fixing feint


log in or register to remove this ad

allo

as written, feinting seems a bit, well, "wonky," for lack of a better term.

Special Attacks :: d20srd.org

is there a way to make it a more "typical" die roll?

messy

It's wonky to prevent fighters from being unable to resist feint. And you are right, it's too wonky. Personally, I'd attempt any other solution.

One possible solution is allow feint to be opposed by either sense motive or BAB, which ever is higher, rather than stacking the two. (That's my house rule.) That's alot less wonky and generally does the trick. It's not like feint is broken even if it usually works, and feint already more or less requires a feat boost to make it worthwhile. The only reason the rules are written that way is a 'realism' argument ("It's not realistic that my highly skilled fighter always falls for your feints!!!").

In the face of the realism argument, I suggest allowing various feats that make you better at resisting combat manuevers and adding them to the fighter bonus feat list: 'Counter Moves', 'Skilled Fighter', 'Wary', 'Can't Fool Me Twice'. If you are interested, I'll share my versions.

IMO Part of that should go into a general fix of the Fighter class so as to avoid creating a feat tax.
 

I like feinting. If I were to rewrite the feinting rules:

1) Feinting is an opposed BAB roll modified by Dex which does not provoke. Standard action.
2) 5 ranks in Bluff grant a +2 synergy bonus to Feint; 5 ranks in Sleight of Hand grant a +2 synergy bonus to Feint checks.
3) 5 ranks in Sense Motive grant a +2 synergy bonus to rolls against Feint attempts
4) Improved Feint as a Move action. Also grants a +4 bonus to both making and resisting Feint attempts.

Think that works well.

High Dex rogue vs high BAB fighter balances approximately; finesse Fighters do best.
 
Last edited:

Here is a really easy mechanic for Feinting.

Feint is a tactic that can be done by anyone with ranks in Bluff, Concentration or Intimidate. When someone is subjected to a Feint, they make an opposed skill check using any of those three skills.

Someone skilled in Bluff is good at making Feint maneuvers, and because of that, is equally skilled at recognizing when someone is trying to do that to them. Same reasoning with the Intimidate skill. Concentration represents not just one's ability to resist or ignore pain to complete what they were doing, but also their focus on their task at hand. This focus encompasses knowing what tactics to use against someone (like Feinting), and being able to recognize when it is being done to them.

The mechanic is simple. Skill check opposed by skill check. Every Core class has either Concentration or Intimidate as class skills, so no one is missing out and Feinting becomes something that everyone can do (and resist). Bards, Rogues and Sorcerers have Bluff as a class skill, so if they are not particularly good at Concentration or Intimidate, they can still be good at Feint by investing in Bluff.

I would also argue that between the Feinter and the Feintee, the person with the highest BAB would be entitled to a +2 circumstance bonus to their opposed check, indicating their greater experience in recognizing and performing that tactic. Not the highest modified BAB, but just the highest value based on their class and levels.
 

I've long thought of just having both sides add half BAB to their Bluff/Sense Motive modifiers, or maybe leave it at full BAB. Never much liked that only the defender's BAB is a factor, and IME feinting was absolutely never worth it without Improved Feint, and even then had too low a success rate for too little a benefit to be worthwhile, especially once splat book spells feats, and martial maneuvers made getting melee sneak attacks pitifully easy later on in 3E. (Example: Persistent Blade, which always works and leaves the target flanked when attacked in melee) Even in core, it never seemed that hard compared to ranged...
 

The problem with that line of reasoning is that feinting doesn't have much to do with BAB. Its not an attack. Its a trick. Its psychology and you either fool them or your don't, you're either fooled or you're not.

Anybody can feint. Anybody can be feinted if they're not paying attention. It has little to do with how well you are at swinging your weapon.
 

>> feinting doesn't have much to do with BAB.
Wrong.

>> Its not an attack. Its a trick.
Right.

>> Its psychology
Wrong. One can be a wonderful feinter if he's been doing it long enough in practice - even if he's absolutely ignorant as human psychology.

>> Anybody can feint. Anybody can be feinted if they're not paying attention.
Sure – that’s what the 2-sided roll is for.

>> It has little to do with how well you are at swinging your weapon.
It has everything to do with how battle practiced you are, but given the world's best warrior nowadays is probably no higher than 5th level, there would still be other factos that together overshadow BAB (peruasiveness, alertnss and random circumstances).


