Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="reapersaurus" data-source="post: 116553" data-attributes="member: 1194">Look, either way you think a feint is:whether it's A) distracting gestures, a head-fake, or such,or whether it's B) pointing behind the guy and saying &quot;Look Out!&quot;it makes NO SENSE why A) rogues would be better at it than fighters and B) why it would work in combat in the first place.Case A) the rogue uses a series of head-fakes and lunges and such to cause the fighter to lose focus on what the rogue is really doing in combat.Puh-lease.As if a fighter, who extensivelly studies all techniques of combat on a day-to-day basis as a CAREER is going to be thrown off by what a punk rogue can do in combat?Those head-fakes and such are what is emulated by BAB!I agree that they are an integral part of combat - that's why fighters go up in BAB every level, and rogues don't ; because fighters are better at combat than rogues.Rogues already have sneak attack, which can eclipse the amount of damage a fighter can do.But those are explicit surprise or unaware scenarios where that happens.To allow a Feint and a sneak attack in a straight-up hand-to-hand combat is baffling to me, and does the fighter's extensive combat-training a great disservice in my eyes.Case B) even MORE insulting to the fighter.You're telling me that a battle-hardened vet of countless fatal battles is going to fall for a foppish rogue pointing somewhere else... and the fighter goes for it?!Ha!In a real combat, the fighter would go - &quot;Yup - this shifty no-combat wuss is gonna try to fake me out - there's my opening!&quot; and crush him while the rogue is assuming he'll fall for the oldest combat trick in the book.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="reapersaurus, post: 116553, member: 1194"] Look, either way you think a feint is: whether it's A) distracting gestures, a head-fake, or such, or whether it's B) pointing behind the guy and saying "Look Out!" it makes NO SENSE why A) rogues would be better at it than fighters and B) why it would work in combat in the first place. Case A) the rogue uses a series of head-fakes and lunges and such to cause the fighter to lose focus on what the rogue is really doing in combat. Puh-lease. As if a fighter, who extensivelly studies all techniques of combat on a day-to-day basis as a CAREER is going to be thrown off by what a punk rogue can do in combat? Those head-fakes and such are what is emulated by BAB! I agree that they are an integral part of combat - that's why fighters go up in BAB every level, and rogues don't ; because fighters are better at combat than rogues. Rogues already have sneak attack, which can eclipse the amount of damage a fighter can do. But those are explicit surprise or unaware scenarios where that happens. To allow a Feint and a sneak attack in a straight-up hand-to-hand combat is baffling to me, and does the fighter's extensive combat-training a great disservice in my eyes. Case B) even MORE insulting to the fighter. You're telling me that a battle-hardened vet of countless fatal battles is going to fall for a foppish rogue pointing somewhere else... and the fighter goes for it?! Ha! In a real combat, the fighter would go - "Yup - this shifty no-combat wuss is gonna try to fake me out - there's my opening!" and crush him while the rogue is assuming he'll fall for the oldest combat trick in the book. [/QUOTE]

Verification