fixing feint

[nonsi256]

Ok, coutering Feint with Intimidate is just something I find too hard to swallow.
Also, Cocentration is all about patience... and I see no reason in the world why a wizard would have any practical practice at negatng feinting attempts.

As for your experience... fencing practice is quite different from RL combat. You're not afraid of actually getting hurt (other than a sprung ankle) so you're ok with over taxing yourself (there's counter-tactics to feinting - catching your opponent off-guard just as he feints).


I also think you missed the point in my explanation.
For a mere mortal, BAB probably culminates at +3, making it the least significant factor in feinting.
Now, given that:
1. Cha is a measure of one's general persuasiveness and Wis is a measure of one's general perceptive capabilities & attantion.
2. High enough Bluff & Sense Motive involve body language to a certain degree.
3. High BAB means a helluvalot combat practice.
4. Non-bipeds don't have a manageable biomechanics.
5. Low-Int oppenents hardly defend themselves and 0-Int opponents don't defend at all.
Things boil down to make my suggeted Feint check (and notes) quite reliable.



As for your suggestions for the general mechanics - I couldn't agree more.
Here's how I think it should be done (tell me what you think of it):

- Feint is a move action to begin with.
- A successful Feint renders your opponent flatfooted in regards to the augmented attack.
- If you can make a sequence of more than a single attack (whether or not as a full attack), you can attempt (using the Feint option) to augment one of your attacks by spending your next attack. The Feint check is rolled using the AB of the attack you’re attempting to augment. For instance, suppose you have +11/+6/+1 sequence available. If you wish to augment your primary attack (+11), you lose your secondary attack (+6), but you make your Feint check at +11. You could instead choose to augment your secondary attack (making the Feint check at +6) by trading your tertiary attack.
- Improved Feint grants +4 to all opposed Feint checks - both offensive and defensive.


The description may seem somewhat clunky, but:
1. The actual execution is quite simple.
2. This mechanic is meant to make Feint a tactical option one would consider whether to use or not (and when) – not a dead option or a “you have to be brain dead not to use it” option. It all depends on your odds of nailing a specific attack. If the next one is almost a sure miss, why not put it to a better use.

 

[messy]

some possibilities for simpler feint rules:

1. opposed skill check (feinter's bluff vs. defender's sense motive, for example).

2. opposed ability check (feinter's charisma modifier vs. defender's wisdom modifier).

3. opposed bab check (feinter's bab vs. defender's bab).

4. defender's reflex save vs. dc 10 + feinter's charisma modifier (like a save vs. a spell).

messy

 

[Ashtagon]

My current houserule set allows for a feint to be Bluff vs either Bluff or BAB (choose one). I'm not overly satisfied with this either.

I assume that normal swordplay or other melee weapon combat incorporates a certain amount of feinting anyway, and that an actual feint manoeuvre involves a more specific action where it is the primary thing you are doing in that round (as opposed to primarily trying to hit him). Combined with this is the observation that the mechanics as written give very little benefit to any class other than a rogue (who can use sneak attack as a follow-up), so the system should make it easier for rogues to feint.

What's been suggested in this thread?

Feint Attack Bonuses
Bluff (RAW)
BAB + Dex mod; synergy from Bluff, Sleight of Hand (Sepulchrave II)
Bluff, Concentration or Intimidate (Hawken)
1/2 BAB + Bluff (StreamOfTheSky)
BAB + Cha mod; synergy from Bluff (nonsi256)
BAB + Cha mod (Kerrick)

Feint Defence Bonuses
BAB + Sense Motive (RAW)
BAB or Sense Motive (Celebrim)
BAB + Dex mod; synergy from Sense Motive (Sepulchrave II)
Bluff, Concentration or Intimidate (Hawken)
1/2 BAB + Sense Motive (StreamOfTheSky)
BAB + Wis mod; synergy from Bluff (nonsi256)
BAB + Wis mod (Kerrick)

Quite a collection of different opinions there (apologies if I missed anyone or misrepresented anyone).