Battle cunning has nothing to do with having a slick tongue.
You could be the greatest liar on earth – one that can lie to god himself and get away with it, but... insincerity has nothing to do with combat trickery.
Ok, Cha definitely has a lot to do with it (you do have to be persuasive) and Bluff synergy is probably in order, but not beyond that.
I happened to have studies Ninjitsu for several months and there was this guy in my group. He couldn’t make the most innocent lie to save his life, but man could he feint.



Therefore, my suggestion for simplified yet reliable feinting rules goes like this:


Aggressor's score = d20 + BAB + Cha-modifier + Bluff synergy (if relevant)
Defender's score = d20 + BAB + Wis-modifier + Sense Motive synergy (if relevant)
Notes:
- Feinting nullifies the benefits of Uncanny Dodge.
- Feinting against a non-humanoid imposes a -4 penalty because it's harder to read a creature's strange body language.
- Against a creature of animal Intelligence (1 or 2), you take a -8 penalty.
- You cannot feint a non-intelligent opponent. Feinting in combat does not provoke an AoO.
 

One possible solution is allow feint to be opposed by either sense motive or BAB, which ever is higher, rather than stacking the two. (That's my house rule.)
That's pretty much what I did:

1d20 + BAB + Cha modifier vs. DC 10 + opponent's BAB + opponent's Wis modifier.

As nonsi noted, feinting in battle is a lot different from bluffing someone - it represents making a move in a direction other than the one you intend to go, and making the other person believe it. If you're in a fight, the person you're trying to kill isn't going to believe a word you say - but he will be watching your every move. If you're skilled enough, you can make it look like you're going to attack high but go low (or vice versa), or go forward when you really plan to go back.

The stats used above (Cha vs. Wis) represent Bluff vs. Sense Motive without actually drawing the skills into it - this makes it a much more balanced system, since you don't have to worry about someone's ridiculously high or low skill score.
 

Therefore, my suggestion for simplified yet reliable feinting rules goes like this:


Aggressor's score = d20 + BAB + Cha-modifier + Bluff synergy (if relevant)
Defender's score = d20 + BAB + Wis-modifier + Sense Motive synergy (if relevant)
Notes:
- Feinting nullifies the benefits of Uncanny Dodge.
- Feinting against a non-humanoid imposes a -4 penalty because it's harder to read a creature's strange body language.
- Against a creature of animal Intelligence (1 or 2), you take a -8 penalty.
- You cannot feint a non-intelligent opponent. Feinting in combat does not provoke an AoO.

In what sense of the word is that 'simplified'?

And I don't even want to get into 'reliable'.
 

feinting doesn't have much to do with BAB.--wrong.
Um, actually, I was right about that. About 14 years ago, I took a fencing class and in one afternoon I learned how to feint. That's all it took. One afternoon. My BAB didn't go up that day. I don't remember leveling up either. I learned other ways to feint later on, but feinting doesn't have anything to do with how well you can handle a weapon.

If I stab low at your leg, you either lower your guard to match that (thus being suckered by the feint) or you realize that you leg is already guarded and an attack there wouldn't inhibit your ability to fight so you keep your guard up (and are not suckered into the feint).

Of course, some feints are almost guaranteed to work regardless of skill. If I stab at your face, you either raise your guard high or you turn away or back away. Even if you know tactically that your face is safe, there is a primal fear everyone has of seeing sharp metal coming right at their face and the urge to block that or move out of the way is nearly impossible to resist.

I stand by my method:
Bluff (for rogues, bards and sorcerers), Concentration or Intimidate for everyone else. Opposed by Concentration or Intimidate, or maybe Sense Motive for those that have that as a class skill. Circumstance bonus goes to the person with the highest BAB.

THAT is simple, and reliable. Easy to remember. Easy to execute.

I would also change the mechanic slightly and treat it as a move action when used in conjunction with a standard attack action. Or I would allow it to be used in place of an attack when someone is making a full round attack action and has at least 2 attacks.

I wouldn't tie Improved Feint to Combat Expertise or require a 13 Int and I would allow it to provide a +4 bonus to Feint checks, both to make the feint and resist it.

While you're at it, you could allow the option to do an extra 1d6 damage on an attack following a successful feint OR have the target flat footed for the next attack. This makes feinting a lot more useful especially to those with high BAB who otherwise would have little or no reason to feint.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top