Nauseated by Dirty Trick Master Feat


Rules Questions

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:

DIRTY TRICK MASTER (COMBAT)Bastards of Golarion 25

You are adept at stifling your enemies and can expertly make a bad situation even worse.
Prerequisites: Greater Dirty Trick, Improved Dirty Trick, base attack bonus +11.
Benefit: Whenever you successfully perform a dirty trick combat maneuver against an opponent who is still affected by a condition inflicted by a previous dirty trick (whether your own or another creature’s), you can cause the condition to worsen. In addition to increasing the duration of the condition as normal, you cause an opponent who is dazzled to become dazed, entangled to become pinned, shaken to become frightened, and sickened to become nauseated. This worsened condition replaces the previous dirty trick condition, and lasts for the duration of the dirty trick (including any rounds remaining from the previous dirty trick condition) or until the opponent uses a standard action to remove the condition (whichever comes first).
Quote:
Nauseated Condition: Creatures with the nauseated condition experience stomach distress. Nauseated creatures are unable to attack, cast spells, concentrate on spells, or do anything else requiring attention. The only action such a character can take is a single move action per turn.

I've unsuccessfully searched the messageboards for a similar topic after observing that the nauseated condition doesn't allow for standard actions, thus the condition wouldn't be removable when applied by the dirty trick master feat. Is it intended that this be the case, or is there an exception to the nauseated condition for this situation?


Nope, looks it would just last the duration. It's a good one to apply. Dazed forbids all actions, however.


As PoB-W mentioned, Dazed prevents them from even limping away. That's pretty harsh, though it's a lot to invest.

Grand Lodge

How did I overlook the dazed condition, but not nauseated? Both are pretty harsh. Quite an investment for a devastating outcome. Few creatures would see it coming, and quite a few GMs and players are to be surprised by it, too. It forces a creature to spend their standard action early or potentially lose the battle... And with no limits on the feat's use it makes dirty trick a formidable option.


xebeche wrote:
How did I overlook the dazed condition, but not nauseated? Both are pretty harsh. Quite an investment for a devastating outcome. Few creatures would see it coming, and quite a few GMs and players are to be surprised by it, too. It forces a creature to spend their standard action early or potentially lose the battle... And with no limits on the feat's use it makes dirty trick a formidable option.

considering that a maneuver master monk can lay down 2 dirty tricks a round, this sounds devastating, and my lorewarden/maneuver master build will be ridiculous at level 12 now. Nice find, I hadn't thought of this.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

lol.


Quote:
The GM is the arbiter of what can be accomplished with this maneuver, but it cannot be used to impose a permanent penalty

It's a stupid-strong feat, but it's not going to apply anything permanently in the usual sense of the word.


FYI, Dazing Assault is available at the same BAB level, only has Power Attack as a Pre-Req,
and is compatable with Full Attacks and AoOs (using Weapon bonuses) without any shenaningans.
The Condition only lasts one round, but you can continue to re-apply it as long as you can attack them next turn.


Quandary wrote:

FYI, Dazing Assault is available at the same BAB level, only has Power Attack as a Pre-Req,

and is compatable with Full Attacks and AoOs (using Weapon bonuses) without any shenaningans.
The Condition only lasts one round, but you can continue to re-apply it as long as you can attack them next turn.

The difference is Dazing Assault gives -5 to hit on every attack and has a very makable save DC (which is Fortitude and so some critters are even just immune straight away). This feat works, to the best of my knowledge, on anything in the game, and it offers no save (and hoping that a maxed-out Dirty Trick character doesn't beat your CMD is no subtitute for a save). Then Dazing Assault, as you said, lasts just one round, rather than 1d4+1 at least.


Sure, both have benefits,
I was just saying DTM isn't unprecedented given the existence of DA, and that it also has more pre-reqs and limitations on use.

