Flat-footed vs. creatures you're aware of but not

[Jeff the Green]

What happens if you're aware of an enemy but don't realize they're an enemy? Like a warforged alter selfed into a rope, or an ally that betrayed you. Do you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC and/or become flat-footed for their first attack?

[Humble Master]

Depends on the situation. If they suddenly attack then I would say yes. But if you are looking at said Warforged turned rope and know something is fishy, well then maybe not.

[TuggyNE]

Like a warforged alter selfed into a rope

Hmm. An animated rope, I assume, since regular objects don't have a type. That seems really tacky, tbh, but I guess it sort of works.

[Emperor Tippy]

You are always flatfooted until you act in combat.

Whether or not the attacker gets a surprise round is up to your DM. I would rule yes as the defender is not aware of an opponent (they are aware that the creature is there but not aware that said creature is an opponent).

But until your first action of a combat (i.e. your initiative comes up), you are flat-footed regardless of anything else (well except for Foresight and a few other things).

[eggynack]

But until your first action of a combat (i.e. your initiative comes up), you are flat-footed regardless of anything else (well except for Foresight and a few other things).
I think that combat reflexes is a way around it. It explicitly lets you attack when flat footed, and attacking might qualify as an action. The feat doesn't have any prerequisites either, so you can theoretically pick up a reach weapon, and stop people from hitting your flat footed AC when charging you, even as a wizard or something. That could actually be useful in combination with abrupt jaunt, because not being able to use immediate actions when flat footed is one of that ability's weaknesses. If you can get one of those whips that can threaten, you'd get 15 foot reach, and still have a hand left over for casting. It doesn't really matter that you'll never hit, because the goal is just getting an action off. It's worth thinking about, I think.

[KillianHawkeye]

I think that combat reflexes is a way around it. It explicitly lets you attack when flat footed, and attacking might qualify as an action. The feat doesn't have any prerequisites either, so you can theoretically pick up a reach weapon, and stop people from hitting your flat footed AC when charging you, even as a wizard or something. That could actually be useful in combination with abrupt jaunt, because not being able to use immediate actions when flat footed is one of that ability's weaknesses. If you can get one of those whips that can threaten, you'd get 15 foot reach, and still have a hand left over for casting. It doesn't really matter that you'll never hit, because the goal is just getting an action off. It's worth thinking about, I think.

Sorry, but an Attack of Opportunity is not an action as per Rules Compendium (page 8).

[eggynack]

Sorry, but an Attack of Opportunity is not an action as per Rules Compendium (page 8).
Huh. That's kinda weird. I'm not sure how that works though. I mean, even if your action didn't take up an action, that doesn't mean that you didn't act. Like, if it's your turn, and you do nothing but take a five foot step, then are you still flat footed on the following turn? I dunno. I've never really considered this rules interaction, so I'm just figuring stuff out at this point.

Edit: Also, this non-action is filed under the category of "actions in combat". You're taking an act, but not one that is an action. I think there's some logic there.

[Jeff the Green]

You are always flatfooted until you act in combat.

Whether or not the attacker gets a surprise round is up to your DM. I would rule yes as the defender is not aware of an opponent (they are aware that the creature is there but not aware that said creature is an opponent).

But until your first action of a combat (i.e. your initiative comes up), you are flat-footed regardless of anything else (well except for Foresight and a few other things).

Sorry, I should have been more specific, I meant when the combat has already started. Say the party is fighting a couple of golems. Sometime during the combat, Bob steps near a statue that's actually an alter selfed warforged (and say he failed his Spot check to notice the warforged in disguise). When the warforged attacks, is Bob flat-footed or does he lose his Dexterity bonus to AC?

[Diarmuid]

In the case of an alter selfed enemy/friend who attacks you, i think it would be like attacking from hidden so you would lose your Dex.

If you we're standing next to your buddy and he just decides to start attacking you, I wouldn't say you lose your Dex as you would see it coming. While combat happens mechanically in turns, it's a fluid thing and someone who all of a sudden is threatening you would be something you would be aware of.

