Trip and Whirlwind Attack

[RigaMortus2]

Such a shame that the FAQ often has rulings that contradict the rules then.....

Indeed. But I don't see a contradiction in the case of Improved Trip. What rule is the FAQ contradicting? It's not like it is changing any rule (like the FAQ likes to do from time to time), it is a Clarification (which is what the FAQ is for).

Why must we discard the FAQ as a whole when contradictions pop up? Why not just discard the contraditions in the FAQ on an individual basis, rather than dismiss the entire FAQ based on a few contradictions?

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Why must we discard the FAQ as a whole when contradictions pop up?

Because people like to cherry pick FAQ rulings that they agree with and ignore the rest.

 

[Legildur]

Only arguable if you don't read the FAQ, which clarifies that the 'as if you hadn't made an attack' language is only there to indicate what BAB the followup attack uses.

I think that the FAQ is making it up at this point but it would have been a lot simpler and straightforward to say that you got an extra melee attack at the same BAB bonus, as used for the successful trip, against the tripped opponent.

The language for Improved Trip is significantly different from that of Cleave.