Player: "I want to kick over the table and dive for cover!"

A table is not actually suitable cover. Arrows and bullets will pass through it like it's nothing.

The only thing a table blocks is line of effect.

>having shit tables

Stay poor and enjoy your cardboard and sheet metal tubes.

While bullets I'll agree with you but arrows? A wooden shield can block arrows. Why not a really long shield made of wood or rock? I mean as long as they dont press their back to the table i'm sure it could block arrows and bolts.

>Why is a table a DC 15 str check?
Why wouldn't it be? Study Dwarven Oak tables are not meant to be tossed around like your plastic patio furniture If the enemy is not next to you it should not provoke AoO, but the action itself implies letting your guard down to commit yourself to something else.

>For example, climbing the outer wall of a ruined tower may have a DC of 15.

Because thats not how DC is supposed to scale.

>but the action itself implies letting your guard down to commit yourself to something else.

So it shouldnt provoke an attack as you yourself said.

My original point still stands, stop being shit and blaming the system.

when I couldn't find anyone to play with

I just heavily mod skyrim with a few followers with generic classes and spells and pretend im in a group

Well fuck I hate to go logical fallacy on you but
"A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent."
You're literally quoting things I didn't say and pretending I made arguments I didn't make mate. I didn't even realize we were in disagreement.

Break line of sight of a caster?

Still bullshit due to being a standard action and DC15.

...

Fireball would still reach around the table.

>Playing a martial character.
>Surrounded on all sides by enemies.
>"I'll spin in a circle t-"
>"Sorry user, you can only do that if you have [spin in a circle while swinging a weapon] feat and that'll provoke an AoO. What's your AC?"

And then I proceeded to eat four different AoO's and died.

Fuck 3.X

>>"I'll spin in a circle t-"
Sorry user, you can't because that's fucking retarded.

What's ridiculous about it?

I'm spinning in a circle in order to hit multiple opponents at once so I don't end up eating four different attacks on my subsequent turns.

I'd imagine getting a penalty towards hitting someone like this, not eating four AoO's just for attempting to perform it without the required feat that's unavailable until like level 10 or something.

>Every spell is fireball.

Yeah, that's a bad argument. It's like saying why take cover because your enemies might be packing grenades. Could be trying to avoid a spell like disintegration, or hold person instead.

Attacks of opportunity incurred from an action (not movement) occur after the action takes place.
Therefor they can only aoo you if you fail to oill them in the attack.

Hit harder.

>presenting your back wide open to enemies
>not expecting AoO
Uhh?

A conversation me and one of my better players had about how the bookkeeping was murder. If not murder-inducing in its own right, then inspiring thoughts of murder in those having to deal with it.

Loot, feats, skills, spells, what your attack bonuses are, buffs, debuffs, magic items, resources at your disposal, whos and wheres and whys, all that stuff has to be kept in the forefront of your mind while you're playing, and it distracts from actually playing.

Also, for as much as I like the spirit of their item creation system, it boils down to arbitrary bullshit-tier garbage-ass ass-garbage where fairly simple magic items can end up costing tens if not hundreds of thousands of gp, because of how the system is basically built around the basic tenet of, "this is a guideline, we don't actually know how it works, or even how it should work, use other, similar items to help you."

I thought AoOs interrupt the provoking action. Isn't that how spellcasting in combat's supposed to work?

They happen after. Which is why I said that.

>meanwhile in Exalted

Ok, that's a two point stunt: you gain two additional dice and one free success. Roll to hit and your normal damage.

I was already surrounded.

Hence the hail mary "I spin in a circle while swinging my sword."

It's fucking stupid because spinning in a circle with any kind of weapon will just get you hit on the back and get your weapon stuck. The first who just put a weapon in the way of yours will stop you and you're dead meat

In reality sure.

In D&D where wrinkled old prunes can summon lightning by waggling their fingers and reciting the gay national anthem, I'd say that it's just as possible for someone to swing in a circle to hit multiple enemies that are surrounding them.

>It's fantasy so you can do anything you want and realism doesn't matters
I hate this meme

While I do agree that it gets annoying that you need feats in pathfinder/d&d3.5 if you want to do anything outside the norm as a martial, spinning around to hit all enemies is stupid anime shit and I have no sympathy for you.

Basically this. Spinning is -not- a good trick.

Not until you git gud it's not.