The fact that DTM needs to already have an existing condition to escalate means it normally needs 2 successful DT CMBs,
while DA can get lucky with one hit, and more easily apply to multiple characters per round (or a single one) because of that.
DA's Save may well be passed fairly often, but you can try with all your attacks, and you still did damage anyways.

People seem to be using Maneuver Master Monk as the way to get multiple DT CMBs per round
(the bonus attacks at -2 below full BAB, i.e. half of normal iteratives, and no AoO opportunity),
but if you do so, then you will be qualifying 4 levels later, at 15th level for single-class Monk to reach BAB+11.
(DTM is not eligible for even MM Monk Bonus Feats, although it's pre-reqs are)
That is only one level from Full BAB qualifying for Stunning Assault, which also drops everything, loses DEX to AC and -2 AC penalty.
High Fort Save creatures tend to have high CMDs as well, and Maneuver Master doesn't really get major attack bonuses.
DA's Save probably equals Stunning Fist at BAB+11 and scales a bit faster beyond that, while applying to all attacks in a round.

Good that there's different options for martials though. Personally I would prefer to not spend 2 Feats building up to something mid-game when I can get other abilities which are immediately useful and still stay useful at higher levels. (E.g. Reckless Abandon which will negate or surpass the -2 vs. -5 attack penalty difference)


Stunning Assault is worse than Dazing Assault--too many things are immune to stun.

There's also other ways like that dirt cheap tattoo from Magical Marketplace to get more Dirty Tricks.

This feat is an auto-win against anything you would be fighting that's vaguely CR-appropriate, which is not a good thing. At the least it should say that affected targets can remove the effect spending their turn even if dazed or nauseated.


For sure.


Quandary wrote:

Sure, both have benefits,

I was just saying DTM isn't unprecedented given the existence of DA, and that it also has more pre-reqs and limitations on use.

The fact that DTM needs to already have an existing condition to escalate means it normally needs 2 successful DT CMBs,
while DA can get lucky with one hit, and more easily apply to multiple characters per round (or a single one) because of that.
DA's Save may well be passed fairly often, but you can try with all your attacks, and you still did damage anyways.

People seem to be using Maneuver Master Monk as the way to get multiple DT CMBs per round
(the bonus attacks, not all iteratives much less AoOs, and at -2 effective penalty),
but if you do so, then you will be qualifying 4 levels later, at 15th level for single-class Monk to reach BAB+11.
(DTM is not eligible for even MM Monk Bonus Feats, although it's pre-reqs are)
That is only one level from Full BAB qualifying for Stunning Assault, which also drops everything, loses DEX to AC and -2 AC penalty.
High Fort Save creatures tend to have high CMDs as well, and Maneuver Master doesn't really get major attack bonuses.

Good that there's different options for martials though.

to be fair, I'd rock the 1 level of manuever master followed by 11 levels of lore warden. That nets me 2 dirty tricks a round, and a +6 to my CMB. With proper gear, you could probably make this close to an auto-succeed against many enemies.

attack: +6 (lore warden) + 6 (strength) + 11 (bab) + 4 (feats) + 1 (trait) + 2 (gloves of maneuver) + 2 (ion stone)= 32 cmd or 31/30 when I "fluffy of maneuvers with it". And that's prior any group buffs that help out further.

This hits most monster CMD even on the CR 15 list on a 10.


Sub_Zero wrote:
Quandary wrote:

Sure, both have benefits,

I was just saying DTM isn't unprecedented given the existence of DA, and that it also has more pre-reqs and limitations on use.

The fact that DTM needs to already have an existing condition to escalate means it normally needs 2 successful DT CMBs,
while DA can get lucky with one hit, and more easily apply to multiple characters per round (or a single one) because of that.
DA's Save may well be passed fairly often, but you can try with all your attacks, and you still did damage anyways.

