Whirtlwind attack: Feat or PowAh!?

[Sitara]

SAGA has sexified Whirlwind attack; it only requires the melee defenses feat (akak combat expertise), an INT of 13, and a Dex of 13.

Now I was thinking if they might do the same in 4e; if they do I doubt they will hae ability score pre-requisites though they might have melee defenses/expertise as a pre-req. When you factor int the fact that iterative attacks are bye-bye, (in SAGA they are, you now need certain feats to make multiple attacks, and those with heavy penalty; and from what we gather they are gone in 4e as well) that would finally make this a really cool feat.

OTOH from dev reports (spring attack will probably be a class power) whirwindf attack could end up becoming a class power/maneuver(like bo9s)/.

Thoughts?

 

[Ander00]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Whirlwind Attack making a comeback as a fighter power, though possibly under a different, less straightforward name.


cheers

 

[Atlatl Jones]

Definitely not a feat. In the feats article, the designers said that 4e feats don't give action options. Feats give static bonuses or abilities, not new options that characters can choose to use on their turns.

 

[Sitara]

First Action would choose to disagree with you.

 

[JohnSnow]

First Action would choose to disagree with you.

Firstly, it's "First Reaction," not First Action. And it requires spending an action point to get that action. And it's not a new option, so much as it removes a penalty. And, First Reaction aside, we know Whirlwind Attack is not a feat. From Design & Development - Feats:

When we started talking about feats for 4th Edition, we already knew that we wanted the bulk of a character’s powers—the exciting actions he performs in combat—to come from his class. Even character classes that hadn’t traditionally offered class-based power options (that is, non-spellcasters) would now acquire these special attacks, defenses, maneuvers, and so on directly from their class’s list of such abilities.

Once that decision was made, a lot of the most exciting feats suddenly looked more like class-based powers. Spring Attack, for example, now looked an awful lot like a power for the rogue or melee-based ranger, rather than a feat that just anybody could pick up. Manyshot, Whirlwind Attack, Two-Weapon Fighting, Shot on the Run—these were specialized powers appropriate for particular character archetypes.

So what design space did that leave for feats? After some discussion, we came to see feats as the “fine-tuning” that your character performed after defining his role (via your choice of class) and his build (via your power selections). Feats would let characters further specialize in their roles and builds, as well as to differentiate themselves from other characters with similar power selections.

They would accomplish these goals with simple, basic functionality, rather than complicated conditional benefits or entirely new powers that you’d have to track alongside those of your class.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Definitely not a feat. In the feats article, the designers said that 4e feats don't give action options. Feats give static bonuses or abilities, not new options that characters can choose to use on their turns.

I hope this promise proves true. I want to build characters who are good at stuff, but can at least try to use the other stuff when the situation warrants.

 

[Gloombunny]

I hope this promise proves true. I want to build characters who are good at stuff, but can at least try to use the other stuff when the situation warrants.

I suspect you'll be disappointed. They're just moving the "you can do new stuff" abilities into class powers, most likely.

 

[The Little Raven]

I suspect you'll be disappointed. They're just moving the "you can do new stuff" abilities into class powers, most likely.

Except if their "Multiclassing is as easy as breathing" promise holds true, this won't be much of an issue, since you'd be able to dip into fighter and pick up Whirlwind Attack when applicable.

 

[Sitara]

They promised 'multi will easy as breathing' for 3e as well. And it was/is true...except for the simple fact it really, really gimps your character. Eswpecially if you are a spellcaster.

 

[Hussar]

They promised 'multi will easy as breathing' for 3e as well. And it was/is true...except for the simple fact it really, really gimps your character. Eswpecially if you are a spellcaster.

Umm, no they really didn't.