Does Sneak Attack apply to ranged attacks when you are flanking?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 645 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

9 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

I know ranged attacks don't benefit from flanking bonus, and you don't normally threaten with a ranged weapon. But if you ARE flanking and make a ranged attack, it seems like it gets Sneak Attack damage, correct?

Sneak Attack wrote:

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 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. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and 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.

With a weapon that deals nonlethal damage (like a sap, whip, or an unarmed strike), a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage. She cannot use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage in a sneak attack, not even with the usual –4 penalty.

The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment.

Flanking 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.

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.

So, a rogue is holding a dagger (threatening) and across from an ally (flanking.) He activates his Cloak of the Hedge Wizard (conjuration) to use Acid Splash against the flanked opponent. He receives no flanking bonus since it's not a melee attack, but he is still flanking and so the Acid Splash does sneak damage, correct?

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

Nope. There is basically no way to get any sort of flanking bonus with a ranged attack.

Grand Lodge

I don't see anything that says it doesn't so I have to say yes.

ryric wrote:
Nope. There is basically no way to get any sort of flanking bonus with a ranged attack.

Are you denying that holding a dagger is threatening? Or are you saying that activating the cloak somehow negates holding a dagger?


I'm not looking for a flanking bonus. The ability asks if the "rogue flanks her target", and in this case the answer seems to be "yes." Unless there's something I'm missing?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Flanking wrote:
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus

You never get the flanking bonus when making ranged attacks, because the flanking bonus only applies to melee attacks.


I'm not sure why you'd want to use a spell where you could provoke an Attack of Opportunity as a Rogue, but I don't see why not. As for other flanking with a ranged weapon, well, I'm pretty sure that's why Snap Shot exists. As long as you're within 30 feet of them, and meet the prerequisites for flanking, I believe you would get Sneak Attack damage.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

This would be GM discretion since it results from a mechanical anomalies of a rule not being used in the spirit of the rule, but due to the wording it is not explicitly prevented. This is something I have never seen come up here on the boards, and I personally would shoot it down, since you can't flank with a ranged weapon. You are threatening when wielding a dagger, not holding. At least that is what I would rule with that cheese


Shinigami02 wrote:
I'm not sure why you'd want to use a spell where you could provoke an Attack of Opportunity as a Rogue, but I don't see why not. As for other flanking with a ranged weapon, well, I'm pretty sure that's why Snap Shot exists. As long as you're within 30 feet of them, and meet the prerequisites for flanking, I believe you would get Sneak Attack damage.

You don't meet the prereq for flanking though, as flanking requires a melee attack.

FAQ on Gang Up


It seems to me they aren't questioning the bonus, but perhaps the ability to get the sneak attack damage, in which case i would say yes, as they are flanked by your partner. Unless i misunderstood the question, and it is about the bonus in which case the answer is no with a slight chance of yes. If your ranged weapon is capable of threatening a melee range, then yes, if not, then no. What do i mean? Lets look at the oldschool 3.5 bow blades. This allows your bow to make piercing attacks like a dagger, so it does threaten, so you get the bonus, even if you fire not stab. It would still provoke AOOs, but there ya go. Now i dont know all the pathfinder books, not even 10% as much as i know of 3.5, but ihave seen feats/weapons/enchants that make a ranged weapon capable of threatening in melee range, so these weapons would allow a yes, but only if you used them, not the acid splash.


What about if you have Snap Shot, which lets you threaten with a ranged weapon? (And Improved Snap Shot improves the range you threaten, but strangely, Greater Snap Shot doesn't.)

Edit: Ninja'd!


No, you can only flank with melee attacks.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

You are only flanking when making a melee attack, it's not a state that turns on or off. So if you are making a ranged attack you are indeed not flanking, no matter how you might be positioned or threatening with an unrelated melee weapon.

A rogue could be dual wielding daggers, flanking a foe, melee stab with her first attack for sneak attack, then throw the offhand and get no sneak attack in the same sequence of attacks. Flanking is for melee only.


The opening phrase of Flanking is what stops you, here:
"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."

The entire concept of flanking is dependent on making a melee attack. Nothing else in the section changes that. (Every Zen Archer tries to make this work.)

You can try to talk your GM into a house rule, but that's really your only option.

Grand Lodge

But he is flanking, he just isn't getting the +2 bonus for making a melee attack while flanking.

