Dirty Trick am I missing something??

[Katt De Grey]

Is there a feat "Dirty Trick" or am I missing something?
Found the "Improved" and "Greater" versions but no regular Dirty Trick can I find.

OR is this just an aspect of the Dirty Trick Combat Maneuver ??

Thanks in advance for all of the help.

[Themetricsystem]

Katt De Grey wrote:

Is there a feat "Dirty Trick" or am I missing something?

Found the "Improved" and "Greater" versions but no regular Dirty Trick can I find.

OR is this just an aspect of the Dirty Trick Combat Maneuver ??

Thanks in advance for all of the help.

Dirty Trick is a new combat maneuver.

Hidden for wall of text:

APG wrote:

Dirty Trick

You can attempt to hinder a foe in melee as a standard action. This maneuver covers any sort of situational attack that imposes a penalty on a foe for a short period of time. Examples include kicking sand into an opponent’s face to blind him for 1 round, pulling down an enemy’s pants to halve his speed, or hitting a foe in a sensitive spot to make him sickened for a round. The GM is the arbiter of what can be accomplished with this maneuver, but it cannot be used to impose a permanent penalty, and the results can be undone if the target spends a move action. If you do not have the Improved Dirty Trick feat or a similar ability, attempting a dirty trick provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.

If your attack is successful, the target takes a penalty. The penalty is limited to one of the following conditions: blinded, dazzled, deafened, entangled, shaken, or sickened. This condition lasts for 1 round. For every 5 by which your attack exceeds your opponent’s CMD, the penalty lasts 1 additional round. This penalty can usually be removed if the target spends a move action. If you possess the Greater Dirty Trick feat, the penalty lasts for 1d4 rounds, plus 1 round for every 5 by which your attack exceeds your opponent’s CMD. In addition, removing the condition requires the target to spend a standard action.

[Paul Watson]

Katt De Grey wrote:

Is there a feat "Dirty Trick" or am I missing something?

Found the "Improved" and "Greater" versions but no regular Dirty Trick can I find.

OR is this just an aspect of the Dirty Trick Combat Maneuver ??

Thanks in advance for all of the help.

It's just like Improved Sunder and Greater Sunder, a modifier of the Dirty Trick combat manoeuvre.

[Katt De Grey]

Thanks again, that is what I was getting from the reading, but just wanted to make sure before using it.

[Varthanna]

Since this thread is already here, what are people's general opinions of this combat maneuver? My initial thought is why ever try to get any other condition besides Blinded? All the others seem drastically less useful.

[Are]

Dazzled and Shaken have no reason to be chosen, since Blinded and Sickened (respectively) do everything they do plus more.

Blinded is very good against everyone. Deafened is useful against spellcasters that rely on verbal spells. Entangled is ok. Sickened is pretty good.

One thing to consider beyond which one is best is "which one is it more likely that people will not use a move/standard action to end". Almost everyone will use an action to end the Blinded, Deafened or Entangled conditions. However, I can envision people not wanting to spend an action to end Sickened, which can make it the choice to go for, since it will have a lasting effect as opposed to a half-turn effect.

[Mabven the OP healer]

Varthanna wrote:

Since this thread is already here, what are people's general opinions of this combat maneuver? My initial thought is why ever try to get any other condition besides Blinded? All the others seem drastically less useful.

The wording of the feat leaves which conditions are options for the feat. So, how would you blind someone? I can think of 3 obvious ways, I am sure there are more: kick sand in their face, splash them with a caustic liquid or powder, or wrap their cloak or other handy piece of fabric around their face. So, maybe you are fighting inside and there is no sand or ash to kick in the enemy's face, he does not wear a cloak and the dm determines that you can't get other fabric over their head effectively, and the enemy wears a helmet with a visor. So, your dm has determined that blinded is not a condition you can cause with dirty trick.

Also, sickened is a very handy debuff to pretty much all rolls that stacks with any spell debuffs that casters may have used on the enemy, and even shaken can be awesome if you can get it to last more than one round, because it seems from the feat's description that it is not prevented from escalating shaken to frightened with 2 applications, in the way that the intimidate skill is limited. Entangled can also be a very handy condition to apply in the right situation.

[YuenglingDragon]

Mabven the OP healer wrote:

The wording of the feat leaves which conditions are options for the feat. So, how would you blind someone? I can think of 3 obvious ways, I am sure there are more: kick sand in their face, splash them with a caustic liquid or powder, or wrap their cloak or other handy piece of fabric around their face. So, maybe you are fighting inside and there is no sand or ash to kick in the enemy's face, he does not wear a cloak and the dm determines that you can't get other fabric over their head effectively, and the enemy wears a helmet with a visor. So, your dm has determined that blinded is not a condition you can cause with dirty trick.

