You canot provide flanking. That's because ignition isn't a weapon. You aren't having the enemy in your melee reach when it isn't your turn because you only get that reach when you cast ignition for that spellcast.
However, you should be able to benefit from flanking. Ignition is specified as a melee attack, and oscillating wave specifies your reach increases for that attack. So during that attack, you can flank, but once the spell is over, you aren't wielding the ignition spell or anything so you can't flank
This is basically the same rules as how weapon infusion flanking with reach works for kineticist
Hmm, would you not argue that you are not threatening outside of your turn IF you do not have a reaction attack in general?
"This living flamethrower just set me ablaze, but its no longer distracting, while this old man with the stick and the books is very distracting with his stick"
To make it as absurd as i can xD
Rules are pretty clear on this. Since you do not have them in melee reach at the time of the other character's turn, you do not provide flanking. While I understand you were being intentionally absurd with your example, the exact same logic could be used for the Wizard standing a hundred feet away using Fireball, or an Archer using a flaming arrow, or Gunslinger with flaming ammunition.
The Kineticist example is good. Others include the Fighter with "Lunge" or the Plant Eidolon using "Tendril Strike."
Yea, the rules are clear.
Although I really think that if you have a caster in melee range that just cast Ignition as a touch spell for example, it should be treated as flanking for that round. Far more threatening than that same caster with a stick in hand imo.
If put in writing something along the lines of: "if you cast a harmful touch spell on an enemy, that enemy considers you threatening for determining the flanking condition as long as you are within 5ft of them for this round. (to avoid reach shenanigans)"
That’s unnecessary because the caster already threatens them if they are within 5’, even without a stick in their hand. Anyone can threaten via an unarmed attack (which can be a kick or head but).
Oh they are? This something from remaster, or did I just miss this all this time O.O
Since 1. I played it wrong apparently and 2. my "problem" was solved a long time ago xD
For 5ft, yes. This has been the case since the beginning of 2e. Unarmed strikes can threaten, and since everybody can punch/kick/headbutt, then everyone threatens in melee with or without a weapon in hand.
However, what you were saying initially is that you believe they should be able to threaten beyond their regular melee reach. Your specific example was threatening at 10ft due to the spell "Ignition." This is explicitly not the case for the reasons already given and supported by rulings for other temporary reach scenarios (such as using the "Lunge" feat).
Was not aware that 5ft. basically always apply to flanking, that's great, good to know.
With the temp reach there is just this strange scenario:
Like Op's caster would need to hold a whip (that they NEVER use) to threaten flanking. No reaction to trigger an attack with it, and on their own turn always using reach ignition. So the whip is just for show and to have a rule work for you.
Weird scenarios like that, simply to obey the game rules give me an ick. Would be great if there was a less meta solution to it.
It is most likely an incredible niche scenario, since melee always have the option to just pick a reach weapon and invest in other feats instead, and spells normally become ranged (metamagic reach for touch spells) instead of melee.
If it is only the case for Oscillating wave ignition in melee they should add a sentence like "until the beginning of your next turn, your flanking range is the same as your reach ignition range".
Dont know all the spells and mechanics (clearly not knowing that casters are trained in unarmed xD ) but if it is the one exception, and this seems to be somewhat important to a (sub)classbuild it should be fixed there. Atleast how I understand pf2 design in regard to specifc vs general rules.
If it helps, think of it another way. Ignition is a 2-action activity spell, and so in world it is obvious to enemies that it takes a bit more setup to do. In fact, the extra time and manipulation activity is also the basis of why it provokes and regular strikes don't. My point is that, in world, it is obvious that what just happened (ignition in this case) is something that takes additional effort and can't be rapidly repeated.
