Quicker than the Eye feat - broken?

[Murrdox]

Personally, I think this feat is too disgusting, and I'm tempted to say it's broken.

Quicker than the Eye lets you make a Bluff check vs. the opponent's spot check as a Move-Equivalent action. If you suceed, you get your next attack as a sneak attack.

What this turns into is that you've got a rogue with a maxed Bluff skill, higher than any creature or human's normal spot skill. Whenever you attack when you WOULDN'T normally get a sneak attack, you just simply make a Bluff check and there you go! Instant sneak attack.

A rogue in our party with this feat rarely made ANY attack that was not a sneak attack. I think it just makes sneak attacks way too easy to pull off.

What do you think?

 

[Trine]

It also means he can't move that round if he's going to be making an attack. In that case, why doesn't he just call in the fighter to stand on the other side of him for both the flanking bonuses and the ability to make a full attack? That'd give him sneak attack bonuses on *every* attack, not just one.

 

[Victim]

Sneak attacks are already easy to pull off. By making an easy Tumble check, a rogue can move into a flanking position and get sneak attacks anyway, with no opposed rolls involved. Also, using Quicker than the Eye denies the rogue a full series of sneak attacks. Five sneak attacks does much more damage than just one, so if the rogue relies on Quicker than the Eye, be thankful.

 

[Murrdox]

I suppose I'm living in a dilusional world where sneak attacks are somewhat hard to pull off. You make a good point with Tumble checks... I DMed a Monk who was a tumbling fiend... he was always flanking. Thank goodness he wasn't a rogue.

I suppose the way it's built is that the rogue SHOULDN'T have to try very hard for a sneak attack. I guess I'M wrong.

 

[IceBear]

I don't have anyone playing a rogue, but I can't imagine that it would be very difficult for a player of a rogue to find a way to get in sneak attack in each battle (if the opponents can be sneak attacked); he just has to flank. I know if I was a rogue I'd be sinking tons of points into tumbling.

IceBear

 

[KnowTheToe]

Because of the gross differences in skill points and class skills I do not use bluff for any combat manuevers. I think a trained fighter uses bluffing constantly during combat and he/she reads the opponents movements and bluff. Since Sense Motive is a cross class skill for almost every class, and rogues get so many more skill points, it seems like a poor use of the skill.

Bluff is still an excellent RPing skill, more useful than many others even without all of the combat benefits they give it.

I personally added Listen, Spot, Sense Motive, and Search to all skill lists. I figured that the fighter has so few skill points anyway, but it just might motivate the rogue to put more than 2-3 skill points in move silently, hide etc. All of the other classes have so many useful skills, that a few more would not really empower them.

I also figure those are all perception skills and class has little to do with how perceptive someone is.

 

[IceBear]

Just curious - what mechanic do you use for feinting then?

IceBear

 

[KnowTheToe]

I don't because to me that is part of a skilled warriors actions, every round. That is how they get +12 or greater to hit, they are more skilled at misleading their opponents and reading their opponents actions. I figure taking that small part away from the rogue is no big deal. So far no complaints, but if someone put up a big fuss, I would look at reworking it.

I just dislike how rules were created to easily bypass fighters. The bluff rules and tumbling rules give no opportunity for the fighter to defend himself. If a rogue uses this on a farm hand, it is no harder than using it against a 10th level fighter. Personal preferance thats all.

 

[IceBear]

Hey - I wasn't attacking your position or anything I was just wondering if you had another mechanic. I've never had anyone use it, but I also don't really like the existing mechanic. I do understand your point about the CHARACTER feinting as part of his attack, but I like having the PLAYER have combat options (so combat isn't just a swing, miss, swing, hit, etc). That's the reason I'd like to have a feint mechanic.

IceBear

 

[Murrdox]

As it currently stands, I don't like the current feint mechanic... but I think there could be a better one.