[Renegade Paladin]

Would he lose his Dexterity bonus to AC (which is not the same thing as flat footed) against the warforged if it were invisible? Yes. Then why would the same not happen if he's unaware of the warforged for some other reason? The case is pretty clear cut; if you're unaware of an incoming attack, you don't get your Dex bonus to AC against that attack.

[Crake]

Sorry, but an Attack of Opportunity is not an action as per Rules Compendium (page 8).

I think by that it means it's a non-action, as in, not a standard, move, free, swift or immediate action, however, an attack of opportunity would surely still qualify as having acted?

[Allanimal]

I think by that it means it's a non-action, as in, not a standard, move, free, swift or immediate action, however, an attack of opportunity would surely still qualify as having acted?

No, it doesn't.


FLAT-FOOTED You can't react well to danger at the beginning of combat until you've taken your first turn. In such cases, you use flat-footed AC.

You are flat footed until your turn comes up on the initiative order. Taking an AOO befoe yuor turn because you have Combat Reflexes doesn't change it - you still have not taken your turn yet.

[eggynack]

You are flat footed until your turn comes up on the initiative order. Taking an AOO befoe yuor turn because you have Combat Reflexes doesn't change it - you still have not taken your turn yet.
Well, that's in direct contradiction to the rules in the DMG page 301, where it states, "A character who has not yet acted during a combat is flat-footed, not yet reacting normally to the situation. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity." Those are the rules I'm looking at, anyways. I've never been entirely clear on what the deal with the rules compendium is. It's not quite errata, and sometimes, like here, it contradicts other rules. It's an odd thing.

[Gwendol]

I don't see the contradiction. AoO's are not actions after all, re-actions, perhaps?

[eggynack]

I don't see the contradiction. AoO's are not actions after all, re-actions, perhaps?
I'm pretty sure that AoO's are actions, even if they're an action that doesn't take up any kind of action. I think it counts as acting. Anyways, I could easily come up with a way to create a contradiction. Instead of using combat reflexes, how about I use nerveskitter? You cast it when you roll for initiative, so if you lose initiative, that's an action you've taken in combat while being flat footed. Thus, according to the player's handbook rules, you would no longer be flat footed, because an immediate action is absolutely an action. Nerve skitter directly relates to combat, so it is also an action you're taking in combat. Contradiction: reestablished. I still dispute the idea that taking AoO's don't count as acting, but it's irrelevant for this particular argument.

[Gwendol]

Isn't nervskitter a specific exception?

[eggynack]

Isn't nervskitter a specific exception?
To the thing about casting immediate actions while flat-footed? Yes. However, it definitely qualifies as acting in combat, because an immediate action isn't a non-action. It's a pretty specific instance providing the contradiction, but it's an instance nonetheless.

[Maginomicon]

So...
If you're no longer flatfooted as a result of initiative, do you become treated as flatfooted when a new unknown enemy attacks you?
Can you make an attack of opportunity while flatfooted?
If you cast nerveskitter, are you still flatfooted?


No, unless the new enemy is so sufficiently hidden at the time such that the attacker can be treated as invisible. The flat-footed condition reflects not being able to adequately react to the attack, not the creature. If after your first initiative a new opponent enters battle (or if an ally turns traitor) and you can be said to be aware of them up until the moment of the attack, then you're aware of them and (barring other circumstances that inhibit your ability to react to an attack) thus are not flat-footed against that attack.
No. According to the Rules Compendium page 18, if you’re flat-footed, you can’t make attacks of opportunity.
Yes. Nerveskitter is a special exception to the rule that you can't cast a spell while flat-footed, but it otherwise does not change the fact that you still aren't reacting properly to the battle yet (until your first initiative comes around). In order: Recall that in a surprise round, only those that could act in the surprise round make initiative checks. A person that would cast nerveskitter cannot do so until he would make an initiative check (that is, after the surprise round is over). Even during the first round before their initiative comes around, someone that had cast nerveskitter still hasn't "acted" (despite casting the spell), and thus is still flat-footed. The text of nerveskitter (or the errata) would mention otherwise if that wasn't the case.

