Precision damage // Grappled when stunned

[EntropyDecay]

Two rules question situations came up in our last session:

1. Precision damage:
One player has a fighter/duelist [the DMG version] whose character gets the +1d6 extra damage class feature. Like the extra damage from a flaming sword this 1d6 won't get multiplied when scoring a critical hit. Right?

What happens when she uses her Whirlwind Attack feat? Is it possible to use a precision based bonus when attacking all spaces around your character in one round or do you get the extra 1d6 only for your first square? At what situations can't she use the bonus damage ability (besides her opponent being immune to critical hits)?

2. Grappled when stunned:
The description of being stunned says that you can't take any actions. What happens when an opponent tries to grapple you? Do you make a grapple check to resist his attempt? Is this reaction to a situation an "action"? Do you get your grapple checks to oppose his grapple checks when your enemy tries to damage, pin,... you?

Entropy
*confused*

 

[Artoomis]

Two rules question situations came up in our last session:

1. Precision damage:
One player has a fighter/duelist [the DMG version] whose character gets the +1d6 extra damage class feature. Like the extra damage from a flaming sword this 1d6 won't get multiplied when scoring a critical hit. Right?

Correct. That was the easy one!

What happens when she uses her Whirlwind Attack feat? Is it possible to use a precision based bonus when attacking all spaces around your character in one round or do you get the extra 1d6 only for your first square? At what situations can't she use the bonus damage ability (besides her opponent being immune to critical hits)?

This one is a bit tricky. By strict reading of the rules I'd say it's allowed - extra damage against everyone! However, since the duelist cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand or use a shield when making using Precise Strike, I'd say that using it in conjunction with Whirlwind Attack is most certainly against the spirit of the rules here - the rules seem to imply a fair amount of focus is involved (can't use a second weapon or shield), and whirlwind attack would preclude that sort of focus.

2. Grappled when stunned:
The description of being stunned says that you can't take any actions. What happens when an opponent tries to grapple you? Do you make a grapple check to resist his attempt? Is this reaction to a situation an "action"? Do you get your grapple checks to oppose his grapple checks when your enemy tries to damage, pin,... you?

Another tricky one.

I think the grapple check to resist a grapple attempt is allowed because:

1. Your defense does not suffer when stunned.
2. This is basically a defensive maneuver
and
3. A grapple check in response to a grapple attempt is not an action.

 

[EntropyDecay]

This one is a bit tricky. By strict reading of the rules I'd say it's allowed - extra damage against everyone! However, since the duelist cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand or use a shield when making using Precise Strike, I'd say that using it in conjunction with Whirlwind Attack is most certainly against the spirit of the rules here - the rules seem to imply a fair amount of focus is involved (can't use a second weapon or shield), and whirlwind attack would preclude that sort of focus.

On the other hand, not allowing the extra damage in a Whirlwind Attack would lead to the following rather strange situation where Whirlwind Attack would be nearly useless compared to a normal full attack:
[I'm disregarding all ability and equipment boni since they won't make any difference to what I'm trying to explain]

Fighter 10 / Duelist 10, +20/+15/+10/+5 BAB, rapier 1d6 + 2d6 extra damage

1. Possible damage output, full attack:
4 * 3d6 = 12d6 total
12d6 against single enemy possible

2. Possible damage output, ww attack, max number of enemies = 8:
8 * 1d6 = 8d6
1d6 against single enemy possible

OK, the whirlwind attack lets you use your highest attack bonus for every roll. But since a character is nearly never surrounded by more than a few enemies, it is better to be able to dispatch one foe quickly than to wound several foes and considering the fact that the player had to spent a feat for his character to be able to do this, somehow the second possibility seems worse than the first one.

Entropy

 

[Orm]

2. Possible damage output, ww attack, max number of enemies = 8:
8 * 1d6 = 8d6
1d6 against single enemy possible

OK, the whirlwind attack lets you use your highest attack bonus for every roll. But since a character is nearly never surrounded by more than a few enemies, it is better to be able to dispatch one foe quickly than to wound several foes and considering the fact that the player had to spent a feat for his character to be able to do this, somehow the second possibility seems worse than the first one.

Who would make a whirlwind attack against just one foe?

Beside of that, let him take a rapier with the wounding ability. One point of CON damage per hit against eight baddies in one round might help to get rid of them quite fast.


Back to your first question:

When you use the Whirlwind Attack feat, you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities.

 

[The Souljourner]

However, since the duelist cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand or use a shield when making using Precise Strike, I'd say that using it in conjunction with Whirlwind Attack is most certainly against the spirit of the rules here - the rules seem to imply a fair amount of focus is involved (can't use a second weapon or shield), and whirlwind attack would preclude that sort of focus.