The second line makes that even more clear "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."


Sniggevert wrote:
Shinigami02 wrote:
I'm not sure why you'd want to use a spell where you could provoke an Attack of Opportunity as a Rogue, but I don't see why not. As for other flanking with a ranged weapon, well, I'm pretty sure that's why Snap Shot exists. As long as you're within 30 feet of them, and meet the prerequisites for flanking, I believe you would get Sneak Attack damage.

You don't meet the prereq for flanking though, as flanking requires a melee attack.

FAQ on Gang Up

This is correct.

Even with Snap Shot et al., you cannot flank with ranged attacks. Those feats let you threaten, but not flank. So, you can help an ally flank with Snap Shot. However, you still yourself cannot actually flank.


claudekennilol wrote:

But he is flanking, he just isn't getting the +2 bonus for making a melee attack while flanking.

The second line makes that even more clear "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."

As was linked above, the Gang Up FAQ answers this.

Gang Up 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)

In short:

Q: Can I flank with a ranged weapon if I have the Gang Up feat?
A: No. You cannot flank with a ranged weapon.

If you could flank with a ranged weapon without this feat, this FAQ response makes no sense.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
claudekennilol wrote:
But he is flanking, he just isn't getting the +2 bonus for making a melee attack while flanking.

If he isn't getting the +2, he isn't flanking.


To make it clear, I am not in any way looking for the +2 flanking bonus, which the rules are very clear only apply to melee attacks.

The question is whether I am considered "flanking" because I am threatening with a melee weapon, and therefore able to get Sneak Attack on a ranged weapon.

ryric wrote:
You are only flanking when making a melee attack, it's not a state that turns on or off. So if you are making a ranged attack you are indeed not flanking, no matter how you might be positioned or threatening with an unrelated melee weapon.

As my counterexample to the bolded sentence, look at Outflank:

Outflank wrote:
Whenever you and an ally who also has this feat are flanking the same creature, your flanking bonus on attack rolls increases to +4. In addition, whenever you score a critical hit against the flanked creature, it provokes an attack of opportunity from your ally.

This demonstrates that both you and your ally are both considered "flanking", even though your ally is not making an attack.

Shar Tahl wrote:
This would be GM discretion since it results from a mechanical anomalies of a rule not being used in the spirit of the rule, but due to the wording it is not explicitly prevented. This is something I have never seen come up here on the boards, and I personally would shoot it down, since you can't flank with a ranged weapon. You are threatening when wielding a dagger, not holding. At least that is what I would rule with that cheese

Well I'm considering this for a PFS character, otherwise I would just ask my GM but I wanted to see if there was anything more official on the matter. By the way, I still am wielding the dagger, not just holding, even when casting a spell.

Shinigami02 wrote:
I'm not sure why you'd want to use a spell where you could provoke an Attack of Opportunity as a Rogue, but I don't see why not. As for other flanking with a ranged weapon, well, I'm pretty sure that's why Snap Shot exists. As long as you're within 30 feet of them, and meet the prerequisites for flanking, I believe you would get Sneak Attack damage.

Spoiler:
It's actually a question that I had regarding this build: my understanding is that if I Sneak Attack with a spell that does only fire damage, the Sneak Attack damage is also fire damage, and for fire-immune enemies I was wondering if I could use a spell like Nauseating Dart and get sneak damage. I suppose I could try to find another melee touch spell on the druid list, but I think this is an interesting question nonetheless.

fretgod99 wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:

But he is flanking, he just isn't getting the +2 bonus for making a melee attack while flanking.

The second line makes that even more clear "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."

As was linked above, the Gang Up FAQ answers this.

Gang Up 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)

In short:

Q: Can I flank with a ranged weapon if I have the Gang Up feat?
A: No. You cannot flank with a ranged weapon.

If you could flank with a ranged weapon without this feat, this FAQ response makes no sense.

I'm not even trying to flank with a ranged weapon, I'm flanking with a dagger.


No. Those who are telling you that you cannot flank with a ranged weapon are correct. The +2 bonus is what flanking is essentially.

You are not flanking with a ranged weapon, even if you are in a position where you normally could flnak if you were instead using a melee weapon.

Flanking applies to melee attacks only.

This is why ranged sneak attack is nearly worthless, and will continue to be for all time.

