Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hairfoot" data-source="post: 3729129" data-attributes="member: 23732">If I were your GM, I'd do it like this:Whirlwind is a pretty difficult, high level manoeuvre, even in D&amp;D, so I'd give it a challenge level of about 28*, with strength being the applicable stat.&nbsp; So, if Fuggit the 8th level barbarian tried it, you'd roll D20, add Fuggit's strength bonus (+3), add his level (+8), and add six because strength is one of his prime stats.So, if Fuggit rolls an 11 or more, he can take an attack at everyone surrounding him, with a -1 for each additional target after the first.If he fails, he only gets a single attack, but if he fails by 10 or more (by rolling a 1), he fumbles.&nbsp; If Fuggit continues to use the manoeuvre in combat, it might get easier for him.I would only allow that if the character was framed as a weaponmaster, and had continuously used the same weapon for a few levels and worked his specialisation into the story - perhaps by going on an adventure to find a suitable tutor - in which case I may just allow him to do it automatically from then on.It's interesting that the debate is essentially about one of the greatest changes between AD&amp;D and 3E: taking rules out of the DM's hands and giving control to the players.&nbsp; If a DM is biased, cruel, or simply not very good at improvising, it can be frustrating for players unless there's a defined rule mechanic to use.Keep in mind that the feat system allows characters to do things which are preposterously far-fetched in a game (like C&amp;C) which aims to foster an OD&amp;D feeling.&nbsp; I like low-ish powered games, in which something like a whirlwind strike is for supernatural killing machines from other planes of existence, and not skilled fighters from the local gladiator school.The existence of feats has changed the way players approach combat.&nbsp; In an old-school session, a player might say &quot;I want to put my weight behind this swing, even if it leaves me a bit vulnerable&quot;, whereas someone coming from 3E might say &quot;I want to Power Attack.&nbsp; Can I swap my bonuses around?&quot;.&nbsp; It's a mechanistic approach which is the opposite of what many of us wish to achieve by moving to rules-lighter systems.* I don't use challenge classes, just +6 for primes</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hairfoot, post: 3729129, member: 23732"] If I were your GM, I'd do it like this: Whirlwind is a pretty difficult, high level manoeuvre, even in D&D, so I'd give it a challenge level of about 28*, with strength being the applicable stat. So, if Fuggit the 8th level barbarian tried it, you'd roll D20, add Fuggit's strength bonus (+3), add his level (+8), and add six because strength is one of his prime stats. So, if Fuggit rolls an 11 or more, he can take an attack at everyone surrounding him, with a -1 for each additional target after the first. If he fails, he only gets a single attack, but if he fails by 10 or more (by rolling a 1), he fumbles. If Fuggit continues to use the manoeuvre in combat, it might get easier for him. I would only allow that if the character was framed as a weaponmaster, and had continuously used the same weapon for a few levels and worked his specialisation into the story - perhaps by going on an adventure to find a suitable tutor - in which case I may just allow him to do it automatically from then on. It's interesting that the debate is essentially about one of the greatest changes between AD&D and 3E: taking rules out of the DM's hands and giving control to the players. If a DM is biased, cruel, or simply not very good at improvising, it can be frustrating for players unless there's a defined rule mechanic to use. Keep in mind that the feat system allows characters to do things which are preposterously far-fetched in a game (like C&C) which aims to foster an OD&D feeling. I like low-ish powered games, in which something like a whirlwind strike is for supernatural killing machines from other planes of existence, and not skilled fighters from the local gladiator school. The existence of feats has changed the way players approach combat. In an old-school session, a player might say "I want to put my weight behind this swing, even if it leaves me a bit vulnerable", whereas someone coming from 3E might say "I want to Power Attack. Can I swap my bonuses around?". It's a mechanistic approach which is the opposite of what many of us wish to achieve by moving to rules-lighter systems. * [SIZE=1]I don't use challenge classes, just +6 for primes[/SIZE] [/QUOTE]

Verification