| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Whip:
A whip deals no damage to any creature with an armor bonus of +1 or higher or a natural armor bonus of +3 or higher. The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don't threaten the area into which you can make an attack. In addition, unlike most other weapons with reach, you can use it against foes anywhere within your reach (including adjacent foes).
Using a whip provokes an attack of opportunity, just as if you had used a ranged weapon.
Flanking:
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.
Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.
Question:
Can you benefit from flanking (and get a sneak attack) with a whip when there is an ally on the opposite side of the enemy? I know you will not help the other guy flank since you do not threaten.
The ruling in our group was no, you do not provide a threatened area of which to gain a flanking bonus while using a whip. Though, feats like Gang Up in the APG do give the Whip attacker the ability to "flank" as it were if two of his allies even threaten the enemy.
Whip:
A whip deals no damage to any creature with an armor bonus of +1 or higher or a natural armor bonus of +3 or higher. The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don't threaten the area into which you can make an attack. In addition, unlike most other weapons with reach, you can use it against foes anywhere within your reach (including adjacent foes).Using a whip provokes an attack of opportunity, just as if you had used a ranged weapon.
Flanking:
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.
Question:
Can you benefit from flanking (and get a sneak attack) with a whip when there is an ally on the opposite side of the enemy? I know you will not help the other guy flank since you do not threaten.
Yes. Even if a halfling with a 6 strength and a dagger is standing opposite a barbarian with damage reduction 6 they still threaten the barbarian. Threat is generated by your ability to attack into a square, not your ability to deal damage to the occupant of a square.
Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack , even when it is not your turn.
you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner
Edit: whoops.. the whip says you don't threaten the area, so no, since you're not threatening the area you can't help flank
If you're adjacent and have a spiked gauntlet, he's threatened. Your whip still provokes, though. Or you could get a Small Longspear to hold in your offhand and stay 10' away, he's threatened, can't take an AoO on you without reach, and no TWF or inappropriate size penalties, since you're not actually attacking with the spear. Only downside is you can't use both hands on your whip for 1.5Str. Also you need a DM that won't punish you for cheesing the small weapon =)
|
If you're adjacent and have a spiked gauntlet, he's threatened. Your whip still provokes, though. Or you could get a Small Longspear to hold in your offhand and stay 10' away, he's threatened, can't take an AoO on you without reach, and no TWF or inappropriate size penalties, since you're not actually attacking with the spear. Only downside is you can't use both hands on your whip for 1.5Str. Also you need a DM that won't punish you for cheesing the small weapon =)
I don't care what the RAW allows anyone who two hands a whip for extra damage is just being ridiculous.
If you're adjacent and have a spiked gauntlet, he's threatened. Your whip still provokes, though. Or you could get a Small Longspear to hold in your offhand and stay 10' away, he's threatened, can't take an AoO on you without reach, and no TWF or inappropriate size penalties, since you're not actually attacking with the spear. Only downside is you can't use both hands on your whip for 1.5Str. Also you need a DM that won't punish you for cheesing the small weapon =)
Isn't the longspear a two handed weapon ? How can you threatened with a two handed weapon wielded in one hand ? Doesn't the weapon need to be ready to hit to threaten ?
And I agree with the 1.5 for the whip, I will never allow this... ;)
I don't care what the RAW allows anyone who two hands a whip for extra damage is just being ridiculous.
Hey, it's a fantasy game; it's easy to explain by using a bit of fantasy!
I don't think using two hands must mean literally holding the weapon in two hands; it means you're using your hands in some way that prevents you from using the other hand for something else. With the whip, I could see it as being able to move more of the body, using your other hand for balance. The same goes for how I see two-handing a dagger or the like; you don't literally hold the weapon in two hands, you just aid the attack with the other hand.
The same goes for how I see two-handing a dagger or the like; you don't literally hold the weapon in two hands, you just aid the attack with the other hand.
Sorry but, I thought you specifically can't use x1.5 with light weapons ? Am I wrong ?
Isn't the longspear a two handed weapon ? How can you threatened with a two handed weapon wielded in one hand ?
Assuming the character is medium, a Small Longspear is a one-handed weapon (with a -2 inappropriate size penalty).
Re: 1.5Str - is it any worse than two-handing a flail? Or a rapier? Of all the things I posted to be called out on... (Edit: A whip is a one-handed weapon, a dagger is light)
Re: subdual damage - Any whipper worth his salt should get a Scorpion Whip for sweet lethal damage (that still provokes, doesn't threaten, and gets fouled by cover).
