Unless they are flat-footed against you. Such as during the surprise round and the first round of combat before the NPC is able to act in the initiative round.
My question is what about after initiative has been rolled and it is later rounds in the initiative order but the enemy is flat-footed against you?
I don't want to derail the thread though, so if this gets too in depth for this thread I can make a new one.
Anytime you are flat-footed you are denied dex.
Being flat-footed is an actual condition. Being denied dex can be the result of other situations and it only last as long as that condition or situation last.
We can discuss it here.
Why do you post as both concerro and wraithstrike?
I understand that flat-footed is a condition that denies Dex thus granting sneak attacks until you are no longer flat-footed.
I guess my question boils down to under what circumstances qualify someone to be flat-footed against you. And if it is a matter of being flat-footed to everyone or if it is a matter of perspective type issue.
I'll try to give an example: Ippen - an arcane trickster with access to a crystal ball and a scry spell - is looking on at his party when they are set upon by bandits. With malice and forthought he casts invisibility on himself and teleports into the fray after the combat has started.
Now, I understand that his party may or may not be flat-footed against the bandits and visa versa. However, the bandits could not possibly have been aware of Ippen. Are they flat-footed against him when he arrives on the scene? Or are they simply denied their Dex bonus until attacked as they are not aware of his presense?
Does that make clear my question and concern?
I try to use concerro when I am 99% sure or better. Sometimes I just pick the wrong avatar. In this case it was intentional though.
You are flat-footed at the beginning of combat before you have acted.
You can also be made flat-footed through the use of special abilities such as feats.
Flat-footed is a condition just like being stunned or blinded is.
You are normally flat-footed against everyone, unless the ability in question says otherwise.
Ippen would not make anyone flat-footed by being invisible. He can cause them to lose dex however since they are not aware of his presence.
But they gain their Dex bonus back as soon as he makes his first attack.
I understand it working that way normally and can get behind that. But in the example I gave its lame that it works that way. I think your right from a RAW standpoint. However, it doesn't make any logical sense. For the same reason the others would be flat-footed for not being aware that a combattant was even a threat to begin with and thus flat-footed, they should be flat-footed against him in the circumstances I provided too.
IMO, you should be able to be flat-footed against some opponents and not others under the right circumstances. These are the rules quirks that frustrate me and one reason I sometimes dislike playing sneaky characters.
Flat-footed is a condition that generally makes it so that you are denied dex, and you can not make AoO's. You can no more be flat-footed against one person, barring a special exception, than you can only be stunned against only one person.
As an example if I am flat-footed, and you are visible and you leave my threatened square then I can not do anything about it.
Let say there is an ability called "concussion hit", and it makes you flat-footed. Due to this ability I would lose dex against everyone, and everyone could just run by me.
If I am only denied dex to AC, then whoever I am unaware of can take advantage of that, but it does not help anyone else, and I can still make the AoO(attack of opportunity) provided I can see the other opponents.
Going back to your first sentence you are only denied dex because you don't know someone is there. Once they attack you, then you know they are there. As soon as you know they are there you are no longer unaware, so they lose all benefits they would gain as soon as you can acknowledge their presence.
edit:clarification.
If you are invisible you basically get the benefits of being flat-footed against the one person since you lose dex, and they can't make AoO's, but conditions are basically like status affects that affect you as a person, and are not subject to circumstances between 2 opponents as an example.
I hate to argue a point based on an exception but there is uncanny dodge as well. That is to say that you can be flat footed against some foes but not others. I only bring it up as precident for there being exceptions in addition to "concussion hit".
The whole "Once they attack you, then you know they are there" thing has it's exceptions too. Like in the surprise round and before their turn in the first initiative order. I think there is room for other exceptions there as well like the example I gave above.
I do, however, agree that by RAW in my example that his foes would not be flat-footed to him even though logically it makes no sense why Ippen isn't treated as having his own surprise round and preinitiative count round too.
I was talking about just the plain invisibility spell that is broken on first attack. Thus outside of surprise round and pre-initiative attacks his foes would generally not be flat-footed against him - only denied their dex and then only to the first attack.
I was basically trying to make a case for a situation where your opponents could not know you are a threat because you are not even there until you pop in. And just because your allies are fighting this somehow denies you of a surprise round and pre-initiative opportunity for a full round sneak attack.
Uncanny dodge stop you from being flat-footed period. It basically give you immunity to the condition.
She cannot be caught flat-footed.....
Note that it never specifies a particular opponent.
I will also add there is a feat which makes flat-footed only work against one person, but that is the only case. Specific rules overrule general.
During the surprise round you are flat-footed unless you get to act in that round, and during the first round of combat you are still flat-footed until you get to act. That is not contradicting what I wrote before.
Just to be clear:
You lose dex the entire time you are flat-footed.
If you are lose dex through other means then it only last as long as the supporting circumstance/condition exist. Of course that also applies to being flat-footed since you don't lose dex from that once you are no longer flat-footed.
I was talking about just the plain invisibility spell that is broken on first attack. Thus outside of surprise round and pre-initiative attacks his foes would generally not be flat-footed against him - only denied their dex and then only to the first attack.
