Circle kick

[Crothian]

So what if it requires a full-round action.

This is from the official S&F FAQ:

Q.:How does the Circle Kick feat work for a monk or other character with multiple attacks? Or for a monk who uses a flurry of blows? Does each successful unarmed attack roll allow a second attack against a different opponent?

A.: A character using Circle Kick makes one attack. If this single attack hits, the character makes a second attack at the same attack bonus as the first.

I agree with you the feat doesn't make sense, they screwed it up and I'm in favor of changing it. However, as it is written and as it has been clarified by the Sage and the FAQ that is how it works.

 

[Pax]

As clarified, it's a nonfeat. It's a NEGATIVE feat -- more penalty than benefit. By a WIDE margin.

A better "power ocntrol" measure is to simply limit it to once per round.

Then make a GREATER Circle Kick, which can be used as often per round as you like (with only normally-gained attacks generating extras, ofc).

Rather like Cleave and Great Cleave.

...

I have to say, this "clarification" is another example of The Sage speaking out of his nether orifice without considering what the FEat SAYS, and what it is/was INTENDED to do.

...

IOW ... more 2E-holdover "oh my god players will LIKE that! quick, kill it! kill it!!" attitude.

 

[Crothian]

IOW ... more 2E-holdover "oh my god players will LIKE that! quick, kill it! kill it!!" attitude.

I think if that were the case we'd have seen the actually powerful things in that book dismantled. THis was just a terrible written feat, and bad rules design.

 

[Tellerve]

Ok, so it appears that when I stated earlier about a circle kick and a greater circle kick is the best way to view it. Otherwise, Pax is correct, it would be a feat no one in their right mind would ever get as it would be a complete hindrance rather than a benefit.

I do think though that although having circle kick give one additional attack is much better if not fair a Greater circle kick would be way too much (if you assumed that for each attack you had a chance for another one)

Tellerve

 

[Crothian]

I house ruled it to work once a round, usible with a single attack or multiple attacks. We even used it with flurry of blows and it was not to bad. It's a neat idea for a feat, but it really needs to house ruled to become worthwhile.

 

[Plane Sailing]

A friend of mine who uses a kicking martial art told me that circle kicks (in his art) are used mostly to knock someones defenses out of the way before following up.

Since (as already noted) the existing circle kick was a feat which penalised higher level monks (!) I modified it as such - if your first attack against a target in a round hits, your penalty for all subsequent attacks against that target in that round are lessened by 2 (you could equally describe it as getting +2 on all subsequent attacks on that target, that round).

This has worked quite nicely for us so far.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

I'm sure I must be missing something simple, but when I read Circle Kick, it seems fairly clear, and relatively useful.

Circle Kick is like an Unarmed Great Cleave, save for two points:

1. Disadvantage: Unlike Great Cleave, Circle Kick demands a full-attack action. So while a fighter could Cleave eight kobolds and still move away, the monk can Circle Kick the same eight kobolds, but is stuck where he started.

2. Advantage: Unlike Great Cleave, Circle Kick does not require that you drop each opponent, only that you successfully hit with each successive attack. This means that Circle Kick will be much more useful at higher levels, where hitting (with your highest attack bonus) is pretty simple, but actually dropping eight successive opponents is highly unlikely.

What am I missing...?

[edit] vs. five opponents, a 20th-level monk can use a full-attack action of +15/+12/+9/+6/+3 or, if he's confident that +15 is enough to hit, +15/+15/+15/+15/+15. Not too shabby, IMO. [/edit]

 

[Hypersmurf]

Circle Kick is like an Unarmed Great Cleave...

What am I missing...?

You make a single unarmed attack. If this attack hits, you can make a single unarmed attack against another opponent.

It goes on to refer to the second attack.

There's nothing in the feat to imply, suggest, or allow a third attack, whether or not the second single attack hits.

-Hyp.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

It has value up until the point that you get iterative attacks (especially a third iterative attack).

A 4th level Monk would ordinarily get one attack at a +3 bonus. With Circle kick, he'd get +3/+3 or +1/+1 using flurry of blows.

At 9th level, you could have +9/+6, +7/+7/+4, or +9/+9 with Circle Kick. There are times when you might choose to use the +9/+9 rather than the other two.

It seems to me to be more useful at lower levels, much like weapon focus and other similar feats

 

[Pax]

It has value up until the point that you get iterative attacks (especially a third iterative attack).

Monks essentially get iterative attacks (through Flurry of Blows) from first level.

A 4th level Monk would ordinarily get one attack at a +3 bonus. With Circle kick, he'd get +3/+3 or +1/+1 using flurry of blows.

No 4th level monk will HAVE this feat. It requires a BAB of +3, which the Monk won't have UNTIL 4th level. Ergo, the Monk will have to pick it uo at 6th level, at which time he has +4/+1 BAB(Unarmed). With Flurry, that becomes +2/+2/-1.

At 9th level, you could have +9/+6, +7/+7/+4, or +9/+9 with Circle Kick. There are times when you might choose to use the +9/+9 rather than the other two.

Not IMO -- at least, not except in very rare circumstances. Feats should be more useful than that.

It seems to me to be more useful at lower levels, much like weapon focus and other similar feats

Except, unlike weapon focus, Circle Kick has a BAB prerequisite -- one that's not easy to meet. One that, obviously, was intended for MONKS to take ...

... at 6th level, when their Unarmed BAB is already +4/+1.