Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Souljourner" data-source="post: 1391473" data-attributes="member: 1622">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</blockquote>

Verification