People seem to be using Maneuver Master Monk as the way to get multiple DT CMBs per round
(the bonus attacks, not all iteratives much less AoOs, and at -2 effective penalty),
but if you do so, then you will be qualifying 4 levels later, at 15th level for single-class Monk to reach BAB+11.
(DTM is not eligible for even MM Monk Bonus Feats, although it's pre-reqs are)
That is only one level from Full BAB qualifying for Stunning Assault, which also drops everything, loses DEX to AC and -2 AC penalty.
High Fort Save creatures tend to have high CMDs as well, and Maneuver Master doesn't really get major attack bonuses.

Good that there's different options for martials though.

to be fair, I'd rock the 1 level of manuever master followed by 11 levels of lore warden. That nets me 2 dirty tricks a round, and a +6 to my CMB. With proper gear, you could probably make this close to an auto-succeed against many enemies.

attack: +6 (lore warden) + 6 (strength) + 11 (bab) + 4 (feats) + 1 (trait) + 2 (gloves of maneuver) + 2 (ion stone)= 32 cmd or 31/30 when I "fluffy of maneuvers with it". And that's prior any group buffs that help out further.

This hits most monster CMD even on the CR 15 list on a 10.

That's exactly the build I was thinking about. Add in true strike potential for extra fun.


Sub_Zero wrote:
to be fair, I'd rock the 1 level of manuever master followed by 11 levels of lore warden. That nets me 2 dirty tricks a round, and a +6 to my CMB.

I'm not clear how you get 2 dirty tricks a round...

A Maneuver Master only gains a 2nd Flurry of Maneuvers Maneuver Attack at 8th level, and DT is otherwise a Standard Action...?
The Lore Warden certainly helps on the CMB, but I don't see how you can get multiple DTs/round that way...?


Quandary wrote:
Sub_Zero wrote:
to be fair, I'd rock the 1 level of manuever master followed by 11 levels of lore warden. That nets me 2 dirty tricks a round, and a +6 to my CMB.

I'm not clear how you get 2 dirty tricks a round...

A Maneuver Master only gains a 2nd Flurry of Maneuvers Maneuver Attack at 8th level, and DT is otherwise a Standard Action...?
The Lore Warden certainly helps on the CMB, but I don't see how you can get multiple DTs/round that way...?

Quick Dirty Trick feat + Flurry of Maneuvers, I believe (and throw in those tattoos for even more).


BTW, when Maneuver Master says all CMBs suffer a -2, then when you gain a 2nd bonus CMB they all suffer an "additional" -3 penalty, then when you gain a 3rd bonus CMB they all suffer an "additional" -7, that is seriously stacking up, 2+3 = -5, and then -12. That probably isn't intended IMHO, but that seems to be the RAW.

EDIT: I considered that simply removing the italic part of "with an additional –3 penalty on combat maneuver checks" would remove the global stacking, but that also wouldn't achieve parity with normal FoB. If the penalties stacked on subsequent bonus CMBs but not on earlier bonus CMBs then it would be much closer to parity (+2 better for 2nd bonus attack, -2 worse for the 3rd but that 'cancels out' the 2nd one's advantage in some weird way that seems dubious but at least plausible), but neither the RAW nor a SIMPLE removal of text would achieve that. I think they just flubbed. Weird that they didn't fix that when they fixed Wild Rager DC to use CON, but there was a whole load of known problems with UC that they didn't fix, either.


Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Quick Dirty Trick feat + Flurry of Maneuvers, I believe (and throw in those tattoos for even more).

Gotcha... I'm not familiar with those tattoos at all, but that could work, although it's just not my cup of tea...

