|
After further review of the Swashbuckler's Superior Feint it is apparent that it is a feint in name only. That is, it is a special ability and does not follow the Feint rules in the CRB. There is no Bluff check, there is no check at all. You purposefully miss and the target is denied it's Dex bonus to AC. There is no reference or link to the Feint action at all (other than the ability name which is basically fluff). Is the effect self only or open to all allies? I am not sure but I would lean towards all allies as there is nothing linking it to feint, loss of AC to melee or ranged, or your attacks only.
|
|
The Fighter Archer archetype introduces all kinds of combat maneuver anomalies. That archetype pretty much breaks every combat maneuver rule there is. Bringing it in to a discussion on Greater Feint is kind of pointless.
Hardly pointless.
We're all referring back to the same thing, which is Greater Feint and the clause of "If not expressly stated that it causes X to happen, then X is limited to Y"
It is stated that Greater Feint does NOT cause the enemy to become denied his dex bonus to AC for all allies because it does not expressly mention that the enemy is in fact denied his dex for all allies.
Which due to the fact that the Ranged Feint does not expressly state the enemy is denied his dexterity for the next ranged attack, but continues under the assumption of melee, that the Archer Archetype must make a melee attack against the enemy with in this or next turn.
Startling Shot (Ex): At 7th level, a gunslinger with least 1 grit point can spend a standard action to purposely miss a creature that she could normally hit with a firearm attack. When she does, that creature becomes flat-footed until the start of its next turn.How odd, the Swashbuckler says deny Dex and Startling shot is flat-footed. Even so, As its YOU tricking the enemy, then is not the enemy only denied his Dex Mod to you?
No where in the wording for Startling Shot does it reference either feint or that the target is weakened to only your attacks. Feint specifically calls out the target is denied it's Dex bonus to AC against your melee attack. Greater Feint specifically calls out and builds upon Feint by extending the duration of the debuff.
|
After further review of the Swashbuckler's Superior Feint it is apparent that it is a feint in name only. That is, it is a special ability and does not follow the Feint rules in the CRB. There is no Bluff check, there is no check at all. You purposefully miss and the target is denied it's Dex bonus to AC. There is no reference or link to the Feint action at all (other than the ability name which is basically fluff). Is the effect self only or open to all allies? I am not sure but I would lean towards all allies as there is nothing linking it to feint, loss of AC to melee or ranged, or your attacks only.
that is what one would think logically.
But one does have to wonder why the change from Flatfooted to Deny Dex when it switched from Gunslinger to Swashbuckler. Even if it is just playtest material, it is a bit of an odd change, that almost means the same thing, but not.
|
|
Greater Feint specifically calls out and builds upon Feint by extending the duration of the debuff.
Thats just the thing though.. It really doesn't extend the duration of the debuff.
I can Imp Feint against two targets turn one, and on my second turn attack both of them to get my sneak attack. Which is ultimately longer in duration than using my next attack during the period in which they are already denied.
Greater Feint works with any feint action. If you feint as a swift action using Wave Strike or Moonlight Stalker Feint, or in place of an attack with Two-Weapon Feint then Greater Feint still comes into play. Greater Feint simply extends the feint effect for all melee attacks by the user until the start of his next turn.
Where in the rules does it specify that? There is nothing in the writeup for Greater Feint to suggest that course of action, no more than there is specific wording that it negates Dexterity for all people fighting the Feinter.
|
Where in the rules does it specify that?
Whenever you use feint to cause an opponent to lose his Dexterity bonus, he loses that bonus until the beginning of your next turn, in addition to losing his Dexterity bonus against your next attack.
Note the "Whenever you use feint". Therefor, it works with anything that uses feint. Two-Weapon Feint, Wave Strike, Moonlight Stalker Feint, Surprising Charge, anything that uses feint to deny an enemy of its dexterity.
It does not specify that it works for any feint outside of Improved Feint. When the rule was written, those other forms of feint did not exist. So you are arbitrarily expanding it to mean something it was not meant to include.
If Greater Feint worked the way you say it does, then there would be no reason for Improved Two Weapon Feint. That ITWF exists and is an expansion of Two Weapon Feint (doing just about the same thing) is strong evidence you are giving Greater Feint abilities it does not have.
|
No, its pretty damn bad if James Jacob's ruling is such.
I mean.. REALLY bad. The ammount of work to get something that doesn't actually really do anything beyond taking six other feats, having jupiter lined up with venus and after sacrificing a goat, you get something that might happen to give you a slight advantage.
My TWF knife master scout that can shred most enemies for ridiculous damage would disagree and contend that the feat is VERY strong.
Without getting into too much, there are a number of magic items that my PC friends are customizing for me that make this build ridiculously powerful in most combats. Greater Feint is key.
Some pointers:
Crazy dex
D8 sneak attacks
Bleed damage equal to number of sneak attack dice thrown
Headband of ninjutsu for +2 insight bonus to sneak attacks
Agile daggers for dex to damage
Dagger +1 damage trait
A stack of 1000 gp shirts that give an extra move action 1/day so as to move and full attack
Boots of speed for extra swing and extra move rate
+5 competence bonus to feint, acrobatics, and perception
Goz Mask to sneak attack in smoke
Etc etc
|
|
It does not specify that it works for any feint outside of Improved Feint. When the rule was written, those other forms of feint did not exist. So you are arbitrarily expanding it to mean something it was not meant to include.