[eggynack]

No. According to the Rules Compendium page 18, if you’re flat-footed, you can’t make attacks of opportunity.

Unless you have combat reflexes. In that case, you're perfectly able to make AoO's.



Yes. Nerveskitter is a special exception to the rule that you can't cast a spell while flat-footed, but it otherwise does not change the fact that you still aren't reacting properly to the battle yet (until their first initiative comes around). In order: Recall that in a surprise round, only those that could act in the surprise round make initiative checks. A person that would cast nerveskitter cannot do so until he would make an initiative check (that is, after the surprise round is over). Even during the first round before their initiative comes around, someone that had cast nerveskitter still hasn't "acted" (despite casting the spell), and thus is still flat-footed. The text of nerveskitter (or the errata) would mention otherwise if that wasn't the case.

I'm going to need some actual rules to back this one up. You've acted by any definition I know of. An immediate action is an action, and that's what you've taken. I can't see anything in the spell's description that specifies that casting this spell doesn't count as acting, and I don't even think that makes sense. The spell has to affirmatively state that casting this spell isn't acting, not the reverse. The default is that an action is an action.

[Maginomicon]

Unless you have combat reflexes. In that case, you're perfectly able to make AoO's.True, but see below.

I'm going to need some actual rules to back this one up. You've acted by any definition I know of. An immediate action is an action, and that's what you've taken. I can't see anything in the spell's description that specifies that casting this spell doesn't count as acting, and I don't even think that makes sense. The spell has to affirmatively state that casting this spell isn't acting, not the reverse. The default is that an action is an action.
This may shed some light on the subject: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266134

[eggynack]

I suppose that's a logical argument on the count of nerveskitter, however it doesn't really effect the AoO argument. You're definitely taking an AoO after combat has started, because an enemy is attacking you. If the rules compendium's claim that taking your actual turn is the factor in flat footedness, AoO's do nothing to stop the condition. However, if the PHB's version is the correct one, an AoO has a shot at working. That's kinda where we were to begin with, and is why I was talking about the difference in rules text in the first place.

Edit: Actually, if the PHB version is correct, nerveskitter would work if there was a surprise round. Otherwise, you might count actions taken before initiative as taking place prior to combat. That's a thing of some kind, I think.

Double edit: I meant the DMG version. That's where condition rules are.

[Maginomicon]

I suppose that's a logical argument on the count of nerveskitter, however it doesn't really effect the AoO argument. You're definitely taking an AoO after combat has started, because an enemy is attacking you. If the rules compendium's claim that taking your actual turn is the factor in flat footedness, AoO's do nothing to stop the condition. However, if the PHB's version is the correct one, an AoO has a shot at working. That's kinda where we were to begin with, and is why I was talking about the difference in rules text in the first place.
Rules Compendium supersedes the PHB in all cases, as evidenced not just by its later publishing date but also the fact that the Rules Compendium has a "Revised Spells" section on page 25 dedicated to updating spells in core that needed to be updated at essentially the last minute (Rules Compendium was one of the very last books put out for 3.5).

Edit: It also supersedes the DMG in all cases for the same reason.

[eggynack]

Fair enough. That's about where we were in the argument anyways. I just noticed the clause in the rules compendium about superseding text with which it has discrepancies. Fancy. Still, I think the idea of a wizard pulling out a whip that can threaten, and using combat reflexes to remove flat footedness, in order to abrupt jaunt away from a charge, seems pretty cool. Ah well. Such is life.

[TuggyNE]

Rules Compendium supersedes the PHB in all cases, as evidenced not just by its later publishing date but also the fact that the Rules Compendium has a "Revised Spells" section on page 25 dedicated to updating spells in core that needed to be updated at essentially the last minute (Rules Compendium was one of the very last books put out for 3.5).

Edit: It also supersedes the DMG in all cases for the same reason.