Too many Feats (also needing Combat Expertise) and too much buildup. Barbarian spoiled me ;-)
Still being relatively limited in # of DT attacks it can make makes it more vulnerable to Miss Chance shutting it down, and you can't easily afford Blind-Fight.
I guess you could with Lore Warden bonus Feats, but I'm just averse to that heavy of Feat investment. Again, spoiled :-)


Quandary wrote:
BTW, when Maneuver Master says all CMBs suffer a -2, then when you gain a 2nd bonus CMB they all suffer an "additional" -3 penalty, then when you gain a 3rd bonus CMB they all suffer an "additional" -7, that is seriously stacking up, 2+3 = -5, and then -12. That probably isn't intended IMHO, those new penalties should be the cumulative total, not "additional" penalties (which always stack unless stated otherwise), but that seems to be the RAW.

hence why you only dip in it for 1 level. And as Rogue stated, you use quick dirty trick along side the flurry of maneuvers. This nets you 1 attack, plus 2 dirty tricks. The -2 is someone negated by counting the monk level as CMB for the flurry maneuver, and the 2nd dirty trick will benefit from whatever debuff you stack on the enemy.

edit: ninja'd

oh, and combat expertise is free thanks to Lore Warden. (it really is a no-brainer for maneuver builds)


Rogue Eidolon wrote:
This feat [DTM] is an auto-win against anything you would be fighting that's vaguely CR-appropriate, which is not a good thing. At the least it should say that affected targets can remove the effect spending their turn even if dazed or nauseated.

If you have your one specific build and ideally can use those tattoos or whatever you mentioned (that I'm not familiar with).

I'm not really sure why being able to spend their turn removing it would be that much of a fix, if you could just easily re-apply the conditions next round.
(A little worse than using DA to do similar, because you need 2 CMB successes, but if you think it's near auto-win with your build anyways, that's supposedly not a problem)
I mean, that would mean you do need to focus on that target, rather than being free to ignore them for 1d4+1 rounds and focus on other enemies, but totally shutting down an enemy while beating them up with full attacks still seems majorly strong (and isn't suffering the -5 to attacks that DA does).

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

No one cares that 3rd-level clerics [Hold Person] can do this, right? Or 4th level alchemists [Stink Bombs]? Or hell, 1st level sorcerers [Color Spray]?

+11 BAB Martials can have nice things too.


Quandary wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
This feat [DTM] is an auto-win against anything you would be fighting that's vaguely CR-appropriate, which is not a good thing. At the least it should say that affected targets can remove the effect spending their turn even if dazed or nauseated.

If you have your one specific build and ideally can use those tattoos or whatever you mentioned (that I'm not familiar with).

I'm not really sure why being able to spend their turn removing it would be that much of a fix, if you could just easily re-apply the conditions next round.
(A little worse than using DA to do similar, because you need 2 CMB successes, but if you think it's near auto-win with your build anyways, that's supposedly not a problem)
I mean, that would mean you do need to focus on that target, rather than being free to ignore them for 1d4+1 rounds and focus on other enemies, but totally shutting down an enemy while beating them up with full attacks still seems majorly strong (and isn't suffering the -5 to attacks that DA does).

Oh I agree, and I do think it's noticably powerful even with the removal clause. That's the minimum of what it needs.

Also the tattoos cost basically nothing (the real cost is the tattoo slot, but those have few things you can put in them anyway) but are per day (for a swift action DT), so if you were relying on them for this trick and had to reestablish each round, you would run out much more quickly than with the longer duration.


Jayson MF Kip wrote:

No one cares that 3rd-level clerics [Hold Person] can do this, right? Or 4th level alchemists [Stink Bombs]? Or hell, 1st level sorcerers [Color Spray]?

+11 BAB Martials can have nice things too.

Different things are balanced in different ways. Saving throws are one thing, CMBs another, particularly in ways to scale and raise them. When they make a 1st level spell that gives you +20 to the next DC of your spell, then there will be more in common between them.

Dark Archive

CMB far out paces CR-appropriate CMD in builds that even remotely think about it.


The Beard wrote:
CMB far out paces CR-appropriate CMD in builds that even remotely think about it.

The same can be said of Spell DC versus Saves. Especially once Persistent gets added and even more so when their Dazing.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

What's really nasty is if it's taken by a cad archetype fighter.