If Greater Feint worked the way you say it does, then there would be no reason for Improved Two Weapon Feint. That ITWF exists and is an expansion of Two Weapon Feint (doing just about the same thing) is strong evidence you are giving Greater Feint abilities it does not have.
Everyone I have talked to believes that there is no need for ITWF if you take greater feint and that the ability from greater feint applies to any feint, regardless of which feat you used to trigger it.
It's thread is honestly the first I've seen that challenges that ruling.
No, GF does not allow ranged, or for your allies to get the benefit. As far as being a useless feat, what about the rogue talent Opportunist?
|
|
No, its pretty damn bad if James Jacob's ruling is such.
I mean.. REALLY bad. The ammount of work to get something that doesn't actually really do anything beyond taking six other feats, having jupiter lined up with venus and after sacrificing a goat, you get something that might happen to give you a slight advantage.
My TWF knife master scout that can shred most enemies for ridiculous damage would disagree and contend that the feat is VERY strong.
Without getting into too much, there are a number of magic items that my PC friends are customizing for me that make this build ridiculously powerful in most combats. Greater Feint is key.
Some pointers:
Crazy dex
D8 sneak attacks
Bleed damage equal to number of sneak attack dice thrown
Headband of ninjutsu for +2 insight bonus to sneak attacks
Agile daggers for dex to damage
Dagger +1 damage trait
A stack of 1000 gp shirts that give an extra move action 1/day so as to move and full attack
Boots of speed for extra swing and extra move rate
+5 competence bonus to feint, acrobatics, and perception
Goz Mask to sneak attack in smoke
Etc etc
So you use a bunch of stuff that gets you sneak attack without the use of feint and claim that the feint is what makes you capable of ridiculous damage?
Crazy Dex - Great. you have dex. Thats wonderful. But it doesn't make greater Feint your key.
d8s - Well, there is something.
Bleed - This does not stack, so Improved feint still functions here.
Head band of Ninjitsu - Finally something that allows you once per day actually use greater feint.
Agile Daggers - Doesn't really make G. feint powerful.
Daggers + 1 damage trait - again, You don't need GF to use this.
A stack of 1000gp shirts that allow you to use your scout stuff to gain sneak attack. The need for GF isn't here. Though, I suppose you sit there and change out your shirt so you can use the three feats you spent on feint to be able to actually use GF.
Boots of Speed - Alright, so with the headband of Ninjitsu, you can actually use GF once per day with an extra attack.
+5 on stuff - Not sure were this is coming from. But I guess with your head band once per day you'll be able to use it.
Goz Mask - Smoke is not using GF.
So to reiterate, the use of a large amount of things that avoid needing to use GF doesn't make GF powerful. And most of those items do just that.
You're using abilities and functions from all sorts of other things to get sneak attack besides using greater feint. Or even feint. Some of them don't even work with having multiple attacks per round (Bleed damage)
The amount of work you spend trying to get the greater feint to work is what makes the feat so incredibly weak. You've got to get all these things lined up to even have a chance to use it. As far as I know, there is no other feat out there that requires so much work to /actually/ get it to work.
|
|
It does not specify that it works for any feint outside of Improved Feint. When the rule was written, those other forms of feint did not exist.
It does. It doesn't say whenever you feint as a move action, or whenever you Improved Feint, it says whenever you feint. So RAW it works. I admit that this is probably not RAI, and it does make ITWFeint irrelevant, but a lot of feats are traps. Until it gets clarified that RAI is to only work as a move action, I will assume it works with anything. If you want to say it only works as a move action, the fine. But RAW it works with everything.
|
|
I think you are missing the point that I was trying to make. Having skill focus (feint) and all those items that make me better at sneak attacks makes GF all the more valuable when ruling that any feint action (such as from Two Weapon Feint) gives sneak attacks for each iterative attack until your next turn.
I liberally use poisons without poison use (life oracle can save me if needed) and the mages make me scrolls and other magic items.
Apologies for making that assumption that you knew where I was going with it.
My rogue's goal is to always have a sneak attack option open, and iterative sneak attacks whenever possible even without a flank buddy. I have UMD for other items when creatures cannot be sneak attacked. At 10th level and a 12cha I have a +20 UMD at 10th level which makes wands automatic and scrolls mostly so.
So in most combats I am a very strong (if rangey) striker, and a good utility player in those few encounters I cannot be 100% effective.
I do agree with your point that it takes work in combat, but I personally believe that a rogue is the party tactician instead of the fighter. A rogue played smartly can be brutally deadly. You just need to really understand the rules and know your capabilities with magic.
It does not specify that it works for any feint outside of Improved Feint. When the rule was written, those other forms of feint did not exist.It does. It doesn't say whenever you feint as a move action, or whenever you Improved Feint, it says whenever you feint. So RAW it works. I admit that this is probably not RAI, and it does make ITWFeint irrelevant, but a lot of feats are traps. Until it gets clarified that RAI is to only work as a move action, I will assume it works with anything. If you want to say it only works as a move action, the fine. But RAW it works with everything.