Inb4 Curmudgeon saying that the RC doesn't have the authority to declare that. :smallsigh:

[eggynack]

Inb4 Curmudgeon saying that the RC doesn't have the authority to declare that. :smallsigh:
Heh. I think I remember him making that argument once. I think it had something to do with the book not being an assumed part of everyone's collection, or something. I don't remember the specifics It's an odd stance to take, though I definitely like it under these circumstances. :smallsmile:

[Chronos]

Personally, I agree with Curmudgeon on this one. If your gaming group was playing before Rules Compendium came out, they'd be using the core rules, and if this situation had come up, they'd rule according to what the core rules say. When Rules Compendium was published, at what time did the rule change? The moment it was typeset? When it first appeared in bookstores? When one player first bought it, or first read it? No, surely not until the group actually agreed to use it, which could be at any time at all, or never.

[Telonius]

Personally, I agree with Curmudgeon on this one. If your gaming group was playing before Rules Compendium came out, they'd be using the core rules, and if this situation had come up, they'd rule according to what the core rules say. When Rules Compendium was published, at what time did the rule change? The moment it was typeset? When it first appeared in bookstores? When one player first bought it, or first read it? No, surely not until the group actually agreed to use it, which could be at any time at all, or never.

So the players were flat-booked until Rules Compendium was opened...?

[Maginomicon]

Personally, I agree with Curmudgeon on this one. If your gaming group was playing before Rules Compendium came out, they'd be using the core rules, and if this situation had come up, they'd rule according to what the core rules say. When Rules Compendium was published, at what time did the rule change? The moment it was typeset? When it first appeared in bookstores? When one player first bought it, or first read it? No, surely not until the group actually agreed to use it, which could be at any time at all, or never.
Are you seriously trying to suggest that the fact that the publishing process is slow and arduous from the instant it was typeset to it being physically in players hands... is reason to negate the fact that it's the gorram Rules Compendium?!

Bounds of reason, people. It's the godsdamn Rules Compendium. It contains "The Rules". That is its whole ****in' purpose. It's entirely unreasonable to claim that improvement having a process implies the improvement inherently could be invalid. That's like saying the new version of the tax code is invalid because everyone already has a copy of the the old tax code.

[Chronos]

So, those rules are binding on players who don't have the book? Even though they have a set of books that explicitly says that they contain everything needed to play the game?

[Psyren]

Sorry, I should have been more specific, I meant when the combat has already started. Say the party is fighting a couple of golems. Sometime during the combat, Bob steps near a statue that's actually an alter selfed warforged (and say he failed his Spot check to notice the warforged in disguise). When the warforged attacks, is Bob flat-footed or does he lose his Dexterity bonus to AC?

Have you acted yet before Wally the Statue Warforged comes at you?

If no, you're flat-footed.
If yes, you react in time.

It could be because you're jumpy from the existing enemies, you've gotten the rush of adrenaline needed, what have you.


So, those rules are binding on players who don't have the book? Even though they have a set of books that explicitly says that they contain everything needed to play the game?

If the topic at hand is within its pages, RC specifically overrides everything that has come before. If you don't have it, what you're effectively doing is playing "d20 game whose rules are the best I can come up with given the books at hand," rather than "Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 by Wizards of the Coast."

It's like playing Magic the Gathering without WotC's rules changes because you had no internet connection to read them. You're free to do so, but you're no longer playing Magic the Gathering, you're only playing a card game with similar rules mixed with some of your houserules. In both cases, the real thing is ultimately their game, not yours.

[KillianHawkeye]

Are you seriously trying to suggest that the fact that the publishing process is slow and arduous from the instant it was typeset to it being physically in players hands... is reason to negate the fact that it's the gorram Rules Compendium?!

Bounds of reason, people. It's the godsdamn Rules Compendium. It contains "The Rules". That is its whole ****in' purpose. It's entirely unreasonable to claim that improvement having a process implies the improvement inherently could be invalid. That's like saying the new version of the tax code is invalid because everyone already has a copy of the the old tax code.

Are you kidding?