Ultimate Combat wrote:
Deadly Surprise (Ex): At 7th level, when a cad hits an opponent that is denied its Dexterity bonus to AC against him with a weapon or unarmed attack, he may attempt a dirty trick combat maneuver as an immediate action as part of the attack. This ability replaces armor training 2.

Or, even worse, a half-orc skulking slayer rogue/cad fighter.

Advanced Race Guide wrote:
Underhanded Maneuvers (Ex): At 1st level, when she could normally make a sneak attack, a slayer may instead make a dirty trick or steal combat maneuver with a bonus on her roll. This bonus is equal to her number of sneak attack dice for a dirty trick combat maneuver, or 1-1/2 × her number of sneak attack dice for a steal combat maneuver. This ability replaces trapfinding.

As long as you can get at least one sneak attack in (and successfully impose the blinded condition) on an opponent that lacks blindsight (or some other ability that prevents them from losing their Dex bonus to AC when blinded), you can full attack and make a dirty trick maneuver check with every attack that hits.


Anzyr wrote:
The Beard wrote:
CMB far out paces CR-appropriate CMD in builds that even remotely think about it.
The same can be said of Spell DC versus Saves. Especially once Persistent gets added and even more so when their Dazing.

No, not really. I once made a character with a DC 38 irresistible dance and who could make it Persistent, which given the duration is very similar to a successful Dirty Trick is about as close as you'll come with a spell. It's not easy to have a DC higher than that, and frankly few casters ever see a DC that high. Ignoring the difficulty of landing a touch attack and bypassing SR, there are still AP finale BBEGs who would chuckle at that DC (saves of +32 or higher on everything, with a Will of +41). Meanwhile, there is no encounter in any AP I have ever seen that would not have their CMD defeated trivially by a CMB-monkey starting at level 11 or 12 (when this feat becomes available). In fact, the referenced BBEG has 48 CMD, which is bypassable on anything but a 1 by that level 11 character with true strike.


Fortunately, it's in a campaign setting book, so it's less likely to be hit by the errata-bat.


Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
The Beard wrote:
CMB far out paces CR-appropriate CMD in builds that even remotely think about it.
The same can be said of Spell DC versus Saves. Especially once Persistent gets added and even more so when their Dazing.
No, not really. I once made a character with a DC 38 irresistible dance and who could make it Persistent, which given the duration is very similar to a successful Dirty Trick is about as close as you'll come with a spell. It's not easy to have a DC higher than that, and frankly few casters ever see a DC that high. Ignoring the difficulty of landing a touch attack and bypassing SR, there are still AP finale BBEGs who would chuckle at that DC (saves of +32 or higher on everything, with a Will of +41). Meanwhile, there is no encounter in any AP I have ever seen that would not have their CMD defeated trivially by a CMB-monkey starting at level 11 or 12 (when this feat becomes available). In fact, the referenced BBEG has 48 CMD, which is bypassable on anything but a 1 by that level 11 character with true strike.

You know you can target more then one save right? So its going to be DC 34-5 (if you try at all) for all your spells against their weakest save. Oh and they have to roll twice, which is incredibly brutal. And that's without any debuffs via a quickened spell. Hell the last boss of Kingmaker will lose to a single Sorcerer so that's a thing...


Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
The Beard wrote:
CMB far out paces CR-appropriate CMD in builds that even remotely think about it.
The same can be said of Spell DC versus Saves. Especially once Persistent gets added and even more so when their Dazing.
No, not really. I once made a character with a DC 38 irresistible dance and who could make it Persistent, which given the duration is very similar to a successful Dirty Trick is about as close as you'll come with a spell. It's not easy to have a DC higher than that, and frankly few casters ever see a DC that high. Ignoring the difficulty of landing a touch attack and bypassing SR, there are still AP finale BBEGs who would chuckle at that DC (saves of +32 or higher on everything, with a Will of +41). Meanwhile, there is no encounter in any AP I have ever seen that would not have their CMD defeated trivially by a CMB-monkey starting at level 11 or 12 (when this feat becomes available). In fact, the referenced BBEG has 48 CMD, which is bypassable on anything but a 1 by that level 11 character with true strike.