In terms of ability scores, there is a consensus on Cha vs Wis, if anything is used at all there.

wrt skills, Intimidate and Concentration seem a little outside of the core concept to me, and I certainly don't buy the idea that a skill automatically provides understanding of how to defend against an attack by that same skill. The number of playground bullies who run crying when seriously challenged is testament to that as far as the Intimidate skill is concerned, and I see Concentration as much too inward-focused to be useful in making an attack.

This leaves Bluff and/or Sleight of Hand as possible attack skills for feint, defended against by Sense Motive and/or Concentration.

Putting it together...

(option a)
Attack: BAB or Bluff ranks + Cha mod
Defence: BAB or Sense Motive ranks + Wis mod

or...

(option b)
Attack: BAB or Bluff ranks or Sleight of Hand ranks + Cha mod
Defence: BAB or Sense Motive ranks or Concentration ranks + Wis mod

Option A is simpler, and stays closer to the core concept of the original rule, whiel also being equally balanced (feint became a losing proposition under RAW; once the defender had modest bonuses in BAB and Bluff, he would be impossible to Bluff against). option B incorporates some of the other skills suggested as reasonable influences on the feint action.

If you include the Cha/Wis ability modifier, you shouldn't count an ability modifier again from the skills - only skill ranks should be counted, without the modifier from their relevant ability score.

 

[Celebrim]

Feint Attack Bonuses
Bluff (RAW)
BAB + Dex mod; synergy from Bluff, Sleight of Hand (Sepulchrave II)
Bluff, Concentration or Intimidate (Hawken)
1/2 BAB + Bluff (StreamOfTheSky)
BAB + Cha mod; synergy from Bluff (nonsi256)
BAB + Cha mod (Kerrick)

While we are listing all the opinions, I should point out that my Feint Manuever Bonus is BAB or Disguise, which ever is better. Under my skill breakdown, Bluff is only used for verbal deception. Deceptive physical activities are under Disguise.

I have to say that I like your idea of breaking out the attribute modifiers, and will have to think about incorporating that.

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted

 

[Hawken]

Ok, coutering Feint with Intimidate is just something I find too hard to swallow.

That's because you're reacting to the statement and not thinking about it. Intimidate is about scaring people. Its about making them think that you're going to do something to them (whether you really do or not). Thus, it is perfectly acceptable as an alternative skill to perform a Feint. Likewise, because someone trained in Intimidate understands what is involved in the skill, they know what the skill is about, they will understand and recognize when someone is attempting to use that skill against them--thus, a logical reason why it could be used to oppose Feint (and someone else attempting to Intimidate them).

Also, Cocentration is all about patience... and I see no reason in the world why a wizard would have any practical practice at negatng feinting attempts.

Actually, there's nothing in the PHB description of the Concentration skill to indicate 'patience'. If there was, the ability associated with it would be Wisdom and not Constitution. And actually, the very FIRST sentence of the skill reads, "You must make a Concentration check whenever you might potentially be distracted...". A Feint is a distraction. Thus, per the PHB, Concentration would be a perfect skill to use to oppose a Feint. And, as I've pointed out, since a Feint is a psychological tactic, it would actually make sense if wizards were some of the best around at recognizing it. And you could use the same logic that I used in the paragraph above with Intimidate, that someone skilled enough in using Concentration is skilled enough to recognize a Feint attempt, and because they can do they, they are skilled enough to know what it takes to perform a Feint against someone else.

My reasons for selecting these two skills for Feint, aside from the fact that they make logical, reasonable sense to use, is that these two skills are class skills for EVERY core class. Everyone has either Concentration or Intimidate as a class skill. So, suddenly, Feint becomes a tactic everyone can use. Does it mean they will, no, but it means they can if they need to and expect a fair chance of success doing it. Plus, the method I outlined above does keep the process simple and intuitive, very easy to remember.

As for your suggestions for the general mechanics - I couldn't agree more.
Here's how I think it should be done (tell me what you think of it):

I think the option should be included to do maybe an extra 1d6 of damage rather than flat footed just to make feint worthwhile. Flat footed is only of direct benefit to rogues. Warriors have a high enough BAB that losing Dex to AC doesn't really matter and spellcasters either don't need to make attack rolls or they make ranged touch attack which are brutally simple to make in most cases.

