A Question on Bluffing

[GhostWolf69]

In D&D, you could still have some protection from a feint because of the armor or other magical protection you wore. It is just the way Armor Class works.

In Conan, a complete loss of DV and being vulnerable to Sneak Attacks seems pretty huge. You could strike an opponent easily (only really needing a result of 10 on the attack roll) and could finesse around the armor VERY easily.

I'm just concerned that this is too much.

This is a general issue with the Conan system. It gets more "dangerous" since you risk to loose all bonuses to DV in so manny different ways. Rendering you helpless, trusting your DR. But in my book this just adds flare to the game. The more "dangerous" the game, the more "grim" the atmosphere.

/wolf

 

[argo]

I am going with the interpertation that anytime the rules refrence someone "loosing their Dex" bonus that you loose all Dodge and Pary bonuses effectievly giving them a DV of 10 (though I think I will allow Pary bonus from shield). It is really the only way that the system remains internally consistent.

In Conan, a complete loss of DV and being vulnerable to Sneak Attacks seems pretty huge. You could strike an opponent easily (only really needing a result of 10 on the attack roll) and could finesse around the armor VERY easily.

I'm just concerned that this is too much.

Yes it is powerful. In fact a feint is probably one of the best ways to get around high DR from a guy in full plate or some such (see the threads about a noble in plate fighting off a horde of Picts) but please keep in mind that you get to add your BAB to a Sense Motive roll to avoid a bluff. In other words, a Bluff roll to feint (and only for feinting) is opposed by BAB + ranks in Sense Motive + Wis + misc With the plethora of classes with full BAB progression that should really keep the feinting in line I think. If you remember to enforce that I don't think that feinting will be too much of a problem.

 

[Hyena]

This is the way I do it to. If you "fall for" the feint you are essentially flat-footed against that attack. Sneak attack will get you, and uncanny dodge or reflexive parry won't help.

I disagree with you on Uncanny Dodge. I don't have the Conan Book at hand, but the 3.5 SRD clearly states that the character retains his Dex bonus to AC even if caught flat-footed. So, according to me, a character with Uncanny Dodge caught by a successful feint retains his Dodge Bonus to DV (but not his Parry Bonus) and isn't vulnerable to sneak attacks. I have to look up Reflexive Parry, but I'd be inclined to rule the same (retain Parry Bonus, no Dodge bonus, isn't Sneak Attacked) for the sake of symetry.

 

[GhostWolf69]

This is the way I do it to. If you "fall for" the feint you are essentially flat-footed against that attack. Sneak attack will get you, and uncanny dodge or reflexive parry won't help.

I disagree with you on Uncanny Dodge. I don't have the Conan Book at hand, but the 3.5 SRD clearly states that the character retains his Dex bonus to AC even if caught flat-footed. So, according to me, a character with Uncanny Dodge caught by a successful feint retains his Dodge Bonus to DV (but not his Parry Bonus) and isn't vulnerable to sneak attacks. I have to look up Reflexive Parry, but I'd be inclined to rule the same (retain Parry Bonus, no Dodge bonus, isn't Sneak Attacked) for the sake of symetry.

Maybe you're right here.
I have to discuss this with my group.

The wordings are strange even in the original SRD.

In the original rules:
Uncanny Dodge says you are immune to being flat-footed.
"retains his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) even if he is caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker."
But the result of a Feint just state that you loose your dex bonus to AC.
It doesn't say you're flat-footed. and it makes no mention of Uncanny Dodge.

So what would you do? Would you let a character with Uncanny Dodge be immune to Feint as well?

/wolf

 

[Anonymous]

Let's take a look at this issue on the high end...

A 20th level Barbarian vs a 20th level thief. Currently there is one way the thief could ever sneak attack the Barbarian since he is not 4 levels higher then the Barbarian. This includes feint, flanking, flat-footed. The only way is if the Barbarian is helpless, and then we're talking coup de grace. Actually there is one additional way: A Zingaran Thief or Pirate with the Zingaran Surprise feat could do it with the right circumstances, like appearing unarmed, disguised, and having the Barbarian distracted in some way.

So a feint in my book give the same benefits as distracted like when one comes across a vast horde of wealth (can't find it currently in the book, and the Index still bites). With those negatives only applying to the feinter for their next attack only. Which would mean, yes, you can sneak attack off the feint, but only for the next attack, not full round.

 

[Anonymous]

So what would you do? Would you let a character with Uncanny Dodge be immune to Feint as well?

