneak attack? (bolding is my own)

PRD wrote:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime 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
PRD wrote:

When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

When in doubt about whether two characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two attackers' centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent's space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.

PRD wrote:
Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.
It sounds as though, I can threaten the opponent and flank them with my off-hand. Throw my main hand as a ranged attack and deal sneak attack damage because they're flanked, but I wouldn't get the +2 flank bonus for a melee attack. With Quick Draw, I should always be able to keep a weapon in hand, thus continuing to threaten the target. Did I interpret that correctly?

Not quite. Ranged attacks never benefit from flanking. If you want the sneak attack damage for throwing your daggers you need to find another way to get it (invisible, catch them flat-footed, etc).


anthonydido wrote:
Ssyvan wrote:

Not to derail this post too much, but how does thrown melee weapons and flanking work in conjunction with sneak attack? (bolding is my own)

PRD wrote:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime 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
PRD wrote:

When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

When in doubt about whether two characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two attackers' centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent's space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.

PRD wrote:
Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.
It sounds as though, I can threaten the opponent and flank them with my off-hand. Throw my main hand as a ranged attack and deal sneak attack damage because they're flanked, but I wouldn't get the +2 flank bonus for a melee attack. With Quick Draw, I should always be able to keep a weapon in hand, thus continuing to threaten the target. Did I interpret that correctly?
Not quite. Ranged attacks never benefit from flanking. If you want the sneak attack damage for throwing your daggers you need to find another way to get it (invisible, catch them flat-footed, etc).

Sneak attack requires that you are flanking. If you are chucking daggers at an adjacent opponent, you very well could be flanking them... all you need is an ally on the other side.

Why? Because you threaten them. Simple as that. You are flanking. You deal sneak attack damage on your attacks.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Remy Balster wrote:

Sneak attack requires that you are flanking. If you are chucking daggers at an adjacent opponent, you very well could be flanking them... all you need is an ally on the other side.

Why? Because you threaten them. Simple as that. You are flanking. You deal sneak attack damage on your attacks.

Hmm. Did some reading and it looks as though by RAW, this is legit. Although keep in mind that each one of those ranged attacks will provoke an attack of opportunity and you will still suffer negatives for them being in melee unless you have precise shot.


anthonydido wrote:
Remy Balster wrote:

Sneak attack requires that you are flanking. If you are chucking daggers at an adjacent opponent, you very well could be flanking them... all you need is an ally on the other side.

Why? Because you threaten them. Simple as that. You are flanking. You deal sneak attack damage on your attacks.

Hmm. Did some reading and it looks as though by RAW, this is legit. Although keep in mind that each one of those ranged attacks will provoke an attack of opportunity and you will still suffer negatives for them being in melee unless you have precise shot.

Right, I had planned on picking up Close-Quarter Thrower and Precise Shot pretty early.


Remy Balster wrote:
anthonydido wrote:
Ssyvan wrote:

Not to derail this post too much, but how does thrown melee weapons and flanking work in conjunction with sneak attack? (bolding is my own)

PRD wrote:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime 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
PRD wrote:

When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

When in doubt about whether two characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two attackers' centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent's space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.

PRD wrote:
Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.
It sounds as though, I can threaten the opponent and flank them with my off-hand. Throw my main hand as a ranged attack and deal sneak attack damage because they're flanked, but I wouldn't get the +2 flank bonus for a melee attack. With Quick Draw, I should always be able to keep a weapon in hand, thus continuing to threaten the target. Did I interpret that correctly?
Not quite. Ranged attacks never benefit from flanking. If you want the sneak attack damage for throwing your daggers you need to find another way to get it (invisible, catch them flat-footed, etc).

Sneak attack requires that you are flanking. If you are chucking daggers at an adjacent opponent, you very well could be flanking them... all you need is an ally on the other side.

Why? Because you threaten them. Simple as that. You are flanking. You deal sneak attack damage on your attacks.

"When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus.."

No melee attack means no flanking so that will not work, and "threaten" is for AoO's. Being able to reach/attack the opponent with a melee weapon is not the same as threatening them. I will however admit that there is not much difference, but I was point ingout the difference in terminology due to a debate I had on sundering, and the other poster pointed out that I had used the word "threaten" incorrectly which I had.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Threaten is used for flanking as well. You forgot the rest of that sentence:

flanking wrote:
...if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

In order to flank you need to threaten. Example: Barring snap shot, someone with a bow in their hand doesn't threaten any squares around them so they do not provide flanking.

Wraithstrike wrote:
Being able to reach/attack the opponent with a melee weapon is not the same as threatening them.

That is the very definition of threatening.

Threatening wrote:
Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn.

The rules for threatening just happen to be under the AoO section because that is when they are most used but that is not the only time the term is used.