Also, your idea of "trading" out your next lowest attack is not practical. With a 25% chance less of hitting, and being able to trade it off to make sure your more accurate attack hits, well, that's one of those 'if its this good, its broken' kind of things. As well as having the check modified by the BAB. As I've explained feinting is a combat tactic, but not a combat application, it is a psychological technique not a form of attack.

Celebrim, your suggestion about Disguise is flawed in that the skill is just about changing one's appearances not actions. Sleight of Hand would be more accurate as far as which skill does that, but the flaw with that selection is that only bards and rogues take that skill and probably fewer than 50% of them have any significant ranks in it. Sense Motive or Concentration would be the most logical defenses, but few people realistically have many ranks in Sense Motive and only spellcasters have ranks in Concentration. That doesn't solve the problem behind the problem.

El Mahdi, the thing is feinting doesn't make one better at attacking, it reduces the effectiveness of the defender's ability to protect himself or possibly interferes with his ability to effectively attack. In essence, it is a distraction. Anyone can make a distraction. Anyone can fall for a distraction.





The obvious problem being the mechanics of the Feint option. But the underlying issue is about who is going to do it and who is going to have a fair chance of not falling for it. Under RAW, rogues are the ultimate feinters, and paladins (that actually max out Sense Motive) are the ultimate resisters of feinting. That's it. 2 out of 11 classes. Fighters, Barbarians and Rangers make the next best feint-resisters but without being able to put ranks in SM, they are at a clear disadvantage despite their BAB (skill modifiers rise MUCH faster than BAB anyway).

There have been many passable fixes for the mechanic, what remains is to fix the underlying problem. My proposition allows for every class to participate in the feint/resist issue and it does so fairly (skills involved are class skills for all classes). However, no one else has really agreed with it.

The next best equitable thing would be to make feint a saving throw. Treat it as a Will save with the following two exceptions:
1) If your BAB is +1/level for at least half or more of your levels, you have the option to treat the save as if it were a Fort save.
2) Rogues can resist Feint attempts with their Reflex save.

This way, everyone has roughly the same odds of resisting it and no one is at a significant disadvantage.

A character performs a Feint as a Move action. If the character chooses, they can perform a Feint as part of a Full Round action, if they are capable of making more than one attack in a Full Attack action. If done as part of a Full Round action, the character makes his Feint attempt and immediately follows up with a single attack made at his highest BAB. When a character is subject to a Feint, they make a saving throw as follows below.

Here's a suggestion for the formula for the DC:
10 + 1/2 character level + Cha mod.

If the save fails, the target suffers one of the following effects, chosen by the person making the feint.
1) The target is considered flat footed against the next attack made by the attacker.
2) The target has left himself exposed and loses either all armor or shield bonuses to AC for the next attack made by the attacker.
3) The target is overextended and suffers a -4 penalty to his next attack against the attacker.

If you are making the Feint:
** You increase the DC by +2 if you have Bluff or Sleight of Hand as a class skill.
** You increase the DC by +2 if you have the Combat Expertise feat.
** You increase the DC by +3 if you have the Improved Feint feat.
** You increase the DC by +2 if you have a higher BAB than the target.

If you are resisting the Feint, you can apply the following modifiers to your saving throw:
** You gain a +2 bonus to the save if you have Sense Motive or Concentration as a class skill.
** You gain a +2 bonus to the save if you have the Combat Expertise feat.
** You gain a +3 bonus to the save if you have the Improved Feint feat.
** You gain a +2 bonus to the save if you have a higher BAB than the person trying to Feint you.

I came up with a few other optional modifiers, but dropped them in favor of keeping this simple. Three of the same modifiers provide up to the same bonuses for either making or resisting the feint, yet none of them separately or together are completely overpowering. And the fourth modifier (highest BAB) tips the favor (or mitigates some of the other's advantages) to the most combat trained.

In line with this optional use of Feint, I would adjust the Improved Feint feat as follows:

Improved Feint
Prerequisites: None
Benefit: You gain a +3 bonus to make or resist Feint attempts. In addition, you can take a Full Round action to attempt a Feint and attack even if you cannot yet make multiple attacks with a Full Round attack action. If your BAB would allow you to make more than two attacks on a full attack action, when performing a Feint as a Full Round attack action, you can make a second attack at your lowest BAB bonus.

