Back Alley Brawler feat

[Shadow Revenge]

I was considering the Back Alley Brawler feat from Mongoose's The Quintessential Rogue:


Prerequisite: BAB+2 or higher
Benefit: Your unarmed attacks deal normal, rather than subdual, damage. In addition, you can feint with your weapon then deliver a quick kick to a sensitive area or a similar dirty shot. If you make no other attacks you can also, as a full attack action, make a Bluff check opposed by your opponent's Sense Motive skill. If you succeed, you may deliver a single unarmed attack against him using your best BAB that deals double normal damage. When Grappling, you tear at your opponent's ears, bite his fingers, or pull his hair, dealing double normal damage.

has anyone used this feat? how does it work out? & also, is such normal dmg unarmed attacks for a non-monk class SA-able? Or at least is finesse applicable & thus Dex to hit would apply?

[TheIronGolem]

is such normal dmg unarmed attacks for a non-monk class SA-able? Or at least is finesse applicable & thus Dex to hit would apply?
Seems pretty plain to me that both would be true. Sneak Attack wouldn't normally apply to unarmed strikes since they do nonlethal damage by default, but if they can do lethal then there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to benefit from Sneak Attack. And unarmed strikes are always finessible.

Still, this seems like a pretty underpowered feat to me, despite the cool flavor. You're not getting anything out of this that you wouldn't already get from Improved Feint, which is more versatile (except for the grappling damage, but even that's too situational to be worthwhile unless your build is focused on grappling). Even the flavor can be replicated by Improved Feint.

Come to think of it, this is definitely worse than Improved Feint as written, because it's not actually granting you a feint and thus doesn't deny the target his DEX bonus, meaning it can't grant Sneak Attacks. So it's badly written as well as underpowered.

[Shadow Revenge]

Seems pretty plain to me that both would be true. Sneak Attack wouldn't normally apply to unarmed strikes since they do nonlethal damage by default, but if they can do lethal then there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to benefit from Sneak Attack. And unarmed strikes are always finessible.

Still, this seems like a pretty underpowered feat to me, despite the cool flavor. You're not getting anything out of this that you wouldn't already get from Improved Feint, which is more versatile (except for the grappling damage, but even that's too situational to be worthwhile unless your build is focused on grappling). Even the flavor can be replicated by Improved Feint.

Come to think of it, this is definitely worse than Improved Feint as written, because it's not actually granting you a feint and thus doesn't deny the target his DEX bonus, meaning it can't grant Sneak Attacks. So it's badly written as well as underpowered.

but say you use the first bit where it says "you can feint with your weapon (would have to be a weapon, or could it be your lethal hands now?) then deliver a quick kick to a sensitive area or a similar dirty shot." Would that "quick kick" be immediate, rather than waiting for the next round? Because if you went with Groin or Knee shots according to TORN ASSUNDER, that would basically do the following:

Groin Shot effect- Dazed for 1rd & suffers -2 circumstance penalty to all attack & Reflex save rolls for 1d6rds (including Dazed rd).Groin severely bruised.

Knee shot effect - movement reduced by 1/2. -8 penalty to Balance, climb, Jump, Move Silently & Tumble skill checks, loses Dex bonus to AC (if any). Kneecap smashed.

So, if that's the case, there may be some chance to get a sneak in there with three or more attacks per round, or at the very least the next round.

Does Improved Feint make the SA available the round it's used, for a multi-attack per round character? I don't remember.

[TheIronGolem]

but say you use the first bit where it says "you can feint with your weapon
That's flavor text, which serves as good evidence that the intent is to grant a feint. But the actual crunch text just states that 1) you make a Bluff check opposed by a Sense Motive check, 2) if the check is successful you get a free unarmed attack, and 3) this is a full-round action. So essentially this feat, as written, gives you a new use of Sense Motive that goes "as a full-round action, make an opposed check, and if it works you get a free unarmed attack". This is distinct from the feint, which is "as a standard action, make an opposed check, and if it works your target is denied DEX against your next attack".

(would have to be a weapon, or could it be your lethal hands now?)
An unarmed strike generally counts as a weapon for most purposes, so yes, by RAW you should be able to use this feat completely unarmed.

then deliver a quick kick to a sensitive area or a similar dirty shot." Would that "quick kick" be immediate, rather than waiting for the next round? Because if you went with Groin or Knee shots according to TORN ASSUNDER, that would basically do the following:
You're mistaking flavor text for crunch again. The "quick kick to a sensitive area" thing is just an example describing the general concept the feat is intended to support. Neither RAW nor RAI suggest the feat is intended to specifically cause any particular type of "called shot" to be made. It's just a plain old unarmed attack (double damage notwithstanding). Calling the attack a groin kick or a rabbit-punch or whatever is merely how you might describe your character's action when you use the feat. The doubled damage is what that fluff represents.


So, if that's the case, there may be some chance to get a sneak in there with three or more attacks per round
No. As I mentioned, it's not a "real" feint, so it doesn't deny the target his DEX bonus, and therefore won't enable a sneak attack.

Also, it's a full-round action, so no attacks beyond the first unless you're using the 3.0 version of haste or something similar. If you have Cleave, you could probably use that (assuming the first attack dropped your opponent), but the feat still wouldn't enable a SA the secondary target.

or at the very least the next round.
Afraid not, since the feat doesn't deny the target their DEX bonus.


Does Improved Feint make the SA available the round it's used, for a multi-attack per round character? I don't remember.
Yes and no.

Feinting is normally a standard action, so you wouldn't be able to feint and attack in the same round (again, barring 3.0 haste or similar).

Improved Feint makes feinting a move action, so you could feint and then use your standard action to attack. But unless you have a way to make more than one attack using a standard action (they probably exist but I can't think of any off the top of my head), you're limited to the one attack. Furthermore, even if you can make multiple attacks following the feint, only the first one would enable a SA, because a successful feint only denies the target their DEX bonus against your next attack (not all attacks you make for the rest of the round).

I'm assuming that you're playing 3.0/3.5, but if Pathfinder material is allowed then you might want to consider using its feint feat tree. Greater Feint (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/greater-feint-combat---final) denies the target their DEX bonus until the start of your next turn, which means that if you do have a way to perform multiple attacks following a feint then you'd be able to SA with all of them (also, your allies would benefit from the feint too).

But even without Pathfinder, Improved Feint will do a better job of supporting a "dirty fighting" concept than Back Alley Brawler, even if your DM can be persuaded to go by RAI instead of RAW.

Finally, be advised that if you're not building specifically for it, feinting is usually a poor use of action economy for most builds even with Improved Feint. To really make it viable, you need a way to feint as a free or swift action, like the Invisible Blade PrC.

[Glimbur]

Sneak Attack wouldn't normally apply to unarmed strikes since they do nonlethal damage by default, but if they can do lethal then there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to benefit from Sneak Attack.

The rest of this seems to have been pretty well answered, but I'd like to offer a small correction here. You can deal non-lethal damage with a sneak attack, as long as the weapon you use normally deals nonlethal. As the ability description says,

With a sap (blackjack) or an unarmed strike, a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage. She cannot use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage in a sneak attack, not even with the usual -4 penalty.

[TheIronGolem]

Yes, good point. I was misremembering "can't do lethal sneak attacks with nonlethal weapon" as "can't sneak attack at all with nonlethal weapon".

[Shadow Revenge]

thanks for the help.