The other case would be an archer in melee that say had a natural attack. They would threaten the enemy adjacent to them but their ranged attacks would not benefit from it.
Why wouldn't he benefit? The target is flanked. He provokes by firing the ranged weapon, but still threatens... *edit* ah, nm. Flanking is for melee attacks only. Oops!
Hey, it's a fantasy game; it's easy to explain by using a bit of fantasy!I don't think using two hands must mean literally holding the weapon in two hands; it means you're using your hands in some way that prevents you from using the other hand for something else. With the whip, I could see it as being able to move more of the body, using your other hand for balance. The same goes for how I see two-handing a dagger or the like; you don't literally hold the weapon in two hands, you just aid the attack with the other hand.
This.
I have a whip-wielder in our current AoW game, and we've had to square all the rules for whips out with our group when making my character, to make sure I could do what I intended to do with the character. That said...
No, whips don't threaten, though if you had another weapon that did, you could attack using the whip instead as long as the whip could reach the opponent. Since you can't flank with a whip, no sneak attack unless the target is flat-footed (my character also has sneak attack, so I've had to deal with few opportunities for extra dice in this game). Our group has treated the flanking bonus as simultaneous for both allies, meaning both have to threaten to flank, and then get the bonus for doing so.
At least, that's how we figured it.
No, whips don't threaten, though if you had another weapon that did, you could attack using the whip instead as long as the whip could reach the opponent.
If so I wonder : Imagine two adjacent persons, each having both a whip and a spiked glove... the first try to trip the second with the whip, the second, since he threatened, can use an AoO against the first... He choose the whip for his AoO (you said he could), does the first gain an AoO against the second 'cause of the whip ?
And if they choose to trip as AoO who fall first ?
Isn't the longspear a two handed weapon ? How can you threatened with a two handed weapon wielded in one hand ? Doesn't the weapon need to be ready to hit to threaten ?
And I agree with the 1.5 for the whip, I will never allow this... ;)
Its a bit of a dm's call. There's no rule for what kind of action it is to take your hand off of a two handed weapon. Realistically when you're using a quarterstaff or even a claymore i know you may have to take one hand off of it for a second to reposition, so taking your hand off to punch someone in the head then gripping it again could easily be construed as a non action.
You could of course just wield a longspear and wear spiked armor, and kick people in the shins.
If so I wonder : Imagine two adjacent persons, each having both a whip and a spiked glove... the first try to trip the second with the whip, the second, since he threatened, can use an AoO against the first... He choose the whip for his AoO (you said he could), does the first gain an AoO against the second 'cause of the whip ?
And if they choose to trip as AoO who fall first ?
It's reasonable to assume you can only make an AoO with a weapon you are threatening with. That aside, assuming the DM allows AoOs with non-threatening weapons, it would fall out like this: (pun!)
Elf and Orc adjacent, whips, spiked gauntlets, lenient DM, and no-one has combat reflexes:
Elf attempts to trip Orc, provoking
Orc takes AoO against Elf, with whip, provoking
Elf takes AoO against Orc, with whip, provoking
Orc cannot make another AoO since he does not have combat reflexes. Orc gets Whipped.
Orc now completes his attack, whipping the Elf
Elf now completes his trip, and if he succeeds, the Orc is prone.
The AoO happens before the action that caused it. (Example: Prone guy standing up provokes, but you can't use the AoO to trip him because he's still prone until after the AoO resolves and he gets up)
If you want to substitute a trip for the AoO, it's the same as random guys tripping without whips involved:
Elf makes Trip attempt against Orc, provokes
Orc makes Trip attempt as AoO against Elf, provokes
Elf makes Trip attempt as AoO against Orc, provokes
since Orc doesn't have Combat Reflexes, the Elf's (AoO) trip attempt goes off. If it succeeds, the Orc is prone and the rest fizzles. If Elf's AoO trip misses, the Orc's goes off. If that misses the Elf's original trip goes off.
|
By RAW, you don't need to threaten in order to gain a flanking bonus. Read carefully if you don't agree. Your opponent needs to be threatened by someone else.
By RAW, a whip-wielder can easily gain the +2 flanking bonus. He cannot, however, grant that bonus to someone else because he doesn't threaten any squares.
f so I wonder : Imagine two adjacent persons, each having both a whip and a spiked glove... the first try to trip the second with the whip, the second, since he threatened, can use an AoO against the first... He choose the whip for his AoO (you said he could), does the first gain an AoO against the second 'cause of the whip ?