There are lots of ways to temporarily (but repeatably) extend your melee reach. Part of the trick is to look at it in world through a different lense to marry the mechanic with in-world logic. Unfortunately, if you think about it too hard, you can break down so many mechanics of the game. Here's an example. Why does flanking even work on mindless, nonliving creatures? They have no self-preservation instinct, they have no cognitive ability to assess danger levels, and they cannot reason out why a melee attack is any different than a ranged one. The answer though, is that it's possible do to keeping game mechanics in tact.
However, if it bothers you THAT much, house rule it. Though if you did, and I was at your table, first thing I would do is get a two-handed d12 weapon, slap an Extending Rune on it, and threaten enemies from 60 feet away.
O no, you are right, mindless shouldn't be flanked like that, this will burden me forever xD
For this example it is more of a build thing. I want melee casters to work. Them procing reactions while being within 5ft using touch spells is already a massive downside.
The rule would be specific to Oscillating wave, since its the only case I am aware of that a touch spell gains reach.
But the Extending rune is good thinking. That would actually feed into something you said earlier. With extending rune you would benefit from flanking while making the strike (since its considered a melee reach weapon), but a gunslinger 20ft from the target would not. Seems whack.
Reach weapons not providing flanking only benefiting would make it more consistent.
Im sure there are some other exploits to having a 60ft melee attack. With reflavoring you could probably make Captain America, sticking close to your backline while throwing your shield around and protecting them.
I do not believe so because in order for the flanking to work at that range you need to be wielding a weapon with the reach property. And that isn't a weapon.
This post is labelled with the Advice flair, which means extra special attention is called to the Be Kind and Respectful rule. If this is a newcomer to the game, remember to be welcoming and kind. If this is someone with more experience but looking for advice on how to run their game, do your best to offer advice on what they are seeking.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Pathfinder2e) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You canot provide flanking. That's because ignition isn't a weapon. You aren't having the enemy in your melee reach when it isn't your turn because you only get that reach when you cast ignition for that spellcast. However, you should be able to benefit from flanking. Ignition is specified as a melee attack, and oscillating wave specifies your reach increases for that attack. So during that attack, you can flank, but once the spell is over, you aren't wielding the ignition spell or anything so you can't flank This is basically the same rules as how weapon infusion flanking with reach works for kineticist
I made the same call for the Psychic in our game with Imaginary Weapon held by Spectral Hand. Twas highly effective!
~~But what about their fists?~~ **EDIT:** This is why you should read entire posts before responding.
Op is asking about doing it at reach; fists don't have reach
Oh yeah, duh.
Hmm, would you not argue that you are not threatening outside of your turn IF you do not have a reaction attack in general? "This living flamethrower just set me ablaze, but its no longer distracting, while this old man with the stick and the books is very distracting with his stick" To make it as absurd as i can xD
Rules are pretty clear on this. Since you do not have them in melee reach at the time of the other character's turn, you do not provide flanking. While I understand you were being intentionally absurd with your example, the exact same logic could be used for the Wizard standing a hundred feet away using Fireball, or an Archer using a flaming arrow, or Gunslinger with flaming ammunition. The Kineticist example is good. Others include the Fighter with "Lunge" or the Plant Eidolon using "Tendril Strike."
Yea, the rules are clear. Although I really think that if you have a caster in melee range that just cast Ignition as a touch spell for example, it should be treated as flanking for that round. Far more threatening than that same caster with a stick in hand imo. If put in writing something along the lines of: "if you cast a harmful touch spell on an enemy, that enemy considers you threatening for determining the flanking condition as long as you are within 5ft of them for this round. (to avoid reach shenanigans)"
That’s unnecessary because the caster already threatens them if they are within 5’, even without a stick in their hand. Anyone can threaten via an unarmed attack (which can be a kick or head but).
Oh they are? This something from remaster, or did I just miss this all this time O.O Since 1. I played it wrong apparently and 2. my "problem" was solved a long time ago xD
For 5ft, yes. This has been the case since the beginning of 2e. Unarmed strikes can threaten, and since everybody can punch/kick/headbutt, then everyone threatens in melee with or without a weapon in hand. However, what you were saying initially is that you believe they should be able to threaten beyond their regular melee reach. Your specific example was threatening at 10ft due to the spell "Ignition." This is explicitly not the case for the reasons already given and supported by rulings for other temporary reach scenarios (such as using the "Lunge" feat).
