Post/Author/DateTime	Post
adnauseum 11-15-04, 01:30 PM	Hello Gang, I am about to engage my party in an encounter where they will be choosing between balancing on 7-12 inch narrow surfaces, or climbing down the side of a ravine, and some questions came to light that I was hoping to get some clarification on. According to the description of Balance, anyone with 5 ranks in the skill does not lose their Dex bonus while Balancing. In other threads I've read, the concensus seemed to be that a character with Uncanny Dodge (Rogue, Barbarian for example) would also retain their Dex bonus while balancing, and would not be subject to sneak attacks. What about when they are climbing? When climbing, a character can have, at most, one hand free and loses their Dex bonus to Armor Class and I believe they are also considered Flat Footed. Would Uncanny Dodge prevent this as well? Thanks for the help. :)
FitzNighteyes 11-15-04, 02:12 PM	Uncanny dodge protects you when you are flat-footed or invisible. IIRC, Balance (0-4 ranks) and Climbing both cause you to be flat-footed in 3r, which means that UD would work. Check their descriptions. If they say Deny Dex to AC as opposed to flat-footed, UD doesn't work. Personally, I hate this, since flat-footed is supposed to represent not having time to react, ie ONLY before your first initiative (as it was in 3e). I've house ruled it so that is the only time you are flat-footed (ie no feat, or action you are taking).
Naaman 11-15-04, 05:51 PM	Uncanny Dodge prevents any condition that would deny you your Dex bonus to AC (except when immobilized such as by a stun attack or being tied down). If you are a sleeping barbarian and someone attacks you, you wake up and apply your dex bonus to AC. Though, when you are flat footed, you are still flat footed (i.e. even though your Dex bonus applies, other restrictions on being flat footed still apply such as no attacks of opportunity allowed).
FitzNighteyes 11-15-04, 06:01 PM	Uncanny Dodge prevents any condition that would deny you your Dex bonus to AC (except when immobilized such as by a stun attack or being tied down).UD only works against flat-footed and invisibility (and probably hidden, but that isn't spelled out in the books). All other Dex denying methods work just fine. Per the SRD: "[...] retains his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) even if he is caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker." So, stunning, feinting, and anything else that Denies Dex to AC works fine.
adnauseum 11-15-04, 08:08 PM	UD only works against flat-footed and invisibility (and probably hidden, but that isn't spelled out in the books). All other Dex denying methods work just fine. Per the SRD: "[...] retains his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) even if he is caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker." So, stunning, feinting, and anything else that Denies Dex to AC works fine. That seems to sum it up, thanks Fitz, much appreciated.
Nom 11-15-04, 10:26 PM	Uncanny Dodge is actually poorly specified. It "allows you to react before you otherwise could", which prevents you losing Dex bonus to AC "even if {you are} caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker" but not if you are immobilised. Unfortunately, that leaves a lot of grey area, most notably whether Uncanny Dodge helps if you cannot evade the attack (such as climbing) but not actually immobilised. Feinting is also problematic. In practice, I tend to agree with Fitz. If the problem is lack of awareness or reflexes (eg flat-footed, hidden attacker), then UD will prevent loss of Dex bonus. If the issue is not awareness but inability to react (climbing, immobilised) or through some special mechanism (eg feinting) then I do not allow UD to restore Dex bonus to AC.
Naaman 11-16-04, 03:55 AM	UD only works against flat-footed and invisibility (and probably hidden, but that isn't spelled out in the books). All other Dex denying methods work just fine. Per the SRD: "[...] retains his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) even if he is caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker." So, stunning, feinting, and anything else that Denies Dex to AC works fine. Yeah I actually realized this after posting. But what about my reference to a sleeping person with uncanny dodge? What do you think would happen? Does uncanny dodge mean that you are always "aware" even if you are unable to react (such as with balance), and would "awareness" carry over into sleep?
Nom 11-16-04, 06:25 AM	Yeah I actually realized this after posting. But what about my reference to a sleeping person with uncanny dodge? What do you think would happen? Does uncanny dodge mean that you are always "aware" even if you are unable to react (such as with balance), and would "awareness" carry over into sleep?Helpless characters are covered under their own rules on pg 153. They have a -4 AC penalty in melee (none when attacked at range), their Dex is considered to be 0 (AC -5), and they can be sneak attacked.
Valthran 11-16-04, 12:34 PM	While balancing or climbing you: 1) Cannot move to avoid a blow therefore lose your dex to AC 2) Cannot make attacks of opportunity The exceptions being if you have 5 or more ranks in balance or you have a climb speed. WoTC could have just said this but instead because of laziness or in an attempt to save space they used the phrase "flat-footed" A lack of being able to move and not having a chance to react are obviously two different things and I believe confusing them was a mistake. Uncanny dodge helps in situations where reaction time (flat-footed) is involved but not if you are immobilized. Now we have the conundrum of states such as climb and balance where you are "flat-footed" but your have lost your Dex to AC because "you cannot move to avoid the blow" Uncanny dodge is not suppose to help when you cannot move to avoid the blow. In our game we don't let uncanny dodge do this for climb and balance unless you meet the above exception (ranks or move speed). This may put us in the minority but it just seems more reasonable to us.
