Daenal's page

Ferious, that is very true. One doesn't negate the other, it simply help validate my point. The text is still as it stands and the verbiage states it is only you, not your allies.

Let's say for example that it was that way, it would be totally broken in the sense that that now applies to everyone. Including the fighters, the other rogues in the group, everyone. It makes them easier to hit for everyone, allows another rogue to sneak attack them without a flank, makes it easier to hit them with dex based saves, etc. That would be broken in my opinion. With just two rogues, that makes greater feint so powerful it is insane. Especially if one of the rogues is built around feint. Trust me on this, I am dealing with it in my tenth level campaign and until I went back a reread, the rogue with feint is doing near 120hp per round if he rolls half decently.

If you have one person take the feint path, the teamwork one is worthless as now everyone gets it anyways. It just helps my case is all.

Crazi, I didn't know about that feat. That really sinks it home then. If Greater Feint was as people are saying, then Feint Partner would be absolutely worthless and they never would have made it a teamwork feat. That tells me everything I need to know. Awesome.

Burko, Yes, but again it says your next turn and refers you back to the original feint so it doesn't change the wording that it is still only applied to you. It just makes it much longer. It doesn't say he loses it entirely, it states he loses "THAT" bonus, referring back to the original loss in the original feint rule so my point is still valid based on verbiage.

Ryric, Like that would be a first. There are lots of feats out there that are basically worthless or very, very situational at best. I mean, look at toughness.

See now I don't see where this is written anywhere that it helps others. The reason I say this is I have a rogue doing a feint rogue and it only helps him. Why? Verbiage. Here is what I mean.

Improved or Greater. They all refer you back to the basic feint rule which says they only lose Dex to you. Each of those state, “…make a bluff check to feint…” & “Whenever you use feint…” Meaning the basics feint rules still apply, with the exceptions of making it move action for improved and making it last longer for greater.

Feint states : If successful, the next melee attack ***you*** make against the target does not allow him to use his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). This attack must be made on or before ***your*** next turn.

They go out of their way to point out the YOU in two places. Otherwise they would have simply said, "The target of this attack loses his Dexterity bonus to attacks made against him this round."

No where in the feint rules does it say he is completely denied his Dex bonus, only to the one feinting him. So I am not sure how this would help anyone except the rogue using the feint?

This actually makes logical sense. You are bluffing him to your attacks, it doesn’t make sense that when you go hey look over there or make your finesse attack or however you distract the opponent, that he would be fooled into thinking anyone else is suddenly any better or worse or any more of a threat because they aren’t the ones trying to trick him.

This has not changed since the first printing as Justyn has stated and the feint states that it only effects the attack you make against him, not anyone makes against him.

Thanks for all the help everyone. I will have to think about it and talk to him to see what is fair.

So, then here is a question. So far he has been able to use his horns as a natural weapon and gain the extra attack because of natural vs manufactured rules.

Let's say the horns become manufactured due to upgrades. He is using a greatsword as his normal weapon, does that allow the horns to be used as a secondary attack with two weapon fighting and improved TWF as if he had another "hand" available?

My ruling on this so far through all the debates, specifically armor spikes, is that the sword itself is so bulky and awkward, it doesn't allow two weapon fighting (armor spikes) because even though they say in the rules you can use them as a light off handed weapon, the sword makes using them near impossible as another attack without another feat. People have argued monk, but to allow them ease of use like a monk, you would train all your life with armor spikes and that doesn't happen in most weapons training. Armor spikes do not give you another "hand" of weapons, it just allows you to use them as a light offhand weapon in my understanding. And as such, if you use a two handed weapon, you can not use another off hand weapon. A monk is taught to use kicks, elbows, knees, etc his entire life. I simply can't see a "logical/realistic" way to get another attack when swinging a huge sword without becoming anime.

With horns, because it is an actual extension of the body you were born with, I may see making an exception there and allowing them to be uses as another "hand" of weapons. Any thoughts?

Here is a little something I am now running into. I am running a steampunk style game, but it could actually work for any kind of game and natural weapons. My question is two parts. First, if you add clockworks or steam or even just reinforce with metals or other substances, when does a natural weapon become a manufactured weapons? In this case, he wants to add reinforcements and magic to his horns to increase damage. Do they ever change types or will they always be considered natural?

If the latter is true, then where is the line drawn to adding to them to make them magical and/or more powerful? Especially in steampunk, where tiny engines can be used and added to magic to keep weight down to basically nothing, where does the line between natural and manufactured begin to blur?

Any thoughts or help would be appreciated...

Daenal
The world of Thelendor is a strange and mystic place. Welcome to the Shattered Lands.