Does sense vitals make feint worth considering?


Advice

Silver Crusade

So i mentioned a couple days ago that i was considering making a feint based dandy ranger, and i asked if it just wasn't worth the trouble if the character had no access to sneak attack. And most people said no it wasnt. However. The dandy has access to the bards spell list and bard has access to sense vitals, but since it takes a standard action and lasts only one round per level, im wondering if it's too clunky to be worth the hassle?


It would give you some real use out of feint… but its still ultimately not very useful… the feat investments required to get not only a high enough feint that you can reliably pull it off as well as to get the action cost and down and feint duration up enough to make it good is pretty heavy…

Silver Crusade

Chell Raighn wrote:
It would give you some real use out of feint… but its still ultimately not very useful… the feat investments required to get not only a high enough feint that you can reliably pull it off as well as to get the action cost and down and feint duration up enough to make it good is pretty heavy…

Thats kind of why i'm looking at the menacing combat style for ranger specifically as something people seem to forget that said combat styles allow you to completely bypass requirements for said feats. Passing trick in particular lets you use it as a swift action. Pretty handy.


While sense vital does make a feinting build more useful, it still seems like you are investing a lot for a limited return. Passing trick does not come online until 10th level. What level are you starting at and how high will the campaign go? Unless the campaign is going to go significantly past 10th level you might not get much use out of it. Don’t forget that a Ranger’s caster level is three less than his character level. That means you are losing a full die off sense vital. That means most of the time you are giving up a full round of attacks to get an extra 7-10 points per attack.

Personally I think the underhanded style is going to be more fun. Being able to steal from someone in combat without them realizing you did it is more interesting than simply doing more damage. At 10th level you can pick up quick steal and steal an item while still attacking.

Silver Crusade

Mysterious Stranger wrote:

While sense vital does make a feinting build more useful, it still seems like you are investing a lot for a limited return. Passing trick does not come online until 10th level. What level are you starting at and how high will the campaign go? Unless the campaign is going to go significantly past 10th level you might not get much use out of it. Don’t forget that a Ranger’s caster level is three less than his character level. That means you are losing a full die off sense vital. That means most of the time you are giving up a full round of attacks to get an extra 7-10 points per attack.

Personally I think the underhanded style is going to be more fun. Being able to steal from someone in combat without them realizing you did it is more interesting than simply doing more damage. At 10th level you can pick up quick steal and steal an item while still attacking.

With 4th level casters i go on the assumption that they get full caster levels because to do otherwise is frankly stupid considering bloodrager gets fullcasting.


If that is the way your GM wants to run it that is fine, but RAW they are 3 levels behind.

Dark Archive

Mysterious Stranger wrote:
If that is the way your GM wants to run it that is fine, but RAW they are 3 levels behind.

correct.

bloodragers are specifically and exception

ranger class wrote:
Through 3rd level, a ranger has no caster level. At 4th level and higher, his caster level is equal to his ranger level – 3.

Silver Crusade

Name Violation wrote:
Mysterious Stranger wrote:
If that is the way your GM wants to run it that is fine, but RAW they are 3 levels behind.

correct.

bloodragers are specifically and exception

ranger class wrote:
Through 3rd level, a ranger has no caster level. At 4th level and higher, his caster level is equal to his ranger level – 3.

Well technically the bloodrager and the child of A&A


3 levels behind is a leftover from 3.5. The difference isn't really worth the math, which I imagine is why they got rid of it.


Name Violation wrote:
Mysterious Stranger wrote:
If that is the way your GM wants to run it that is fine, but RAW they are 3 levels behind.

correct.

bloodragers are specifically and exception

ranger class wrote:
Through 3rd level, a ranger has no caster level. At 4th level and higher, his caster level is equal to his ranger level – 3.

More accurately Medium & Bloodrager have full CL, while Paladin, Antipaladin, & Ranger are the explicit exceptions as noted in their Spells class features.

Mediums get cantrips starting at level 1 and advance their CL from there. Bloodragers have their bloodline powers and gain a CL at first to support their bloodline. Even the Child of Acavna and Amaznen archetype of fighter gets full CL from their cantrips starting at 2nd, though they start with no CL at 1st they are CL2 at 2nd level.


Chell Raighn wrote:
More accurately Medium & Bloodrager have full CL, while Paladin, Antipaladin, & Ranger are the explicit exceptions as noted in their Spells class features.

I don't know if "exceptions" is right either. The core classes are copied from 3.5, so they have that CL-3 spellcasting. The newer classes didn't see an advantage to wasting text on that semi-confusing limitation.

Dark Archive

Melkiador wrote:
Chell Raighn wrote:
More accurately Medium & Bloodrager have full CL, while Paladin, Antipaladin, & Ranger are the explicit exceptions as noted in their Spells class features.
I don't know if "exceptions" is right either. The core classes are copied from 3.5, so they have that CL-3 spellcasting. The newer classes didn't see an advantage to wasting text on that semi-confusing limitation.

In 3.5 the CL was half level IIRC


Name Violation wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
Chell Raighn wrote:
More accurately Medium & Bloodrager have full CL, while Paladin, Antipaladin, & Ranger are the explicit exceptions as noted in their Spells class features.
I don't know if "exceptions" is right either. The core classes are copied from 3.5, so they have that CL-3 spellcasting. The newer classes didn't see an advantage to wasting text on that semi-confusing limitation.
In 3.5 the CL was half level IIRC

Indeed it was…

3.5 Paladin wrote:
Through 3rd level, a paladin has no caster level. At 4th level and higher, her caster level is one-half her paladin level.
3.5 Ranger wrote:
Through 3rd level, a ranger has no caster level. At 4th level and higher, his caster level is one-half his ranger level.

The Exchange

Here's my document on feint. The main reasons to use feint are sneak attack, and Blistering Feint with a battle poi or flame blade.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Does sense vitals make feint worth considering? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.