| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You watch your foe’s every movement and then punch through its defense.
Prerequisite: Improved Unarmed Strike, Acrobatics 1 rank, Sense Motive 3 ranks.
Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus on Sense Motive checks, and you can deal piercing damage with your unarmed strikes. While using the Snake Style feat, when an opponent targets you with a melee or ranged attack, you can spend an immediate action to make a Sense Motive check. You can use the result as your AC or touch AC against that attack. You must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed.
Normal: An unarmed strike deals bludgeoning damage.
I'm a little confused by how to use this feat and would like some clarifications on my misunderstandings:
1) Does this feat work like Mounted Combat for a single attack?
2) When you make an Immediate action to deflect an attack do you have to do it BEFORE the attack is resolved since it says, "...when an opponent targets you...". (E.g. A creature is doing a Claw-claw-bite attack so you declare before you want to deflect the bite attack only, not just the one that misses you and THEN you roll)
3) If you roll your Sense Motive check, with the +2 bonus, but its lower than your current AC or touch AC do you need to take the lower result since it says, "...you can use...", and doesn't say "...you must use...".
4) Is the +2 bonus to Sense Motive checks untyped?
5) If you have the Snake Style active already can you use the +2 bonus to your Sense Motive checks vs. Feint?
Just added #4 and #5. Thanks for clearing up #3 for me.
4 yes
5 yes
And to clear up since its an immediate action its once a round not every other round on how often you can do it.
You can continue to use an immediate action when attacked, but you lose your swift action on your own round every time you use an immediate action.
** spoiler omitted **
I'm a little confused by how to use this feat and would like some clarifications on my misunderstandings:
2) When you make an Immediate action to deflect an attack do you have to do it BEFORE the attack is resolved since it says, "...when an opponent targets you...". (E.g. A creature is doing a Claw-claw-bite attack so you declare before you want to deflect the bite attack only, not just the one that misses you and THEN you roll)
/QUOTE]I could use some further clarification on #2 my self.
I would play #2 like this:
Option #1:
The opponent would make the attack against your normal ac or touch ac and if it would normally hit with their attack roll, then the snake stylist would then get an option to use their immediate action in an attempt to deflect the attack and roll their sense motive and then compare the new AC or touch AC value against the attack roll to see if it hits...
Option #2
The player chooses which attack to deflect ahead of time and makes his sense motive check to increase their AC or touch AC prior to the attack roll by the monster being made. This requires a certain amount of descriptive decision making on the part of the player. He'll have to describe what attack or attack type to deflect ahead of time.
Since the text says "can use", the player has the option of using his normal AC or touch AC instead of the check if it is somehow lower than his normal AC.
Personally, I think option #2 is closer to RAI.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) Does this feat work like Mounted Combat for a single attack?
No. Mounted Combat lets you retroactively negate an attack that has already hit your mount. Snake Style can be used after the attack is committed, but before it is resolved.
2) When you make an Immediate action to deflect an attack do you have to do it BEFORE the attack is resolved since it says, "...when an opponent targets you...". (E.g. A creature is doing a Claw-claw-bite attack so you declare before you want to deflect the bite attack only, not just the one that misses you and THEN you roll)
Yes.
GM: The fiendbear rears up and tries to bite you Sajan, what is your AC?
Sajan: 21, but since I'm using Snake Style, I'll try to figure out where the fiendbear is going to strike. I'll make a sense motive check as an immediate action. *rolls* 26, that's better than my armor class value, so I'll use that for this attack instead.
GM: The fiendbear's jaws snap shut where you were standing a split second earlier, barely missing you!
Since Sajan just used an immediate action, he doesn't have the option of doing that again when the fiendbear finishes it's full attack (claw claw). If he had chosen to not use it against the bite, he could have chosen either claw attack, or saved it for later, or whatever.
3) If you roll your Sense Motive check, with the +2 bonus, but its lower than your current AC or touch AC do you need to take the lower result since it says, "...you can use...", and doesn't say "...you must use...".
Can means optional. After the attack is declared, you decide if you want to use that aspect of Snake Style as an immediate action. If you do, you then have the option of using the result of that check in place of your AC.
4) Is the +2 bonus to Sense Motive checks untyped?
There's no type listed, so yes.
5) If you have the Snake Style active already can you use the +2 bonus to your Sense Motive checks vs. Feint?
Yes. (Why wouldn't it?)
Holy necro, Batman!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
2) When you make an Immediate action to deflect an attack do you have to do it BEFORE the attack is resolved since it says, "...when an opponent targets you...". (E.g. A creature is doing a Claw-claw-bite attack so you declare before you want to deflect the bite attack only, not just the one that misses you and THEN you roll)Yes.
GM: The fiendbear rears up and tries to bite you Sajan, what is your AC?
Sajan: 21, but since I'm using Snake Style, I'll try to figure out where the fiendbear is going to strike. I'll make a sense motive check as an immediate action. *rolls* 26, that's better than my armor class value, so I'll use that for this attack instead.
