Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Hey Big Brains Check this thread out! AKA Whirlwind with a 5' step?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Anubis" data-source="post: 94542" data-attributes="member: 2358"><p>Since when were the rules perfect? We've had a lot of errata be released thus far, and although sometimes the errata fixes problems, the errata far more often creates more problems. (For example, forcing XP costs for spells needed in item creation FOR EVERY DAY OF THE CREATION is inane and ridiculous because it makes several items IMPOSSIBLE to create, primarily a Ring of Three Wishes, Manuals that give you inherent bonuses, or anything that requires a spell with an XP component of more than 1,000 XP. Think about it. If you change the rule to force the XP costs to be paid, the Ring of Three Wishes takes 500,000 XP to create rather than 15,000. Another good example of bad judging is lowering the threat range of the bladed gauntlet as well as lowering the damage of the mercurial greatsword.) Because of that, I not only ignore most errata as being utterly senseless, but I also house rule anything I deem to be too vague or unaccounted for in the original rules, such as this Whirlwind Attack question.</p><p></p><p>I consider Whirlwind Attack to be a controlled "spin" attack, and therefore there is no 5-ft. step allowed. Perhaps that is not what the "letter" of the rules states, but I am POSITIVE that it is what the "spirit" of the rules intend. If you don't believe me, ask Skip Wiliams. I know he has a poor track record as far as clarifications and errata goes, but I think he'd call this one the same as I have. There was even a point where I almost rules that Whirlwind Attack hits EVERYTHING within five feet, INCLUDING ALLIES. I figured that such a ruling would be a bad idea, however, and dropped it.</p><p></p><p>I would suggest going with my interpretation of Whirlwind Attack, and then creating a new feat called Improved Whirlwind Attack.</p><p></p><p><strong>Improved Whirlwind Attack</strong> </p><p></p><p>You can become an armed tornado capable of tearing up the battlefield.</p><p></p><p><em>Prerequisites:</em> Int 13+, Expertise, Dex 13+, Dodge, Mobility, base attack bonus +11 or higher, Spring Attack, Whirlwind Attack, Str 13+, Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave, Tumble 6 ranks.</p><p></p><p><em>Benefit:</em> As Whirlwind Attack, except you are allowed to move up to 20 feet during the attack, and all allies and foes within 5 feet are attacked. All attacks are made at your full base attack bonus.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Anubis, post: 94542, member: 2358"] Since when were the rules perfect? We've had a lot of errata be released thus far, and although sometimes the errata fixes problems, the errata far more often creates more problems. (For example, forcing XP costs for spells needed in item creation FOR EVERY DAY OF THE CREATION is inane and ridiculous because it makes several items IMPOSSIBLE to create, primarily a Ring of Three Wishes, Manuals that give you inherent bonuses, or anything that requires a spell with an XP component of more than 1,000 XP. Think about it. If you change the rule to force the XP costs to be paid, the Ring of Three Wishes takes 500,000 XP to create rather than 15,000. Another good example of bad judging is lowering the threat range of the bladed gauntlet as well as lowering the damage of the mercurial greatsword.) Because of that, I not only ignore most errata as being utterly senseless, but I also house rule anything I deem to be too vague or unaccounted for in the original rules, such as this Whirlwind Attack question. I consider Whirlwind Attack to be a controlled "spin" attack, and therefore there is no 5-ft. step allowed. Perhaps that is not what the "letter" of the rules states, but I am POSITIVE that it is what the "spirit" of the rules intend. If you don't believe me, ask Skip Wiliams. I know he has a poor track record as far as clarifications and errata goes, but I think he'd call this one the same as I have. There was even a point where I almost rules that Whirlwind Attack hits EVERYTHING within five feet, INCLUDING ALLIES. I figured that such a ruling would be a bad idea, however, and dropped it. I would suggest going with my interpretation of Whirlwind Attack, and then creating a new feat called Improved Whirlwind Attack. [B]Improved Whirlwind Attack[/B] You can become an armed tornado capable of tearing up the battlefield. [I]Prerequisites:[/I] Int 13+, Expertise, Dex 13+, Dodge, Mobility, base attack bonus +11 or higher, Spring Attack, Whirlwind Attack, Str 13+, Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave, Tumble 6 ranks. [I]Benefit:[/I] As Whirlwind Attack, except you are allowed to move up to 20 feet during the attack, and all allies and foes within 5 feet are attacked. All attacks are made at your full base attack bonus. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Hey Big Brains Check this thread out! AKA Whirlwind with a 5' step?
Top