D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Feinting & Uncanny Dodge

[Olgar Shiverstone]

That's exactly the same text as in 3.0, and it was ruled in the FAQ that it only helps against invisible opponents, being flat-footed, or being flanked if you have the improved version.

The bit about being immobilized is so that you can't claim to keep your Dex bonus again invisible attack when you are immobilized. (Which would lead to the odd circumstance of losing your dex bonus if you are immobilized and can see your attacker, but keeping it if you are immobilized but your attacker is invisible.)

Thanks. I should have known to check the FAQ. You'd think that in the process of updating the rules, they'd have bounced the FAQ off of the books to clean up little language issues like this. Eliminating six characters would clear up that whole question.

Good. Now a bluffing rogue has the potential to sneak attack a rogue of higher level ...

 

[Hypersmurf]

The bit about being immobilized is so that you can't claim to keep your Dex bonus again invisible attack when you are immobilized. (Which would lead to the odd circumstance of losing your dex bonus if you are immobilized and can see your attacker, but keeping it if you are immobilized but your attacker is invisible.)

Sort of like the odd circumstance they wrote into the FAQ, where a barbarian flanked by two rogues four levels higher than him takes sneak attack damage unless he closes his eyes?

-Hyp.

 

[Caliban]

Sort of like the odd circumstance they wrote into the FAQ, where a barbarian flanked by two rogues four levels higher than him takes sneak attack damage unless he closes his eyes?

-Hyp.

I don't think that is actually a circumstance created by the FAQ.

If the barbarian is aware of the rogues position to the point that he keeps his Dex bonus to AC, then he's aware that he's being flanked.

All closing his eyes will do is lower his AC by 2.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Suppose an ally of mine is attacking one foe, then I
somehow become invisible, draw my sword, and move to
the other side of that foe, thus flanking the foe. Does my ally
still get a flanking bonus even if I am invisible?
You get a flanking bonus from any ally your foe can see (and
who is in the correct position to flank). If your foe can’t see
you, you don’t provide a flanking bonus to any ally.
Sharp readers will note that this means you cannot flank a
blind creature; however, truly blind creatures are effectively
flanked already (the can’t use their Dexterity bonus to AC and
you a +2 bonus to attack them). Creatures with the blindsight
ability effectively “see” within blindsight range and can be
flanked.

Uncanny Dodge is certainly not equivalent to Blindsight.

The Sage's original answer in the Chat transcript agreed with you - if you retained your Dex bonus to AC, you could be flanked (which had its own weirdnesses). The FAQ is different to the Chat transcript response, however, and makes no such provision.

When the barbarian closes his eyes, he becomes blind and therefore cannot be flanked; however due to UD he retains his Dex bonus against unseen opponents. He doesn't know where they are - he cannot pinpoint them automatically, for example - but he gets his Dex bonus and therefore cannot be sneak attacked.

And his AC doesn't even change - he swaps a +2 flanking bonus for a +2 invisible attacker bonus.

If he opens his eyes for his own attacks and then closes them again, he doesn't even suffer attack penalties - in this case, the rogues can ready actions to attack when he opens his eyes, but it still restricts them to single sneak attacks or full non-sneak attacks, rather than full sneak attacks...

-Hyp.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Feinting doesn't render you flat-footed - it makes you lose your dex bonus. Uncanny dodge doesn't help against losing your dex bonus, it helps you so that being caught flat-footed means for you that you don't lose your dex bonus. Note that you still lose your ability to make AoO's (but that can be helped with Combat Reflexes)

Couldn't disagree with you more. It means that the seasoned veteran warrior with 15 levels of fighter can't be hoodwinked by any given first level rogue with 4 ranks in bluff and a moderate charisma.

Means if you want to keep feinting people, you'll have to keep developing more and more skill at it as your opponents likewise get more and more skillful at the fight. That's a good thing, in my oppinion.

The only downside is that you can become "unfaintable" if you max out Sense Motive - the feinter can only increase his Bluff ranks and charisma (and that only slowly), while the target automatically gets his BAB AND can increase his Sense Motive Ranks (and increase wis). There's no way for the feinter to break even. But nothing's perfect.

 

[Caliban]

Lots o' stuff.
-Hyp.

*shrug* I disagree. I'm sticking with my interpretation. No need to further hijack this thread.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The only downside is that you can become "unfaintable" if you max out Sense Motive. There's no way for the feinter to break even.

How many classes get Sense Motive as a class skill in 3.5, though?

A feint-maxed rogue will tend to have a decent Cha, while a combat-optimised fighter will usually have a fairly average Wis, with the cross-class max rank cap on his Sense Motive.

I'd guess it will tend to work out fairly even... which is perhaps a little weak for a specialised tactic, but probably better than never failing...

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'm sticking with my interpretation.

Fair enough I, on the other hand, am sticking with the PHB and ignoring the FAQ entirely in this case - there's nothing in the core rules that prevents an invisible creature granting an ally a flanking bonus.

(And it's a minor quibble, but if you're going to trim my quote for space - which I have no problem with - could you remove the apostrophe from "Lots"? It's a plural, not a possessive or a contraction. I wouldn't mind if it didn't come directly between my attribution and my signature... Thanks.)

-Hyp.

 

[Branduil]

The problem with adding BAB to Sense Motive is it takes away a reason to take any ranks at all in it. I think, really, that Feinting and sensing feints should be made a special combat maneuver like sunder and grapple, etc. Something like this:

Feint: You can feint as a standard action. This does not provoke attacks of oppertunity. A feint is an opposed check. You roll a d20 with the following modifiers:

BAB+Cha

You may also use your bluff modifier instead, if you so wish.

Your opponent rolls a d20 with the following modifiers:

BAB+Wis

He may use his Sense Motive modifier instead, if he so wishes.

Does anyone else think this would be more balanced?

 

[Kae'Yoss]

The problem with adding BAB to Sense Motive is it takes away a reason to take any ranks at all in it. I think, really, that Feinting and sensing feints should be made a special combat maneuver like sunder and grapple, etc. Something like this:

Feint: You can feint as a standard action. This does not provoke attacks of oppertunity. A feint is an opposed check. You roll a d20 with the following modifiers:

BAB+Cha

You may also use your bluff modifier instead, if you so wish.

Your opponent rolls a d20 with the following modifiers:

BAB+Wis

He may use his Sense Motive modifier instead, if he so wishes.

Does anyone else think this would be more balanced?

Sounds great. This deletes the possiblity of having an unfaintable enemy (however small that chance is. And it isn't such big), but still doesn't make the fighter 20 standing there like a 3-year-old with a stick.

As long as they don't introduce classlevel bonuses for spot and listen...