| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
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 Combat) against her.
If a rogue already has uncanny dodge from a different class, she automatically gains improved uncanny dodge (see below) instead.
Okay, so reading this I get the impression that they can't be caught flat-footed but that they can be made flat-footed. It doesn't seem like they are immune to the flat=footed condition. Any official ruling on this?
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 Combat) against her.
If a rogue already has uncanny dodge from a different class, she automatically gains improved uncanny dodge (see below) instead.
Okay, so reading this I get the impression that they can't be caught flat-footed but that they can be made flat-footed. It doesn't seem like they are immune to the flat=footed condition. Any official ruling on this?
"cannot be caught flat-footed" seems like immunity to me. If you are made to be flat-footed then you are caught flat-footed. It is nigh impossible to make some flat-footed anyway.
What is the reason for this question?
From the APG, the court bard's glorious epic makes opponents flat-footed. Might be one of the few exceptions that proves the rule, but I'm sure that's not it...
Zo
I'm also not sure of the distinction you are trying to make.
Are you saying that it has to do with visual-based methods of making them flat-footed? Or that it has to do with "first strike" flat-footedness?
The latter is incorrect simply because the invisibility comment, as being invisible grants flatfootedness on all attacks, even if it's in the middle of combat and they know you are there, etc.
For the former, I'm not sure if "senses" are meant to be used in such a specific manner. The verbiage is emphasizing the speed at which you are reacting, not the fact that it's sense based.
Basically, it's about instinct and "unnatural" speed of response to putting your guard up. I'd apply that equally to being attacked by an invisible person, as I would towards openings while frightened (Shatter Defenses).
A friend of mine had a cousin or family member who lived in Croatia during a period of war. Despite being years later, and safe in Canada, relaxed at a party with family, when a balloon popped unexpectedly, they were down on the floor under the coffee table faster that people could blink.
It's survival instinct kicking in. When you lived daily life where snipers were shooting at anyone out after curfew, or random invasions and shelling... I'm sure there's real life people out there who develop a form of uncanny dodge for at least some situations.
.
Being immobilized (prevented from moving to defend yourself), or feinting (fooled into defending the wrong way) still work because they aren't trying to get past the speed of your defense.
I'd say you'd have to make a case for each new ability as to whether or not it works on fooling or holding a target still to see whether it bypasses Uncanny Dodge.
For Shatter Defenses, nothing there would really indicate to me it's fooling you, or holding you still.
It assumes you are dropping your guard, which is what uncanny dodge is specifically supposed to prevent (you technically never drop your guard, even when frightened in this case).
Are there other abilities that treat people as flatfooted?
So they can not be caught flat-footed but can still lose their dex bonus to ac apparently :)
From the APG, the court bard's glorious epic makes opponents flat-footed. Might be one of the few exceptions that proves the rule, but I'm sure that's not it...
Zo
Hmm... depending on the description. But is sounds similar to Shatter Defenses... trying to catch you offguard. If you are being made to sort of "step out of combat mode", I'd say no.. since a Uncanny Dodge's main point is that you are always ready for battle.. even when listening to an Epic tale.
Think of Dr McNinja.. taking out several attackers before even waking up.
|
Isn't this just about the fact that "Flat Footed" is not the same thing as "losing Dex Bonus to Defense"?
I.e. Flat Footed is a condition that means the character loses Dex Bonus to Defence and cannot make Attacks of Opportunity. In other words, being flat footed is one way to lose your Dex Bonus to Defense, but its not the only way (being immobilised is one).
It seems that Paizo have been confusing the two here - IIRC being Invisible never means you catch a foe Flat Footed (whether they have Uncanny Dodge or not), instead it allows you to ignore their Dex Bonus to Defense and gain a +2 to attack.
In 3.5 this is written as:
Starting at 4th level, a rogue can react to danger before her senses would normally allow her to do so. She retains her Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) even if she is caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker. However, she still loses her Dexterity bonus to AC if immobilized.
I.e. if caught flat footed (by being beaten in initiative) the Rogue only suffers the no AoO from being flat footed, they don't lose their Dex bonus to defence.
Equally if attacked by an Invisible foe (another way to lose Dex bonus to defense) the Rogue only suffers from the +2 bonus to attack tha foe gets for being invisible, and doesn't also lose his Dex bonus.
I think this probably could do with some errata in PF (whilst it was clear in 3.5, which makes me wonder why they changed the wording!)
|
|
From the APG, the court bard's glorious epic makes opponents flat-footed. Might be one of the few exceptions that proves the rule, but I'm sure that's not it...