For your specific example of holding the dagger, you can flank with the dagger, but only the dagger could get sneak attack. Not the bow.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
RumpinRufus wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:

But he is flanking, he just isn't getting the +2 bonus for making a melee attack while flanking.

The second line makes that even more clear "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."

As was linked above, the Gang Up FAQ answers this.

Gang Up 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)

In short:

Q: Can I flank with a ranged weapon if I have the Gang Up feat?
A: No. You cannot flank with a ranged weapon.

If you could flank with a ranged weapon without this feat, this FAQ response makes no sense.

I'm not even trying to flank with a ranged weapon, I'm flanking with a dagger.

No...you're trying to flank with a ranged touch attack (Acid Splash). You're threatening with a dagger, but unless you use it for the attack you're not flanking with it.

You do not even have to threaten the target to flank them. You just have to be making a melee attack.

If you have an ally on the other side of your opponent, who is threatening the opponent, then if you punch him (without IUS) you would provoke an AOO AND get a +2 to your attack and get sneak attack dice added to your punch. In this case, you do not provide flanking for your ally, but flanking does not have to be a two-way street.


Sniggevert wrote:

No...you're trying to flank with a ranged touch attack (Acid Splash). You're threatening with a dagger, but unless you use it for the attack you're not flanking with it.

You do not even have to threaten the target to flank them. You just have to be making a melee attack.

If you have an ally on the other side of your opponent, who is threatening the opponent, then if you punch him (without IUS) you would provoke an AOO AND get a +2 to your attack and get sneak attack dice added to your punch. In this case, you do not provide flanking for your ally, but flanking does not have to be a two-way street.

So is it your opinion that the Outflank feat literally does nothing at all? Because if you have to be actively making a melee attack to be "flanking", then it is a 100% useless feat, as there is no way for two characters to be making simultaneous melee attacks.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
RumpinRufus wrote:
So is it your opinion that the Outflank feat literally does nothing at all? Because if you have to be actively making a melee attack to be "flanking", then it is a 100% useless feat, as there is no way for two characters to be making simultaneous melee attacks.

Flanking does not require both characters to be attacking at the same time. The second character has to be threatening when the first attacks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Exactly. If you look at the original situation:

Are both characters in the appropriate positions? Yes.
Are both characters threatening the target? Yes.
Are both characters flanking the target? Yes.
Can both characters apply sneak attack damage when they attack the target? Yes.

The state of "flanking" a target gives a bonus to melee attacks against them, but your character is either flanking them or they aren't. If they are flanking, they can use sneak attack. And in this situation, they are flanking them.

I strongly agree with RumpinRufus in this situation.


You're flanking if you're making a melee attack and an ally is threatening across from you.

If you're not making a melee attack your not flanking, even if you're in a situation where if you were making a melee attack it would be flanking.

Outflank works because When you make a melee attack you check to see if you have a person threatening across from you, and if so, then you both are "flanking" for that attack. Then when it's the other persons turn, and they make a ranged attack then you're not flanking with him because he's not making a melee attack, so there is no check for flanking.


Avoron wrote:

Exactly. If you look at the original situation:

Are both characters in the appropriate positions? Yes.
Are both characters threatening the target? Yes.
Are both characters flanking the target? Yes.
Can both characters apply sneak attack damage when they attack the target? Yes.

The state of "flanking" a target gives a bonus to melee attacks against them, but your character is either flanking them or they aren't. If they are flanking, they can use sneak attack. And in this situation, they are flanking them.

I strongly agree with RumpinRufus in this situation.

Except if you make a ranged attack you're no longer flanking. Flanking isn't a state. You don't give the flanked status to your enemy, nor do you gain the flanking status. So flanking, much like off-hand, only exists when it's being used and otherwise isn't there. So yes, the characters can apply sneak attack damage if they attack in such a way to be flanking, but attacking with a ranged weapons means you aren't flanking for that attack.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Avoron wrote:
Can both characters apply sneak attack damage when they attack the target? Yes.

The qualifier being 'yes, with a melee attack'. For all the reasons stated above.


Avoron wrote:

Exactly. If you look at the original situation:

Are both characters in the appropriate positions? Yes.
Are both characters threatening the target? Yes.
Are both characters flanking the target? Yes.
Can both characters apply sneak attack damage when they attack the target? Yes.

The state of "flanking" a target gives a bonus to melee attacks against them, but your character is either flanking them or they aren't. If they are flanking, they can use sneak attack. And in this situation, they are flanking them.