 

[Ashtagon]

@Hawken

I think the fundamental area where we disagree is that you see feinting as something that anyone should be able to do well as a manoeuvre. I see routine feinting as something that happens automatically as a normal part of an attack action, and the feint manoeuvre itself indicates a very different focus, where the character is primarily trying to distract, as opposed to hit, his enemy.

(I still think Intimidate and Concentration aren't the best skills to illustrate feint, but since our fundamental assumptions are different, it's not worth examining why in detail).

 

[Hawken]

I think the fundamental area where we disagree is that you see feinting as something that anyone should be able to do well as a manoeuvre.

You're mistaken about that. I never stated everyone should be able to do it well. Everyone should have a fair chance though, that I do believe. Just like Grapple, Trip, and any other combat special action. Feinting is a basic maneuver because it is basic psychology, but with potentially deadly consequences. Anyone who learns even rudimentary combat skills learns how to fake people out and what to watch out for when someone else tries it on them, and if they don't they're not going to last very long in a fight.

My first suggestion about skill checks (resolved between Bluff, Intimidate or Concentration and resisted by Sense Motive, Concentration or Intimidate) are equitable. Some people may have to 'stretch' to accept this, but there are plenty of things in D&D that some people have to 'stretch' to accept. Its called suspension of disbelief. However once you get past that, and you have to get past it to pretend to be a fireball throwing wizard, you'll see that the mechanic offers everyone a fair (read: not 'good', but fair) chance at performing and resisting a Feint.

My second suggestion is even better than the first actually. It is simpler, it improves on the Feint and while it gives everyone a fair chance, there is a greater chance of success for those with the appropriate feats, class skills, and the higher BAB.

I see routine feinting as something that happens automatically as a normal part of an attack action, and the feint manoeuvre itself indicates a very different focus, where the character is primarily trying to distract, as opposed to hit, his enemy.

And that's your mistake. A feint is not an 'automatic' part of an attack action. I don't have any idea where or how you could have come up with that assumption. The feint maneuver is a different focus from trying to hit someone because its not an attempt to hit someone. Its an attempt to make someone THINK you're going to do something (and get them to respond as if you were), when you're not going to do that. If you want to hit someone, make an attack action. If you want to fool someone, feint. Two VERY different, very separate actions. If you can get past that misconception, you'll catch up to the rest of us pretty quick.

 

[Ashtagon]

And that's your mistake. A feint is not an 'automatic' part of an attack action. I don't have any idea where or how you could have come up with that assumption...

Not a mistake. It was explicitly stated that this was going on as part of a normal attack action in !e and 2E. Personal experience of fencing suggests that this must be going on even in the six-second rounds of 3E. To do otherwise would be tantamount to leaving yourself defenceless.

I don't mean a feint *manoeuvre* is automatic in the game definition sense, but rather that combatants will be doing something that in real-world terms woudl be considered feinting at the same time as trying to strike. The game-definition feint is an attempt to misdirect while not trying to strike, and maintaining that stance for the full round.

 

[Hawken]

Not a mistake. It was explicitly stated that this was going on as part of a normal attack action in !e and 2E. Personal experience of fencing suggests that this must be going on even in the six-second rounds of 3E. To do otherwise would be tantamount to leaving yourself defenceless.

You're getting off topic. This thread was made to try to fix the feint mechanic, which I've reasonably done...twice.

1st and 2nd edition have nothing to do with this discussion and anything they wrote in there was filler for combat which was measured in 1 minute rounds. If you thing that feinting has to occur, again, you're horribly mistaken, especially if you think not doing so leaves one defenseless.

I don't mean a feint *manoeuvre* is automatic in the game definition sense, but rather that combatants will be doing something that in real-world terms woudl be considered feinting at the same time as trying to strike. The game-definition feint is an attempt to misdirect while not trying to strike, and maintaining that stance for the full round.

That's irrelevant. This discussion is about game-world mechanics not real-world guessing and assumptions. I think you may be confusing a fighter looking for an 'opening' for feinting--something else that has no application in game mechanics.