I am not familiar with the APG but if it that power does indeed make opponents flat-footed, then a Rogue with Uncanny Dodge would seem to keep his Dex Bonus to Defense but not be able to make Attacks of Opportunity (that is if PF Uncanny Dodge is meant to work as the 3.5 version).
For me it's about the immunity. Improved Uncanny Dodge has the *4 levels higher* rule built into it, and it doesn't make sense that they are always immune to the flat-footed condition. It's and extreme example but- if I send a level 20 rogue against a level 2 rogue and they tell me that they can't be caught flat-footed there for Mr. level 20 rogue doesn't get his sneak attack dice I'm going to rule otherwise.
Now, I know that a level 20 rogue will have more to do against the rogue than just sneak attack dice, but that doesn't change the fact that experience and skill need to play a role in the equation.
Kaisoku used the example of the guy that lived in Croatia during war and would duck under a table from a balloon popping out of reflex. And that's great- but when he hears the gunshot/balloon pop that doesn't change the fact that the bullet is already on it's way and humans don't move as fast as bullets and other projectiles.
And with Shatter Defense and Catch Off Guard, those are feats that people take to over come the standard combat readiness. It's one thing to be aware of surroundings and ready to draw down as soon as a twig snaps in the trees, it's another thing for someone to use an ability that has to overcome a pre-set DC (Armor for catch off guard and 10 + 1/2 HD + Wis Mod for Shatter Defense) and have them still not work.
Flatfooted is a condition a defender has. Flanking is a condition an attacker has.
This is the distinction you might be missing here.
The level 2 Rogue is standing there... "not flatfooted... not flatfooted... not flatfooted". The level 20 Rogue comes along and attacks him. There no reason for the level 2 Rogue's condition to change.
Conversely, the level 20 Rogue is standing next to the level 2 Rogue... "not flanking... not flanking... not flanking". Another attacker walks up to the level 2 Rogue, standing in one of the valid flanking squares opposite the 20 Rogue. Now the level 20 Rogue has the "flanking" condition to use against the level 2 Rogue.
Poor level 2 Rogue.. if only he was 15 levels higher, he'd be able to defend himself against that flanking condition the level 20 Rogue was using.
.
Oh, and while a guy who lived in war torn Croatia might not be able to, someone with the extraordinary ability to react before his senses would normally allow him to, just might.
This is "uncanny" dodge, after all. Uncanny meaning "mysteriously beyond what is normal"...
Flatfooted is a condition a defender has. Flanking is a condition an attacker has.
This is the distinction you might be missing here.The level 2 Rogue is standing there... "not flatfooted... not flatfooted... not flatfooted". The level 20 Rogue comes along and attacks him. There no reason for the level 2 Rogue's condition to change.
Conversely, the level 20 Rogue is standing next to the level 2 Rogue... "not flanking... not flanking... not flanking". Another attacker walks up to the level 2 Rogue, standing in one of the valid flanking squares opposite the 20 Rogue. Now the level 20 Rogue has the "flanking" condition to use against the level 2 Rogue.
Poor level 2 Rogue.. if only he was 15 levels higher, he'd be able to defend himself against that flanking condition the level 20 Rogue was using..
Oh, and while a guy who lived in war torn Croatia might not be able to, someone with the extraordinary ability to react before his senses would normally allow him to, just might.
This is "uncanny" dodge, after all. Uncanny meaning "mysteriously beyond what is normal"...
Yeah, I understood what you were saying about the Croatian, and I would say he has Uncanny Dodge, whereas I don't in that example. It's the real world example of an extraordinary instance.
And I should have been a little more clear- I don't like any immunities really. Oil Fires are put out by explosions. Fire Giant walking on the sun would die... From lack of oxygen if nothing else ;)
The other note is that I play in a group with 3 regular DM's and we typically vote on house rules- I'm just info gathering for said votes.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Uncanny Dodge protects against one very specific condition: flat-footed. A lot of confusion happens when players, DMs, and even designers on occasion use the term flat-footed when it shouldn’t be used. In a lot of instances people say flat-footed as a blanket term to describe anything that denies a combatant their DEX bonus, but in fact that is wrong. Flat-footed is a specific condition that only happens in the beginning of combat before a combatant has had the opportunity to move (IE: Ready/Prepare themselves for combat). However, Uncanny Dodge does not protect you from ever losing your DEX bonus to AC.