It no more allows Feint Feats that were built after the Core Rulebook's publication than it allows the target's Dexterity modifier to be ignored by every single opponent, not just the one who feinted him.
The very same wording ambiguity that you say does not allow others to take advantage of a Feinter's Greater Feint also prevents your ruling concerning Greater Feint's ability to be used with other Feint abilities.
Nor does it lessen the pointlessness of taking Improved Feint to get Greater Feint when Improved Two Weapon Feint will provide pretty much the same benefit without needing to waste two Feats.
In regards to Greater Feint / Improved two weapon feint, it is a feat tree thing in my mind. Both can be obtained in this order
Combat Expertise, Two Weapon Feint.
Then, you can either take Improved Two Weapon Feint, or Improved Feint and Greater Feint. Getting greater feint actually takes more feats to acquire, there-by not making Improved Two Weapon Feint "exist for no reason". However, Greater Feint is more versatile.
Really. One exists for up to the start of your next round. You're talking about a high-dexterity Rogue who would likely have chosen Improved Initiative to try and go first in almost every situation. The start of the next round thus is before everyone else went.
The second is until the end of the existing round. With a high-initiative Rogue, that is essentially the same thing as Greater Feint. And even better, you didn't waste a Feat that you don't use (Improved Feint) to get to this point.
Even more, it's based on an assumption about Greater Feint that is not backed up by FAQ. That entire Feat Set could go tumbling down should the folks at Paizo turn around and rule "Greater Feint only works with Improved Feint."
|
|
In regards to Greater Feint / Improved two weapon feint, it is a feat tree thing in my mind. Both can be obtained in this order
Combat Expertise, Two Weapon Feint.
Then, you can either take Improved Two Weapon Feint, or Improved Feint and Greater Feint. Getting greater feint actually takes more feats to acquire, there-by not making Improved Two Weapon Feint "exist for no reason". However, Greater Feint is more versatile.
Very good way to put it. In my build, I'm "all in" so it did not make sense to take it.
Really. One exists for up to the start of your next round. You're talking about a high-dexterity Rogue who would likely have chosen Improved Initiative to try and go first in almost every situation. The start of the next round thus is before everyone else went.
The second is until the end of the existing round. With a high-initiative Rogue, that is essentially the same thing as Greater Feint. And even better, you didn't waste a Feat that you don't use (Improved Feint) to get to this point.
Even more, it's based on an assumption about Greater Feint that is not backed up by FAQ. That entire Feat Set could go tumbling down should the folks at Paizo turn around and rule "Greater Feint only works with Improved Feint."
My gaming group believes this is what is actually intended for both home and PFS play. If Paizo officially makes an announcement that conflicts with this thought, I'm sure I would be allowed to rearrange my feats slightly to accommodate whatever would need to change.
|
|
I think you are missing the point that I was trying to make. Having skill focus (feint) and all those items that make me better at sneak attacks makes GF all the more valuable when ruling that any feint action (such as from Two Weapon Feint) gives sneak attacks for each iterative attack until your next turn.
I liberally use poisons without poison use (life oracle can save me if needed) and the mages make me scrolls and other magic items.
Apologies for making that assumption that you knew where I was going with it.
My rogue's goal is to always have a sneak attack option open, and iterative sneak attacks whenever possible even without a flank buddy. I have UMD for other items when creatures cannot be sneak attacked. At 10th level and a 12cha I have a +20 UMD at 10th level which makes wands automatic and scrolls mostly so.
So in most combats I am a very strong (if rangey) striker, and a good utility player in those few encounters I cannot be 100% effective.
I do agree with your point that it takes work in combat, but I personally believe that a rogue is the party tactician instead of the fighter. A rogue played smartly can be brutally deadly. You just need to really understand the rules and know your capabilities with magic.
Heres the thing.. You present me with "GF is powerful!" And then show me a large collection of things that have nothing to do with GF, don't work with GF, or even just simply by pass the need for doing GF, as if this would prove that GF is somehow the most powerful thing in the world.
But the thing is.. it doesn't show it at all. Smoke and Mirrors is what you presented with it. Like trying to say that Wizards are powerful melee fighters, and then showing me a build were you're a level 1 wizard, level 19 fighter. Its understandable that if you get sneak attack, you'll do better than if you don't get sneak attack. But having things like the Goz Mask or various other ways of getting sneak attack beyond using Greater Feint doesn't show that greater feint is indeed a powerful option.
And while the Rogue could be somewhat more of a tactician, he doesn't have really ways of expressing his abilities. The blow to greater feint only serves to increase that failing further.
The truly sad thing is that Greater Feint could have been a method of allowing one-weapon rogues (or fighters!) to shine. If Feint became a Swift action and lasted for the round, then every attack afterward would be able to use the Rogue's sneak-attack bonus.
Instead, all it does is force players using just the Core Rulebook to take a Move Action to feint and then hope an AoO happens afterward. The saving grace was the belief that ANYONE could benefit from the Dexterity loss - so a Bard could use Greater Feint and let the Rogue get in two or three sneak attacks.