Yup, I think so. I can't remember any practical difference between 'flat-footed' and 'lose Dex Bonus to AC' to save my life, and Uncanny Dodge allows dodging attacks from a friggin' invisible attacker. But Uncanny Dodge would only allow Dodge, not parry : you can forget about this shield of yours... I have to find an equivalent for parrying : Reflexive Parry looks like a good candidate.

Besides, it doesn't make feinting useless in my game as I intend to allow players to use it to avoid some opportunity attacks. For instance : if preceded by a successful feint, your grappling attempt won't give an opportunity attack to your opponent.

 

[GhostWolf69]

So what would you do? Would you let a character with Uncanny Dodge be immune to Feint as well?

Yup, I think so. I can't remember any practical difference between 'flat-footed' and 'lose Dex Bonus to AC' to save my life, and Uncanny Dodge allows dodging attacks from a friggin' invisible attacker.

I've just checked this one with my WotC guru, and we rule differently.
The question about Uncanny Dodge was avoided in the WotC latest "Sneak Attack" installement despite the fact that it was one of the most frequently asked questions. In short, Uncanny Dodge (as the text says) makes you keep your dex bonus to AC when [AND ONLY WHEN] flat-footed or attacked by an enemy of which you are unaware. That is it. It has nothing to do with being immune to Feint, or anything else that would make you loose your DEX bonus to AC.

So that is the way I'll rule in the future.

As someone else posted here, Uncanny Dodge does NOT make you immune to one of tha last ways to Sneak Attack someone who can not be flatfooted or flanked. And so on.

/wolf

 

[Brand_Robins]

Which would mean, yes, you can sneak attack off the feint, but only for the next attack, not full round.

This is, in fact, exactly the way I'm handling in in my game.

 

[Hyena]

I've just checked this one with my WotC guru, and we rule differently.
...SNIP...
So that is the way I'll rule in the future.

Well, that makes sense. I'll rule this way too. Thanks for the info.

 

[Johannixx]

As far as I can tell, Uncanny Dodge doesn't help you if you fall for a feint. You're not flat-footed, you've just lost your Dex bonus to AC. Thus, you're vulnerable to a Sneak Attack. Them's the breaks, unfortunately.

 

[Shonuff]

I'm still having trouble with this, although rule-wise I see where everyone is coming from.

It's just that if you take a scholar with a good CHA and ranks in Bluff he's going to accomplish some massive shredding against tough barbarians and heavily armored soldiers (whom lack the Sense Motive skill). With their skill points, scholars might be the best feint/finesse fighters in the land.

With thieves it's even worse if your adding in their sneak attack damage.

Feint = being reduced to a DV of 10, you armor is almost useless because of the ease at which a finesse attack can go around it, and you are vulnerable to sneak attacks no matter what.

A good BAB is fine, but with no Sense Motive skill you will be outmatched by a character with a good Bluff skill on a regular basis.

Soldier 3rd level = BAB+3 and no Sense Motive
Thief 1st level = Bluff 4 (not counting ability mods)

3rd level armored soldier with a hauberk and sword = DR6, dmg 1d10
1st level thief with short sword = 2-14 damage (1d8+1d6) and can easily get around armor by rolling against a DV of 10.


I'm stoked if I'm a thief or scholar but think about it from the barbarian's or soldier's point of view. Those are supposed to be the best fighters. With the use of Bluff, feint, and finesse - I don't think so.

I'm certainly open to a good counter argument here.
Like I said, I'm just struggling with this. I think it goes too far.

The fact that a good liar can out fight someone with superior sword fighting skills and armor rubs me the wrong way.

"Forget the soldiers! Bring out the politicians to lead the charge!!"

OK- I'm being a smart@$$ but you see what I mean?

Maybe FEINT should be a separate skill? And in combat you need to compare feinting skill rolls and BAB to determine success?

Or like I said before - a successful feint halves your foe's DV.

Still thinking . . . And hoping for something better.

 

[Anonymous]

3rd level armored soldier with a hauberk and sword = DR6, dmg 1d10
1st level thief with short sword = 2-14 damage (1d8+1d6) and can easily get around armor by rolling against a DV of 10.

Remember to finesse the attack he would have to hit DV 16, not DV 10. (you add DR to the DV in order to determine if the finesse attack bypasses armour)

So the First level thief is only hitting fineesing 25% of the time, sounds like one fate point using thief to me.

 

[Shonuff]

Remember to finesse the attack he would have to hit DV 16, not DV 10. (you add DR to the DV in order to determine if the finesse attack bypasses armour)

So the First level thief is only hitting fineesing 25% of the time, sounds like one fate point using thief to me.

