As people are probably aware RAW anyone wielding a melee weapon, reach weapon or is able to make an unarmed strike (remembering that it specifically says you can make attacks outside of punches); qualifies for flanking purposes.
So, in a very real meta sense the optimal route for casters and alchemists would be to carry around whips. Never using them, just getting that flanking bonus from 10ft away whenever it is possible.
There are some cases when this won't make sense to do, but they are few and far between. What do others feel about this, do you think this is a design intention or a weird unintended interaction?
Personally I don't mind anyone being in melee range getting AoO, but the idea of a caster with a whip and produce flame getting an AoO from 10ft away but a person with a crossbow, sling, bow or javelin won't, is a bit weird.
Personally I don't mind anyone being in melee range getting AoO, but the idea of a caster with a whip and produce flame getting an AoO from 10ft away but a person with a crossbow, sling, bow or javelin won't, is a bit weird.
I'm confused. Why would carrying a whip grant a Wizard an AoO?
Personally I don't mind anyone being in melee range getting AoO, but the idea of a caster with a whip and produce flame getting an AoO from 10ft away but a person with a crossbow, sling, bow or javelin won't, is a bit weird.I'm confused. Why would carrying a whip grant a Wizard an AoO?
Sorry sick and have a very tired brain, I meant flanking rather than AoO.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, in a very real meta sense the optimal route for casters and alchemists would be to carry around whips.
It costs you one hand. You must be 10ft. away from the enemy and thus exposed. It forces you to use actions to position yourself properly.
Where is it "optimal"? I don't even see the point of doing it.
It can definitely be helpful in many situations. And depending on what side of the Ranged Weapon flanking issue, this would allow a Wizard to qualify for casting spells at flanked foes.
I don't know if I would call it "meta" so to speak though. It is fairly situational and requires a caster who is okay with being near the front lines.
Now once the Witch is fully released I can get behind them carrying a whip. There is something deeply satisfying about the image of a witch in tight leather.. armor with a whip.
So, in a very real meta sense the optimal route for casters and alchemists would be to carry around whips.It costs you one hand. You must be 10ft. away from the enemy and thus exposed. It forces you to use actions to position yourself properly.
Where is it "optimal"? I don't even see the point of doing it.
It isn't about being in that position at all times. It is about the weird scenario of having a whip ornament of sorts that lets you take advantage of these situations with next to no downsides. But a scenario where a bow user in the same position wouldn't.
Occupying a hand means so little to a caster or alchemists, worst case you drop the whip.
I am not thinking of this as a balance issue, I am more asking about what people think the intent is and how they feel with the weird thematics attached.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The intent is that if you are holding a weapon that can make AOOs you can threaten, or whatever. They weren't going to specifically put in a clause that stops wizards from flanking. Jim Wizard is still going to get his face pounded because he's ten feet away from the enemy trying to flank them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Occupying a hand means so little to a caster or alchemists, worst case you drop the whip.
I very strongly disagree. Casters are the ones who need the most hands. Scrolls, wands, staves, weapons, shields. You need a dozen of hands to hold all I would put in a caster's hands.
With a whip, you lose an action to get the proper wand or scroll. Still a pretty heavy cost for an extremely situational and not much desirable advantage.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I'd have the caster use the whip. I'll note the whip is a trip weapon. The trip action isn't based on weapon proficiency but Athletics proficiency. Even if you aren't proficient in the weapon, as long as you have Athletics as a skill, you've got decent odds of doing something.
Certain stat distributions (i.e. 16 Strength, 18 Int) are pretty close to as good as a fighter can get for athletics check. At level 3, a wizard could be rolling +3 (level) + 4 (expert) + 1 (weapon) + 0 to 3 (strength) = +8 to +11 for tripping with a +1 whip.
Compare to their best possible spell attack roll of +3 (level) +2 (trained) +4 (key stat) = +9.
At 7th level, it could be +7 (level) +6 (master) +1 (weapon) + 0-4 (strength) = +14 to +18 with a +1 whip.
Spell attack would be +7 (level) +4 (expert) + 4 (key stat) = +15.
Alternatively, ignore strength and grab the Assurance feat. Against enemies with low reflex saves, you can trip your level or lower automatically.
Another fun fact if you use it before your save DC spells, you can get away with no MAP penalty. Since its a single target action affecting reflex saves, it also ignores most of the benefits of cover.
You don't need to use it every fight, but its not a bad 3rd action option for a caster.
I'd agree that the cost is fairly heavy, but it's not insurmountable.Occupying a hand means so little to a caster or alchemists, worst case you drop the whip.I very strongly disagree. Casters are the ones who need the most hands. Scrolls, wands, staves, weapons, shields. You need a dozen of hands to hold all I would put in a caster's hands.
With a whip, you lose an action to get the proper wand or scroll. Still a pretty heavy cost for an extremely situational and not much desirable advantage.
The cost is always calculated "in regard of what you gain". In that case, the cost is not heavy, but the advantage is so low and situational...
And staves can be shifted into gauntlets, so they don't use a hand unless used.Anyway, some may use this strategy, but I think it'll never become a meta, even if not all metas are rational :)
Sorry sick and have a very tired brain, I meant flanking rather than AoO.Personally I don't mind anyone being in melee range getting AoO, but the idea of a caster with a whip and produce flame getting an AoO from 10ft away but a person with a crossbow, sling, bow or javelin won't, is a bit weird.I'm confused. Why would carrying a whip grant a Wizard an AoO?
Ah, I've been there. I hope you feel better soon.
I remember another game (Spycraft 2d edition) that let you ranged flank. You had to be in the line (so if you're at 1E 2N of an enemy, you'd flank with someone 1W 2S, or 2W 4S, and so on). I don't remember USING that often tho.
As far as 'drop the whip when needed' ... well, then you're no longer flanking. You're not wielding the reach weapon when it's on your foot.
I personally lean towards 'You need to be TRAINED at least with the thing!' for flanking. Which means the wizard can still flank with his fist but not with that long length of leather he keeps tying himself up in. Of course when the party Champion ties the wizard up in leather ... oh, right, never mind ...