Only to have Jacobs turn around and say "nope, you can't help other people out with your Feint." So now it's basically a Feat designed to be ambiguous and help Paizo encourage sales of other sourcebooks. How very wonderful.
No, GF does not allow ranged, or for your allies to get the benefit. As far as being a useless feat, what about the rogue talent Opportunist?
A feat that is obtained at 6th or 7th level isn't used till 10th? Eh.
Feat path for two weapon fighting and feinting
1 Two Weapon Fighting
H:(Combat Expertise if your human)
3 Combat Expertise
5 Two Weapon Feint
7 Improved Feint
9 Greater Feint
And two feats along the same chain are invalidated. Improved Two Weapon Feint is meaningless and Improved Feint is rendered useless through Two Weapon Feint. Improved Feint doesn't even give you a +2 on bluff checks made to feint!
|
|
It no more allows Feint Feats that were built after the Core Rulebook's publication than it allows the target's Dexterity modifier to be ignored by every single opponent, not just the one who feinted him.
The very same wording ambiguity that you say does not allow others to take advantage of a Feinter's Greater Feint also prevents your ruling concerning Greater Feint's ability to be used with other Feint abilities.
Nor does it lessen the pointlessness of taking Improved Feint to get Greater Feint when Improved Two Weapon Feint will provide pretty much the same benefit without needing to waste two Feats.
Well, if that is how you feel like ruling, then that is fine. It is ambiguous RAW, so it could go either way I suppose. Just for the record though, you are right because my typical group rules that your dexterity bonus is lost to everyone in home games, and I don't make feint-centric character or see feint-centric characters in PFS, so as far as I am concerned, it works with everyone. Your Mileage May Vary I suppose.
|
|
Smoke and Mirrors is what you presented with it.
Ok, forget everything I said before this post because you getting what I'm trying to say.
I postulate that that you read into GF too much and try to pick it apart into something that it wasn't supposed to be, and instead allows a high level TWF rogue to fully shine in close quarters melee by sacrificing the first main hand swing and all iterative attacks are sneak attacks only for that rogue and no one else benefits.
My gaming group is all comprised of 20-30 year gaming vets and we unilaterally agree on this interpretation and that it is neither geeky or overpowered, and to be honest that is all that matters to us.
In my personal experience I think that ruling would also hold at any PFS table. There are far more ambiguous and contentious rules that this one IMO.
|
|
It does not specify that it works for any feint outside of Improved Feint. When the rule was written, those other forms of feint did not exist. So you are arbitrarily expanding it to mean something it was not meant to include.
If Greater Feint worked the way you say it does, then there would be no reason for Improved Two Weapon Feint. That ITWF exists and is an expansion of Two Weapon Feint (doing just about the same thing) is strong evidence you are giving Greater Feint abilities it does not have.
Frankly this is a ludicrous claim to me. The feat says "whenever you use feint..." You don't use improved feint for this, it is when you make a feint in combat per the combat rules. D20pfsrd even makes it easier by linking the feint maneuver in the Combat Rules for you. Improved Feint is a feat requirement and nothing more. You are trying to argue a point that doesn't make any sense because you are saying that the word feint specifically and only means the improved feint feat with no other support or precedent.
And BTW, feats are not dated. You cannot arbitrarily make a claim based on the date a feat was written to support an obtuse RAI argument. It makes no sense. "Well as of the books that were made by 2011" is a case that has no relevancy for a game system that is designed to work together with future publications.
|
|
Well, I'd like to point out that two classes have similar ability to knock out Dex mod, and potentially for everyone. (Gunslinger's Startling Shot, and Swashbuckler's Superior feint)
Both of them are about the same level as Greater Feint.
Both of them Function for the entire team (at least Rules as I think are intended, however by the new reading of GF, its questionable)
Both of them hit a greater number of enemies (As in all of them. GF works only on certain enemies)
Both of them tend to be easier to hit, especially Startling Shot.
I wonder why these aren't too powerful, and GF is.
Well, if that is how you feel like ruling, then that is fine. It is ambiguous RAW, so it could go either way I suppose. Just for the record though, you are right because my typical group rules that your dexterity bonus is lost to everyone in home games, and I don't make feint-centric character or see feint-centric characters in PFS, so as far as I am concerned, it works with everyone. Your Mileage May Vary I suppose.It no more allows Feint Feats that were built after the Core Rulebook's publication than it allows the target's Dexterity modifier to be ignored by every single opponent, not just the one who feinted him.
The very same wording ambiguity that you say does not allow others to take advantage of a Feinter's Greater Feint also prevents your ruling concerning Greater Feint's ability to be used with other Feint abilities.
Nor does it lessen the pointlessness of taking Improved Feint to get Greater Feint when Improved Two Weapon Feint will provide pretty much the same benefit without needing to waste two Feats.
To be honest? It's not going to matter in my groups. In my Runelords campaign, the Cleric is adding Feats to improve summoning and the like, the Barbarian isn't going to Feint, and pretty much the only character who used Feint (the GMPC Arcane Trickster) retrained the Improved Feint skill in exchange for Two-Weapon fighting and I'm not even sure I'd bother with any Feint abilities at all as with Acrobatics and Combat Expertise, the character can get on the other side of a foe and use flanking for sneak attacking (flanking bonuses negating penalties from Combat Expertise).