And if they choose to trip as AoO who fall first ?
There's a few ways to do this according to the rules.
1, that i would go with, is that since the whip does not threaten the area around it, you cannot use the whip to make the attack of opportunity.
2) Harry and bob both have the spiked gauntlet whip setup. Apparently neither has improved trip, or combat reflexes.
Harry won initiative. if its round 1 bob doesn't get attacks of opportunity.
If its round 2
harry attempts to trip bob with the whip.
Bob gets his attack of opportunity and attempts to use the whip
harry can use either the whip or the spiked gauntlet. As long as bob doesn't have combat reflexes bob can't make another attack.
In order you would get Harry's AoO, then Bobs AoO, then Harry's regular attack.
By RAW, you don't need to threaten in order to gain a flanking bonus. Read carefully if you don't agree. Your opponent needs to be threatened by someone else.
By RAW, a whip-wielder can easily gain the +2 flanking bonus. He cannot, however, grant that bonus to someone else because he doesn't threaten any squares.
"read carefully" isn't an argument. Post something from the rules you think makes your point.
|
I don't care what the RAW allows anyone who two hands a whip for extra damage is just being ridiculous.If you're adjacent and have a spiked gauntlet, he's threatened. Your whip still provokes, though. Or you could get a Small Longspear to hold in your offhand and stay 10' away, he's threatened, can't take an AoO on you without reach, and no TWF or inappropriate size penalties, since you're not actually attacking with the spear. Only downside is you can't use both hands on your whip for 1.5Str. Also you need a DM that won't punish you for cheesing the small weapon =)
As someone playing a whip focused character, I agree 100%.
By RAW, you don't need to threaten in order to gain a flanking bonus. Read carefully if you don't agree. Your opponent needs to be threatened by someone else.
By RAW, a whip-wielder can easily gain the +2 flanking bonus. He cannot, however, grant that bonus to someone else because he doesn't threaten any squares.
I think you're right in all counts. My confusion stemmed from the wording "threatened by another enemy character" which I thought implied the target needed to be threatened from both sides.
Flanking: When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner. ...
Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.
"another" could be read to just mean you need a separate entity providing the flank. (You can't flank a tiny creature sharing your space, even though you somehow threaten all sides of it) The last line I quoted seems to imply that the attacker doesn't have to be threatening. Maybe not intended, but as written I think Lyrax is right.
If so I wonder : Imagine two adjacent persons, each having both a whip and a spiked glove... the first try to trip the second with the whip, the second, since he threatened, can use an AoO against the first... He choose the whip for his AoO (you said he could), does the first gain an AoO against the second 'cause of the whip ?
And if they choose to trip as AoO who fall first ?It's reasonable to assume you can only make an AoO with a weapon you are threatening with. That aside, assuming the DM allows AoOs with non-threatening weapons, it would fall out like this: (pun!)
Elf and Orc adjacent, whips, spiked gauntlets, lenient DM, and no-one has combat reflexes:
Elf attempts to trip Orc, provoking
Orc takes AoO against Elf, with whip, provoking
Elf takes AoO against Orc, with whip, provoking
Orc cannot make another AoO since he does not have combat reflexes. Orc gets Whipped.
Orc now completes his attack, whipping the Elf
Elf now completes his trip, and if he succeeds, the Orc is prone.The AoO happens before the action that caused it. (Example: Prone guy standing up provokes, but you can't use the AoO to trip him because he's still prone until after the AoO resolves and he gets up)
If you want to substitute a trip for the AoO, it's the same as random guys tripping without whips involved:
Elf makes Trip attempt against Orc, provokes
Orc makes Trip attempt as AoO against Elf, provokes
Elf makes Trip attempt as AoO against Orc, provokes
since Orc doesn't have Combat Reflexes, the Elf's (AoO) trip attempt goes off. If it succeeds, the Orc is prone and the rest fizzles. If Elf's AoO trip misses, the Orc's goes off. If that misses the Elf's original trip goes off.
That sounds okay I guess, but then, if I were attacking with a whip, I wouldn't be adjacent to provoke. If I had no choice and this is the scenario, I imagine it would play out somewhat like your description. I'm not sure if leniency has anything to do with it, as I read that an AoO can be made with any melee weapon you can reach the target with whether or not the weapon threatened, though I can't think of where it was that I did.