Feint: This combat action does not make you opponent flat-footed. It denies them their DEX bonus to AC. Therefore, Uncanny Dodge does not protect against it.
Invisible attackers: Also do not make their target flat-footed. They get a +2 to attacks and they ignore their opponents DEX bonus to AC, which is similar but still a different condition than being flat-footed. So UD would protect against being caught flat-footed by an invisible attacker, but IMO it would not negate the invisible attackers bonuses/advantage for being invisible, which is a separate condition. That is RAW, some people will disagree with me based on RAI arguments.
Shatter Defenses: By RAW, Shatter Defenses makes your opponent flat-footed to your attacks, and UD protects from being flat-footed. By strict adherence to RAW I think UD defeats SD. That said, IMO it shouldn’t. This is my take and it is a RAI based argument so very much up to interpretation, there are a few reasons I feel UD should not protect from SD:
1) They way the feat is worded. The feat says it makes you flat-footed and in fact it can’t do that. The only time you can be flat-footed is in the beginning of combat before you have moved. A feat can’t rewind time to the first round of combat before you have moved and make you “flat-footed” by the definition of the flat-footed condition. Shatter Defenses doesn’t represent you being unprepared to defend yourself in the first rounds of combat. It represents you being intimidated to the point where fear is locking up your muscles and not allowing you to react the way your instincts would otherwise allow you to.
2) Again the wording of the feat. It says it makes the opponent “flat-footed to YOUR attacks” which is different than having the flat-footed condition. In the feat description in PRD there is a link to the flat-footed condition where it plainly states, a condition that only applies in the beginning of combat before you have acted, which is not the case with Shatter Defenses. Then it describes the effects of the condition: denied DEX bonus to AC and unable to take AoOs. So are the developers really saying this feat makes you flat-footed, which is impossible after you have acted in combat, OR are they conveying that you become effectively flat-footed gaining the hindrances associated? My opinion is that they made the mistake of using flat-footed as a blanket term for denied DEX to AC, and possibly unable to make AoOs against you. My opinion is that this feat doesn’t make your opponent flat-footed but instead gives them the same negatives associated with it, but for different reasons.
3) Similarity to Feint. Why does Feint deny your DEX bonus to AC when SD and Catch of Guard render you flat-footed? My opinion is that it was an error in terminology. I can see why UD would protect against CoG making you flat-footed. But why should UD protect against SD but not Feint, they are almost the same thing, in one instance you are bluffing someone into defending the wrong way, in the other you are intimidating them to the point of inaction. Neither of those has anything to do with “reacting before you senses would normally allow.” IMO it should say denies DEX bonus to AC rather than renders flat-footed.
Hello everybody,
i would just change the wording of the Uncanny Dodge rules
Original wording:
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.
New wording:
Uncanny Dodge (Ex): Starting at 4th level, a rogue can react to danger before her senses would normally allow her to do so. She doesn't loose der Dexterity bonus to AC even if caught flat-footed or the attacker is invisible. She is still considered to be flat-footed.
So most of the other feats would work, since the condition is in effect but the rogue retains her Dextery Bonus.
Flat-footed is a specific condition that only happens in the beginning of combat before a combatant has had the opportunity to move
No, balancing can also make you flatfooted:
[Y]ou can use Acrobatics to move on narrow surfaces and uneven ground without falling. A successful check allows you to move at half speed across such surfaces—only one check is needed per round. Use the following table to determine the base DC, which is then modified by the Acrobatics skill modifiers noted below. While you are using Acrobatics in this way, you are considered flat-footed and lose your Dexterity bonus to your AC (if any).
Someone on the how-to-use-battlefield-control-spells thread opined that Uncanny Dodge meant barbarians and rogues are immune to being made flatfooted by the grease spell. (Since you must make an Acrobatics check to move through it, that would be the normal effect).
I have my misgivings there; I read the Uncanny Dodge text as making you immune to being caught flatfooted at the beginning of combat -- but not immune to being made so through circumstance.
Uncanny Dodge in PF makes someone immune to the flatfooted condition.
There are plenty of situations where you lose dex to AC but it is not the flatfooted condition.
The game hands out many blanket immunities. Yes, it ruins some attacks and techniques, but it's no more disruptive to that than say, the Paladin's fear immunity foiling a fear escalation build.
3E Uncanny Dodge only protected against the loss of dex from flatfooted but not the condition itself (so still need Combat Reflexes to AoO while flatfooted, still vulnerable to attacks that only work on flatfooted targets, etc...), but PF changed the rules text to make it total immunity to the condition.