Dirty Tricks (A pathfinder combat maneuver Question)

[Ravens_Wing]

First off the concept for a dirty trick combat maneuver is awesome!

My question is how long does it take for the target to get rid of it? The Dirty Trick is introduced in the Pathfinder Advanced Players Guide and it allows a player to hinder a foe by applying a one of a series of conditions to said foe. Example: throw dirt in their eyes and they are blinded for a short period of time.

The problem is that the target of the dirty trick can undo this negative condition but the amount of time that is required to do so is contradictory. The write up on the CM itself has this line at the end of the description.

"In addition, removing the condition requires the target to spend a standard action."

This would be fine except the Advanced Players Guide also has feats pertaining to this CM and the write up for the "Greater, Dirty Trick" contradicts this.

Here is that feat:
Greater Dirty Trick (Combat)
When you pull a dirty trick, your foe is truly hindered.
Prerequisites: Int 13, Combat Expertise, Improved
Dirty Trick, base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: You receive a +2 bonus on checks made
to attempt a dirty trick. This bonus stacks with the
bonus granted by Improved Dirty Trick. Whenever you
successfully perform a dirty trick, the penalty lasts for
1d4 rounds, plus 1 round for every 5 by which your attack
exceeds the target’s CMD. In addition, removing the
condition requires the target to spend a standard action.
Normal: The condition imposed by a dirty trick lasts
for 1 round plus 1 round for every 5 by which your attack
exceeds the target’s CMD. Removing the condition
requires the target to spend a move action

So which is right? The errata published for this book missed this error.
Should it be standard action normally and full rnd action with the feat or
Move action normally and standard with the feat.

Thoughts?

[acid_ninja]

From the SRD:


If your attack is successful, the target takes a penalty. The penalty is limited to one of the following conditions: blinded, dazzled, deafened, entangled, shaken, or sickened. This condition lasts for 1 round. For every 5 by which your attack exceeds your opponent’s CMD, the penalty lasts 1 additional round. This penalty can usually be removed if the target spends a move action. If you possess the Greater Dirty Trick feat, the penalty lasts for 1d4 rounds, plus 1 round for every 5 by which your attack exceeds your opponent’s CMD. In addition, removing the condition requires the target to spend a standard action.

Move action normally, standard with the feat. Look at trip - takes a move action to remove the condition (prone) but provokes AoO (unless you withdraw and then you can't attack).

I actually think its not a bad idea to allow dirty trick to work in place of an attack, like trip, disarm and sunder - all of which require a move action to 'cure' (standing up, picking up your weapon or drawing a new one) and/or make removing the condition provoke an AoO - its hard to keep your guard up when pulling up your pants or wiping sand from your eyes.

[Ravens_Wing]

Yeah i suppose if that move action provoked an AoO then that would still make it worth-while. I just find it annoying that the errata missed this goof.

I did like your comparison to the other combat maneuvers. It makes so much more sense that way.

[Doorhandle]

Also, may I interest you in Quick dirty trick and this class? (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/other-races/featured-races/arg-orc/dirty-fighter-fighter-orc)

[Starbuck_II]

Also, may I interest you in Quick dirty trick and this class? (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/other-races/featured-races/arg-orc/dirty-fighter-fighter-orc)

Sadly, it isn't until 9th level that the archetype is any good.

[Doorhandle]

True. Okay, instead, try being either a Maneuver master monk or getting Quick dirty trick at level 6 instead of greater dirty trick.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Dirty Trick: Spend a standard action to *maybe* force the foe to spend a move action to remove something.

It's not worth using until Greater Dirty Trick, the action tradeoff is just too imbalanced. People have said it's really good when your party is up against one hapless dude and can overwhelm him with their combined action economy. ...Yeah, they can do that already without dirty trick.