Bah, you're just not thinking creatively enough. In the time it took my page to load and to format this I thought of two ways to blind a person in the situation you designed.

1. Smash the pommel of your sword into the helmet denting the visor so this he can't see or simply spin it around backwards.
2. Keep a spare pouch with a wide mouth on your person and just slip it over his head.

Mabven the OP healer wrote:

Also, sickened is a very handy debuff to pretty much all rolls that stacks with any spell debuffs that casters may have used on the enemy, and even shaken can be awesome if you can get it to last more than one round, because it seems from the feat's description that it is not prevented from escalating shaken to frightened with 2 applications, in the way that the intimidate skill is limited. Entangled can also be a very handy condition to apply in the right situation.

You're right about shaken to frightened. I hadn't noticed it before but it does seem to have that possibility. The only problem is that the effect of a dirty trick can be ended with a move action. Unless an opponent decides a full round action is better than staying shaken or avoiding being frightened, you won't be able to do that. Unless, of course, you have a partner who is also good at dirty tricks to follow up on your own. Now the only question is if the standard actions of two PC's is worth frightening an opponent.

[Phil. L]

I think dirty trick is dependent on what your GM allows you to get away with at the time. Also certain creatures would be immune to certain conditions. You couldn't blind a grimlock for instance, but you could certain deafen it, while a creature immune to the sickened condition (an undead) could be dazzled instead. Also, as has already been posted these minor conditions might not cause a creature to want to lose a move action.

[Varthanna]

Hmm, tag-teaming with somebody that's good at demoralizing (for the stacking effects) seems like a good choice, too.

[Velderan]

Varthanna wrote:

Since this thread is already here, what are people's general opinions of this combat maneuver? My initial thought is why ever try to get any other condition besides Blinded? All the others seem drastically less useful.

Heh, I was going to say the same thing. First off, I totally love it. Whether the options are all equally good, it left me thinking "why aren't the other maneuvers more like this?" Why not have trip/grapple, or sunder/disarm, or other maneuvers to make characters multi-trick ponies.

Yes, from an optimizing standpoint, I'd never use anything but blind unless I was grouped with an intimidate-based fighter. But from an RP perspective, there are plenty of cool things to do with it, and one foe can be struck by more than one maneuver that way.

For example, I like to occasionally swarm my players with hordes of goblins. From now on, they'll all be employing this feat, so, with 3 goblins or so per PC, I can see the use (Goblin 1 may push the wizard's cap down, while goblin two bites him in the nethers and goblin 3 vomits on him. I could get creative).

[NotMousse]

Sounds like I'm getting the AGP...

[Lyrax]

I fought with a guy who wore gloves, and he loves to throw a glove into his opponent's face and then follow up with a strike. It was kind of like blinding, but also like a feint attack.

Two dirty tricksters (a fighter and a rogue?) could be an awesome combo. They could easily get an opponent nauseated. Or frightened, and then take AoO's on the enemy when they leave...

[Ravingdork]

I still don't see how my giving up a standard action (which may well provoke) to POSSIBLY get him to use up his move action is a fair trade.

Even if I spend 2 feats, it's still a standard action for a standard action.

[Lyrax]

Ravingdork wrote:

I still don't see how my giving up a standard action (which may well provoke) to POSSIBLY get him to use up his move action is a fair trade.

Even if I spend 2 feats, it's still a standard action for a standard action.

If you're fighting a powerful BBEG, it could very well be worth it, as long as you have the one feat to deny him an AoO. Or if you're fighting a really strong zombie, or a slowed creature. Or if you just want the guy to be blinded long enough for the rogue to get into a flanking position. It's a situational benefit, not intended to be used in every single combat, but I can see some good uses.

[Velderan]

Ravingdork wrote:

I still don't see how my giving up a standard action (which may well provoke) to POSSIBLY get him to use up his move action is a fair trade.

Even if I spend 2 feats, it's still a standard action for a standard action.

Well, A: being blinded sucks (as do the other things), which he's still stuck with until his action. So, that right there is pretty good. B: he can't full attack on a round he takes his move action to remove the effect, so, if you think in terms of economy of actions, it's trading a standard for a full attack.

I mean, you are right, it's not exactly awesome and game-breaking, it's just neat. I'd use it.