In fairness you did need magic to beat that dc . Without true strike a cmb monkey would have an incredibly hard time getting anything off. Plus true strike also trivializes touch attacks as well.


Anzyr wrote:


You know you can target more then one save right? So its going to be DC 34-5 (if you try at all) for all your spells against their weakest save. Oh and they have to roll twice, which is incredibly brutal. And that's without any debuffs via a quickened spell. Hell the last boss of Kingmaker will lose to a single Sorcerer so that's a thing...

Weakest save is +32. That's very unlikely to fail even when rolling twice.

Sub Zero wrote:
In fairness you did need magic to beat that dc . Without true strike a cmb monkey would have an incredibly hard time getting anything off. Plus true strike also trivializes touch attacks as well.

True, but then that's one level 11 character facing a campaign finale BBEG alone with 0 buffs. The sorcerer would be even worse at it if you deleveled her (That DC 38 was at level 16--I think my sorceress had her best DC around 31 or 32 back at level 11, which would be succeeded on the weakest save of that BBEG on anything but a 1).

And the fact is that many substantial buffs exist that are easy to gain and will greatly influence the Dirty Tricker in the Dirty Tricker's favor (heck even just flanking with someone with a Menacing weapon will get the non-true strike level 11 towards a 50% success rate). They simply don't exist for the DC-user.


I'm starting to wonder how this feat interacts with conditions that don't have a dirty trick as their source. Like, what if I dazzle someone who's already dazzled from flare?

Do conditions have a "memory" of where they came from? Is Shaken from the Intimidate skill inherently different than Shaken from a dirty trick?

-Matt


It explicitly says how it works in that regard:

Quote:
Whenever you successfully perform a dirty trick combat maneuver against an opponent who is still affected by a condition inflicted by a previous dirty trick (whether your own or another creature’s), you can cause the condition to worsen...

Conditions not deriving from usage of Dirty Trick (your own or another's) aren't eligible to trigger DTM. 100% clear.


Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Anzyr wrote:


You know you can target more then one save right? So its going to be DC 34-5 (if you try at all) for all your spells against their weakest save. Oh and they have to roll twice, which is incredibly brutal. And that's without any debuffs via a quickened spell. Hell the last boss of Kingmaker will lose to a single Sorcerer so that's a thing...

Weakest save is +32. That's very unlikely to fail even when rolling twice.

Sub Zero wrote:
In fairness you did need magic to beat that dc . Without true strike a cmb monkey would have an incredibly hard time getting anything off. Plus true strike also trivializes touch attacks as well.

True, but then that's one level 11 character facing a campaign finale BBEG alone with 0 buffs. The sorcerer would be even worse at it if you deleveled her (That DC 38 was at level 16--I think my sorceress had her best DC around 31 or 32 back at level 11, which would be succeeded on the weakest save of that BBEG on anything but a 1).

And the fact is that many substantial buffs exist that are easy to gain and will greatly influence the Dirty Tricker in the Dirty Tricker's favor (heck even just flanking with someone with a Menacing weapon will get the non-true strike level 11 towards a 50% success rate). They simply don't exist for the DC-user.

yeah, this feat is probably a bit too powerful. Making it a full round action to remove (and always allow them to remove it), would make this feat good, without breaking the system too much.


Sure, it's clear, but... Am I the only one who finds it strange that this feat is (iirc) the only rules element which requires you to "remember" where a condition came from?

Isn't it strange that with this feat, a mere Condition Card with a d6 to track duration is not enough; the source of the condition also needs to be tracked?

-Matt


Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Anzyr wrote:


You know you can target more then one save right? So its going to be DC 34-5 (if you try at all) for all your spells against their weakest save. Oh and they have to roll twice, which is incredibly brutal. And that's without any debuffs via a quickened spell. Hell the last boss of Kingmaker will lose to a single Sorcerer so that's a thing...