KangTheCallipygian 11-16-04, 12:47 PM	Uncanny Dodge is actually poorly specified. It "allows you to react before you otherwise could", which prevents you losing Dex bonus to AC "even if {you are} caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker" but not if you are immobilised. Unfortunately, that leaves a lot of grey area, most notably whether Uncanny Dodge helps if you cannot evade the attack (such as climbing) but not actually immobilised. Feinting is also problematic.Nom, It's only poorly specified if you read it in a certain way, ie. to mean "It doesn't protect you if you're immobilized. Also, it protects you if you're flat-footed or attacked by an invisible attacker (or potentially any number of other ways you might lose your Dex bonus to AC)". If you interpret it a little differently, the ambiguity disappears: "So long as you're not immobilized, Uncanny Dodge prevents you from losing your Dex bonus to AC when flat-footed or attacked by an invisible opponent." Where's the grey area? If you're climbing, you lose your Dex bonus to AC (you don't become flat-footed as was suggested in a couple of places above; I checked the SRD. Does the PHB actually call it flat-footed? If so, I'm terribly unimpressed). Regardless of whether you may be immobilized or not, the reason you lose the Dex bonus to AC is not due to flat-footedness or being attacked by an invisible opponent, so UD is irrelevant in this case. If, on the other hand, it were irrelephant, then that certainly would imply a lot of grey area! :) ...And "this case" would obviously have to be a trunk of some sort. Sorry; couldn't resist the bad puns. Hope the rest was at least a little bit helpful. Good call about the 'helpless characters' rule, BTW. Kang
Nom 11-16-04, 02:41 PM	"So long as you're not immobilized, Uncanny Dodge prevents you from losing your Dex bonus to AC when flat-footed or attacked by an invisible opponent."That is one way of interpreting the text. However, the text specifies what happens in two cases - you cease to lose it when flat footed or invisible, you lose it (as normal) when Immobilised. But just as there is nowhere a definitive list of 'states' in which you lose Dex to AC, neither is there a definitive list of 'states' in which Uncanny Dodge protects. In both cases, we are left with extrapolating from examples. At least the text regarding when you lose Dex to AC clearly reads principle -> examples. Uncanny Dodge just comes out with flavour text and examples, without further examination of the flavour text.
Valthran 11-16-04, 02:48 PM	The text in the PHB on the balance skill uses the phrase "flat-footed" but the text on the climb skill does not. However, PHB pg 151 table 8-6 Armour class modifiers lists Climbing and Balancing under examples of being flat-footed. As I have I said before I think this was a poor choice. UD does not/should not help if you cannot move to avoid the blow. Climbing and balancing may mimic the state of being Flat-footed (loss of dex to AC and no AoO) but they happen for different reasons and should not be treated as the same thing Climb and balance skill both clearly state that you lose your dex to AC because you cannot move to avoid a blow. Being Flat footed and all of the addtional rules that entails (such as no AoO) are just an additional features. Or not depending on how you interpret things.
FitzNighteyes 11-16-04, 03:37 PM	That is one way of interpreting the text.IMO the most valid way: It says "however, you still lose blah blah blah when immobilized." In other words, if you are retaining it because they are invisible or you are flat-footed, you still lose it when immobilized. It's a moot point though, since it says when you retain your Dex to AC. When fighting something invisible or flat-footed. Is it something other than these. If NO, then you do not retain Dex to AC, because UD doesn't say you do. If so, then Dex to AC is retained, since UD says so. Under Kang's interpretation, the above means that the immobilized line is important only if you are also fighting something invisible or you are flat-footed. Under your interpretation, the immobilized line becomes completely irrelevant, since UD already defines clearly when it applies (invisible or flat-footed), and you have to treat each thing differently. Flat-footed and Feinted? Flat-footed means yes, Feinted means no, state = Denied Dex to AC. Basically, the easiest way is to give it treat it that way. We know if it's flat-footed or invisible UD applies (for those things only), and we know for anything else (with immobilized stated, others because they are not invisible/flat-footed) UD doesn't apply, so if you are under multiple effects, you had to treat each seperately and if UD doesn't work against one or more of them, then you are Denied Dex to AC.
