Reach Weapons, Monks, Whirlwind Attack

[Darklone]

Nothing against Great Cleave in my humanocentric and nearly medieval campaigns... players love it.

About the TWF stuff with unarmed attacks (or spiked gauntlets) and polearms: There are good reasons why most people here agreed after long discussions that it made sense to apply at least TWF penalties, if you allow it at all. Without any penalties, it will cause some incosistencies... but well. To each his own.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

By not being in line with the 'spirit' of the feat, what do you mean?

I simply mean that when I envision a combatant using this feat, I see him taking a single swing while pivoting in place. Of course, this view would be more logical if the feat stated that only one roll is made. Eh.

Oh well.

AR

 

[sparxmith]

I think that something everyone forgets about the monk is that his "unarmed strike" doesn't have to be with his hand? I think you'd have a hard time arguing that a monk can't kick a goblin that is running by him just because he attacked with a weapon a split second before--that's part of a monk's giftedness.

Logic should always over-ride the rules, and versimilitude should always be maintained. 2 of the 3 basic rules of DM'ing. =-)

 

[FrankTrollman]

I simply mean that when I envision a combatant using this feat, I see him taking a single swing while pivoting in place. Of course, this view would be more logical if the feat stated that only one roll is made. Eh.

Oh well.

AR

And this is why it requires Combat Expertise and Mobility?

The feat's requirements are ones based on movement, fluidity, and grace - I don't see much basis for the "Zangiff" version where you stand there like an idiot and spin.

-Frank

 

[Hypersmurf]

The feat's requirements are ones based on movement, fluidity, and grace - I don't see much basis for the "Zangiff" version where you stand there like an idiot and spin.

I always think of that as the "Capcom" version, where you're pushing all the buttons at once...

-Hyp.