GM: The fiendbear's jaws snap shut where you were standing a split second earlier, barely missing you!Since Sajan just used an immediate action, he doesn't have the option of doing that again when the fiendbear finishes it's full attack (claw claw). If he had chosen to not use it against the bite, he could have chosen either claw attack, or saved it for later, or whatever.
So as I read it, a player cannot decide to use Snake Style after he has been notified of the attack AND after the hit has been declared. He must decide to use the immediate action at the point the attack is declared or not at all. Is that correct?
Sajan: (on his turn) I assume the Snake Style stance as a swift action.
GM: The fiendbear rears up and tries to bite you, Sajan (targeting and attack roll). What is your AC?
Sajan: My AC is 21.
GM: The Fiendbear grabs hold of your right shoulder with his jaws (determining a hit).
Sajan: As an immediate reaction I attempt to deflect/dodge the attack with my snake style. *rolls* 26. Does the bears attack still hit?
GM: No. You yank your right shoulder from the jaws of the bear (Hit converted to a miss).
Now that I write it out like that, it seems pretty obvious to me that once a hit has been declared, it is too late for the player to attempt to use Snake Style to dodge it. I need a definitive answer on this for my table.
So as I read it, a player cannot decide to use Snake Style after he has been notified of the attack AND after the hit has been declared. He must decide to use the immediate action at the point the attack is declared or not at all. Is that correct?
It could be.
"While using the Snake Style feat, when an opponent targets you with a melee or ranged attack..."
I read "targets you" meaning intent to attack. If it's already hit you, the attack has happened, so it's not targeting you anymore (for that attack).
It wouldn't make much sense, otherwise. "You must be aware of the attack" well, if something hits you, you're aware of the attack. The only way that line makes sense (to me) is if you need to be aware of the attack before it lands. If it's already hit, and you're retroactively moving out of the way, you can't fail to be aware of it.
I need a definitive answer on this for my table.
The Most Important Rule: "The rules presented are here to help you breathe life into your characters and the world they explore. While they are designed to make your game easy and exciting, you might find that some of them do not suit the style of play that your gaming group enjoys. Remember that these rules are yours. You can change them to fit your needs. Most Game Masters have a number of “house rules” that they use in their games. The Game Master and players should always discuss any rules changes to make sure that everyone understands how the game will be played. Although the Game Master is the final arbiter of the rules, the Pathfinder RPG is a shared experience, and all of the players should contribute their thoughts when the rules are in doubt."
The Most Important Rule: "The rules presented are here to help you breathe life into your characters and the world they explore. While they are designed to make your game easy and exciting, you might find that some of them do not suit the style of play that your gaming group enjoys. Remember that these rules are yours. You can change them to fit your needs. Most Game Masters have a number of “house rules” that they use in their games. The Game Master and players should always discuss any rules changes to make sure that everyone understands how the game will be played. Although the Game Master is the final arbiter of the rules, the Pathfinder RPG is a shared experience, and all of the players should contribute their thoughts when the rules are in doubt."
Thank you, Grick. By "my table" I meant that I am a new PFS judge and when I brought the issue up, I was informed by one of the more experienced players that my interpretation of the feat (the interpretation you have outlined here) would constitute an illegal GM fiat for a PFS game. According to them (they were NOT the player with the monk, btw) the proper PFS application of the feat is that a player can wait to see the resulting attack roll and a declared hit before deciding whether or not he wishes to use his immediate action.
That seems wrong to me and a couple of other more experienced players at the table. Thus my need for a more definite ruling.
By "my table" I meant that I am a new PFS judge
There's always going to be table variation, and many people have said PFS isn't really attempting to stop that.
I'm told the 'chain of command' is to ask other local GMs, then venture officers, then escalate to campaign leadership if needed. Given how some venture officers don't really have a firm grasp of the rules, I would post in the PFS section of the forums, and when that fails to garner a satisfactory consensus you could contact Mike Brock.
Or just get a consensus for the table and go from there. I haven't personally seen anyone get so worked up by a rule that it's ended a game (or killed someone).
The other option is to post in the rules forum and flag it for FAQ. It's possible Jason will address it in an official capacity, which would then be binding for PFS as well.
I'm told the 'chain of command' is to ask other local GMs, then venture officers, then escalate to campaign leadership if needed. Given how some venture officers don't really have a firm grasp of the rules, I would post in the PFS section of the forums, and when that fails to garner a satisfactory consensus you could contact Mike Brock.
Well, it does make a difference in how quickly a monk might get killed when he runs headlong into melee combat, leaving the rest of the party behind, and keeps ducking out of known critical hits with the ability.
I'll go through "chain of command" since there isn't strong consensus around the table.
Thanks again for the help. Peace.
1) Does this feat work like Mounted Combat for a single attack?No. Mounted Combat lets you retroactively negate an attack that has already hit your mount. Snake Style can be used after the attack is committed, but before it is resolved.
this is not magic the gathering. you do not declare attacks then give the opponent a chance to place other effects on the stack before resolution.
