Bluff: Feinting and RANGED sneak attacks

[Hypersmurf]

Do you know how silly this sounds?

You'll have to be more specific - I don't know what you mean.

Do you mean you have a problem with the logic chain? With one of the rules being used? With the FAQ entry (that one I'd understand)?

-Hyp.

 

[Technik4]

I think hypersmurf just meant the precedent set by the Gaze Attack Ruling the sage made.

Technik

 

[LokiDR]

You'll have to be more specific - I don't know what you mean.

Do you mean you have a problem with the logic chain? With one of the rules being used? With the FAQ entry (that one I'd understand)?

-Hyp.

I don't mind the FAQ entry, but we have already had long discussions on invisibility. The logic works, but the end result is the silly part.

"Because of gaze attacks, I can prevent sneak attak."

It may work, but it is still funny.
Just remember:
"charisma is the most broken stat"
"shields are the most powerful weapon"

- Loki "this is a silly game" DR

 

[Hypersmurf]

I think hypersmurf just meant the precedent set by the Gaze Attack Ruling the sage made.

Now I'm lost. The Sage made a ruling on Flanking. Gaze Attacks are right there in the Core Rules.

And I'm Hypersmurf. He's LokiDR.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

"Because of gaze attacks, I can prevent sneak attak."

I just see it as a Heavy Crossbow rule.

The rule for what happens if you choose to completely avoid looking at someone happen to be found under Gaze Attacks, because that's the most common situation under which they're found.

-Hyp.

 

[LokiDR]

I just see it as a Heavy Crossbow rule.

The rule for what happens if you choose to completely avoid looking at someone happen to be found under Gaze Attacks, because that's the most common situation under which they're found.

-Hyp.

Heavy Crossbow rule?

The irony is long lost, so I won't bother to try to explain it.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Heavy Crossbow rule?

A rule found in a specific place that nevertheless is applicable to the more general case.

-Hyp.

 

[LokiDR]

A rule found in a specific place that nevertheless is applicable to the more general case.

-Hyp.

I have never heard of rules from heavy crossbow being used in a different place. Where does this show up?

 

[Hypersmurf]

"The Two-Weapon Fighting feat does not reduce these penalties because it represents skill with melee weapons, not ranged weapons."

The only place in the Core Rules that it is stated that the TWF feat does not apply to ranged weapons is in the PHB, p100, under the equipment description of "Crossbow, Heavy".

-Hyp.

 

[Minaret]

Okay, so where does all this leave us from a practical perspective? I’m feeling the pull of the two dichotomous trains of thought.

Hyp, I agree with your interpretation of the rules as they’re written. The detail with which you pull scattered bits of information together is impressive (BTW: I also agree with your Expert Tac’ ruling) .

LokiDR, I also agree with your perspective of what’s reasonable – or at least what is “silly.”

So, how the heck do we pull this back together to make a decision on feinting and ranged feinting? I have a feeling the “cure” provided by the gaze/invisibility ruling is worse than anything it fixes. I can understand that a character can disregard an invisible opponent they are unaware of, but completely blocking out the presence of an opponent they are aware of would take enormous effort.

For example, try not to think about an “elephant” not that I mentioned it. That’s tough?