Envoy's Clever Feint

[Myrrdoch]

Okay, so the envoy's clever feint ability reads that it makes the target flat-footed against the envoy's attacks until the end of the envoy's next turn. On a successful use, it makes the target flat-footed against the entire party's attacks until the end of the envoy's next turn.

Flat-footed applies a -2 penalty to the target's AC, but the condition itself also prevents reactions like attacks of opportunity.

Does this mean that on a successful bluff check, an Envoy can just prevent an enemy from ever making reactions? Or does it just mean that they take the AC penalty, because they are flat-footed "against the attack" and they haven't gained the flat-footed condition a la an operative's debilitating strike?

[KingOfAnything]

Quote:

Or does it just mean that they take the AC penalty, because they are flat-footed "against the attack" and they haven't gained the flat-footed condition a la an operative's debilitating strike?

This one.

[Shaudius]

This came up in a game last night. I'm inclined to agree with the response from KingofAnything, but interested in hearing others opinions/an official response.

[Pantshandshake]

Given the super specific wording used, I'd say it means they just take the ac penalty but are not actually flat footed.

[HammerJack]

I am fairly confident that the ability means they don't have the full flat-footed condition. The part that I'm always a bit uncertain about is whether it should also prevent reactions that are specifically triggered by that attack (AoO, share pain, etc).

[Dracomicron]

If they just take the AC penalty, then why not just say "the enemy takes -2 to AC from this attack" or "you gain +2 to attack from this effect?"

I'd rule that the Flat-Footed target couldn't use an Attack of Opportunity against the Envoy (or the rest of the party on a successful roll) if they make a ranged attack from a threatened square. Considering that Operatives can get Uncanny Mobility at level 2 and simply designate a target who can't make an AoO against them that turn, I don't see this as overpowered.

However, the opponent could still make an AoO against an Envoy or party member who cast a spell from a threatened square, even if the spell resulted in a ranged attack, because that's not specifically worded as flat-footed to spellcasting. Same goes for movement.

[Pantshandshake]

You know, that's a good point. I think you might have the best interpretation so far.

[Shaudius]

Yeah, I agree that they would not get AoO against ranged attacks made against them while threatened (since they are flat-footed to the attack) but would still get AoOs through spellcasting and provoking movement.

[HammerJack]

The only reason I can think of that they would use partial flat-footed instead of a flat -2AC without it affecting AoOs is to limit stacking.

But Starfinder does do a lot to limit stacking.

I do think Draconomicon is about right, and that other attack-triggered reactions like, say, a laser reflecting ability should also be affected, but there is enough grey area for me to expect varied rulings.

[trollbill]

It also possible they are looking to the future where Feats or Abilities might allow additional advantage against a Flat-footed Target.

[BigNorseWolf]

Dracomicron wrote:

If they just take the AC penalty, then why not just say "the enemy takes -2 to AC from this attack" or "you gain +2 to attack from this effect?"

To keep it from stacking with the Opperatives flat feet inducing abilities.

Which is why I skipped this on my PFS SoldierVoy