The other group, the Rogue prefers using the blowgun in combat so will likely go down the Dazzling Display/Shatter Defense route for sneak attack bonuses. No one else would really need to Feint so it won't get used there either.
And I don't recall seeing any enemies ever using Greater Feint. This kind of suggests that it serves no effective role in the eyes of the module-designers and thus isn't used. If I were to use it for a foe, until a FAQ states otherwise I'd let the effects of Greater Feint be usable by others because it doesn't state it doesn't. Unofficial FAQs need not apply.
It does not specify that it works for any feint outside of Improved Feint. When the rule was written, those other forms of feint did not exist. So you are arbitrarily expanding it to mean something it was not meant to include.
If Greater Feint worked the way you say it does, then there would be no reason for Improved Two Weapon Feint. That ITWF exists and is an expansion of Two Weapon Feint (doing just about the same thing) is strong evidence you are giving Greater Feint abilities it does not have.
Frankly this is a ludicrous claim. It says "whenever you use feint..." You don't use improved feint for this, it is when you make a feint in combat per the combat rules. D20pfsrd even makes it easier by linking the feint maneuver in the Combat Rules for you. Improved Feint is a feat requirement and nothing more. You are trying to argue a point that doesn't make any sense because you are saying that the word feint specifically and only means the improved feint feat with no other support or precedent.
And BTW, feats are not dated. You cannot arbitrarily make a claim based on the date a feat was written to support an obtuse RAI argument. It makes no sense. "Well as of the books that were made by 2011" is a case that has no relevancy for a game system that is designed to work together with future publications.
It is no more ludicrous than your claim that the benefits of Greater Feint are not usable by people outside of the person who used Feint. You are claiming that the wording of previous Feats influence the current Feat. I'm stating that the same ambiguities can be used to state you cannot use Greater Feint with Feint abilities outside of its direct Feat Tree and it has as much validity as your claim.
There is no FAQ proving your point. Either for denying the use of Greater Feint penalties for others who didn't use the Feint, or for allowing Greater Feint to be used for Feint feats outside the Improved Feint feat tree.
|
|
It is no more ludicrous than your claim that the benefits of Greater Feint are not usable by people outside of the person who used Feint. You are claiming that the wording of previous Feats influence the current Feat. I'm stating that the same ambiguities can be used to state you cannot use Greater Feint with Feint abilities outside of its direct Feat Tree and it has as much validity as your claim.There is no FAQ proving your point. Either for denying the use of Greater Feint penalties for others who didn't use the Feint, or for allowing Greater Feint to be used for Feint feats outside the Improved Feint feat tree.
You have me confused with another poster, for I made no such claim of influence of prior feats.
Feint means feint, the combat action, not Improved Feint, a feat.
Greater Feint does not somehow give you the ability to extend the benefit to other characters, for three reasons.
1) it does not explicitly state that benefit
2) we should all know that something that changes a core mechanic would be explicitly stated
And 3) the entire argument for that is based off the words dexterity bonus. To believe it extends to others is based off of interpretational fallacies. To wit:
3a) "Whenever you use feint to cause an opponent to lose his Dexterity bonus"-- in this situation we know the author is referring to a feint maneuver, not a feat. That maneuver is a core combat mechanic that only denies a dexterity bonus to AC vs. the feinter.
3b) "he loses that bonus until the beginning of your next turn" --we know that by standard English prose we are not intended to presume only male characters derive a penalty, but instead the author is assigning a male pronoun to describe the feintee.
'That bonus' in this case refers not to some bonus we think that we are going to get by this feat, but describes the normal bonus derived from the core feint maneuver. That means the bonus is a loss of Dex to AC towards the feinter. 'Until the beginning of your next turn' refers from the point in time this aforementioned feint activity occurs, but through the rest of the character's turn and until that feinter's initiative comes up again, presumably to include any immediate action and/or opportunity attacks.
3c) "in addition to losing his Dexterity bonus against your next attack." We know by the feint core rulebook maneuver that the bonus referred to, again, is the specific bonus derived from said core maneuver, not a broader scope statement of dexterity bonuses in general such as to saving throws and skill checks. It is stated this way to reinforce the normal behavior prior to having this feat.
3d). "Normal: A creature you feint loses its Dexterity bonus against your next attack." Here Is more reinforcement that the Dexterity bonus mentioned is not a general Dexterity bonus to all things, but instead refers to the specific dexterity bonus that is lost due to the feint action core rule book maneuver.
Hopefully this clears some things up for certain readers. You can certainly make your own home brew rules as you like and your GM allows.
A feat does not have to be in the same tree as another feat in order for the feats to stack. They simply have to show through their wording that they synergize.
In this case, if the ability enhancing\modifying feint states that you activate it as "part of a feint" or "whenever you use feint", then they can be stacked.
Improved Feint betters the action economy to a move action, but you're still using 'feint'. Two-Weapon Feint again improves the action economy, to an attack-equivalent action when two-weapon fighting - and you're still using feint. Improved Two-Weapon Feint extends the duration of the feint's effects - still using feint.
Greater Feint requires that you be feinting; in all of the above cases, you are doing so, and thus Greater Feint would trigger in all of those instances.
