Improved Feint?

[Aaden]

Is this feat any good? If not, why?

[Angelus_dead]

Is this feat any good? If not, why?

The overall answer why it isn't good is because in normal situations, the rogue will already be getting sneak attacks on nearly every hit anyhow, so he doesn't need to spend two feats and 19 skillpoints to get more.

Improved Feint gives you a chance to bluff, which gives you a chance for a sneak attack. If the monster was aggroed onto any other player, you already had a chance for sneak anyway.

So really, Imp Feint would only be theoretically useful for a rogue who wants to fight monsters without the help of other characters doing damage. And even in that case it's not very helpful, because it only works for 1 sneak attack at a time. Then you've got to wait for the cooldown to expire before you can use it again. When you add up the time spent using the feat and the amount of feat slots you spent compared to the benefit, it's not defensible.

[Lithic]

As A-D says, it sucks. Why? Cause.

You'd be better off with "Alertness"

[Accelerando]

The overall answer why it isn't good is because in normal situations, the rogue will already be getting sneak attacks on nearly every hit anyhow, so he doesn't need to spend two feats and 19 skillpoints to get more.

Improved Feint gives you a chance to bluff, which gives you a chance for a sneak attack. If the monster was aggroed onto any other player, you already had a chance for sneak anyway.

So really, Imp Feint would only be theoretically useful for a rogue who wants to fight monsters without the help of other characters doing damage. And even in that case it's not very helpful, because it only works for 1 sneak attack at a time. Then you've got to wait for the cooldown to expire before you can use it again. When you add up the time spent using the feat and the amount of feat slots you spent compared to the benefit, it's not defensible.

Actually my tempest rogue (str based) runs across very few melees who can hold aggro when he is getting sneak attacks. I have to pretty much spam bluff and diplomacy constantly to keep myself out of aggro even with subtle backstabbing. When he reaches 15 imp feint will be added into his repertoire.

Do you need this feat OP? Ask yourself these questions.
1. What is your str mod? (Dex based rogues i.e 10 or lower str mod do not need this feat)
2. How many levels of rogue do you have? [Low rogue level multiclass (under 7 levels of Rogue) do not need this feat]
3. Do you find yourself drawing aggro frequently and not being able to shake it? (If you can't shake it with bluff you probably can't with imp feint, you do not need this feat)
4. Are you TWF or sword and board? (Sword and board rogues do not need this feat)
5. Do you prefer stat damage or DPS? (Stat damaging rogues do not need this feat)

Best of luck on your decision!

[llevenbaxx]

Imp Feint may have been a useful feat to take if they didnt make diplomacy so good. For the cost of IF, taking diplo instead is a no brainer. That said, I made my one rogue with enough AC to make Combat Exp useful, so its was really just one feat to stick with the characters original concept. I currently use both diplo, IF & bluff.

This is a feat that really needs attention that it will never likily see(lazy Devs). They gave diplomacy, which is supposed to take some time to use(though its nothing like PnP I know), an instant use/affect. Basically they made diplomacy do everything IF does but with no feats needed, they need to give it something to make it worth the cost.

[CSFurious]

this feat has 2 main problems

first, you need to be very close to make it work

second, the AOE bluff does not last long enough

as a previous poster stated, diplomacy is great

i would just invest in faster sneaking 1 &/or 2, have 30 to 40 hide/move silenty, be hasted, put on fearsome armor & shadow the main melee, you will do just fine & will probably end up with a lot of kills

anyway, i took a rogue to level 14 with this feat & i know that as currently implemented in-game it is not good

[Coldin]

IF is....alright. It's better than Bluff because of it's shorter animation, shorter cooldown, and AOE effect. It's not that great though, because like other posters have stated, most of the time you're getting sneak attacks anyway. It's a useful feat choice though if you frequently enjoy soloing and have taken CE already. It's usefulness is also kinda mitigated by weapon effects like Deception and the new Radiance II on greensteel items.

You're probably better off taking something like Dodge or Luck of the Heroes, and just maxing out diplomacy.

[krud]

As others said, IF for a pure rogue is probably not worth it. If you have some fighter levels and extra feats to spare it can be nice. I use it a lot on my ftr/rog in combination with cleave, but I don't mind if I get some aggro in return. Not sure i'd take it if he was a pure rogue. I'd stick with diplomacy instead.

[Angelus_dead]

Actually my tempest rogue (str based) runs across very few melees who can hold aggro when he is getting sneak attacks. I have to pretty much spam bluff and diplomacy constantly to keep myself out of aggro even with subtle backstabbing. When he reaches 15 imp feint will be added into his repertoire.

Sounds like you're playing with weak fighters, or you forgot to take Subtle Backstabber. Maybe because you have many ranger levels you weren't able to qualify for the same Subtle Backstabber level a pure rogue would have. Well, you can get it later.

Regardless- if you already use diplomacy to remove aggro, Improved Feint won't help. You've already got the problem solved, so you can't solve it twice.

Note that Bluff is NOT helpful to get sneak attacks. The time it takes to bluff stops you from attacking for 2-3 swings, and adding sneak damage to one hit isn't worth the attacks you gave up.

[Kistilan]

Note that Bluff is NOT helpful to get sneak attacks. The time it takes to bluff stops you from attacking for 2-3 swings, and adding sneak damage to one hit isn't worth the attacks you gave up.

There's an exception to that. Bluff, Whirlwind/Cleave. It works well in a grouping of 2+ monsters ie average damage defeated with sneak attack damage. My main does this a lot.

[Accelerando]

Sounds like you're playing with weak fighters, or you forgot to take Subtle Backstabber. Maybe because you have many ranger levels you weren't able to qualify for the same Subtle Backstabber level a pure rogue would have. Well, you can get it later.

Regardless- if you already use diplomacy to remove aggro, Improved Feint won't help. You've already got the problem solved, so you can't solve it twice.

Note that Bluff is NOT helpful to get sneak attacks. The time it takes to bluff stops you from attacking for 2-3 swings, and adding sneak damage to one hit isn't worth the attacks you gave up.

Actually I have to alternate because I loose aggro and regain it quickly, so yes you can solve the problem twice. Additionally, I do have subtle backstabbing however only tier 2.

Additionally with tempest i generally get about 2-3 backstabs with bluff before the mob regains aggro, so yes it is helpful.

No I do not play with weak fighters, unless all the fighters on my server are weak.

[krud]

There's an exception to that. Bluff, Whirlwind/Cleave. It works well in a grouping of 2+ monsters ie average damage defeated with sneak attack damage. My main does this a lot.

make sure you keep the distinction between Improved feint and bluff. Bluff (the skill) sux. Improved feint the feat (DC based off bluff skill) is better, and probably what you meant.

[rodgyramjet]

Just use sirocco and blind them, then sneak attack em. Only feat you need then is maybe Oversized 2wf so you can offhand it.

Suzuki 16th lv WF ROGUE

[Aspenor]

I dunno, I have IF, and I find it fairly useful. Then again, I guess it's all in how you play. I plan on using it in tandem with the Assassin Death Attack after mod 7. My rogue has a pretty nasty INT score.