I strongly agree with RumpinRufus in this situation.

Your position is that "flanking" is, essentially, just a positional thing. As long as the positions are satisfied, you are "flanking" and can sneak attack because of denied DEX, etc.

However, the Gang Up FAQ quite literally says ranged weapons do not benefit from the Gang Up feat. The only benefit provided by the Gang Up feat is to change the positional requirements of flanking.

What your positions means, then, is that ordinary flanking (which is only determined by relative position of allies and enemies) does apply to ranged attacks. However, the increased opportunities to flank provided by the Gang Up feat which only changes the positional aspect of flanking does not apply to ranged attacks.

If flanking is only positional, why don't ranged attacks benefit from the increased opportunities to flank provided by the Gang Up feat? The FAQ explicitly says they do not. It only stands to reason then that ordinary flanking won't provide the benefit, either.

Either flanking is solely positional, and then the Gang Up FAQ literally makes no sense, or flanking requires a relevant attack type on top of being in the appropriate position.

The only question remaining, frankly, is whether the Snap Shot chain of feats allows a person to actually flank with a ranged weapon (current RAW reads no, because flanking requires a melee attack, but there is a fair argument for RAI to allow it because you are threatening).


I retract my previous statement.
Upon closer examination of the "Attack Roll Modifiers" table, it appears I was incorrect.

The ranged attack roll modifier for being on higher ground is "+0".
The ranged attack roll modifier for flanking is "-".

The only way I can see to interpret that is that a character is never considered flanking for the purposes of making a ranged attack. Otherwise, why wouldn't it just say +0?

Although most of the arguments in this thread don't fully apply.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Thanks for that catch Avoron. I'll keep it in mind for future arguments.


Avoron wrote:

I retract my previous statement.

Upon closer examination of the "Attack Roll Modifiers" table, it appears I was incorrect.

The ranged attack roll modifier for being on higher ground is "+0".
The ranged attack roll modifier for flanking is "-".

The only way I can see to interpret that is that a character is never considered flanking for the purposes of making a ranged attack. Otherwise, why wouldn't it just say +0?

Although most of the arguments in this thread don't fully apply.

But that's the modifier for the attack. The Sneak Attack ability does not care whether the attack is considered to be flanking, only whether the rogue is considered to be flanking. And the rogue meets all the criteria, RAW, of flanking.


RumpinRufus wrote:
Avoron wrote:

I retract my previous statement.

Upon closer examination of the "Attack Roll Modifiers" table, it appears I was incorrect.

The ranged attack roll modifier for being on higher ground is "+0".
The ranged attack roll modifier for flanking is "-".

The only way I can see to interpret that is that a character is never considered flanking for the purposes of making a ranged attack. Otherwise, why wouldn't it just say +0?

Although most of the arguments in this thread don't fully apply.

But that's the modifier for the attack. The Sneak Attack ability does not care whether the attack is considered to be flanking, only whether the rogue is considered to be flanking. And the rogue meets all the criteria, RAW, of flanking.

Except that pesky melee attack requirement.

Jason Bulmahn wrote:
...and since flanking specifically refers to melee attacks...


The rogue is only flanking if it's making a melee attack threatening someone while their ally across from them is making a melee attack. The moment a ranged attack enters the equation that attack, and the person making that attack, are no longer flanking.

Flanking doesn't exist if there's not a melee attack being made. This is something, like off-hand, that only exists while being used. So if you're not making a melee attack, you can't be flanking. Nothing in anything says you're flanking if two people across an enemy threaten that enemy. It says you're flanking if you make a melee attack.


RumpinRufus: I don't think attacks can be considered flanking, which is why I originally believed a threatening character in the right position was flanking for all purposes.

Either the character is considered flanking while making a ranged attack, or they aren't. If they were considered flanking, then the Attack Roll Modifier would be +0. I don't think individual attacks can be "flanking" or "not flanking."


Chess Pwn wrote:

The rogue is only flanking if it's making a melee attack threatening someone while their ally across from them is making a melee attack. The moment a ranged attack enters the equation that attack, and the person making that attack, are no longer flanking.

Flanking doesn't exist if there's not a melee attack being made. This is something, like off-hand, that only exists while being used. So if you're not making a melee attack, you can't be flanking. Nothing in anything says you're flanking if two people across an enemy threaten that enemy. It says you're flanking if you make a melee attack.