@Atarlost: I agree that whomever wrote Greater Feint intended it to do something. The question is, what? The more conservative interpretation makes it pretty impotent; without combining it with feats from another tree, all it will do is grant you sneak attack damage on AoOs. The more liberal interpretation makes it (possibly) overly-potent.
@Arliss Drakken: I think most of us understand that. The problem with that interpretation, though, is that it makes a feat with rather heavy prerequisites, well, not ever worth taking, unless you've got a build that somehow grants you scads of AoOs.
|
|
Well apparently, startling shot also does the same thing as Greater Feint as per read by JJ.
But as he said previously in the Greater Feint post, we need the actual rules team.
A feat does not have to be in the same tree as another feat in order for the feats to stack. They simply have to show through their wording that they synergize.
In this case, if the ability enhancing\modifying feint states that you activate it as "part of a feint" or "whenever you use feint", then they can be stacked.
Improved Feint betters the action economy to a move action, but you're still using 'feint'. Two-Weapon Feint again improves the action economy, to an attack-equivalent action when two-weapon fighting - and you're still using feint. Improved Two-Weapon Feint extends the duration of the feint's effects - still using feint.
Greater Feint requires that you be feinting; in all of the above cases, you are doing so, and thus Greater Feint would trigger in all of those instances.
@Atarlost: I agree that whomever wrote Greater Feint intended it to do something. The question is, what? The more conservative interpretation makes it pretty impotent; without combining it with feats from another tree, all it will do is grant you sneak attack damage on AoOs. The more liberal interpretation makes it (possibly) overly-potent.
@Arliss Drakken: I think most of us understand that. The problem with that interpretation, though, is that it makes a feat with rather heavy prerequisites, well, not ever worth taking, unless you've got a build that somehow grants you scads of AoOs.
You're wrong in this. Improved Feint and Two-Weapon Feint are two separate Feats that are only related insofar that they need Combat Expertise. TWF is not an "improvement" of IF, it's a completely separate Feat line that includes Improved Two-Weapon Feint that allows all subsequent Two-Weapon attacks to benefit from the Feint.
You're implying that TWF is a stepwise progression. It's completely separate.
As for GF being "overly-potent" it is no more overly potent than other abilities that do the same thing at around the same level.
Now let's look at the wording for Greater Feint and Improved Two-Weapon Feint. And then consider a scenario:
Greater Feint (Combat)
You are skilled at making foes overreact to your attacks.
Prerequisites: Combat Expertise, Improved Feint, base attack bonus +6, Int 13.
Benefit: Whenever you use feint to cause an opponent to lose his Dexterity bonus, he loses that bonus until the beginning of your next turn, in addition to losing his Dexterity bonus against your next attack.
Normal: A creature you feint loses its Dexterity bonus against your next attack.
Improved Two-Weapon Feint (Combat)
Your primary weapon keeps a foe off balance, allowing you to slip your off-hand weapon past his defenses.
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Int 13, Combat Expertise, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: While using Two-Weapon Fighting to make melee attacks, you can forgo your first primary-hand melee attack to make a Bluff check to feint an opponent. If you successfully feint, that opponent is denied his Dexterity bonus to AC until the end of your turn.
We have a 10th level Rogue with a Dexterity of 22 (with magic) and Improved Initiative, who has an average Initiative roll of 20.
On average the Rogue will be going before most foes. The Rogue attacks and Feints. The enemy is denied Dexterity 'til the end of the Rogue's turn.
Greater Feint extends this to the start of the next turn - however, on average the Rogue does not have any enemies go before him. So why bother taking Greater Feint?
(Do note, the wording is nearly identical to Greater Feint. If you assume Greater Feint ONLY negates Dex Bonuses for Armor Class, then ITWF and GF could both be assumed by their wording to negate dexterity bonuses to all foes unless you go by the Jacobs unofficial ruling.)
|
|
@Arliss Drakken: I think most of us understand that. The problem with that interpretation, though, is that it makes a feat with rather heavy prerequisites, well, not ever worth taking, unless you've got a build that somehow grants you scads of AoOs.
Great post Xaratherus.
Isn't Two Weapon Feint + Improved Feint + Greater Feint mechanically superior to Two Weapon Feint + Improved Two Weapon Feint for a dual-wielding rogue? Since both modify the feint action, it seems that if you afford the feats, the former is the better route to go because you have a feint you can youse as a move action when not close to melee?
@Tangent101. Most of my combats have plenty of opponents so I was t to feint multiple times per combat. Usually I would not feint at first because we rarely start combat that close to enemies, unless I use a 1/day magic item to grant an extra move action to close and them use my first weapon attack to feint.
If you have to move to enter combat then you are forced to either forgo your attack to feint (which is actually Feint - standard action prior to Improved Feint) or forgo the feint itself to attack. This doesn't change unless you somehow gain an extra action from Haste or the like. And even then you get one extra action so Greater Feint is no better in this situation than plain augmented Feint.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the point that some people do not understand is that Feint is a specific maneuver detailed in the Combat Maneuver section of the Core Rulebook (page 201). Improved Feint, Greater Feint, Two-Weapon Feint, Improved Two-Weapon Feint, Moonlight Stalker Feint, and Wave Strike ALL directly reference, use, state unequivocally that they apply to this rule for the Feint maneuver (again, listed on page 201 of the CRB). When you feint, however you feint, you are doing a feint according to the rules for the Feint maneuver/action in the CRB.