I would say in this instance that they can sneak attack since, by RAW, all the rogue needs is to be flanking themselves, not gaining the advantage of someone else's flank. However, they wouldn't get the +2 bonus to hit since that requires a melee attack.


Zhayne wrote:
Those weird firearms with melee weapons attached to them?

I think he said effective.

SlimGauge wrote:
Or you can wield rifles as a two-handed club ! Wait, that's a different rules argument.

This is yet another part of the firearm rules... they can blow up literally %1.25 of the time that you take two shots with them, yet you can swing them around like a club no problems? Anyways.

Yes, I'm pretty sure you misread the line. Despite the superflouity of the wording, all thrown weapons are ranged weapons. At least when they're thrown.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can certainly attack an adjacent opponent with an unarmed strike, but if you aren't trained then you don't threaten with that attack.

This shows that 'threaten' and 'being able to attack' are not the same thing.

The person helping you get the flanking bonus needs to threaten; you don't.

Flanking wrote:
When making a melee attack...

Any bonuses you get, like the +2 to hit or Sneak Attack, are based on that line, which explains what an attack benefitting from flanking is.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

You can certainly attack an adjacent opponent with an unarmed strike, but if you aren't trained then you don't threaten with that attack.

This shows that 'threaten' and 'being able to attack' are not the same thing.

The person helping you get the flanking bonus needs to threaten; you don't.

Flanking wrote:
When making a melee attack...
Any bonuses you get, like the +2 to hit or Sneak Attack, are based on that line, which explains what an attack benefitting from flanking is.

As anthonydido points out, only the rogue must be flanking in order to gain sneak attack damage.

PRD wrote:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime 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.

It doesn't say that the attack must be an attack with a flanking bonus, just that the rogue is flanking the opponent.

In that scenario the rogue is flanking so long as they have the means to continue threatening their target. An unarmed strike is an exception to the rule that you threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack.

PRD wrote:
Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you're unarmed, you don't normally threaten any squares and thus can't make attacks of opportunity.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I will say this though. In order for the rogue to be flanking they would need a flanking partner. Otherwise you are just threatening. So if the rogue was flanking he would also be flanked with an ally on the other side. The 2 kinda go hand-in-hand.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
FAQ wrote:

Gang Up: Does this feat (page 161) allow you to flank a foe with ranged weapons?

The Gang Up feat allows you to count as flanking so long as two of your allies are threatening your opponent. The feat makes no mention of ranged attacks being included, and since flanking specifically refers to melee attacks, ranged attacks do not benefit from this feat. (JMB, 8/13/10)

Bolding relevant portions of this FAQ that goes right back to the Flanking wording.

There is a reason the section under Flanking starts with "When making a melee attack..." as was quoted above, and reiterated by Jason Bulmahn in this FAQ. You are only flanking when making a melee attack, barring a feat or ability overriding that base rule.

Sczarni

anthonydido wrote:

Threaten is used for flanking as well. You forgot the rest of that sentence:

flanking wrote:
...if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

In order to flank you need to threaten. Example: Barring snap shot, someone with a bow in their hand doesn't threaten any squares around them so they do not provide flanking.

Wraithstrike wrote:
Being able to reach/attack the opponent with a melee weapon is not the same as threatening them.

That is the very definition of threatening.

Threatening wrote:
Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn.

The rules for threatening just happen to be under the AoO section because that is when they are most used but that is not the only time the term is used.

I would say in this instance that they can sneak attack since, by RAW, all the rogue needs is to be flanking themselves, not gaining the advantage of someone else's flank. However, they wouldn't get the +2 bonus to hit since that requires a melee attack.

I do not believe this is correct. Wish that it were, but for the Rogue to get Sneak Attack from flanking alone they must be making a melee attack.

Keep in mind this is a good thing because if the Rogue were making a ranged attack against an adjacent creature (that threatened them), the Rogue would be provoking an AoO. Best to just stab them...

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

That's for the +2 bonus. Are you saying that if I am wielding a melee weapon but don't use it that I'm not flanking? Because I am surely providing a flank for my ally regardless of whether or not I actually make a melee attack.

I also agree that it's not a good tactic and the rogue would be better off just melee attacking.

Sczarni

Huh?. If you have a weapon that you threaten with, you can be providing a flank for an ally (presuming they meet the criteria for flanking themselves).

Neither you nor your ally would receive the benefits of flanking if you were not making melee attacks.

You have to make a melee attack in order to receive the benefits of flanking.

Edit: removed a word

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

That's not what it says under the description for sneak attack:

sneak attack wrote:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime 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.

bolded mine. Is the rogue not flanking regardless of whether or not he makes a melee attack?

Sczarni

Go read the rules for 'flanking'.

