When reading the rules from PH3.5 about feints, it states that a feint is a standard action, or with the feat "improved feint" it can be a movement action.
So unlike with others special attacks that can replace one attack in a full round attack, a feint cannot replace a single attack roll. One who has no particular feat dedicated to improving feint must use the full round to make a movement action (if useful) and a feint, then wait for the next round to benefit from the feint.
But during that time, the enemy might counterattack or move, so I wonder how my feint can be effective until the next round. The rule would be much more understandable if a feint was a replacement of any attack roll, so that for example someone fighting with two weapon could make a feint with its off-hand, then immediately attack with its main-hand, or a warrior with several attacks per round could make a feint on first attack, then take benefit from it on the following attack don't you feel?
And in case you know of different rules from any 3.0/3.5 rulebook, please give the book name, so that I can show it to my MD.
Thanks
Best Answer
“Why” is a question we cannot answer
The authors very rarely give us any insight, commentary, or evidence for the reasoning that went into individual rules. As far as I am aware, there is none for this particular rule. That makes it an impossible question to answer.
However, I want to address some other points:
It doesn’t make sense: the rules often don’t
There are tons and tons of rules that don’t make sense in 3.x. Some of them are simply abstractions to ease play, some of them are corner-cases the desigerns probably didn’t consider, and some, like this one, just.... don’t make a lot of sense
It doesn’t seem fair: things rarely are
Yes, Feint is basically a complete waste of time because of the way the rules work. The only person who cares enough about the flat-footed status to consider the move is the rogue, and the rogue relies on dual wielding and full-attacks so he can apply Sneak Attack as many times per round as possible, so he’s not going to use Feint (except with the invisible blade prestige class; see Tridus’s answer). Meanwhile, Feinting would be an appropriate and useful move for the rogue, who could use to have it just a little easier to apply Sneak Attack.
All true. The rules don’t care. There are much greater balance problems than these in the rules.
Solution: Houseruling!
Your suggestion that Feinting replace a single attack, rather than being a standard or move action, is a pretty good one. I suggest that, even though you do it first, it replace your attack with the lowest attack bonus (since you won’t be using it anyway as a Feint is a Bluff check). Without Improved Feint, I suggest, have it only apply to the next attack, but allow Improved Feint to allow it to apply to the rest of your attacks that turn.