I was basically trying to make a case for a situation where your opponents could not know you are a threat because you are not even there until you pop in. And just because your allies are fighting this somehow denies you of a surprise round and pre-initiative opportunity for a full round sneak attack.
The rules don't support the second paragraph though. Once you have acted you are free to take normal actions against any opponent you can see so if the invisible ally pops in he gets the first attack, but once that attack is made he is visible.
The enemy can see him so he loses any benefit being invisible would have given him, and he is not flat-footed because he has already acted.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Personally I don't consider the issue of being flat-footed during 1st round to be realistic, especially if you have had a conversation with the bad guys, but I think it is there to reward those who go first.
On the contrary, Uncanny Dodge is specific. Here is the full ability. Bolding and italics mine:
At 2nd level, a barbarian gains the ability to react to danger before her senses would normally allow her to do so. She cannot be caught flat-footed, nor does she lose her Dex bonus to AC if the attacker is invisible. She still loses her Dexterity bonus to Armor Class if immobilized. A barbarian with this ability can still lose her Dexterity bonus to Armor Class if an opponent successfully uses the feint action against her.
If a barbarian already has uncanny dodge from a different class, she automatically gains improved uncanny dodge (see below) instead.
That comma is splitting the sentence up into two different situations. It is protecting you from being flat-footed, and also invisible attackers.
In order for it to be person specific you would have to be able to say that if there are multiple opponents one of them can catch you flat-footed. As it is written you just can't be caught flat-footed period so that is blanket immunity, not creature/person specific.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A few things: I've had a hunch for a long time that you used concerro when you were answering rules questions. I've been vindicated! whoo.
And I have now found the posts that lead me to believe the devs think Stealth does not allow sneak attacks from RAW.
...The important part is that you gain the bonus to attack rolls, and you ignore its opponents Dex bonus to AC. That's the main thing that we really want to keep....
The first playtest used the invisibility condition. The goal of the changes were to make it explicit that stealth makes opponents denied their dexterity bonus to AC. That is why they used that condition. If the Perception text (and Dexterity text) already allowed it...well what's the point of making it explicit?
...The reason why we need to use a condition, is that the "use Stealth" as a condition in the game is, well...a stealth condition. It is not defined. That is one of the chief things we need to change in the Stealth rules. What does "use Stealth," mean other than in the natural language sense of the term. The need for this came from the many, many, many FAQ questions we have received on the subject. ...
From the bolded section, the devs state clearly that the stealth condition is not defined (as the post says it is), and that they needed to change. One of the changes to the stealth rules were the explicit addition of making the enemy denied their dexterity bonus.
Emphasis mine on both quotes.
Post 1:
When you are invisible the opponent is not only denied dex, but you get a +2 to attack. When you are stealthed, the +2 is not granted by RAW, but since the opponent can't see you in either case there is no reason why stealth should not grant the +2. The rewrite would allow a non-invisible character to get both benefits.
Post 2:This post is just saying that by the language that is used stealthed is spoken of like it is a condition.
As an example you are stunned/dead/invisible/stealthed.
"Stealthed" however is not an actual condition, and they need to either reword the phrasing or come up with a definition for it like they do for actual conditions.
That 2nd post in no way hints that if someone is aware of you because a perception check was failed vs the stealth skill that you are not denied dex.
That is a good point.
Perhaps what needs to change is not whether there is a stealth condition, or defining how the target who fails his perception check is affected, but the rules for sneak attack. Perhaps, if it is in fact the intention of the designers to allow a successful stealth check to allow sneak attacks, one tiny line needs to be added to the description of sneak attack such as thus:
An opponent who is unable to perceive you (such as through a failed perception check versus stealth) may also be the target of a sneak attack. The moment the opponent has been attacked, whether the attack is successful or not, it receives a new perception check with a bonus of +20.
This would allow a stealthed character to use sneak attack, yet it would not give the other benefits of invisibility (deny target dex to ac, +2 to hit), thus preserving the superior nature of being invisible. It would also make creatures with scent, tremor sense, blind sense and any other extraordinary sense abilities immune to a sneak attack when it is attempted by a character who is relying only on stealth to provide the sneak attack opportunity.
Shatter Defenses actually causes opponents to be flat-footed to your attacks.
I'm of the opinion that's an archaic rules fragment that sneaked through release and will be revised (So he's flat-footed to my attacks, but not flat-footed in general? Can he perform attacks of opportunity on me, but not to my attacks? Can he use Immediate actions against other combatants, but not to me ...?).
I wouldn't mind if the CRB were combed through, and every instance of 'flat-footed' were removed besides from Uncanny Dodge, and stating that you're flat-footed before you've acted in combat.
Cheapy, another little tidbit: In the most recent Pathfinder Superstar, one of the devs' complaints about an archetype submission was that the archetype gained Hide in Plain Sight, which was bad in part because it 'doesn't really do anything.' Emphasis on the para-phrase there, since I'm not recalling with total accuracy.
We can shut this one down fellas. :)