No one is disputing that a Rogue gets to apply Sneak Attack when they 'flank' their target. But in order to 'flank' your target you need to be making a melee attack.

As per the FAQ posted by Sniggevert just a few posts up thread the designers have confirmed that flanking does not apply to ranged attacks.


anthonydido wrote:

That's for the +2 bonus. Are you saying that if I am wielding a melee weapon but don't use it that I'm not flanking? Because I am surely providing a flank for my ally regardless of whether or not I actually make a melee attack.

I also agree that it's not a good tactic and the rogue would be better off just melee attacking.

Actually, it was Jason who was saying that in the FAQ. If it's not a melee attack then it is not a flanking attack.

That is not to say in your example that you would not be providing a flank to someone on the other side of a target who was making a melee attack.

If you hold a sword in one hand and dagger in the other, if you choose to throw the dagger the dagger does not count as a flanking attack (and you provoke and take a -4 for throwing into melee). If you stab with the dagger, you take none of those minuses, gain the benefits of flanking, which includes a +2 to hit.

Sczarni

Krodjin wrote:

Go read the rules for 'flanking'.

No one is disputing that a Rogue gets to apply Sneak Attack when they 'flank' their target. But in order to 'flank' your target you need to be making a melee attack.

As per the FAQ posted by Sniggevert just a few posts up thread the designers have confirmed that flanking does not apply to ranged attacks.

This post is not intended to be as rude as it appears when I re-read after posting...

I used to feel the same way as you and had my hopes dashed when I was building an Archer Rogue with Snap Shot feats... It doesn't work.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I didn't take it as such Krodjin. This is just a friendly debate to me. I have no horse in this race. I'm just trying to rule based on what's written.

Basically, what I am getting at is the wording for sneak attack probably should be changed if that was not the intent of it. They could have easily just said "when the rogue benefits from flanking" which would have been much clearer.

Sczarni

Personally i'd rather they make it so that Rogues can get to apply sneak attacked via 'ranged' flanking... I house rule it that way for my players. It's a heavy feat investment that is not unbalancing IMHO.


Sniggevert wrote:
anthonydido wrote:

That's for the +2 bonus. Are you saying that if I am wielding a melee weapon but don't use it that I'm not flanking? Because I am surely providing a flank for my ally regardless of whether or not I actually make a melee attack.

I also agree that it's not a good tactic and the rogue would be better off just melee attacking.

Actually, it was Jason who was saying that in the FAQ. If it's not a melee attack then it is not a flanking attack.

That is not to say in your example that you would not be providing a flank to someone on the other side of a target who was making a melee attack.

If you hold a sword in one hand and dagger in the other, if you choose to throw the dagger the dagger does not count as a flanking attack (and you provoke and take a -4 for throwing into melee). If you stab with the dagger, you take none of those minuses, gain the benefits of flanking, which includes a +2 to hit.

I completely agree that the attack isn't a flanking attack, but the attack doesn't have to be a flanking attack in order for the rogue to apply sneak attack damage. The only qualifier is that the rogue is flanking (which is different language than flanking attack, similar to attack action vs. full attack). Also, I know that it isn't a good option, but there are feats that let you get around a lot of the issues. Close-Quarters Thrower lets you throw in melee without provoking. Precise Shot lets you not take the -4 penalty for throwing into melee (which assuming you would always be doing if you are attempting to flank). Snap Shot allows you to throw your dagger instead of using a melee attack when someone provokes an AoO from you.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I would allow it in my home games regardless.

I don't think that quote by Jason applies in this situation either because the rogue isn't gaining any benefits from flanking. He is just providing a flank which, according to sneak attack, is all that is required. And again, you still provide a flank regardless of whether or not you attack with the weapon. Until they clear it up that is what it says and I don't see any other way to read it as it's written.


anthonydido wrote:

I would allow it in my home games regardless.

I don't think that quote by Jason applies in this situation either because the rogue isn't gaining any benefits from flanking. He is just providing a flank which, according to sneak attack, is all that is required. And again, you still provide a flank regardless of whether or not you attack with the weapon. Until they clear it up that is what it says and I don't see any other way to read it as it's written.

The Rogue would be benefiting though if the Rogue gets to Sneak Attack. Threatening so your ally is flanking is not the same as flanking yourself. The Gang Up FAQ means that making a ranged attack does not count for you flanking, even if you threaten. The purpose of that FAQ is to say that you do not count as flanking if you are using a ranged attack, whether using the Gang Up feat or not.

Snap Shot allows you to threaten with a ranged weapon; it does not allow you to actually be flanking with a ranged weapon. The intent of the flanking section pretty clearly seems to be that you have to be actually making a melee attack.

1 to 50 of 217 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Thrown Daggers, are they Ranged Weapons? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.