No, what he's saying is that not everybody uses every book (even if they have that book available). Like it or not, Rules Compendium is a rules supplement. That means that it's something that you might get in order to enhance your gameplaying experience. It is in no way shape or form required for everyone to have and/or use it.

Your tax code analogy is not correct, because people can have different DMs and can pick and choose which rules to apply to their games, but they only have one government who defines what the rules of taxation are for its citizens. Within a single D&D group, I'd expect the use of any book (including Rules Compendium) to be applied consistently, just as I'd expect the tax code to be applied consistently within a given nation.

Considering the lateness of the Rules Compendium's publication date, I imagine a lot of people may have given up on buying additional supplements. It's definitely NOT guaranteed that every game group has access to this book.

[Maginomicon]

So, those rules are binding on players who don't have the book? Even though they have a set of books that explicitly says that they contain everything needed to play the game?
Having what's needed "to play" doesn't necessarily mean having what's needed to play it the way it was literally written/intended. Otherwise, D&D help forums wouldn't exist. Places like this quote the rules when it's necessary (and when also we're at our books and feel like it) and just because you don't have the book that such a quote references doesn't mean it's not a legitimate ruling.

[TuggyNE]

Personally, I agree with Curmudgeon on this one. If your gaming group was playing before Rules Compendium came out, they'd be using the core rules, and if this situation had come up, they'd rule according to what the core rules say. When Rules Compendium was published, at what time did the rule change? The moment it was typeset? When it first appeared in bookstores? When one player first bought it, or first read it? No, surely not until the group actually agreed to use it, which could be at any time at all, or never.

That's actually not exactly his argument, which is based primarily around the letter of errata, specifically primary sources; since the PHB/DMG respectively are by definition primary sources for essentially every rule they cover, the RC can't (legally) override them, because it was published later and isn't in the list of core.

Of course, since this obviates the purpose of the RC entirely without houserules, it's a somewhat annoying position. But there you have it.

[Diarmuid]

Back on topic:



Flat-Footed

At the start of a battle, before you have had a chance to act (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order), you are flat-footed. You can’t use your Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) while flat-footed. Barbarians and rogues have the uncanny dodge extraordinary ability, which allows them to avoid losing their Dexterity bonus to AC due to being flat-footed.

A flat-footed character can’t make attacks of opportunity.
Inaction

Even if you can’t take actions, you retain your initiative score for the duration of the encounter.


Nerveskitter and/or Combat Reflexes will not remove the Flat-Footed condition. The rules define "before you act" as "specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order".

This seems pretty black and white to me.

[Renegade Paladin]

Have you acted yet before Wally the Statue Warforged comes at you?

If no, you're flat-footed.
If yes, you react in time.

It could be because you're jumpy from the existing enemies, you've gotten the rush of adrenaline needed, what have you.
Nope. The first part of what you said is true - if you haven't acted, you're flat footed, by definition. However, the second part is not - just because you're not flat footed doesn't mean you react in time. Being flat footed makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC, but losing your Dexterity bonus to AC does not make you flat footed and can happen in a lot more ways than being flat footed. If the character is unable to react to the attack, he loses his Dexterity bonus to AC, flat footed or not. The rules are quite clear on that.
You apply your character’s Dexterity modifier to:
...
Armor Class (AC), provided that the character can react to the attack.
If you are unaware of an incoming attack, you can't react to it. This is why Dexterity is lost against invisible opponents, and it is also lost against opponents that you can't detect for other reasons - such as a successful Hide roll or being successfully disguised as a statue. I'd allow the character a Spot check to notice as the attack starts, but if he doesn't notice, he'd better hope that warforged isn't a rogue.

[Psyren]

Nope.

It was shorthand actually :smalltongue: which I should have known better than to bring into a thread like this.

*Ahem* [nasally voice] "According to paragraph A subsection 3B on page..."

[Renegade Paladin]

It was shorthand actually :smalltongue: which I should have known better than to bring into a thread like this.

*Ahem* [nasally voice] "According to paragraph A subsection 3B on page..."
If your shorthand says exactly the wrong thing, it isn't good shorthand. :smalltongue: