D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5 SRD] Question about Feinting

[theoremtank]

Reading the paragraph about feinting in the revised SRD I came across something that doesn't sit well with me. It says that the combatant attempting to feint uses a bluff check while the opponent uses a sense motive check plus his base attack bonus.

Why doesn't the one attempting the bluff get to add his level to the check? It seems like this would make sense. Can anyone reason why the designers chose to allow the opponent this bonus and not the feinter? Would feint be too powerful without this rule?

I would think that while a higher level combatant would get better at avoiding the negative affects of his opponents feint, the one doing the feinting would get better at disguising his manuvers as his level increased also.

What do you guys think about this rule mechanic?


This is the text from the SRD...

Feinting is a standard action. To feint, make a Bluff check opposed by a Sense Motive check by your target. The target may add his base attack bonus to this Sense Motive check. If your Bluff check result exceeds your target’s Sense Motive check result, the next melee attack you make against the target does not allow him to use his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). This attack must be made on or before your next turn.

 

[Tellerve]

probably because fighters don't have sense motive and without their bab being added they'd get fooled a lot. BTW, I thought it was BAB not level you added? Anyways, I think they did it because if your higher level then you just have a higher bluff and since sense motive isn't going to be a fighters strong suite they didn't want them getting fooled all the time.

that's my guess.

Tellerve

 

[drnuncheon]

Can anyone reason why the designers chose to allow the opponent this bonus and not the feinter?

I can make some guesses.

In 3.0, if you were a rogue with maxed out Bluff, you could feint anyone that didn't have maxed out sense motive. That includes the fighter, the master of all combat - which doesn't make sense. The 20th level fighter should not fall for a feint as easily as the 1st level wizard. In fact, he should be pretty hard to feint - he's seen it all over the years.

So, how do you fix the problem? Well, you could give fighters Sense Motive as a class skill, but that doesn't make much sense. BAB is a measure of fighting ability, on the other hand - it makes sense to use something keyed to that.

If you let the feinter add in his class level (or his BAB), you would just be resetting the problem to where it was in 3.0, only with bigger numbers.

J

 

[theoremtank]

Oops. I meant BAB not level.

Anyway, thanks for the responses. Your reasoning makes sense.

 

[Petrosian]

So now we have...

Assuming 10th level characters.

Rogue with 13 ranks in bluff, +3 for charisma gets a +16.

Fighter with 12 ranks in sense motive (net +6) , +12 BAB, +1 for wisdom (a conservative estimate) for a net +19.

net result is about a 1/3 chance of the bluff working.

i have to say that its likely that "fixed" is the proper term for this change... feitning has been fixed... in the veterinary sense of the word.

 

[Technik4]

Petrosian: What fighter takes 12 ranks in Sense Motive? I mean, a paladin or cleric, sure I can see him maybe taking a dive in such things (might even be a class-skill for paladins now), but a regular ol fighter? I mean 2 skill points per level and they just got intimidate as a class skill for petes sake.

I suppose if one wanted a certain type of fighter you could swing it, but by and large I think the rogue is still going to be a bluff/feint master. The "fix" just means it isn't automatic (as it was, more or less in 3.0).

Additionally, unrelated though it may be, Feinting is now strictly a melee ability. No more ranged feinting for Rays of frosts you little tricksters!

Technik

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

There's nothing veterinary about the sense in which feinting has been fixed.

Taking a more reasonable example:

Rogue as described: +16 bluff.

Fighter 10 with no ranks of sense motive and a 10 wisdom= +10

The net result is that the rogue will still fool the fighter more times than not.

This is a more reasonable example for several reasons:

1. Most fighters will not put anywhere from 33%-100% (depending upon int and race) of their skill points into sense motive cross-class. In fact, the vast majority of fighters will put 0 ranks into it. (And if a fighter did spend 12 skill points in sense motive (cross-class or otherwise) being difficult to feint is surely a reasonable benefit--it's not as if that +6 is likely to prevent him from being bluffed by a competent rogue, bard, or trickery cleric outside of combat).

2. Most 10th level fighters will not have a wisdom bonus. Multiclass fighters/clerics or fighter/paladins or fighter/rangers will often have a wisdom bonus but they're the only ones. (And except for the fighter/paladin who has sense motive as a class skill, the increased wisdom bonus of the multiclassed fighters is likely to be cancelled out by reduced BAB). Assuming no incredible rolls ("Look, with these stats I could be a 2e cavalier kit paladin!") or <=32 point buy, normal fighters will not have wisdom bonusses (and they'll probably use their neck slot for amulets of natural armor instead of periapts of wisdom). IIRC, Redgar the iconic fighter actually has a wisdom penalty.

