|
Page 200
"Pin: You can give your opponent the pinned condition
(see Appendix 2). Despite pinning your opponent, you
still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your
Dexterity bonus to AC."
Page 568
"Pinned: A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take
few actions. A pinned creature cannot move and is flatfooted."
Page 567
"Flat-Footed: A character who has not yet acted during
a combat is flat-footed, unable to react normally to the
situation. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus
to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity."
Here is my problem.
Page 69
"Uncanny Dodge (Ex): Starting at 4th level, a rogue can
react to danger before her senses would normally allow
her to do so. She cannot be caught flat-footed, even if the
attacker is invisible. She still loses her Dexterity bonus to
AC if immobilized. A rogue with this ability can still lose
her Dexterity bonus to AC if an opponent successfully uses
the feint action (see Chapter 8) against her."
So - if I am reading this correctly: A rogue (or other creature w/ Uncanny Dodge) who is PINNED breaks the usual rule of Uncanny Dodge because they keep their DEX mod to AC while imobilized! (because PINNED states person is FLAT-FOOTED - not "lose their DEX"); Meanwhile the person DOING the pin to the other "Loses their DEX" So A rogue is better off being pinned by another - for the rogue will continue to keep their AC, while all the rogue's buddies can sneak attack the person pinning the rogue....Even if the person doing the pin is another rogue!
Isn't this a bit backwards? Why should the person who is PINNED actually be better off than the person doing the PIN?
IMO, the person PINNED should "LOSE THEIR DEX" and the person doing the PIN should be either Flat-Footed, or as far as I'm concerned just keeping the GRAPPLED condition is good enough without the additional "lose their dex" caveat. Completely making them susceptible sneak attacks is a bit of a stretch. Especially for a large creature with say tentacles or something that is just holding someone or a dragon sitting on someone etc.
Regardless, my biggest beef is that the person PINNED can avoid sneak attacks (provided they have Uncanny Dodge) while the person who is doing the PIN can not (regardless of Uncanny Dodge).
This seems counter-intuitive.
Robert
I usually don't address rules issues because honestly I think, while you should take into account what the RAW says with certain things you have to use a degree of judgement as well as common sense.
Page 200
"Pin: You can give your opponent the pinned condition
(see Appendix 2). Despite pinning your opponent, you
still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your
Dexterity bonus to AC."
Okay the person initiating the grapple loses their Dex bonus to AC.
Fair enough and makes sense they are focusing on pinning their opponent.Page 568
"Pinned: A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take
few actions. A pinned creature cannot move and is flatfooted."
I think here's where some interpretation and common sense needs to come in.
"A pinned creature CANNOT MOVE and is flatfooted"
To me "cannot move" is the same as being Immobilized.
Page 567
"Flat-Footed: A character who has not yet acted during
a combat is flat-footed, unable to react normally to the
situation. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus
to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity."Here is my problem.
Page 69
"Uncanny Dodge (Ex): Starting at 4th level, a rogue can
react to danger before her senses would normally allow
her to do so. She cannot be caught flat-footed, even if the
attacker is invisible. She still loses her Dexterity bonus to
AC if immobilized. A rogue with this ability can still lose
her Dexterity bonus to AC if an opponent successfully uses
the feint action (see Chapter 8) against her."
"A character who has not yet acted during a combat is flat-footed, unable to react normally to the situation." - Specific condition under which defines what flat-footedness is
"a rogue can REACT to danger BEFORE her senses would normally allow her to do so" - also specific condition under which uncanny dodge works
If she's already PINNED she's not reacting to anything. It's assumed that here ability to react was already factored into the ability to avoid being pinned in the first place (via CMD). The key words if you want to be literal about it are "caught flat footed". What does that mean? I see it as short hand for not being caught by surprise to the extent where it hinders your ability to react in a situation. In short, the rogue doesn't experience the whole "deer in headlights thing".
I dont see it covering the issue if your rogue is already PHYSICALLY restrained or made in capable of reacting
Even if you still want to stretch and apply the flat footed thing you still have to take into consideration whether or not you consider "can't move" to be the same as "immobilized".
Which I do. If the pinnee is immobilized then he doesn't get his dex bonus to AC anyway.
His chance to avoid being pinned in the first place was factored into their CMD.
