Whirlwind Great Cleave?

[Saeviomagy]

If it allows potentially thousands of attacks when others are getting two or three, then yes, it probably needs to be houseruled.

I like the idea of great cleave being limited to a certain number of extra attacks, although I'd say that extra number should be fairly large.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I like the idea of great cleave being limited to a certain number of extra attacks, although I'd say that extra number should be fairly large.

BAB, perhaps?

-Hyp.

 

[Legildur]

Why limit it to BAB? By the time a fighter qualifies for the WWA/GC combo (6th level for human fighter and 8th level fighter otherwise - assuming they don't go the weapon specialisation route along the way), then they'll pretty much be at their maximum use for Great Cleave anyway if they are surrounded on all sides (exluding 3D situations) by small creatures or larger.

If a 6th level fighter is willing to place himself in that situation, then either he is overly confident in his abilities, an incompetent tactician, or desperate.

Just strike dead any character using the bucket of snails or similar cheese (doesn't 3.5 have rules for swarms? That might be a better fix).

Let the Great Cleave hit any creature, not necessarily the next one in the circle, and let the poor fighters thrive - after all, feats are the only thing that they have available to them to separate them from the hordes of characters with special abilities.

 

[Legildur]

(double post)

 

[Forrester]

Does it need to be house-ruled?

While you are at it, bin the shield-smiting paladins and uber-archers.......

Yes, it does. Did you miss the part about it being retarded?

If you want to make fighters more powerful relative to wizards, there's plenty of things you can give them. (In my campaign, I've nuked Haste from existence -- that's really helped them!).

Give them more hp. Make more pro-fighter magic items that protect them from arcane stupidity. Whatever. The solution is NOT to allow them to get three times as many attacks against a Big Bad by swinging at the butterflies floating around next to him first.

You don't need to embrace utter nonsense in order to balance them. Trust me.

 

[Legildur]

I don't want to make fighters more powerful just don't wany to see them nerfed into obscurity.

And is it any more retarded than casting a fireball?

And mmmm, embracing utter nonesense? See fireball comment above

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I don't see any real dramas with a combination that takes 8 feats to achieve and is only 'appararently' overpowered in a very small number of situations, and no more so than other feat combos out there that can be achieved with less feats.

Of course, Your Mileage Does Vary in this case.

 

[Forrester]

I don't want to make fighters more powerful just don't wany to see them nerfed into obscurity.

And is it any more retarded than casting a fireball?

Ah, yes, because without Whirlwind/Great Cleave, fighters would suck horribly.

Yes, since you ask. It is more retarded than casting a fireball. Much, much more retarded. It violates the laws of cause and effect in a plainly disturbing way.

It is a given in a fantasy world that magic exists. It is not a given that nearby butterflies should allow you to triple (or more) your normal attacks against the foe in the middle of them.

Would it make sense in Toon? Sure. Not in D&D.

 

[Crothian]

It is a given in a fantasy world that magic exists. It is not a given that nearby butterflies should allow you to triple (or more) your normal attacks against the foe in the middle of them.

So, has any PC seriously suggested this in a game? I've yet to see it or hear about it, so with a little common sense and trust it never becomes a problem.

 

[Legildur]

I agree with Crothian - situation shouldn't arise. And like so many have argued before, you can't really begin arguing logic and cause and effect in a D&D world with real credibility - it is a fantasy world.

And as for the butterfly arguement, I think I said before that any such attempt (or similar) is plain cheese and should be nerfed (and that the new swarm rules for 3.5 should fix this).

Personally, I think Spring Attack is more broken in allowing you to beat reach etc.

 

[DM_Matt]

I dmed a char who's schtick was being the biggest, baddest guy in a pitched military engagement. He took the Fighter/Weaponmaster route with WWA/GC and Weaon Spec with his longsword. He got himself a shield of invulnerability to get DR so that weak crahacters couldnt hurt him much at all if they hit him.

He did not break anything, and that 8 n 1 thing never actually came up. In fact, I had to specifically add in some lacky-smashing scenes so that he COULD use it (Not a problem as long as you dont give full XP for the lackies and their GROUP CR.)

He was consistantly outshined by the other fighter, the Half-Orc barbarian Frenzied Berserker when most of the baddies were tough.