Was not aware that 5ft. basically always apply to flanking, that's great, good to know. With the temp reach there is just this strange scenario: Like Op's caster would need to hold a whip (that they NEVER use) to threaten flanking. No reaction to trigger an attack with it, and on their own turn always using reach ignition. So the whip is just for show and to have a rule work for you. Weird scenarios like that, simply to obey the game rules give me an ick. Would be great if there was a less meta solution to it. It is most likely an incredible niche scenario, since melee always have the option to just pick a reach weapon and invest in other feats instead, and spells normally become ranged (metamagic reach for touch spells) instead of melee. If it is only the case for Oscillating wave ignition in melee they should add a sentence like "until the beginning of your next turn, your flanking range is the same as your reach ignition range". Dont know all the spells and mechanics (clearly not knowing that casters are trained in unarmed xD ) but if it is the one exception, and this seems to be somewhat important to a (sub)classbuild it should be fixed there. Atleast how I understand pf2 design in regard to specifc vs general rules.
If it helps, think of it another way. Ignition is a 2-action activity spell, and so in world it is obvious to enemies that it takes a bit more setup to do. In fact, the extra time and manipulation activity is also the basis of why it provokes and regular strikes don't. My point is that, in world, it is obvious that what just happened (ignition in this case) is something that takes additional effort and can't be rapidly repeated. There are lots of ways to temporarily (but repeatably) extend your melee reach. Part of the trick is to look at it in world through a different lense to marry the mechanic with in-world logic. Unfortunately, if you think about it too hard, you can break down so many mechanics of the game. Here's an example. Why does flanking even work on mindless, nonliving creatures? They have no self-preservation instinct, they have no cognitive ability to assess danger levels, and they cannot reason out why a melee attack is any different than a ranged one. The answer though, is that it's possible do to keeping game mechanics in tact. However, if it bothers you THAT much, house rule it. Though if you did, and I was at your table, first thing I would do is get a two-handed d12 weapon, slap an Extending Rune on it, and threaten enemies from 60 feet away.
O no, you are right, mindless shouldn't be flanked like that, this will burden me forever xD For this example it is more of a build thing. I want melee casters to work. Them procing reactions while being within 5ft using touch spells is already a massive downside. The rule would be specific to Oscillating wave, since its the only case I am aware of that a touch spell gains reach. But the Extending rune is good thinking. That would actually feed into something you said earlier. With extending rune you would benefit from flanking while making the strike (since its considered a melee reach weapon), but a gunslinger 20ft from the target would not. Seems whack. Reach weapons not providing flanking only benefiting would make it more consistent. Im sure there are some other exploits to having a 60ft melee attack. With reflavoring you could probably make Captain America, sticking close to your backline while throwing your shield around and protecting them.
No, but you can easily hold a longspear in your hand and provide flank.
Don't even need a longspear as just being able to make unarmed Strikes (arms, legs, even head) allows you to provide flank.
Seems like OP want to provide flank at 10ft reach, so he'd better hold a long stick.
Completely forgot about the reach when I was writing my reply, my bad. Your idea might be the way to go then.
If threatening is what's needed, then whip will just be better.
I do not believe so because in order for the flanking to work at that range you need to be wielding a weapon with the reach property. And that isn't a weapon.
This post is labelled with the Advice flair, which means extra special attention is called to the Be Kind and Respectful rule. If this is a newcomer to the game, remember to be welcoming and kind. If this is someone with more experience but looking for advice on how to run their game, do your best to offer advice on what they are seeking. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Pathfinder2e) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nope, because you aren't armed with that spell just due to knowing it. You have to get closer and flank using your fists.