Two questions about feinting in Combat

[Darklone]

Only if he wears a 3.5 helmet.

 

[AuraSeer]

If a smith and a half can make a helm and a half in a day and a half, how long does it take 3.5 smiths to make a 3.5 helmet?

 

[RigaMortus]

You can bluff and use an unarmed attack, but unless you have IUS or monk levels, you'll draw an AoO...

-Hyp.

But if you Feint (Bluff) successfully, your opponent is dened their Dex bonus against you on your next attack. I thought you could not take an AoO on someone if you were denied your Dex bonus? Or is this one of those WotC/Sage suggested house rules that I have been using all along?

 

[Hypersmurf]

I thought you could not take an AoO on someone if you were denied your Dex bonus?

That exists nowhere in the rules.

After all, if it were true, you couldn't make an AoO on an invisible opponent!

-Hyp.

 

[nimisgod]

According to the Combat Reflexes feat, a character without it cannot make attacks of opportunity while flatfooted.

 

[Hypersmurf]

According to the Combat Reflexes feat, a character without it cannot make attacks of opportunity while flatfooted.

That's nice.

What's the relevance to a character denied his Dex bonus due to a succesful feint?

-Hyp.

 

[nimisgod]

[Continued since I was in a hurry earlier...]

It could be assumed then that since being flatfooted doesn't allow one to make AoOs, then being denied one's dex bonus has the same effect.

Thus getting rid of the unusual circumstance that you can make AoOs against invisible provoking opponents.

At least, that's the reasonable explanation for it.

If you want to be blindly literalist about it... then you would say that being flatfooted is different from being "denied one one's dex bonus" and thus irrelevant (as what Hyp is saying).

Geez, do I have to spell everything out for you, Hyp? Lol

 

[Hypersmurf]

It could be assumed then that since being flatfooted doesn't allow one to make AoOs, then being denied one's dex bonus has the same effect.

How on earth do you get from A to B?

That's like saying "A character wielding a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a -4 penalty on attack rolls; a prone character takes a -4 penalty on attack rolls; therefore a wizard with a greataxe is prone."

If you want to be blindly literalist about it... then you would say that being flatfooted is different from being "denied one one's dex bonus" and thus irrelevant (as what Hyp is saying).

That's exactly what I'm saying!

A character can be denied his Dex bonus without being flatfooted. (Held, Blind, Bluffed, etc.)

A character can be flat-footed without being denied his Dex bonus. (Uncanny Dodge)

Just because most characters who are flat-footed are also denied their Dex bonus in no way means that all other effects of being flat-footed occur any other time you are denied your Dex bonus.

-Hyp.

 

[Darklone]

Just because most characters who are flat-footed are also denied their Dex bonus in no way means that all other effects of being flat-footed occur any other time you are denied your Dex bonus.

-Hyp.

Actually, this was in one of the old FAQs IIRC...

 

[Hypersmurf]

Actually, this was in one of the old FAQs IIRC...

If you do, they obviously came to their sense and took it out, 'cos it's not in there any more...

-Hyp.