Shatter Defences vs. Rogues

[Choon]

If you use Shatter defences on a Rouge, does the rogue loose it's abilities like evasion that depend on non-flatfootedness?

Or does the description mean that the rouge isn't really flat footed, just seems that way to you.

Does that then mean that they loose all flat-foot dependent effects only in regards to you?

[AvalonXQ]

Shatter Defenses says "flat-footed to your attacks".

So, only flat-footed with respect to attacks made by you.

This only works until the rogue gains Uncanny Dodge, at which point the rogue can no longer be caught flat-footed.

[Archaeik]

Well, you're going to get some people in here saying that Uncanny Dodge doesn't allow them to suffer from FF at all...

This may be the RAI, but if they are actually immune, I'd prefer for the rules to state it with that game term.

Anyway, Shatter Def

Quote:

Benefit: Any shaken, frightened, or panicked opponent hit by you this round is flat-footed to your attacks until the end of your next turn. This includes any additional attacks you make this round.

Flat-Footed(condition) wrote:

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 and Combat Maneuver Defense (CMD) (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity, unless he has the Combat Reflexes feat or Uncanny Dodge class ability.

Characters with Uncanny Dodge retain their Dexterity bonus to their AC and can make attacks of opportunity before they have acted in the first round of combat.

So a FF rogue with UCD would only have the condition in name, they could still take AoOs and would keep their dex to AC.

Re: evasion
It looks like it only deactivates on the helpless condition, not FF

In terms of anything else that actually is dependent on being FF, unless it's called out as not turning off, it turns off.

[Choon]

in other words this isn't as good as it sounds. I think i'll leave it alone then.

[Alitan]

Actually, Shatter Defenses is most useful AS a rogue... or a 'rouge,' as the case may be.

[Choon]

ok, should have said, "isn't as good for my character". I see how that would rock with a sneek-attacker

[Maerimydra]

Alitan wrote:

Actually, Shatter Defenses is most useful AS a rogue... or a 'rouge,' as the case may be.

Given the high number of feats required to get Shatter Defenses, I think that it is best suited for a multiclassed Fighter/Rogue(Thug Archetype). Even a 1 level dip into Rogue(Thug Archetype) makes the Dazzling Display and Shatter Defenses much more useful. A 2 levels dip into Rogue(Thug Archetype) gives you a Rogue Talent, and Befuddling Strike stacks with the Shaken condition. A 3 levels dip into Rogue(Thug Archetype) gives you Brutal Beating, which lets you forgo 1d6 of sneak attack damage to sicken your opponent, and the Sickened condition stacks with the Shaken condition and Befuddling Strike. Your opponent now have a -6 penalty on attack rolls against you. I can easily see a sword'n'board Fighter/Rogue(Thug Archetype) using this combo to become nearly unhittable against a designated opponent. If you have a caster who uses debuffing/crippling spells in your party (ex: a Witch), things could get even worse for your opponents.

[Alitan]

Yeah.

Round 1: Dazzling Display -- whip rapier about in threatening manner.
Round 2: Sneak Attacks all 'round! All round...

[MC Templar]

Archaeik wrote:

Well, you're going to get some people in here saying that Uncanny Dodge doesn't allow them to suffer from FF at all...

Flat-Footed(condition) wrote:

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 and Combat Maneuver Defense (CMD) (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity, unless he has the Combat Reflexes feat or Uncanny Dodge class ability.

Characters with Uncanny Dodge retain their Dexterity bonus to their AC and can make attacks of opportunity before they have acted in the first round of combat.

Since the two sentences in flat-footed are separated by a period, not a colon, semi-colon, or comma; isn't is a leap of logic to apply that 'unless he has the combat reflexes...' portion to the segment in the first sentence that mentions not yet acting in the first round of combat.

I thought the rule of thumb for combining clauses, is if removing the clause would make the sentence untrue, it must be contained in the sentence.

Since the sentence "A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC and Combat Maneuver Defense (CMD) (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity, unless he has the Combat Reflexes feat or Uncanny Dodge class ability." is presented as the entire sentence, doesn't that make it possible that the RAW and RAI are treating the 'condition' of flat-footedness is something that can be avoided by this ability?

I'm not saying you are wrong, I am just saying if I were reading it your way I wouldn't be nearly as certain of that reading as you are.

[chaoseffect]

AvalonXQ wrote:

This only works until the rogue gains Uncanny Dodge, at which point the rogue can no longer be caught flat-footed.

If I remember correctly, things like Feinting can actually make someone with Uncanny Dodge flatfooted, ie they just can't be caught flatfooted through being surprised.

"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."

I'd assume that the feat OP talked about would apply as well.

[Michael Foster 989]

Technically the only way to lose dex to AC if you have uncanny dodge is the single listed exception which is a successful feint, nothing else explicitly overrides the rogues special ability.

[Archaeik]

MC Templar wrote:

STUFF

(since I'll just be pasting it again)

I don't see anything that specifically calls out flat footed itself as being avoidable.

Flat-Footed(condition) wrote:

A character who has not yet acted during a combat is flat-footed, unable to react normally to the situation. (full stop) A flat-footed character 'loses his Dexterity bonus to AC and Combat Maneuver Defense (CMD) (if any)'(penalty 1) and 'cannot make attacks of opportunity' (penalty 2), 'unless he has the Combat Reflexes feat or Uncanny Dodge class ability'.(exceptions only to penalty 2)

Characters with Uncanny Dodge retain their Dexterity bonus to their AC and can make attacks of opportunity before they have acted in the first round of combat.(specific clarification that UCD ignores both penalties)

Further, UCD uses the language "caught flat footed". This clearly means they cannot have the condition from not having acted in combat, but is ambiguous to whether such a character can be made flat footed by other things. (7-branch sword, shatter defenses, et al)

On top of this, we have an example of an archetype (Scout) ability specifically "dealing SA damage as if the target was FF" but also "this ability does not function if the target has UCD" (I paraphrased there I'm sure).
This is purely my bias, but I dislike when they restate the rules "just because"; if a rule is misunderstood or obscure, point to it, reprint it, or include a separate explanation from the ability it interacts with.
To me this means that the flat footed condition can apply to characters with UCD, even if they are otherwise unaffected.

Anyway... the other half of the discussion is really about "if they don't apply any part of the penalty, do they really have the condition?"
I haven't really decided which side of that I come down on. (and my overbearing sense of order prefers that consistent game terms be used across the board.)

I have no problem with UCD == immune, but I don't find the wording to say that in a sufficiently explicit manner.