There is no pathfinder definition of 'targeted' to differentiate it from 'attacked' or 'hit'. therefore the closest thing there is to the use of this ability (mounted combat feat) is the only thing that we have to compare it to (using a skill check to replace your armor class). so people run it like that. i agree it should have some clarification, but claiming there is a targeting before resolution of attacks is adding your own rules set to combat, which isn't allowed in pfs, which must use RAW. the only references to targeting is with spells, which doesn't apply here.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
There is no pathfinder definition of 'targeted' to differentiate it from 'attacked' or 'hit'.
Pathfinder rules refer to the intended victim of an attack as the "target" approximately a gazillion times.
claiming there is a targeting before resolution of attacks is adding your own rules set to combat
The combat chapter of the Core Rulebook states (under the "Attack Roll" heading) that "If your result equals or beats the target's Armor Class, you hit and deal damage."
So it was the "target" before hit/miss was determined.
Further on in that chapter, under "Touch Attacks", we have "When you are the target of a touch attack, your AC doesn't include blah blah blah".
Once again, you're already the target before we look at your AC/Touch AC to determine if you're hit.
Oh, and again, where we find the penalty for shooting into melee: "If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll."
So we've got targeting before we've even finished calculating the attack roll, let alone determining if it's enough.
And then there's full-attacks: "You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones."
The list goes on. Declaring targets before the attack is resolved is a central component of Core rules.
the only references to targeting is with spells, which doesn't apply here.
Then I guess you'd better tell Paizo there are dozens and dozens of errors in the Official PRD, because there's targeting all over the place in there.
you do not declare attacks then give the opponent a chance to place other effects on the stack before resolution.
You certainly do when the opponent has an ability which may change what is about to happen. Reroll abilities, for instance, often happen after a d20 roll happens, but before the results are revealed.
There is no pathfinder definition of 'targeted' to differentiate it from 'attacked' or 'hit'.
The attack happens, a hit is determined, the damage is dealt.
Mounted Combat happens after a hit is determined, and then voids the damage.
Snake Style happens after the attack, but it changes how a hit is determined, so it has to be used before the hit is determined.
If it was supposed to work like mounted combat, it would be written like mounted combat. But it doesn't say "When an opponent hits you..." it says "when an opponent targets you..." and that must happen before the hit is determined.
claiming there is a targeting before resolution of attacks is adding your own rules set to combat, which isn't allowed in pfs, which must use RAW.
You're saying a hit is determined before deciding on a target?
the only references to targeting is with spells, which doesn't apply here.
Attack Roll: "If your result equals or beats the target's Armor Class, you hit and deal damage."
Touch Attacks: "When you are the target of a touch attack..."
Damage: "Damage reduces a target's current hit points."
Ranged Attacks: "With a ranged weapon, you can shoot or throw at any target that is within the weapon's maximum range..."
Shooting or Throwing into a Melee: "If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee..."
Critical Hits: "When you make an attack roll and get a natural 20 (the d20 shows 20), you hit regardless of your target's Armor Class..."
Deadly Stroke (Combat): "If you hit, you deal double the normal damage and the target takes 1 point of Constitution bleed..."
Exhausting Critical (Combat, Critical): "When you score a critical hit on a foe, your target immediately becomes exhausted."
Spring Attack (Combat): "...without provoking any attacks of opportunity from the target of your attack."
I'm with Jiggy and Grick. I even have a Master of Many Styles monk (although not in PFS, that one is a Maneuver Master), so I do have some "skin" in the game. I often announce as my turn ends that I'll be using Snake Style against the first incoming attack. Or if I'm next to something that does a claw/claw/bite that I'll be using Snake Style against the Bite. Or other times I'll say during my turn that I'm about to intentionally draw an AoO (with some action I'm about to perform) and intend to use Snake Style against it.
I don't think I get to see the results of the attack before electing to attempt to sense (motive) that it's coming and not be there when it lands.
Now, with Crane Wing, the attack actually DOES need to land before I can deflect it (no deflecting misses so as to activate Crane Riposte).
1) Does this feat work like Mounted Combat for a single attack?No. Mounted Combat lets you retroactively negate an attack that has already hit your mount. Snake Style can be used after the attack is committed, but before it is resolved.this is not magic the gathering. you do not declare attacks then give the opponent a chance to place other effects on the stack before resolution.
If your GM is speeding through the action of announcing an enemy is attacking you... and then announcing the hit, simply remind him that you have an ability that can interrupt the attack rolls and you need a chance to activate it.
But RAW... for snake style you do not get to find out if the enemy's attack roll was successful before deciding to use the feat.
If your GM is speeding through the action of announcing an enemy is attacking you... and then announcing the hit, simply remind him that you have an ability that can interrupt the attack rolls and you need a chance to activate it.But RAW... for snake style you do not get to find out if the enemy's attack roll was successful before deciding to use the feat.
Thank you MC. Speeding through declaring attacks and hits was a major part of what ran me into this trouble in the first place, and the first thing I will be adjusting when I go back to the table as a GM.
Normally the GM should announce the attack and you can then decide to use snake style as an immediate action. Before you know if it would hit you normally or not, what can make the feat difficult from time to time.