More rules that contradict these claims:

Threatening Illusion wrote:

Benefit: You can use this metamagic feat only on illusion (figment) spells.

A threatening illusion spell causes one target to believe your illusion is a threat. Choose one 5-foot square within the area of your illusion; that square threatens the target as long as it is adjacent. Thus, if you or an ally is on the opposite side of the target, it is considered flanking.

No attack is being made, no attack is needed. They are just perpetually "considered flanking" as long as they are in position.


And even more rules against the "flanking only exists during attacks" claims:

Enfilading Fire wrote:
Benefit: You receive a +2 bonus on ranged attacks made against a foe flanked by 1 or more allies with this feat.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

None of which allows you to be considered flanking with a ranged weapon unfortunately.


I'm not flanking with a ranged weapon, I'm flanking with a dagger.

Enfilading Fire makes it very clear that you can be "flanking" even when you are not making an attack. Thus, although I am making a ranged attack, I am still flanking with a dagger. Because I am flanking, I get Sneak Attack.


what about the Pack Flank feat?
Benefit: When you and your companion creature have this feat, your companion creature is adjacent to you or sharing your square, and you both threaten the same opponent, you are considered to be flanking that opponent, regardless of your actual positioning.

With this it says you are considered flanking regardless so long as you threaten. Combined with Snap Shot this would equal Flanking with a ranged attack. Combined with holding a dagger and casting a ranged touch spell - you are still flanking.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
RumpinRufus wrote:
I'm not flanking with a ranged weapon

Then you don't get sneak attack with it either.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
RumpinRufus wrote:
I'm not flanking with a ranged weapon, I'm flanking with a dagger.
Then you don't get sneak attack with it either.

Can you post any rules to support that? Because the rules I have seen state:

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.


That is a spell, it gives an effect. It is able to override the general condition for flanking.

Grand Lodge

I still agree with Rufus. He is flanking because of the dagger. Therefor he gets sneak attack damage with any attack he makes against the target.

This also implies to me that a rogue/zen archer would get his sneak attacks when firing in melee since he has IUS. (assuming he were flanking)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

If that is the case, it only works with thrown weapons, or the monk/rogue you mention. And without Point Blank Master, will provoke.

RumpinRufus wrote:
Can you post any rules to support that?

On further review, I find nothing more than what has been posted in this thread. The language is imprecise.

Scarab Sages

There is no condition called "flanking" or "flanked". Flanking is a conditional bonus that only applies to melee attacks, and only lasts for the duration of that melee attack.

There is simply no way under the rules as written to allow a ranged attack a flanking bonus.


Imbicatus wrote:

There is no condition called "flanking" or "flanked". Flanking is a conditional bonus that only applies to melee attacks, and only lasts for the duration of that melee attack.

There is simply no way under the rules as written to allow a ranged attack a flanking bonus.

This argument has already been invalidated by the existence of Enfilading Fire.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Crap - i wanted to side with you RumpinRufus - but i found the one rule that shows why what you want to do won't work:

Under the rules of Combat, under "Cast a Spell" there is the folowing line:
While casting a spell, you don't threaten any squares around you.

So you no longer threaten with the dagger while you cast the acid splash -
or any other spell you may have wanted to cast - and therefore you are not flanking while you cast that spell - and therefor you cannot get the sneak attack damage.

Scarab Sages

RumpinRufus wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:

There is no condition called "flanking" or "flanked". Flanking is a conditional bonus that only applies to melee attacks, and only lasts for the duration of that melee attack.

There is simply no way under the rules as written to allow a ranged attack a flanking bonus.

This argument has already been invalidated by the existence of Enfilading Fire.

Enfilading Fire is not the only example of a feat that literally does nothing RAW.

Grand Lodge

Oddman80 wrote:

Crap - i wanted to side with you RumpinRufus - but i found the one rule that shows why what you want to do won't work:

Under the rules of Combat, under "Cast a Spell" there is the folowing line:
While casting a spell, you don't threaten any squares around you.

So you no longer threaten with the dagger while you cast the acid splash -
or any other spell you may have wanted to cast - and therefore you are not flanking while you cast that spell - and therefor you cannot get the sneak attack damage.

Welp, there it is.

1 to 50 of 645 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Does Sneak Attack apply to ranged attacks when you are flanking? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.