Can I make the Whip work ?

[joshjurg]

Hi - I am looking for a little insight on the whip. I have read the description on the SRD and done a bit of research looking at the current FAQ and errata. I still have a few questions whose answers haven't availed themselves yet.

Whip

A whip deals nonlethal damage. It deals no damage to any creature with an armor bonus of +1 or higher or a natural armor bonus of +3 or higher. The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don’t threaten the area into which you can make an attack. In addition, unlike most other weapons with reach, you can use it against foes anywhere within your reach (including adjacent foes).

Using a whip provokes an attack of opportunity, just as if you had used a ranged weapon.

You can make trip attacks with a whip. If you are tripped during your own trip attempt, you can drop the whip to avoid being tripped.

When using a whip, you get a +2 bonus on opposed attack rolls made to disarm an opponent (including the roll to keep from being disarmed if the attack fails).

You can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with a whip sized for you, even though it isn’t a light weapon for you.


1) Can a sneak attack do damage to a creature that a whip could normally not harm ? The srd says in the case the whip deals no damage - and it looks like the SA is extra damage, not a new damage source in itself. I would like to know for certain.

2) does this answer change when using the whip at -4 to deal lethal damage ?

3) What happens if you have a +1 flaming whip - will the fire damage still apply if you could not normally damage the creature ? *EDIT* and if it did, would that damage open up the door for sneak attacks ?

4) Or, in an extreme case - if you wielded a whip while under the influence of the wraithstrike spell ? Could you deal damage to things normally immune to you ?

Thanks in advance for untangling this mess.

 

[s-dub]

1. Since you are unable to lethally damage an opponent effectively with a whip, I'd rule that you couldn't sneak attack with one, since the sneak attack text doesn't mention it.

"With a sap (blackjack) or an unarmed strike, a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage".

But, the All about Sneak Attacks, part 1, seems to indicate though that there's no restrictions on nonlethal weapons:

"The attacker must use a weapon optimally to make a sneak attack. If the attacker takes the -4 penalty to deal nonlethal damage, no sneak attack is possible. (A weapon that normally deals nonlethal damage, such as a sap, can be used in a sneak attack; however, you deal nonlethal damage if you do so.)"

Which incidentally may answer two as well, since taking a -4 to deal lethal damage with a non-lethal weapon seems less than optimal (I can't find any direct rules to back this up)

3. I'd rule that thte flaming portion would damage even if the whip didn't. This seems consistent with how I've seen this adjudicated with DR.

4. Yes, the way I'm reading this would allow you to make nonlethal attacks at 0 penalty to creatures with armor/natural armor (or a mage with mage armor or bracers of armor) and lethal damage as a -4. I still wouldn't let sneak attack work.

(Also, I'd ban wraithstrike), it's just like the "Brilliant Blade" spell but much lower level (yes I know it works for only 1 round, but that's all you need if you're doing it right )

 

[joshjurg]

I found this from the FAQ :

You can make a sneak attack when you use a weapon that
normally deals nonlethal damage to deal lethal damage. The
penalty for doing so is –4, but in this case, it represents the
difficulty you have finding and hitting a vulnerable area (also
see page 146 in the Player’s Handbook). This extra exactness
in your attack doesn’t interfere with sneak attacks.

so would that be possible to damage a normally non-damageable critter ? I could possibly envision snapping a platemail-bound knight right in an unguarded area - neck, eyeslit, etc..But our playgroup maintains that all logic goes out the window with 3.5. So I would like to see if there is any literature to back this up.

 

[Hypersmurf]

3) What happens if you have a +1 flaming whip - will the fire damage still apply if you could not normally damage the creature ?

Heh.

And will it be lethal or non-lethal?

-Hyp.

 

[joshjurg]

Dangit, HS !
You're supposed to be the one to clarify & answer questions, not make 'em even harder !
(it would make sense for the fire damage to be lethal)

All of this makes me want to make a whip fighter in 4th. I hope it's a lot simpler then.

 

[Hypersmurf]

You're supposed to be the one to clarify & answer questions, not make 'em even harder !

This one's come up before.

-Hyp.

 

[frankthedm]

1) No.

2) No.

3) No.

4) Not by the rules as they read though a bit of common sence would allow for it.

RAW, just about nothing can get around "It deals no damage to any creature with an armor bonus of +1 or higher or a natural armor bonus of +3 or higher." It is not reduced to zero as by DR, the damage was never dealt in the first place.



Easiest wat to make the whip work is a quick houserule of "A non magical whip deals nonlethal damage. It deals no damage to any creature with an armor bonus of +1 or higher or a natural armor bonus of +3 or higher unless the whip has at least a +1 enhancement. "

 

[joshjurg]

Well, I read that old thread and boy, whatta can of worms.

I just chalk it all up to sloppy game design. I am surprised that they haven't addressed this - or they just can't come to a decision on it.

Thanks for all of your help so far. Looks like I will just have to scrap the idea of a whip wielder.

 

[boolean]

If you're trying to do cool stuff, like pull an enemy's feet out from underneath him, or pull a sword out of his hand before he gets anywhere near you, a whip is a fine weapon.

If you're trying to simply kill somebody, something sharp, pointy, hard, and/or heavy is a much better choice.

 

[Legildur]

I just chalk it all up to sloppy game design. I am surprised that they haven't addressed this - or they just can't come to a decision on it.

Maybe that's part of the reason why they are introducing 4e - so they can stop plastering over the cracks