I chuckle a bit too at the idea of 1.5x strength with a whip, but I'd be fine with it. I mean, why not? My AoW character would only get a +3 to damage (at 16th level). It's much more in his interest to wield another whip with how his abilities and features work, not even counting feats. It's a huge difference, so I don't see the harm in it mechanically, even if the flavor isn't to some peoples' taste.
EDIT: My bad, I'd at least need to count two-weapon fighting because of the attack penalties.
|
By RAW, you don't need to threaten in order to gain a flanking bonus. Read carefully if you don't agree. Your opponent needs to be threatened by someone else.
By RAW, a whip-wielder can easily gain the +2 flanking bonus. He cannot, however, grant that bonus to someone else because he doesn't threaten any squares.
+1, you flank if someone else threatens.
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.
also note the above does not require you to also threaten.
and since a whip is a melee attack:
The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach
You don't threaten because the whip doesn't but you can be given a flanking bonus if someone else threatens the guy.
By RAW, you don't need to threaten in order to gain a flanking bonus. Read carefully if you don't agree. Your opponent needs to be threatened by someone else.
By RAW, a whip-wielder can easily gain the +2 flanking bonus. He cannot, however, grant that bonus to someone else because he doesn't threaten any squares.
+1, you flank if someone else threatens.
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.also note the above does not require you to also threaten.
and since a whip is a melee attack:
The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reachYou don't threaten because the whip doesn't but you can be given a flanking bonus if someone else threatens the guy.
We may have to revise our ruling for the next game. ;-)
If your DM allows 3.5 material, get a 'Water Whip' form the Magic Item Compendium. Fixes ALL your issues and is stupid cheap for what it does.
Even better, with that and a size increase you threaten to 30', do lethal damage and can hurt anyone, even armored.
"read carefully" isn't an argument. Post something from the rules you think makes your point.He doesn't need an argument.. he's just stating fact. You can go back to the rules and read them carefully to see this if you haven't already.
-James
Yes, he needs an argument. "I'm right and you're wrong because I have read the rules carefully and you have not" does not make a point.
You ARE making a point by quoting the section of rules that agree with you. You've convinced me that that is A valid way of interpreting the rules. He is not.
Did you believe otherwise and then change your mind after a careful reading of the rules?
I changed my mind after reading the additional rules specific to the whip rather than just the flanking rules. That's how this game works sometimes, you can read one paragraph carefully and another rule in another place may change your conclusion completely. I could carefully read the flanking rules all day, without noticing the rules specific to whip it wouldn't change a thing.
Characters don't threaten squares with whips, as such they cannot flank using them. It's cut and dried as a careful reading of the rules will illustrate.
I'm a little confused here. I thought you were arguing that the whip user can't flank for someone else but can take advantage of someone else's flank?
Not really, cause in this case there is no argument to be made.
on the contrary. Several phrases in the flanking description lead me (and others) to the conclusion that flanking is supposed to be a two way street.
"Threatened by another" to me, reads as though you both have to be threatening. Normally the distinction would be non existent because you can't both not threaten an area and still make a melee attack into it, but whips and unarmed strikes are exceptions to that. You point out that it could be read as though just the other creature has to do the flanking. You could carefully read the sentence a number of times without questioning that interpretation.
|
|
Sorry for the thread necromancy...
...but I was wondering:
If I attack a creature with my whip, and there's an ally on the other side, do *I* get a flanking bonus? (I know I don't threaten squares with a whip out of turn for AoO purposes, but when I actually whip an enemy raw, you'd think I'd get +2 to hit if there's a guy in his back trying to shiv his ribs with something pointy...)
Edit:
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.
... so it seems I get the flanking bonus. Let me know if this logic makes sense...
Yes. Flanking can be asymmetrical.
In your example you would gain +2 to hit and other benefits from flanking, your ally does not.
Re: 1.5Str - is it any worse than two-handing ... a rapier? Of all the things I posted to be called out on...
You can't get 1.5 strength to damage by two-handing a rapier.
Drawback: You can’t wield a rapier in two hands in order to apply 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus to damage.
Re: 1.5Str - is it any worse than two-handing ... a rapier? Of all the things I posted to be called out on...You can't get 1.5 strength to damage by two-handing a rapier.
Drawback: You can’t wield a rapier in two hands in order to apply 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus to damage.
Responding to a post from 2010? Grick, sadly, hasn't even posted here in four years.