Startling Shot and Superior Feint, both Extraordinary Abilities and not Feats, never once reference the Feint maneuver/action and neither behave in accordance with the rules for Feint listed in the CRB.
You're wrong in this. Improved Feint and Two-Weapon Feint are two separate Feats that are only related insofar that they need Combat Expertise. TWF is not an "improvement" of IF, it's a completely separate Feat line that includes Improved Two-Weapon Feint that allows all subsequent Two-Weapon attacks to benefit from the Feint.
You're implying that TWF is a stepwise progression. It's completely separate.
No, I'm not implying that at all. Let me try to state it one more time:
Feint is a combat maneuver*. You can feint a target without having any feats whatsoever; the basic feint really grants no benefit since it's normally a standard action, but you can do so if you so choose.
Improved Feint is a feat that modifies that combat maneuver. Two-Weapon Feint is a feat that also modifies that combat maneuver. Greater Feint is a feat... and so on.
Even though all those feats are not directly related, they all synergize because they both modify the basic combat maneuver upon which they're based. The fact that they're in different feat lines is irrelevant.
*It's classed as such, even though a 'combat maneuver' is normally an attack roll made using your CMB. There's not really another good place to put it in the book.
@Midnighter: Exactly. They all stem from the base feint mechanic, and since they all mention that they 'trigger' from that mechanic, they're all stackable - even though they're in different feat chains.
@Arliss Drakken: Yeah, I would consider it to be superior. However, the fact that they lie in separate feat chains makes it a little odd.
Someone earlier mentioned that it looked like the intention was for Greater Feint to grant some superior method to single-weapon Rogues\sneak attack classes, but with the conservative interpretation of the feat, it doesn't really do that.
|
|
I think the point that some people do not understand is that Feint is a specific maneuver detailed in the Combat Maneuver section of the Core Rulebook (page 201). Improved Feint, Greater Feint, Two-Weapon Feint, Improved Two-Weapon Feint, Moonlight Stalker Feint, and Wave Strike ALL directly reference, use, state unequivocally that they apply to this rule for the Feint maneuver (again, listed on page 201 of the CRB). When you feint, however you feint, you are doing a feint according to the rules for the Feint maneuver/action in the CRB.
Startling Shot and Superior Feint, both Extraordinary Abilities and not Feats, never once reference the Feint maneuver/action and neither behave in accordance with the rules for Feint listed in the CRB.
I think the point some people don't understand is James Jacobs isn't exactly the end all be all of rules based discussion. He himself says as much.
Even if he is the lead developer he isn't the rules guy.
The two EX abilities have the same 'ambiguous wording' of Greater Feint. Which is to say both do not mention that all allies attacking the enemy get the effect.
It is probably the fact that greater feint lacks the word "melee" in the normal. This probably sets people off with this whole, "It only applies to your attacks!"
Because denying someone their dex bonus works the opposite way. When its only for you, it is Expressly stated
This is because whenever an enemy is taking a penalty, it applies to /everyone/ unless otherwise expressly stated.
Normally with feint is your next attack.
However we're replacing that. Its not just your next attack. They are denied period, and against your next attack.
FAQ'ed and dotting for posterity. I'd like to see this topic resolved.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
First off, let's tidy up a bit.
Feint isn't a Combat Maneuver.
Combat Maneuvers use your CMB and are resisted by the target's CMD. Attempting one without Feats draws an AoO. Improved and Greater Feats grant bonuses on the attempts in addition to other goodies. Feint doesn't have any of this.
It is a Skill check.
The section talking about it just happens to come AFTER the Combat Maneuver section. Notice the CMs are all nicely lined up alphabetically? "Feint" has never come after "Trip" in any Dictionary I've looked at, unless I'm reading it backwards. And in that case, I probably have other issues to be more concerned about.
So Feint is no more a CM than Mounted Combat is.
Ok done with that. Now onto some misunderstandings.
Regular Feint denies the target's Dex bonus against your next attack made on or before your next Turn. So far all this means is you must Feint in Round 1 and then attack in Round 2 (unless you have Opportunist that triggers or you are lucky enough to get an AoO). Ok, got that. Simple enough.
Improved Feint changes this and makes the check a Move action. So now you can do 1 of 2 things. You can Feint as your move and then Attack, which probably most players do. Or you can still Feint in Round 1 and Attack in Round 2 since doing so is still ON or before your next Turn. Maybe you need to move into position and then Feint, thereby using up all your actions. Maybe you want to Feint 2 targets so you can stick each of them once in Round 2 (assuming you have the attacks). Or maybe there is some other reason why you'd take your time with it. Regardless, taking the Improved Feat doesn't remove the "on...your next Turn" timetable.
Where Improved changed the check from Standard to Move, Greater Feint changes the rules yet again. Now your Feint is doing 2 things at the same time:
#1 You are denying your target his Dex bonus until the start of your next Turn, IN ADDITION TO...
#2 You are denying your target his Dex bonus against your next Attack.
