Cleave Whirlwind Combo

[Gaiden]

Simple Fix - you may only cleave into a creature that is the closest to you and the creature that you dropped. If there a number of creatures equidistant beteween you and the creature you dropped, the character whirling and cleaving can choose.

It is not fair for the DM to rule that whirlwind attack can only be made in a clockwise or counter clock wise direction. First, it necessarily weakens the feat. Second, it would not make sense that the attack is at the highest BAB for every creature. The last of the eight bugbears will certainly be able to see it coming. Whirlwind attack is not the equivalent of Kenshin's succession technique. It merely gives one attack at the highest BAB vs. every opponent within 5'.

Further, if the DM were to rule the clock rule it would make more sense for it to effect cleave, then whirlwind attack. SImply rule that before every attack the character has to designate which direction he will go if he drops the opponent he is currently attacking. (This has its own problems, but is a better fix than the original)

 

[The Furious Puffin]

Re: Re: Don't Mind in the least

To address you issues.

B) Minions combo. I have never run bugbears in my game, but I can assure you by the time the party fighter has amassed the 8 feats need for this combo he will be unable to drop the the elite guard of the big boss they are facing in one hit as he would be level 6. Of course he could whirlwind twice or more times, and he would indeed get a lot of cleaves on the boss. But first he would have to spend at least two rounds surronded. This is likely to get him killed.

If he surivives that he is welcome to the attacks, and deserves them for having the luck to survive that many grapple attempts. But I rarely run that sort of game (my player detest it) so it has not become an issue.

15 attacks. Yeah nice if you can get it. However the situation is so *dire* for the player, or the enermies are so weak that I am not concerned. See - Whirlwind is a full round action. That means that to get these 15 attacks he has muscled in surviving AoOs, then been surronded for a round and not torn to peices or grappled (Which is what the bugbears would do). Harm delivered by a priest punching you is instant death. Harm wins on the DM worry stakes.

The whirldwind combo is hard to set up, and the reason why I metioned the blinking mage thief. He can A) blink himself and run straight in and use haste to not have to wait for ages while getting sneak attack.

A) The Bat thing. A seriously good question. I have no actual idea what I would do in that situation. It's never come up, and hopefully never would. I would most likely rule 0 that, like I would rules 0 Mr. Ginsu, the paladin shield smack or indeed anything else that comes off the smackdown pages ;-). Or have the bats not stand withing 5 feet on the fighter. (if the cavern holds a dragon, bats certainly will not fly need the fighter.)

Of course remember whirldwind a full round action. The way the example you describe will unfold is -

The fighter runs in an asks about bats.

Dm: Dunno 'bout 50, and one big dragon.

Fighter: I whirlwind agaist the bats getting a million cleave attacks on the dragon

Dm: *blinks* You can't - full round action, and you attract AoOs from the dragon, which deals vast amounts of damage

Fighter: Smeg!

Dm: *Rolls to hit for the dragon.* The dragon then bites you with a harm spell precast. You die, no save.

Fighter: Awwwwwww

But more seriously, my solution is to make sure it never happens. Yeah whirldwind is stupid with the snails or other swarms of critters (Bats for example). I would dispose of that option running with Caliban on the subject. Beyond that I don't really care for the reason outlined above.

It is a stonklingly powerful attack, but considering the huge risks invovled the player is welcome to it.

 

[Ace]

I have never had problems with the combo.

Now that I am running again I am more worried about my monsters dying in droves to low powered characters.

I mean I try to give them a challenge but even with all of my deviousness my players shred everything I thow at them, even stuff 2 challenge ratings higher.

Sigh..... And I try so hard to be a killer DM

 

[Gaiden]

Ace - take a lesson from my DM - read Ravenloft by Solid snake in the bit's n peices>>Story hour thread. Every single battle is life or death and we survive so long as he can continue his storyline.

Believe me a DM who wants to can really screw over the party.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Re: Re: Re: Don't Mind in the least

Of course remember whirldwind a full round action. The way the example you describe will unfold is -

The fighter runs in an asks about bats.

Dm: Dunno 'bout 50, and one big dragon.

Fighter: I whirlwind agaist the bats getting a million cleave attacks on the dragon

Dm: *blinks* You can't - full round action, and you attract AoOs from the dragon, which deals vast amounts of damage

Uh... no.

Not all full-round actions draw an AoO.

Especially not full attack actions.

And even if it did, it would only be one, not "AoOs from the dragon".

But check Table 8-1 (PHB p122). A full attack draws no AoO. A melee attack draws no AoO.

Check Whirlwind Attack, PHB p86. No mention of provoking an AoO.

So Whirlwind Attack uses a Full Attack Action to make multiple Melee Attacks. WWA doesn't draw an AoO simply for being a WWA, or the feat would say so. A FAA doesn't draw an AoO, 'cos Table 8-1 says so. And a melee attack doesn't draw an AoO, 'cos Table 8-1 says so, and because that would be a really, really silly idea.

So there's no support in the rules at all for WWA drawing an AoO.

Unless, of course, you used your one melee attack against each opponent to attempt a disarm or sunder. Which would be very, very cool, but also very, very risky.

-Hyp.

 

[Ace]

Ace - take a lesson from my DM - read Ravenloft by Solid snake in the bit's n peices>>Story hour thread. Every single battle is life or death and we survive so long as he can continue his storyline.

Believe me a DM who wants to can really screw over the party.

Thanks. I just try to be fair and balanced. Honestly I don't think I will change anything.
The players keep asking for more and I am having a good time too.
Now that the group hit 3rd level I can send in the bigger stuff heheheheh

 

[KarinsDad]

Is that how you run it in your campaign or has it not come up yet?

It hasn't come up yet.

We have an 8 Fighter, a 7/1 Fighter/Cleric and a 4/3/1 Fighter/Cleric/Ranger in our group, but two out of three want to be bow specialists, not melee specialists. The melee Fighter (F/C 7/1) does have Cleave, but he just switched over to Cleric, so I doubt he will go that way either.

This is our second major campaign. The first never got past 6th level. So, we have yet to see the high levels where this type of combination is possible.

I just think the purpose of Whirlwind is to spin around and getting a single attack on each opponent. Throwing Great Cleave into the mix should not allow a boatload of full to hit attacks against a single opponent, merely because there is no feat that does that anyway.

 

[Geoff Watson]

I have a House Rule that a character can only make one bonus attack from Cleave/Great Cleave against any particular opponent per round.

Geoff.

 

[Crothian]

I have a House Rule that a character can only make one bonus attack from Cleave/Great Cleave against any particular opponent per round.

Geoff.

I can understand that if the guy is sourounded by seven lackies a nd great enemy and uses the cleave from each lackey to attack the big bad guy. However, if there are just three people around him and he happens to roll great against the first, cleaves the second, whirlwinds the second (doesn't kill him) continues the whirlwind to the third, falls the third (again through lucky damage rills) I''d allow him to cleeave into the second guy again. I

So, I think that rule is a little too absolute for me.

 

[Geoff Watson]

I can understand that if the guy is sourounded by seven lackies a nd great enemy and uses the cleave from each lackey to attack the big bad guy. However, if there are just three people around him and he happens to roll great against the first, cleaves the second, whirlwinds the second (doesn't kill him) continues the whirlwind to the third, falls the third (again through lucky damage rills) I''d allow him to cleeave into the second guy again. I

So, I think that rule is a little too absolute for me.

I disagree.
Why is three allowed but seven not allowed?
Would 5 be OK?

Geoff.