So - if I am reading this correctly: A rogue (or other creature w/ Uncanny Dodge) who is PINNED breaks the usual rule of Uncanny Dodge because they keep their DEX mod to AC while imobilized! (because PINNED states person is FLAT-FOOTED - not "lose their DEX"); Meanwhile the person DOING the pin to the other "Loses their DEX" So A rogue is better off being pinned by another - for the rogue will continue to keep their AC, while all the rogue's buddies can sneak attack the person pinning the rogue....Even if the person doing the pin is another rogue!
I agree with ShinHakkaider. To me, "Cannot move" = "immobilized" and therefore, a character with Uncanny Dodge still loses her Dex bonus to AC while pinned.
It's just in all other circumstances, where she is able to move, that she cannot be caught flat-footed. You are able to Uncannily Dodge when you are only physically capable of dodging.
|
If the rogue is pinned, then she 'cannot move'. Immobilized means, simply, 'not mobile'.
As the rogue is immobilized when pinned, she would not benefit from uncanny dodge. She would be flat-footed in addition to taking another -4 penalty to her Armor Class (as per the Pinned description).
Your God of Knowledge,
Nethys
|
|
Okay - thanks for all the responses.
I guess the wording is just a bit wonky.
I'm thinking that by saying "Cannot move and is Flat-footed" would have been better stated "Creature is considered immobile and may not make attcks of opportunity"
Since Immobile - that strips the DEX, and flat-footed which also strips the dex are redundant - except for the AoO aspect of F-F.
Robert
I'm not arguing with the interpretations so far, but I wanted to point out how what seems obvious to those making the interpretations, can easily not be obvious to others.
There is a bit of fuzziness in "immobilised." I know that sounds weird, let me explain.
If a rogue was bound, but free to move around, is that immobilised? (Remember, I'm not actually questioning - just illustrating.)
If a rogue wasn't bound, but for some reason had his feet rooted to the floor, is that immobilised?
If a rogue was bound, and had his feet rooted to the floor (but was upright and had the ability to "dance about"), is that immobilised?
So what am I getting at?
Pinned is worded as "can take few actions." That could easily fall under some peoples' interpretation as not immobile, since they can still perform some actions and it isn't clear that wiggling (to avoid an attack, or to move your vital spots to foil Sneak Attacks) isn't available.
That being said, I'd rule cannot move == immobilised.
There are many ways a rogue can loose their dex and be back stabbed.
Catch them on a frictionless surface, stuck in a net, or climbing a rope and they loose their dex. Any time their moment options are cut off they loose the ability to duck.
In my games a rogue can still avoid the sneak attack but only if they do something radical. Climbing a rope? Let go. On slippery ice? Fall to your back.
|
|
I'm not arguing with the interpretations so far, but I wanted to point out how what seems obvious to those making the interpretations, can easily not be obvious to others.
Disenchanter said what I was thinking - better than I could - for that thank you.
It simply wasn't obvious enough.
I know I could deduce the same conclusion that others made - but not everyone would come to the same conclusion, and that is where rule-lawyering issues crop up.
Thank you for illustrating what I failed to.
There appears to be a little bit of incongruity in the wordings here. A pinned character is immobilized (hence uncanny dodge will not help). I will see that this is clarified.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Thank you very much, sir. Once again, I find myself completely appreciative and humbled by your devotion to making our game better and more clear. I really appreciate you taking the time clear such matters up and build a better gaming platform.
And with that comment, I feel a lot better about the rules.
As a side note - is there a benchmark to the DC needed to grapple, that a grappler could beat the other while pinning - to allow the pinner not to be "flat footed"
(referencing the old 3rd edition rule "if you are willing to take a -20 on your grapple check, you can grapple your foe and not have the grappled condition)
Something I had implemented during Beta playtesting was "if you beat the CMB DC by 10 or more, the grappler is not flat footed"
Robert
Okay - thanks for all the responses.
I guess the wording is just a bit wonky.
I think the problem is that flat-footed used to be very narrowly defined in 3.5 D&D (i.e. "hasn't acted yet in combat") and in Pathfinder it's sometimes used to mean "no Dex bonus to AC".
For instance, if you look at stat blocks in the Adventure Paths, "flat-footed AC" really means "AC without Dex & dodge bonuses (regardless of Uncanny Dodge)".