Sneak Attack vs. Uncanny Dodge

[FEADIN]

I see that is not very clear in fact....
Being Attacked while Balancing: You are considered flat-footed while balancing, since you can’t move to avoid a blow, and thus you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). If you have 5 or more ranks in Balance, you aren’t considered flat-footed while balancing. If you take damage while balancing, you must make another Balance check against the same DC to remain standing.

For exemple they say in the FAQ that the barbarian loose his dext bonus to ac while climbing or balancing, why not if feinted?
You can say that it's not a question of movement but a question of sixth sense and reaction to a form of surprise, like in the flatfooted explanation
Difficult situation but maybe I will agree with you.
Uncanny dodge is about reaction/sixth sense vs surprise no?

 

[Hypersmurf]

For exemple they say in the FAQ that the barbarian loose his dext bonus to ac while climbing or balancing, why not if feinted?

Since Uncanny Dodge permits you to keep your AC when flat-footed, and Balancing explicitly denies you your Dex bonus because you're flat-footed, Uncanny Dodge allows you to retain your Dex bonus while Balancing. The FAQ answer is in error if it claims otherwise.

-Hyp.

 

[irdeggman]

Since Uncanny Dodge permits you to keep your AC when flat-footed, and Balancing explicitly denies you your Dex bonus because you're flat-footed, Uncanny Dodge allows you to retain your Dex bonus while Balancing. The FAQ answer is in error if it claims otherwise.

-Hyp.

I don't think this is specifically correct.


from the SRD:

Being Attacked while Balancing: You are considered flat-footed while balancing, since you can’t move to avoid a blow, and thus you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). If you have 5 or more ranks in Balance, you aren’t considered flat-footed while balancing. If you take damage while balancing, you must make another Balance check against the same DC to remain standing.

I think the use of the term flat-footed is improper here - the real reason you don't get your Dex bonus while balancing is the inability to move to avoid a blow. And not being able to move is essentially synomous with immobilized in D&D which is the one time uncanny Dodge doesn't let you keep your Dex bonus. Wel that is how I see it anyway and it is consistent with both the SRD and FAQ.

 

[Synthetik Fish]

I don't think this is specifically correct.


from the SRD:
Quote:
Being Attacked while Balancing: You are considered flat-footed while balancing, since you can’t move to avoid a blow, and thus you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). If you have 5 or more ranks in Balance, you aren’t considered flat-footed while balancing. If you take damage while balancing, you must make another Balance check against the same DC to remain standing.



I think the use of the term flat-footed is improper here - the real reason you don't get your Dex bonus while balancing is the inability to move to avoid a blow. And not being able to move is essentially synomous with immobilized in D&D which is the one time uncanny Dodge doesn't let you keep your Dex bonus. Wel that is how I see it anyway and it is consistent with both the SRD and FAQ.

I think you missed something really important.

Note the line: "If you have 5 or more ranks in Balance, you aren’t considered flat-footed
while balancing."

This inherantly implies that if you DON'T have 5 skill ranks, that you ARE flat-footed, because you become un-flat-footed when you DO have 5 ranks in Balance.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I think the use of the term flat-footed is improper here...

But they used it.

No AoOs while balancing, for example, without Combat Reflexes.

Since 5 ranks allows you to be considered 'not flat-footed', do you still lose your Dex bonus, since it doesn't say the 5 ranks allows you to move to avoid a blow?

-Hyp.

 

[apesamongus]

I think the issue here is with the term "would be". The description of sneak attack states:



This can be interpreted as saying that whether or not a character is in fact denied hs Dex bonus to AC, if that character would be denied their dexterity bonus to AC, they are suceptible to Sneak Attacks.

I'm not saying I personally think this, I'm just clarifying where I think the question is raised.

Yea, I also think that's where the confusion is coming from. And that would bea valid interpretation without that parenthetical statement that follows clarifying what they mean by "would be".