Ranged Feint has some weird interpretations of the CRB. Specifically:
Normal: You can feint only with a melee weapon, and only against a creature you threaten with that weapon.
Feint
Feinting is a standard action. To feint, make a Bluff skill check. The DC of this check is equal to 10 + your opponent's base attack bonus + your opponent's Wisdom modifier. If your opponent is trained in Sense Motive, the DC is instead equal to 10 + your opponent's Sense Motive bonus, if higher. If successful, the next melee attack you make against the target does not allow him to use his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). This attack must be made on or before your next turn.When feinting against a nonhumanoid you take a –4 penalty. Against a creature of animal Intelligence (1 or 2), you take a –8 penalty. Against a creature lacking an Intelligence score, it's impossible. Feinting in combat does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Feinting as a Move Action: With the Improved Feint feat, you can attempt a feint as a move action.
Feint: You can use Bluff to feint in combat, causing your opponent to be denied his Dexterity bonus to his AC against your next attack. The DC of this check is equal to 10 + your opponent's base attack bonus + your opponent's Wisdom modifier. If your opponent is trained in Sense Motive, the DC is instead equal to 10 + your opponent's Sense Motive bonus, if higher. For more information on feinting in combat, see Combat.
The Feint entry never mentions a weapon requirement OR a threatening requirement. Is the "normal" line of Ranged Feint an erratum of the Feint rules or is it a case of "the contributor didn't read the Feint rules before submitting the feat"?
You can think of it as an erratum, but it would probably just be considered a clarification, by the design team. This sort of thing has happened before.
You can think of it as an erratum, but it would probably just be considered a clarification, by the design team. This sort of thing has happened before.
See, that's a problem. You have things like the Handle Animal debate, where people argue that the printing of the Exclusive trick either did or didn't reveal some super loophole with Handle Animal, but then we have the printing of this feat that seems to imply that feint hasn't worked as written for 7 years.
It's a problem to have rules that stop working as written because of a feat in a new book. If the CRB is missing intended verbiage, it should have an actual erratum to address it. If the feat in Ultimate Intrigue is incorrect, then there should be a erratum to address it.
This kind of thing holds a lot more weight when it's in the main rpg line of books. Something in the player companion line doesn't exactly compare.