KangTheCallipygian 11-16-04, 04:19 PM	Agreed, FatzNighteyes. "Flat-footed and not immobilized," and "attacked by an invisible opponent and not immobilized" is a "definitive list of 'states' in which Uncanny Dodge protects". Either interpretation is semantically valid; it's just that this one leaves no grey area or unanswered questions. (I'm Kang by the way, Fitz) ;) And thanks Valtran for pointing out where people seem to be getting the idea that climbing = flat-footed. It appears the table contradicts the text in this case. I smell the primary source rule... That is one way of interpreting the text. However, the text specifies what happens in two cases - you cease to lose it when flat footed or invisible, you lose it (as normal) when Immobilised.That is one way of interpreting the text. However, the text specifies what happens in two cases - you retain your Dex bonus to AC when flat-footed but not immobilized; you retain your Dex bonus to AC when attacked by an invisible opponent but not immobilized. We could go around and around like that all day and not prove a thing. I only wanted to point out there's a way to read it that eliminates the grey area, not start an argument. Well, OK, I admit it; I really only wanted to make an elephant joke... Although I'm not sure what you mean when you say my interpretation leaves you extrapolating from examples... Kang
Dalton Onestone 11-16-04, 06:11 PM	What kind of action is an attempt to Intimidate in melee combat. Free? Move? I'm looking at creating a high charisma rogue who takes Combat Expertise/Improved Feint, and high skill levels in Bluff and Intimidate. Can he use both Feint and Intimidate in the same melee round? (If so, he'll do it every round unless I'm missing something.)
Valthran 11-17-04, 01:10 PM	On carefully reading the RAW for uncanny dodge I agree with Fitz, Kang, etc. Uncanny dodge... flat-footed or invisible attacker.... retain Dex to AC Uncanny Dodge + immobile...Flat-footed or invisible attacker....No retain Dex to AC The only minor problem I see is that there is no clear DnD definition of "immobilized" According to Websters dictionary Immobilized is defined as: -to make or keep immobile -restrict the free movement of -make incabable of being moved Immobilized does not equal being paralyzed, held or helpless though you may also be immobile in these conditions. Many conditions can render you immobile (webs, entangle spell, tangle foot bag, etc) but you still maintain your Dex to AC. Would these conditions also negate UD ability to allow you to retain Dex to AC when flat-footed? Clearly in the case of climb and balance you are flat-footed and "unable to move to avoid the blow". Being unable to move clearly meets the definition of being immobile therefore UD will not allow you to retain your Dex to AC. But what about an invisible rogue attacking an entangled Barbarian with UD
adnauseum 11-17-04, 01:59 PM	Many conditions can render you immobile (webs, entangle spell, tangle foot bag, etc) but you still maintain your Dex to AC. Would these conditions also negate UD ability to allow you to retain Dex to AC when flat-footed? Exactly, which makes me wonder, if Mr. Barbarian is climbing down the ravine, and Mr. Drider Rogue wants to sneak attack him (since being immobile, he gets no dex, and if I'm correct, being denied his dex leaves him vulnerable to sneak attack) does he get to sneak attack him? I'm leaning toward yes, since the drider is an adroit and native climber and is accustomed to attacking while climbing, and standard bipedal barbarian is not, regardless of his abilities to uncanny dodge. The same question arises in the case of the entangled barbarian, and any rogue standing outside the entangled area with a missile weapon and a penchant for shooting people in the kidneys when they aren't looking (provided they are within 30' of course) since the entangled target is considered 'flat-footed', but still retains his dex. In that case, UD seems fairly clear, as does sneak attack, and because he still has his dex, there can be no ranged sneak attack in that circumstance.
Valthran 11-17-04, 06:56 PM	Climbing is a bit of a problem because it states denied Dex to AC in on part of the PHB and flat footed in another. Being immobilized does not cause you to lose your dex to AC but it can change how UD works. UD allows you to retain Dex to AC under conditions where you are flat-footed or your attacker is unseen UNLESS you are immobilized. One definition of immobilized would be situations where your movement rate is zero or it is otherwise stated that you cannot move. If you are flat-footed or attacked by and an unseen attacker under one of these conditions (immobilized) then you would still be denied Dex to AC despite having UD. If this is true then: A Rogue could sneak attack a Barbarian with UD and less than 5 ranks in balance who is crossing a narrow rope bridge(balancing) because the barbarian is flat-footed and immobile(cannot move to avoid attack) An invisible Rogue could sneak attack a Barbarian with UD who failed his reflex save to an entangle spell and is now immobile. However a barbarian with 5 ranks in balance who fails his balance check by 4 would not be subject to a sneak attack because even though he is immobile he is not flat-footed.
rumanchu 11-21-04, 05:34 PM	While balancing or climbing you: WoTC could have just said this but instead because of laziness or in an attempt to save space they used the phrase "flat-footed" They did the same thing with the Distraction ability of Swarms, and I think that it's just to simplify things. Rather than have 3 or 4 states which do the same thing mechanically, they keyword it and have them all make you "nauseated" or "flat-footed".