That doesn't seem to be solid reasoning. Having something in your other hand is a much different environmental factor than "how you're attacking". What it implies is that you need to have a free hand to properly execute a precise strike. It doesn't imply at all that this can only be done against one person. In fact, if you have 4 attacks, you can precisely strike 4 different people, or even up to 8 if you have great cleave and the first 4 all die.

It seems like people often put unreasonable restrictions on whirlwind attack, simply because of how they imagine the "typical" whirlwind attack works.... i.e. taking a sword and swinging it around your head like an idiot. Whirlwind attack says you make an attack at everyone within reach. Period. If they had intended for you not to get precision based damage, they'd have said so. If they only wanted it to work with slashing weapons, they'd have said so.

I can easily imagine a high level duelist precisely stabbing all his opponents in a vital spot in 6 seconds. You see that sort of thing in movies all the time - the highly dextrous martial artist surrounded by mooks pokes each of them in the eye, kicks them in the knee, etc.

As for grappling... it's not an action, but neither is holding onto your sword, and you can't do that either.... it's a DM call. I'd probably say grapples against you automatically succeed while you're stunned... it just makes sense.

-The Souljourner

 

[Darklone]

Remember Inigo Montoyas performance? Whirlwind or Great Cleave, that's the question

Being stunned does not keep you from opposing a grapple check as usual. But you can't make an AoO.

 

[Artoomis]

I think the grapple check to resist a grapple attempt is allowed because:

1. Your defense does not suffer when stunned.
2. This is basically a defensive maneuver
and
3. A grapple check in response to a grapple attempt is not an action.

I was relying on memory for "stunned" effects. Actually:

Stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).

Given that, it looks like you would NOT get an opposed grapple check - you are essentially just standing there, so no check. At that point, "it sucks to be you!"

You certainly could argue that an opposed grapple check is not an "action" and I think you'd be right, using the technical D&D term, "action." It looks to me like that's not what's meant here - it looks to me like if you are "stunned" you are darn near helpless - but not quite. You even drop your shield, but not your buckler (since it is strapped to your arm, not in your hands). You get to minimally defend yourself (-2 to AC and no Dex bonus), but I just don't see how that really would translate into actively defending yourself in a grapple attempt. The problem with many D&D terms is that you cannot tell when they are used in a more generic sense, and when they are used in a more technical sense. "Action" is one of the worst offenders in this way - when you are denied the ability to act, does that mean you can do anything not a Free Action, Standard Action, Move Action or Full-Round Action (did I miss any?), but you can do anything labeled "not an action?" Or does it mean you can't really do anything besides stand there looking foolish (but still acting instinctively; in this case, you do still get to defend yourself, albiet somewhat poorly)?

So, to be really, really clear, I am changing my position of how "Stunned" and opposed grapple checks work, and now feel that you would not get an opposed grapple check when "stunned." I think that's within the spirit of being "stunned."

In the alternative, I suggest applying a -4 penalty (at least) to the opposed check (with no Dex bonus allowed). This is because it is rather apparent that, if allowed, the designer did not take into account opposed grappling checks when designing the effects of being Stunned. It's rather difficult to believe that when you drop everything, lose you Dex bonus AND get -2 to AC you would still get opposed grapple checks as normal. That strains credibility to the breaking point.

If you believe that opposed grapple checks can be taken, then, by the same very strict letter of the rules, you'd also have to accept that you could use you full Dex bonus to resist the grapple (since the defender can choose STR or DEX), despite the fact that you could not use it for your defense per the description of being "stunned." This, once again, strains credibility to the breaking point.

 

[Artoomis]

Retracted

 

[Caliban]

If you believe that opposed grapple checks can be taken, then, by the same very strict letter of the rules, you'd also have to accept that you could use you full Dex bonus to resist the grapple (since the defender can choose STR or DEX), despite the fact that you could not use it for your defense per the description of being "stunned." This, once again, strains credibility to the breaking point.

You seem to have your rules confused. You don't have the option of using Dex to resist a grapple, only BAB+Str+Size. You're thinking of an opposed Trip attack.

I'd say that you can in fact attempt to resist a grapple check when stunned, as you are not helpless. I'd probably apply a circumstance penalty of at least -2, but you should get it.

If you don't allow opposed grapple checks while stunned, mind flayers become even deadlier than they already are.

 

[Caliban]

As to Whirlwind Attack with Precise Strike, it's hard to argue with the Whirlwind Attack Feat language itself:



That last sentence prohibits Precise Strike.

Precise strike isn't a bonus attack or extra attack. Why would that sentence prohibit you from using it?