Weakest save is +32. That's very unlikely to fail even when rolling twice.

Sub Zero wrote:
In fairness you did need magic to beat that dc . Without true strike a cmb monkey would have an incredibly hard time getting anything off. Plus true strike also trivializes touch attacks as well.

True, but then that's one level 11 character facing a campaign finale BBEG alone with 0 buffs. The sorcerer would be even worse at it if you deleveled her (That DC 38 was at level 16--I think my sorceress had her best DC around 31 or 32 back at level 11, which would be succeeded on the weakest save of that BBEG on anything but a 1).

And the fact is that many substantial buffs exist that are easy to gain and will greatly influence the Dirty Tricker in the Dirty Tricker's favor (heck even just flanking with someone with a Menacing weapon will get the non-true strike level 11 towards a 50% success rate). They simply don't exist for the DC-user.

You missed the same round debuffing, but sure. I still fail to see how this is a problem when Casters have No Save - Just Dies.


Anzyr wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Anzyr wrote:


You know you can target more then one save right? So its going to be DC 34-5 (if you try at all) for all your spells against their weakest save. Oh and they have to roll twice, which is incredibly brutal. And that's without any debuffs via a quickened spell. Hell the last boss of Kingmaker will lose to a single Sorcerer so that's a thing...

Weakest save is +32. That's very unlikely to fail even when rolling twice.

Sub Zero wrote:
In fairness you did need magic to beat that dc . Without true strike a cmb monkey would have an incredibly hard time getting anything off. Plus true strike also trivializes touch attacks as well.

True, but then that's one level 11 character facing a campaign finale BBEG alone with 0 buffs. The sorcerer would be even worse at it if you deleveled her (That DC 38 was at level 16--I think my sorceress had her best DC around 31 or 32 back at level 11, which would be succeeded on the weakest save of that BBEG on anything but a 1).

And the fact is that many substantial buffs exist that are easy to gain and will greatly influence the Dirty Tricker in the Dirty Tricker's favor (heck even just flanking with someone with a Menacing weapon will get the non-true strike level 11 towards a 50% success rate). They simply don't exist for the DC-user.

You missed the same round debuffing, but sure. I still fail to see how this is a problem when Casters have No Save - Just Dies.

You mean power word kill? That's really just a fancy-pants way to do 100 damage, nothing more.


I'm pretty certain there is a good number of other similar mechanics,
of the top of my head, conditional bonuses vs. enemies who have attacked you.


Would the specific "until the opponent uses a standard action to remove the condition" clause supersede the general rule that a dazed or nauseated character can't take standard actions?


I don't think so, that wouldn't imply that a target can make a standard action when they wouldn't otherwise be able to.


Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Anzyr wrote:


You know you can target more then one save right? So its going to be DC 34-5 (if you try at all) for all your spells against their weakest save. Oh and they have to roll twice, which is incredibly brutal. And that's without any debuffs via a quickened spell. Hell the last boss of Kingmaker will lose to a single Sorcerer so that's a thing...

Weakest save is +32. That's very unlikely to fail even when rolling twice.

Sub Zero wrote:
In fairness you did need magic to beat that dc . Without true strike a cmb monkey would have an incredibly hard time getting anything off. Plus true strike also trivializes touch attacks as well.

True, but then that's one level 11 character facing a campaign finale BBEG alone with 0 buffs. The sorcerer would be even worse at it if you deleveled her (That DC 38 was at level 16--I think my sorceress had her best DC around 31 or 32 back at level 11, which would be succeeded on the weakest save of that BBEG on anything but a 1).

And the fact is that many substantial buffs exist that are easy to gain and will greatly influence the Dirty Tricker in the Dirty Tricker's favor (heck even just flanking with someone with a Menacing weapon will get the non-true strike level 11 towards a 50% success rate). They simply don't exist for the DC-user.

