Change to "Feint" maneuver ...

A while back I posted on a few boards to get some feedback (this amongst them) to changing the default of how the 'feint' maneuver works.

IRL, it's KING of combat - seriously. If you can fake out your opponent, and commit them to a false defense, you can blow past their defenses entirely and really punish them for it.

The current "feint" only affects targets with any sort of doge/dex types of bonuses and only helps in those situations (ie: you CAN NOT "fake out" anyone other than high dex/dodgy types of characters).

This solution comes with a final suggestion by Dabbler of these boards (thanks) in helping to hash out the final version I'm likely going to adopt in my games from here forward.

Basically, it's a wording change from working on dex/dodge loss only to include the following statement, more or less:

"[dex/dodge loss existing text], OR impose a flat -5 penalty to the target for the duration of the round. Whichever is worse for the target is what will be used."

So, if you get a dex/dodge monstrosity - it'll negate those boons (still leaving things flat) IF it's greater than a net +5 they gain from those types of boons. If it's less than a -5 to AC, then they take the -5 to AC.

Duration, IMO, should last like normal and as dictated by the Feint feat lines.

Why -5 ?

I think the effectiveness of the feint should vary with the type of the armor. For example, normal feint would allow to ignore a part (or all ?) of the bonus of a light armor, improved feint medium armor, greater feint heavy armor. Because if we're to base the rules on IRL combat, a full plate is supposed to allow the combattant to neglect his defense in comparison to the less covering types of armor.

Another possibility is to inflict the target of a feint a dexterity penalty (say -5 normal, -10 improved, -15 greater). That makes it equally effective against armored or agile comabattants before greater feint (since even heavy armor builds have a 10 dex to avoid penalties to AC), and greater feint confers a slight advantage to armor wearers, which seems justified. The problem is that it doesn't allow for sneak attack without making an exception to the rules.

Why should feinting make you more accurate in hitting the seams and weak points of armor? I mean, you don't need to move for armor to protect you (it applies while flat-footed).

Feinting sounds like you make someone commit to active defense against a direction/area/approach that you aren't attacking. Active defense being defensive movements (posture, dodge, etc).

The only thing I could see working is to maybe also remove the shield bonus, since you could say your feint is to purposefully make the shield move towards a direction that will momentarily let you get by.

.

Honestly, shield bonuses to AC always seemed more like they were appropriate as active defense, and applied towards things that Dex bonus to AC would work.

There was a feat in PHBII that allowed applying your shield bonus against touch attacks and what amounted to combat maneuver defense in 3.5e.
I think that's rather telling.

You might consider allowing the attacker to alter the feint benefit from "defender loses Dex bonus to AC for next attack" to "defender is effectively flanked", ie the attacker gains a +2 circumstance bonus on the next attack roll against that defender. The latter benefit would also not stack with the normal flanking bonus.

Interesting ideas, but they all needlessly complicate things, IMO.

Currently, the only adjustment comes in the form of what happens when you FAIL your feint checks. It's either "same as normal" or "-5 to current AC rating."

It's very simple and very straight forward/streamlined.

Fred's Suggestion would have a re-write to include what feint does to particular armor types at particular degrees of Feat interaction (I think this is where you're going). IMO, that's almost like going back to 1e's Armor vs. Wpn Type modifications - too much tracking for too little gain.

And - it would still let sneak attack work just fine - existing rules are unchanged, so a feint failure would still mean "flat footed" even against the dex 8 target.

Kaisoku's bit isn't about Armor as "armor" but as AC as your overall "defensive" rating. Keep in mind how darn near everything in this system is an abstraction somehow. AC is no different, and so, if you get "faked out" in combat, you're easier to hit. Period. No need to over-complicate it beyond that. Negating shield-bonuses, however, *is* interesting - possibly worthy as a feat itself, but not as part of Feint (unless that -5 would blow past the shield bonus anyway - then *descriptively* you can call it how ever you'd like, eh?).

delabarre - flanking ... interesting. I'm not sure where to go with it, though as it's very, very odd. To "flank" with no one present is odd, and to get no additional benefit if someone IS present is likewise odd. Maybe a 'flank' or +2 flat bonus to hit in addition would be a thought. Maybe as an add-on for the advanced feat-line for Feinting?

Fred's Suggestion would have a re-write to include what feint does to particular armor types at particular degrees of Feat interaction

With the first option, yeah, but that's not a lot to write. Something like

And - it would still let sneak attack work just fine - existing rules are unchanged

With my second suggestion, I was actually (should have written it) thinking of replacing the "deny the dexterity bonus" with "apply a dexterity penalty", for it seemed redundant and cumbersome to have two similar effects. But yes, they can stack too.