Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hypersmurf" data-source="post: 28359" data-attributes="member: 1656">Re: All 3 are sneak attackThat is the point that is being debated - is he really dexless until his next action?While this is the case - as Ridley's Cohort pointed out - if someone is caught flat-footed, there is a difference between &quot;flat-footed&quot; and &quot;denied Dexterity bonus against an invisible attacker&quot;.There is an obvious precedent for someone losing there Dex bonus against only one attack in a round - use of the Bluff skill to feint in combat.On a successful feint, you deny your opponent his Dex bonus for your next attack.If he didn't get it back until his next action, then you could use Bluff in one round, and the next round make a full attack action with ITWF for five sneak attacks.&nbsp; This is clearly not the intention of the feint - it only works for one attack.&nbsp; So we know that someone can have a variable Dex bonus against the same opponent in one round.The invisible attacker makes his first attack.&nbsp; Since he is invisible, his opponent is denied his Dex bonus, and the attack is a sneak attack.&nbsp; He is now no longer invisible.&nbsp; By the rule on p124, he now decides (since he hasn't moved this round) whether he is making a standard attack or a full attack.&nbsp; He chooses full attack, and as a non-invisible attacker, continues with the other four strikes in his full attack routine.&nbsp; Since he is visible, his opponent receives a Dex bonus, and the attacks are not sneak attacks.Unless you can provide a reference for &quot;He is dexless until his next action&quot; that doesn't require him to be flatfooted?-Hyp.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hypersmurf, post: 28359, member: 1656"] [b]Re: All 3 are sneak attack[/b] That is the point that is being debated - is he really dexless until his next action? While this is the case - as Ridley's Cohort pointed out - if someone is caught flat-footed, there is a difference between "flat-footed" and "denied Dexterity bonus against an invisible attacker". There is an obvious precedent for someone losing there Dex bonus against only one attack in a round - use of the Bluff skill to feint in combat. On a successful feint, you deny your opponent his Dex bonus for your [i]next[/i] attack. If he didn't get it back until his next action, then you could use Bluff in one round, and the next round make a full attack action with ITWF for five sneak attacks. This is clearly not the intention of the feint - it only works for one attack. So we know that someone can have a variable Dex bonus against the same opponent in one round. The invisible attacker makes his first attack. Since he is invisible, his opponent is denied his Dex bonus, and the attack is a sneak attack. He is now no longer invisible. By the rule on p124, he now decides (since he hasn't moved this round) whether he is making a standard attack or a full attack. He chooses full attack, and as a non-invisible attacker, continues with the other four strikes in his full attack routine. Since he is visible, his opponent receives a Dex bonus, and the attacks are not sneak attacks. Unless you can provide a reference for "He is dexless until his next action" that doesn't require him to be flatfooted? -Hyp. [/QUOTE]

Verification