I do know that. It is just that as the thief or scholar increases their attack bonus with levels, the target number for the finesse attack will NOT change. It reamins 16. Then those fate points are not quite so necessary.

 

[argo]

Re: can you feint someone with Uncanny Dodge?

First off, loosing your Dex bonus due to a feint and being Flat Footed are defiantly two different conditions. Being Flat Footed is a special, unique condition which also just happens to result in the person loosing their Dex bonus. Loosing your Dex bonus is the general condition which can arise in many different circumstances.

Now, moving on, this is actually one of the big debates in 3.x (does Uncanny Dodge protect you from ever loosing your Dex bonus or just in some circumstances) and the argument revolves around this one phrase in the SRD.

She retains her Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) even if she is caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker. However, she still loses her Dexterity bonus to AC if immobilized.

the key here is the words even if. Some people interpret it as "retain Dex bonus, even if flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker" (notice the comma) which means those two conditions are just examples and the person with Uncanny Dodge never looses their Dex bonus (even if feinted, or climbing, or whatever). Some people interpret it as "retain Dex bonus even if flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker" which means that the list is inclusive and you can still loose you Dex bonus in other situations. WoTC has steadfastly refused to hand down an official rulling on the matter (at least AFAIK)

However, Conan is different. Conan says:

retains his dodge or parry bonus to Defence Value (if any) if caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker.

Conan says "if" not "even if" which means there is no ambiguity: the list is inclusive. A person with uncanny dodge keeps their dodge or parry when flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker but not under any other circumstances where they might loose their Dex bonus (such a feinting or while climbing, etc). Also note that Uncanny Dodge does explicitly say dodge or parry.

I hope that makes as much sense written down as it did in my head :wink:

 

[argo]

A good BAB is fine, but with no Sense Motive skill you will be outmatched by a character with a good Bluff skill on a regular basis.

Soldier 3rd level = BAB+3 and no Sense Motive
Thief 1st level = Bluff 4 (not counting ability mods)

Which means that that thief, trying to bluff that soldier, goes opposed rollls which look something like this:
Soldier d20 + 3 + Wis
Thief d20 + 4 + Cha
now, admitedly the Thief will probably have a better Cha than the soldier does Wis, but that is not that overwhelming a contest. Prety close actually.

Lets do another thought experiment. Lets consider a feinter (Thief) and someone with a full BAB (Soldier) who are at the same level (whatever level, 1, 8, 16, 20 it doesn't matter). Assuming the Thief has maximum advanced his bluff skill (that is no small expenditure of resources, and after a certain point it becomes a little absurd, except that if he ever stops maximum advancing bluff then he will never win a feint against a equal leveled Soldier) then that means that the Soldiers BAB cancels out most of the Thiefs skill ranks and the contest really looks like this
Soldier d20 + Wis
Thief d20 + 3 + Cha
and that holds at any level. 3 points is not a lot of advantage on an opposed skill check when your life depends on it. Now the theif could take Skill focus for another +3 and Persuasive for another +2 which makes the contest
d20 + Wis
d20 + 8 + Cha
Which is a little better, but still not unbeatable, but now the Thief has spent two feats on being a blufmaster but he hasn't gotten Improved Feint yet and he isn't exactly overflowing with bonus feats.

Plus there is another wrinkle. Anybody who is concerned with defense is gonna want combat expertise, which means they need a 13 Int, which means they will be getting bonus skill points. If our soldier drops just 3 points in Sense Motive (and I can think of many worse things to do with bonus skill points than Sense Motive, that is always useful) then he is on even footing against our Thief who just maximum advances and against our blufmaster who spent two feats it looks like
d20 + Wis
d20 + 5 + Cha
Those are very acceptable odds, considering how much the blufmaster has put into his attempt to feint while our Soldier has put in a minimal investment of 3 skill points (yes, Int is a uber stat in Conan).

Plus there is one more thing to consider. Lets say our blufmaster wants to be an actual feintmaster, so he takes Improved Feint (now he has spent four feats on being able to feint in combat, a real one trick pony) He can still only attack once per round. Yes, he gets sneak attack damage (which means a good chance of triggering a massive damage save) but at higher levels he will quickly be outpaced by, oh lets say that Thief's twin who spent his feats on two-weapon fighting and wepon focus and his skill points on Tumble to move into flanking position. What if our feintmaster rolls a 1 on his attack roll?

