Concentrated Fire and Attack rolls

[Wonderstell]

Concentrated Fire:

Your simultaneous ranged attacks punch through your foe’s defenses with ease.

Prerequisites: Point-Blank Shot, elf, weapon familiarity racial trait.

Benefit: If you and a single ally who also has this feat both ready an action to each make a ranged attack against the same opponent and choose the same condition for the readied action, when you and the ally make those attacks, each of you can use the highest of the two attack rolls for your attack roll. Furthermore, if you and your ally both hit the target, you can total the damage for both attacks before applying the target’s damage reduction or energy resistance.

***

Attack Roll:

An attack roll represents your attempt to strike your opponent on your turn in a round. When you make an attack roll, you roll a d20 and add your attack bonus. (Other modifiers may also apply to this roll.) If your result equals or beats the target’s Armor Class, you hit and deal damage.

***

So do I use the highest d20 roll, or the highest attack roll (which includes the attack bonus)?

Kind of an obvious question, but I've been using the highest d20 roll and then applied the separate bonuses. I got the impression that's how it should be because of the last sentence of the feat, but that could be referring to miss chance.

[blahpers]

Quote:

. . . each of you can use the highest of the two attack rolls for your attack roll.

Seems pretty straightforward. How would the last sentence of the feat (regarding damage totalling) change anything about the roll being used to hit?

Edit:

Aha, because in most cases "if you and your ally both hit" would have a redundant "both" as either both of you will miss or both of you will hit. There are a few cases where this wouldn't happen, such as if the target negated one of the hits somehow (e.g., mirror image in which one attack hits the image and the other hits the target; Crane Wing + total defense completely negating a hit) or had an AC bonus versus one of the attacks but not the other (can't think of an example of this at the moment).

[Chell Raighn]

blahpers wrote:

or had an AC bonus versus one of the attacks but not the other (can't think of an example of this at the moment).

Swashbuckler’s opportune parry and reposte would be a good example of that... there are also situations where an immediate action might make them an invalid target for one attack but not the other, such as being moved to another location (coincidentally the swashbuckler provides a solid example of this as well via dodging panache). Normally movement like that wouldn’t have any real effect on a ranged attack, but if they moved behind cover that they were adjacent too, then only one attack could even hit them.

[Wonderstell]

Would I use my own d20 roll for any critical threats or is that part of the higher attack roll I'm taking from my ally?

[LordKailas]

When I've read the feat before I assumed that it just referenced the physical number on the die and as a DM I would probably rule it that way, just because I see immediate exploits (since it's a teamwork feat) if you get to use the actual attack value of the roll. Of course, the exploitable interpretation may be the correct way to look at it.

If its determined that you get to use the highest attack value then any abilities you have based on your attack roll I imagine would have to reference the physical die associated with the highest resulting attack value. Since the feat says that you use that "attack roll".

[Derklord]

I presume the writer intended to refer to the actual d20 roll, but as written, it's the entire thing, with bonuses.

For crits, the way I see it, you actually use your own d20, no matter which attack roll you end up using. You use your own confirmation roll, and even automatically hit on a nat 20 (and miss on a nat 1). This is because crits (and fumbles) trigger on making an attack roll, while the feat lets you use the other character's attack roll.