So now we have...

Assuming 10th level characters.

Rogue with 13 ranks in bluff, +3 for charisma gets a +16.

Fighter with 12 ranks in sense motive (net +6) , +12 BAB, +1 for wisdom (a conservative estimate) for a net +19.

net result is about a 1/3 chance of the bluff working.

i have to say that its likely that "fixed" is the proper term for this change... feitning has been fixed... in the veterinary sense of the word.

 

[Plane Sailing]

C'mon Petrosian, you're saying that the 10th level fighter who has invested almost every ounce of his time into avoiding feints and sussing out people might have a better than average chance of avoiding feints - and it is broken?

Plus, your 10th Fighter can only have +10 BAB, making his total 10+6+1 (and I'd dispute the wisdom bonus - that tends to come way after STR, DEX, CON, INT for most fighters that I've seen... (Int for the expertise chain). Certainly if you were using the default array for instance.

So in most cases we've got, say +16 for the rogue against +16 for the fighter who has focused to extreme levels on sensing motive, OR +10 for the average 10th fighter.

Now, +16 vs +10 seems much fairer to me than +16 vs +0.

Furthermore, it is going to be a pretty exceptional circumstance when a fighter of equal levels to a rogue is going to be much better at avoiding the feints than the rogue is at making them. It can be done, sure, but it is not likely.

Cheers

 

[iwatt]

Since it's an opposed check the actual succes of the feinter (+16)against your uber sense motive fighter(+19) is: 38,25%

Besides, you used a level 10 rogue v/s a 12 level fighter

Agaisnt ane equal level fighter and rogue, without sense motive , your maxed ranked bluffer will have improved feint:

feinter: 13 (ranks) + 3(Cha)+4(Imp feint)=+20
fighter: 12 BAB + 1 (Wis)=+13

This leads to an 80,5 % succes for a character built for bluffing. If the above fighter takes the max ranks in sense motive:1

feinter: 13 (ranks) + 3(Cha)+4(Imp feint)=+20
fighter: 12 BAB + 1 (Wis)+6(ranks)=+19

This leads to 57,25% succes for the bluffers.

 

[Petrosian]

[/B][/QUOTE]

Petrosian: What fighter takes 12 ranks in Sense Motive?

One who realizes the potency of cross-class skills. One who wants to be able to deal with social situations and use sense motive which serves as an extremely useful traits in those cases.

I think, am not certain, that the dwarven fighter in my current game has the highest sense motive or if not is very close.

BTW, in case you and everyone you have ever gamed with missed it, by taking a couple points off the meat stats, you can increase those skills per rank quite a bit. getting a 14 is rather cheap, costing only 6 points in a point buy where a 18 costs 6 points more than a 16. So, for example, a fighter who wanted to be more than meat could take a 16 str and a 14 INT and have on top of any skills the meat-only fighter wanted some 13 ranks in intimidate and 13 ranks (for +6) in sense motive and not be bluff fodder for the vast majority of people.

I mean, a paladin or cleric, sure I can see him maybe taking a dive in such things (might even be a class-skill for paladins now), but a regular ol fighter? I mean 2 skill points per level and they just got intimidate as a class skill for petes sake.

See above.

I suppose if one wanted a certain type of fighter you could swing it, but by and large I think the rogue is still going to be a bluff/feint master. The "fix" just means it isn't automatic (as it was, more or less in 3.0).

Actually, having a totally lopsided add-on makes it less than "not automatic" and more into the realm of BAD CHOICE. If they had made BAB stack into BOTH SIDES, then the issue of "fighting prowess" would be reflected. Now it just ignores the bluffers fighting prowess.

Lets use a better example to get this little point across.

My fighter spent by level 10 13 ranks on bluff so i CAN feint. Your fighter being meat-boy dropped his int to 8 and spent his skills on tavern knowledge. When i apply my +5 to my bluff roll to feitn you, you get a +10 due to your BAB. Your combat prowaess trumps my 13 skill ranks and my combat prowess which is equal to your is irrelevent.

This raises a very important question... which is "huh??"

Why doesn't combat prowess, if it is to be considered a relevent factor, count on both sides?

Why does a wizard who has a lower BAB get the bonus for combat prowess and the fighter attempting to bluff him get squat?

O do not think making fighting prowess a factor in the odds of sucess was a bad thing. i think making it an entirely one sided factor in the odds of success a bad thing.

YMMV.