Yes, feinting + sneak attack is powerful. Mostly for its potential to trigger a massive damage save and end the fight in one round. But I really doubt that it is enough to make the pliticians "better fighters than the fighters". In fact, I am considering a house rule that Improved Feint gives a +4 bonus to feint rolls in addition to its other benefits. I'll have to playtest that one and see how it works out.



ps: every soldier in Conan needs to make a 12 Int a priority!

 

[Shonuff]

What about a scholar who feints, reduces the DV to 10 (because dodge is cancelled), and then Death Touches (or something worse)?

Pretty mean stuff.

 

[tekatana]

I see the Parry/Dodge class bonus as a learned skill. It improves as you gain combat experience in your class' style of fighting.

When you feint you are in effect tricking the opponent to apply that skill to a place where your blade/fist/etc. will not be; in effect countering/negating the skills the target possesses to protect himself. This is a wholehearted commitment on the part of the defender, he believes 100% the attck is going to strike elsewhere on his person so he moves himself or his weapon/shield to counter it when in actuality the attack is destined for a place the defender was not intending to protect.
I would think the defender could keep his STR bonus to parry and his DEX bonus to dodge only while losing his class bonus to parry/dodge representing that "hamfisted, unskilled attempt to parry last minute" or that "last minute unskilled heave to move yourself out of the way."

Unfortunately though, this may be one of those cases where logic may have to take a backseat to playability/powergaming prevention since this could potentially cause any feinter to become the most deadly combatant on the field especially when coupled with the sneak attack that accompanies such a maneuver.

But, in the Conan setting, this may make sense. Quick and deadly fights. It would certainly cause NPC's and PC's alike to think before they get into one and to be careful which tactics they use to employ.

I will see how it plays out if we implement it in my group. This is to say if a Rulesmaster doesn't give us a ruling on the subject first.

-T

 

[Shonuff]

Just to recap:

Summary from the book:
Feint is a standard action. Make Bluff vs. Sense Motive+BAB. If Bluff wins, your next attack causes the target "does not allow him to use his Dexterity bonus to DV (if any)."

--OK, sounds like DnD. The feint might drop a few points off Defense Value with a loos of Dex. But then someone asked the following:

So, does this loss of Dex bonus negate Dodge totally? Some said YES.

What about Parry? The book doesn't say. According to the book, if I parry, your feint is useless. Some then said you lose parry bonuses as well.

The someone said that the feint reduces ALL bonuses and gives you a DV of 10.

---------------
My problem has been the snowball effect spinnig the feint into a deadly and possibly unbalanced/misplaced (regarding class skills) ability.

I think people have some great points, but I'm still not quite sold on it yet. I believe it was a mistake when they took a mechanic from one system and attempted to transfer it over "as is" without taking into consideration the differences using DV and DR in comparison to AC.

I also think people's assumptions that you lose all natural ability and skill when defending yourself (and potentially losing your armor protection with finesse) against a feint is a bit much. Especially when non-fighter classes are potentially best at it. (That still raises my eyebrows despite the points made here and elsewhere.)

I'm all for Conan being nasty and brutal. Absolutely. But I'm also for it making as much logical sense as possible and this paticular maneuver, added with the assumptions mentioned, just doesn't cut it with me. No disrespect intended to those that disagree.

I'm still wondering if a good feint might halve your effective DV, therefore drastically cutting your chances to adjust to the attack (and also making at least some reaction possible due to superior martial training and reflexes).

Just to ask the question of you experienced players:
Feinting is somewhat implied with increasing BAB scores.
Would it wreck the game if Feint meneuvers and the Improved Feint feat were removed from the game completely as a House Rule?

 

[Phil]

Just to recap:

Summary from the book:
Feint is a standard action. Make Bluff vs. Sense Motive+BAB. If Bluff wins, your next attack causes the target "does not allow him to use his Dexterity bonus to DV (if any)."

--OK, sounds like DnD. The feint might drop a few points off Defense Value with a loos of Dex. But then someone asked the following:

So, does this loss of Dex bonus negate Dodge totally? Some said YES.

What about Parry? The book doesn't say. According to the book, if I parry, your feint is useless. Some then said you lose parry bonuses as well.

The someone said that the feint reduces ALL bonuses and gives you a DV of 10.

---------------
My problem has been the snowball effect spinnig the feint into a deadly and possibly unbalanced/misplaced (regarding class skills) ability.

I think people have some great points, but I'm still not quite sold on it yet. I believe it was a mistake when they took a mechanic from one system and attempted to transfer it over "as is" without taking into consideration the differences using DV and DR in comparison to AC.