You missed the same round debuffing, but sure. I still fail to see how this is a problem when Casters have No Save - Just Dies.
You mean power word kill? That's really just a fancy-pants way to do 100 damage, nothing more.

No I mean No Save - Be Controlled via Limited Wish duplicated Geas/Quest, No Save - Leave the Fight via Maze, and of course my personally favorite massed Explosive Runes in reading range and a guaranteed to fail Greater Dispel Magic (obviously not cast by yourself), which is no save take Xd6 damage where X is arbitrarily number.

Going to preempt cries of min/max/munchkinery/never-see-play-in -a-real-game, by tossing that back at Dirty Trick Master and then preemptively rolling my eyes.


redward wrote:
Would the specific "until the opponent uses a standard action to remove the condition" clause supersede the general rule that a dazed or nauseated character can't take standard actions?

Not any more than me saying "I will give you a cookie when you give me one million dollars" gives you the capacity to pay me one million dollars. ...Although the offer is still open, if you can ;-)

Grand Lodge

Mattastrophic wrote:

Sure, it's clear, but... Am I the only one who finds it strange that this feat is (iirc) the only rules element which requires you to "remember" where a condition came from?

Isn't it strange that with this feat, a mere Condition Card with a d6 to track duration is not enough; the source of the condition also needs to be tracked?

-Matt

I seem to recall that there are a few other things that don't stack with themselves, even if they stack with other origins of the same debuff.

I think there is an Intimidate feat chain that applies shaken, won't stack with another shaken from that same feat/Intimidate, but will turn a shaken from, say, Cause Fear to go to the next step down the fear list.


Mattastrophic wrote:

Sure, it's clear, but... Am I the only one who finds it strange that this feat is (iirc) the only rules element which requires you to "remember" where a condition came from?

Isn't it strange that with this feat, a mere Condition Card with a d6 to track duration is not enough; the source of the condition also needs to be tracked?

-Matt

Same for fear rules, and some spells IIRC.

For the dirty trick stuff... I don't know, when I read the description, I find it tricky: You need to make specific action with GM approval.

Quote:
The GM is the arbiter of what can be accomplished with this maneuver

If you don't know your GM, you risk to be completely trashed when you pull off your combo.

For the reliability, I clearly prefer dirty tricks. You don't burn spell slots (Ok, you maybe can burn some spell slots/wands charge for True strike), no problem with DR, and you can easily gain some bonus for your manoeuvers. It's all about tastes.

One problem I see with Dirty Tricks is the lack of option for someone else to remove the condition.

Grand Lodge

HectorVivis wrote:
Mattastrophic wrote:

Sure, it's clear, but... Am I the only one who finds it strange that this feat is (iirc) the only rules element which requires you to "remember" where a condition came from?

Isn't it strange that with this feat, a mere Condition Card with a d6 to track duration is not enough; the source of the condition also needs to be tracked?

-Matt

Same for fear rules, and some spells IIRC.

For the dirty trick stuff... I don't know, when I read the description, I find it tricky: You need to make specific action with GM approval.

Quote:
The GM is the arbiter of what can be accomplished with this maneuver

If you don't know your GM, you risk to be completely trashed when you pull off your combo.

For the reliability, I clearly prefer dirty tricks. You don't burn spell slots (Ok, you maybe can burn some spell slots/wands charge for True strike), no problem with DR, and you can easily gain some bonus for your manoeuvers. It's all about tastes.

One problem I see with Dirty Tricks is the lack of option for someone else to remove the condition.

True, but I would think that casting Remove Sickness, or using such a potion on them (full round action, provokes) would clear it.


That's part of the problem.
But more, I was more thinking about Person1 using DT to dazzle Person2, and Person3 clearing the DT with the normal action (depend of the feat Person1 have) on Person2. Sad we don't have the opportunity to do it.

*Imagine a BBEG, pants pulled down, asking his goblin army to fix it.*


This is why the Dirty Fighter archtype rules so, so very much.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Nauseated by Dirty Trick Master Feat All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.