Your opportunistic attacks are particularly detrimental. When you use Debilitating Strike, you can apply two debilitations simultaneously; removing one removes both.
What does that last part mean? Even my best guess here doesn't seem particularly intuitive. My best guess being that if the condition caused by one debilitation is removed, the other debilitation's condition is also removed?
For instance, a rogue renders an enemy enfeebled 1 and slowed 1. They get the enfeeblement cured, so are they also no longer slowed? If they save against the slowed effect, does enfeebled not apply?
Anyone have a clearer idea? Is there some other "removal" mechanic I'm missing? Thanks!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your opportunistic attacks are particularly detrimental. When you use Debilitating Strike, you can apply two debilitations simultaneously; removing one removes both.What does that last part mean? Even my best guess here doesn't seem particularly intuitive. My best guess being that if the condition caused by one debilitation is removed, the other debilitation's condition is also removed?
For instance, a rogue renders an enemy enfeebled 1 and slowed 1. They get the enfeeblement cured, so are they also no longer slowed? If they save against the slowed effect, does enfeebled not apply?
Anyone have a clearer idea? Is there some other "removal" mechanic I'm missing? Thanks!
If a rogue renders an enemy enfeebled 1 and slowed 1. Should either enfeebled or slowed get removed for any reason before the end of the duration, the other is removed as well.
If a rogue's "Strike hits a flat-footed creature and deals damage." and they have Double Debilitaion, they choose two debilitations. Let us say that enfeebled 1 is one of them and slowed is the other. The Critical Debilitations requires a fort save. If the foe critically succeeds, they are not affected by Critical Debilitations. This does not thence remove enfeebled 1 as the other chosen debilitation was not 'removed'. It was not 'removed' because the foe never had the condition to begin with. Thus, in the above situation, it would resove with the foe only being enfeebled 1.
That is how I read it, at least.
My best guess being that if the condition caused by one debilitation is removed, the other debilitation's condition is also removed?
For instance, a rogue renders an enemy enfeebled 1 and slowed 1. They get the enfeeblement cured, so are they also no longer slowed?
That is how I understand that part of the rule also.
If they save against the slowed effect, does enfeebled not apply?
From what I am seeing in the Rogue's Debilitating Strike, it doesn't offer a save against the effect. The Rogue already has to have the target flat-footed and succeed at an attack roll against it. Offering a save is too much rolling. Chances of success decrease exponentially with the number of rolls required.
From what I am seeing in the Rogue's Debilitating Strike, it doesn't offer a save against the effect.
I was thinking of a specific one that did have a save attached. Might have been stunned, not slowed.
Thanks everyone!