D&D 3.x Is there ANY way to make whips good using WotC-only 3.5 material?

[mvincent]

Interestingly, I notice that the Balor's whip does not have the normal whip limitations. Maybe a PC could use one of those ; )

 

[Vuron]

Depends on your DM.

Strictly (in a Hypersmurfian way), a flaming whip does (1d3 [Slashing] + 1d6[Fire]) nonlethal damage on a successful hit*, and no damage at all to anyone with armor or "tough" natural armor.

Given your earlier comments, your DM might decide to stick with the strict interpretation.

* - Just like the same whip in the hands of a mid-level rogue might do (1d3 [Slashing] + 3d6 [Slashing]) nonlethal damage on a successful hit, and no damage at all to anyone with armor or "tough" natural armor.

Hrmm I'm not sure I buy this interpretation of the flaming whip as sneak attack bonus damage or even bonus damage based on strength is still based on the original weapon (in this case a non-lethal weapon) however flaming, etc is bonus energy damage which is from a separate damage source. Thus a mid-level rogue with a flaming whip would do 1d3 (non-lethal slashing) + 3d6 (non-lethal slashing) + 1d6 (lethal fire)

 

[mvincent]

a mid-level rogue with a flaming whip would do 1d3 (non-lethal slashing) + 3d6 (non-lethal slashing) + 1d6 (lethal fire)

Correct. From the 3.5 FAQ:
"a fighter wielding a +1 flaming sword can’t choose for the fire damage to be nonlethal (even if the base weapon damage is nonlethal)."

Please consider this post (and all my other FAQ related posts) as being solely directed at those that find the FAQ useful.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Yeah, uh, again, quoting the FAQ doesn't help, especially when the question asked and answered is only tangentially related and probably wrong.

The whip does nonlethal damage, and no damage at all against armored creatures.

The flaming special property increases the damage done by "+1d6 [Fire]."

Take a putative feat which increased your damage with a melee weapon - call it "Pommel Mastery" - by +2 [Bludgeoning].

You use this feat with a whip. Is the +2B damage nonlethal?

Why is this feat treated differently than the fire damage? And "Just because" isn't a proper answer.

 

[mvincent]

Yeah, uh, again, quoting the FAQ doesn't help

Then (as said before) please consider my previous post (and all my other FAQ related posts) as being solely directed at those that do find the FAQ useful.

Edit: I have now corrected my previous post to include the aforementioned disclaimer.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

Best use I could see for a whip is using it to trip/disarm foes and then quick drawing a lethal weapon to finish them off, probably a big 2 handed weapon.
Might as well use a spiked chain or guisarme though if thats going to be your strategy.

The whip is just a crappy exotic weapon I guess.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

There are those of us who strongly disagree with H-Smurf's/Patryn's position on enchanted whips.

My position can roughly be summed up in posts #294, #298, #336 of this thread:
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=138686&page=1&pp=40

 

[Jack Simth]

Well....

At first level, a Wizard can disarm a fighter with a pretty high degree of certainty, if he can get two rounds in.

How?

Round 1: Cast True Strike
Round 2: Gripping whip in both hands (for the +4 bonus of it being a two-handed weapon) Disarm the Fighter.

Now, at 1st, the Fighter is probably using a two-handed weapon (+4), and maybe has a strength of, say, 16 (+3). With his BAB (+1), he's got a grand total of +8 to his attack roll in the opposed check.
At 1st, the Wizard has maybe a 7 in strength (-2), isn't proficient with the Whip (-4), but is holding it two-handed (+4) and is spending a True Strike on this (+20), and gets a bonus for using the Whip (+2) for a grand total of +20. If the Wizard rolls an 8 or better, RAW, the Fighter can't hold on to his weapon. So there's a 65% chance that the Fighter is simply weaponless. Of the remainder.....
If the Wizard rolls a 7, the Fighter needs a 20. On a 19 or less, the Fighter loses his two-handed weapon; the probability of the Wizard rolling a 7 and the Fighter rolling 19 or less is 0.05*0.95. If the Wizard rolls a 6, the Fighter needs a 19 or 20. The probability of the Wizard rolling a 6 and the Fighter rolling the 18 or less to lose his weapon is 0.05*0.90, and so on, down to the Wizard rolling a 1 and the Fighter needing a roll of 14. So the overall chance, if the Wizard gets those two rounds, of the Strength 16 Fighter-1 with a Greatsword of losing his weapon is: 0.65 + 0.05 * 0.95 + 0.05 * 0.90 + 0.05 * 0.85 + 0.05 * 0.80 + 0.05 * 0.75 + 0.05 * 0.70 + 0.05 * 0.65 = 0.93 = 93%.

Mind you, the probability that the Wizard-1 will get two rounds to do this to the Fighter without help is somewhat less than that.....

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

IME, tripping & disarming can be quite handy if you are not a front line fighter.

I'm using a 2WF optimized PC with a flaming whip & nonmagical pick in a RttToEE campaign. While we've gotten to the point where my PC is running around with a magical 2 handed sword (which he really shouldn't be, but that's another tale), initially, his main combat tactic was to disarm or trip the foes nearest the front-line fighters, who then beat the tar out of the whip's target, or disarm spellcasters and then take them down. Picks don't do much damage, but when they crit...OUCH!

And, for the record, he does have True Strike...

 

[brehobit]

Aside from using one as a back-up weapon to disarm or trip, I can't think of much use for the whip. 3.5 lacks the whip-dagger, and my DM would not allow the book I wrote about whips, so I'm looking for other suggestions.

As it is a melee weapon. So a duskblade or Bo9S character might find it very useful indeed. With their strikes the weapon damage can be fairly minor at higher levels. A whip in one hand and a long sword in the other (for AoO or whatever) would be handy. I could see a rather nasty swordsage built this way.

Also, it isn't clear (to me) if the "wounding" ability requires damage or just a hit. It might be useful....

Mark