I also think people's assumptions that you lose all natural ability and skill when defending yourself (and potentially losing your armor protection with finesse) against a feint is a bit much. Especially when non-fighter classes are potentially best at it. (That still raises my eyebrows despite the points made here and elsewhere.)

I'm all for Conan being nasty and brutal. Absolutely. But I'm also for it making as much logical sense as possible and this paticular maneuver, added with the assumptions mentioned, just doesn't cut it with me. No disrespect intended to those that disagree.

I'm still wondering if a good feint might halve your effective DV, therefore drastically cutting your chances to adjust to the attack (and also making at least some reaction possible due to superior martial training and reflexes).

Just to ask the question of you experienced players:
Feinting is somewhat implied with increasing BAB scores.
Would it wreck the game if Feint meneuvers and the Improved Feint feat were removed from the game completely as a House Rule?

Okay, I haven't played Conan as of yet (I got it just after starting a new D&D campaign) but having DMed D&D ever since 3.0 came out I can't see that removing feinting would "wreck the game" - all it does is remove a potential method of attacking. I do have a number of points however.

1. All characters can feint - not just thieves, pirates and scholars which seem to be the examples that have been used throughout this discussion. Thus, while the more roguish characters get the most benefit from feint anyone can do it.

2. If we assume that you lose all Dodge and Parry bonuses to DV (reducing it to 10) it makes the target easier to hit - for ONE attack - whether it is in the same round (Improved Feint) or not (normal feint). This means that a character with multiple attacks still only gets one attack at DV 10 regardless of how many attacks they may normally get. This means that they only get sneak attack damage on that one attack.

3. Assuming that the character feinting is a character with sneak attack they still need to get through the DR of the target - sneak attack damage makes this more likely but not guarenteed (depending on armour). As a thief IME may not have an incredibly high STR (generally roguish characters prioritise INT and DEX (and maybe CHA for bluffing etc)) this may be the only way to defeat a heavily armoured opponent other than finesse attacks.

4. The other way to defeat a heavily armoured opponent is with a finesse weapon (and a finesse attack) - in which case the DV is effectively increased by the DR of the target - hence while technically you only NEED a 10 to hit you need a higher number to finesse attack - if you fail you are unlikely to hurt the target at all due to the low PEN of weapons when making Finesse Attacks.

5. Assuming you are HAVE Improved Feint you make a single attack every round - regardless of BAB. You are potentially sacrificing multiple attacks - and therefore multiple changes to hurt your foe, for ONE really nasty attack which, while likely to hit your target, has still got to penetrate armour or, in the case of a finesse attack, is still relatively difficult as you add the DR of the character to their DV! This situation is worse if you DON'T have Improved Feint as then you get to attack only every other round!

6. To carry on from above, while you are attacking every other round, or once per round (with Improved Feint) your opponent - whom this thread seems to assume is one of the more combat orientated classes (such as a soldier) is, if mid to high level, getting multiple attacks EVERY round - and, as they have a high BAB probably hitting you for large amounts of damage as they probably have a high STR.

7. Finally, combat in Conan is meant to be nasty!

While I understand the concerns about feinting it, IMO as a long time DM, not that bad - it gives weaker characters the CHANCE (as you still need to penetrate DR or roll higher than 10+DR) to do a lot of damage to the more combat orientated classes. This comes at the expense of multiple attacks per round - or even a single attack per round if you don't have Improved Feint - ALL while the target is pounding the feinter with their multiple attacks per round.

 

[Anonymous]

I was thinking on the bluff/ finesse/ sneak attack thing the other day and had a thought on a house rule I might try out. I know the d20 system is basically a pass or fail siutation, ie you roll your dice and your bonus and if you reach the TN you succeed and if you dont get there you fail and the amount you succeed or fail by isn't a factor ( except for Conans finesse attacks) but a more flexible system might be appropriate for feinting.

How about if the attacker succeeds in the opposed roll he lowers his opponents DV by an amount equal to ( twice, three times or whatever works for you) the amount he won the test by. If this lowers the defenders DV to 10 then he is flat footed and subject to sneak attacks etc. On the flip side it can sometimes be dangerous to feint so if he looses maybe his opponents DV goes up or his goes down etc, by some mutiple of the amount the defender won by.
As this reduces the effect of only just succeeding at ta feint it might be possible to give some other bonus like your opponent has a penalty to attack you on his next attack if you feint successfully and do hit him, or something like that.
I've done a little sword fighting and feinting, especially against a better opponent is often disasterous as two fighters might swing at each other, one pulling his initial blow as its a feint and the other scewering him because his wasnt!!