These are 2 exclusive effects. You can still Feint in Round 1 and make your Attack in Round 2 on your next Turn if you really wanted to since the "on...your next Turn" timetable is still there. Or you could Feint as a Move and then Attack. But this is no different than what Improved Feint offers you. So what would be the point of taking Greater then?
Effect #1 is the point. Your target has now lost his Dex bonus for a whole Round. He didn't lose it to just you. If he did, then the text would say so, just as it does for Shatter Defenses or Catch off-guard. All it states is that he loses it.
We don't argue over who gets the benefit attacking a blind target. Everyone does. The target is blind against everyone, not just the one doing the blinding.
We don't argue over who gets an AoO against a target being Greater Tripped. Everyone within melee does. The text doesn't have to spell that out. If the AoO was only enjoyed by the Tripper, then the text would say so. That's what text like that is there for.
And that text is absent from Greater Feint...because it doesn't apply.
Greater Feint denies the target his Dex bonus until the beginning of your next Turn. In that time, anyone attacking him does so without his Dex bonus in place. Congratulations, you made him stumble. The text is very clear in what it says and doesn't say. You are best served by not reading into it what isn't there.
Does this make the Feat overpowered? Not at all. 3 Feats, +6 BAB, and a 13 INT required to pull it off? That effect is paid for. If you don't like it, don't take it.
Just my buck and a half, anyway.
|
|
Just to be clear, denying Dexterity bonus and denying Dexterity bonus to AC are not the same thing. Feinting only denies Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).
I do not think anyone here thinks that Feint is a Combat Maneuver using CMB/CMD to resolve. Feint is a Special Attack, listed after the Combat Maneuver entries and that is all.
These are 2 exclusive effects. You can still Feint in Round 1 and make your Attack in Round 2 on your next Turn if you really wanted to since the "on...your next Turn" timetable is still there. Or you could Feint as a Move and then Attack. But this is no different than what Improved Feint offers you. So what would be the point of taking Greater then?
The benefit (and point) of Greater Feint is that you deny the target it's Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) not only for your next attack but for any other attacks you can make until the start of your next turn.
|
|
Just to be clear, denying Dexterity bonus and denying Dexterity bonus to AC are not the same thing. Feinting only denies Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).
I do not think anyone here thinks that Feint is a Combat Maneuver using CMB/CMD to resolve. Feint is a Special Attack, listed after the Combat Maneuver entries and that is all.
These are 2 exclusive effects. You can still Feint in Round 1 and make your Attack in Round 2 on your next Turn if you really wanted to since the "on...your next Turn" timetable is still there. Or you could Feint as a Move and then Attack. But this is no different than what Improved Feint offers you. So what would be the point of taking Greater then?The benefit (and point) of Greater Feint is that you deny the target it's Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) not only for your next attack but for any other attacks you can make until the start of your next turn.
And that is where I'm going to have to continue to disagree, Reginal.
Just to be clear, denying Dexterity bonus and denying Dexterity bonus to AC are not the same thing. Feinting only denies Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).
I do not think anyone here thinks that Feint is a Combat Maneuver using CMB/CMD to resolve. Feint is a Special Attack, listed after the Combat Maneuver entries and that is all.
These are 2 exclusive effects. You can still Feint in Round 1 and make your Attack in Round 2 on your next Turn if you really wanted to since the "on...your next Turn" timetable is still there. Or you could Feint as a Move and then Attack. But this is no different than what Improved Feint offers you. So what would be the point of taking Greater then?The benefit (and point) of Greater Feint is that you deny the target it's Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) not only for your next attack but for any other attacks you can make until the start of your next turn.
That is your interpretation. That is not what the rules specifically state.
You are putting your viewpoint onto the rules. Now, you are allowed to do that for your game because the first rule is: The GM can change any rule he or she desires for playability." But that does not mean that is the intent of the rule.
|
|
Hopefully the FAQ request will get answered and we can all put this to rest. Until then, have a Happy New Year all, and remember it is just a game :)
Tell that to Bob
|
|
If you do a search of these forums you will find that these questions were asked back in 2009. You will also find that most of the answer were that the dex loss was against all opponents not just the one doing the feinting.
But of course that just players opinions as there hasnt been a FAQ for greater feint in going on 5 yrs.
The benefit (and point) of Greater Feint is that you deny the target it's Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) not only for your next attack but for any other attacks you can make until the start of your next turn.
I won't speak for Tangent, but I agree with everything you say in this... :) ...except what I emboldened. That's the part you're reading into this. Those words aren't anywhere in the Feat description. Not in my CRB nor on the PRD anyway. So where are you finding these words? Because the only place I see them mentioned is under the description of the basic, non-feat Feint action....which applies to "your next attack"....basically Effect #2 that I pointed out in my previous post.
Remember, Greater Feint offers 2 Effects. #1 is a distinct thing set apart from Effect #2. In addition to the target losing his Dex bonus to AC (if any) against your next attack (#2), he also loses his Dex bonus to AC (if any) for a full Round (#1). This loss for the Round does not say "against your attacks" or any such thing. If those words were meant to be there, then either it is an oversight of the designers or they would be written there just like they are for Shatter Defenses and Catch Off-guard.