[Zurai]

Ravingdork wrote:

I still don't see how my giving up a standard action (which may well provoke) to POSSIBLY get him to use up his move action is a fair trade.

Even if I spend 2 feats, it's still a standard action for a standard action.

That's because you're not thinking like a team member. Delay your action until directly after the target acts, then dirty trick: blind him and your ranged rogue can sneak attack him with a full attack, just as an example. Or, with Greater Dirty Trick, you basically stunlock one enemy (it still gets a move action, but it can't attack with a move action), giving your other three party members essentially carte blanch to kill it.

[Varthanna]

Yea, you wouldnt use it going solo against somebody, but it really ruins their day when its four against one. Economy of actions and all jazz. Stun-locking them is spicy sauce, as Zurai pointed out.

[YuenglingDragon]

Ravingdork wrote:

I still don't see how my giving up a standard action (which may well provoke) to POSSIBLY get him to use up his move action is a fair trade.

Even if I spend 2 feats, it's still a standard action for a standard action.

Velderan and Zurai have the right of it, I think. Eliminating the enemies ability to full attack is pretty strong against melee based baddies. Less so against a caster who will nuke you with his standard action, but still strong as it eliminates his ability to move more than 5 feet from you and levies the status effects that all your pals get to take advantage of.

Lets say that the enemy has a dex bonus to AC of 3. With the additional -2 penalty levied by blinded you just eliminated the attack penalty of your fighter friend's Dazing Assault. Now he's fubar'd forever. Forever. Loss of a standard action is sure as sh*t worth that.

[Arkadwyn]

I still don't get it. When I first saw this Combat maneuver I thought it would be really cool, but it's really not...I mean, why would I want to give someone any of these conditions if they could end them with a move action when I could just as easily trip, grapple, or disarm them and all of those either give me an attack of opportunity (in all likelihood) or prevent the person from moving, and are much harder to remove than the Dirty Trick effect is.

I mean, throwing sand in someone's eyes is the classic one-on-one fight maneuver, but it's not at all useful the way Dirty Trick is written. If the action of removing the condition provoked an attack of opportunity then I think it would make sense, but as written it is useless except for those weird, multi-skill/spell/feat combos.

Adding the AOO balances it perfectly with Trip and Disarm I think and makes it worthwhile. You throw sand in the guy's eyes and if it works you still get to smack him when he tries to clear them. Your smacking him is more effective than if he is tripped in some circumstances, but not all since you get +4 to hit the prone guy with no dex bonus, but only +2 to hit the blinded one. Yes rogues can more out of this than other characters, but shouldn't rogues be the ones most likely to benefit from a Dirty Trick???

[ryan beller]

Arkadwyn your not thinking how to use dirty trick clearly. Yes its only a move action to remove however this is how i use it in my group. I simply delay my action till my group members act directly after me and use blind or sicken on the appropriate creature allowing maximum attacks on it before it can remove the effect. I use a reach weapon so no attacks of opportunity hit me. as soon as a creature is blinded my party can then gang bang a creature that has NO DEX MOD added to defense and -2 ac this means almost all your groups attacks targeting that creature will hit and your rogue gets sneak attack its all in the timing. Also since the creature is blind it is fairly safe to move around it to get flanking bonuses due to the 50% concealment!

Sure trip gives melee characters +4 to hit but what about any ranged characters? they will take a penalty to hit not good for rogues back stab either! not only that but a lot of creatures are either immune to trip or have a very high bonus against it.

Grapple means that your also out of combat and if your a healer *oracle of battle* like i am grappling is NEVER a good idea. I just use entangle not only does it reduce movement to 1/2 it also applies nasty penalties to attack and Dex sure they can move but not far enough to matter and it almost always forces my GM to use the move action to remove it.

Disarm is also kinda MEH imo all they have to do is pick the weapon back up and what about natural attacks those cant be disarmed with dirty trick i can just reduce the effectiveness of a characters attacks directly my gm HATES me i lock down so much stuff with dirty trick its not even funny

My gm even lets me stack effects from dirty trick I can take a vital striking monk and turn him into a wet towel with blind and entangle, spell casters are my favorite since most spells are a full round to cast you use deafen and they cant cast any spells that require them to hear the casting essentially completely locking them down.

Dirty trick is a multi purpose feat it can be used in almost ANY situation if your smart a person will pick up quick dirty trick then be able to attack a blind, entangled, sickened, shaken, dazzled character right afterwards. You just have to be smart enough to use it correctly.

In my opinion Dirty trick is over powered just because of its sheer utility