Ok, make your normal number of attacks at your normal attack bonus and tell me which ones you want to target. As normal.

Or shove, tumble, or overrun your way out of being surrounded.

Are there ceaving rules for regular attacks in 3.5/Pf ?

>"Oh, spinning to hit multiple opponents at once, that's unrealistic."
>"Turning bat guano and sulfer into a bead of fire that blows up a small convo, perfectly legit and totally appropriate to the setting."

I hate this meme.

Especially when most of the bullshit that martials want to do, don't even break the game.

>dc 15 to kick a table over

the fuck?

>Just full attack you fucking pleb, you don't get to be creative!

Also, shoving, tumbling, and overrunning require feats to perform admirably and even then, you might eat an AoO anyway.

>Turning bat guano and sulfer into a bead of fire that blows up
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder

A martial that jump six meters easy?
I take it.
A wizard who use a fireball to make explode a pool of water?
Fuck him

Stop thinking in D&D terms.

Okay?

It still doesn't mean that you can take bat shit and sulfer and blow something up with it IRL.

I mean, the components for lightning bolt is a piece of metal and some wool but last I checked, nobody shoots lightning outta their dick they start rubbing a nail with a sweater hard enough.

And the wrinkled old prune needs to know the right spells to summon lightning ... just as the jock needs to know the right techniques to pull off his faggoty pirouette without getting his spine, left kidney and right lung simultaneously fucked by 12 hard inches of steel.

How long are you sticking around on your bait thread? Do you have some sort of auto alert or something?

Yet the jock is penalized for trying to do something outside the box while the prune can basically devastate a small village with magic without any questions asked.

While they're both considered roughly the same in terms of power level, as far as 3.X is concerned.

It's bullshit.

no, it's not bullshit, it's a bait

>I should be able to suddenly decide I can make four attacks in one action to get myself out of a jam because the only rule is the rule of cool!
If there were 1000 enemies coming at you, would you expect to be able to attack 1000 times?
I don't believe you got that far without realizing you were playing a style of game that doesn't cater to your tastes.

The prune isn't doing anything outside the box though.

The ability and application is written pretty clearly. Outside the box would be using lightning bolt to commence electrolysis.

I wouldn't say it provokes. The enemies are going to be concerned about what is going on with the table. Potentially using their shields/weapons/off hands to keep it from hitting them.

I am making an assumption from the OP post that the the enemies are adjacent (Beside or opposite the table) if they are getting AOO.

It's unbalanced, but not for that reason.
A fighter cannot do things he doesn't know how to do.
A wizard cannot do things he doesn't know how to do.

Sorry you have had shit DMs.
(YOU)

Three things.

1) I should be able to attack four opponent who are tightly bunched around me in a DESPERATE attempt to take at least one of them down with me.
2) If there were 1000 enemies, I'd only be able to swing at 8 per turn at the most.
3) The wizard's fireball can attack a group of enemies within the AoE (20 ft.) and deal more damage to more targets with one spell than I can with multiple sword stabs.

Consider that this entire thread was about "when you realized D&D was shit" in the first place.

>arrows will pass through tables
not all of us are so poor that we own cardboard tables, user

I, as an out of shape nerd, could take a stick or a piece of rhubarb and spin in a circle to attack multiple people around me. It's not going to work like I hoped it would but the point is, it's something that I, as an untrained person, would know how to do.

Meanwhile, Mr. Fighting man apparently cannot do this simple maneuver while being stronger than the average peasant just because the player didn't give him the correct feat to do so.

You're right though, it is unbalanced.

Post video of yourself making a circle attack. No enemies necessary, I don't want to be unreasonable.

>as an untrained person

Answered your on complaint on why simply making him stronger will not resolve the AoO problem.

The guy simply has not mastered the technique to reliably perform a whirlwind attack.

1) Well your character in that game can't, because he doesn't have that ability, so you don't get to just make shit up. A wizard without the required training would not know how to spin in a circle with a sword to hit four people at once either.
2) Do you think it's reasonable to take a swing at 8 people at once and have any chance of hitting most of them, when YOU HAVE NOT LEARNED THAT ABILITY? Unless they're all gelatinous cubes completely filling their spaces, they're not going to just stand there and take it. Sure, D&D is not perfectly realistic, but if you want to do something clearly fantastic that most people cannot do, YOU HAVE TO LEARN THAT ABILITY.
3) Yeah, so? The wizard's fireball has a description and RULES explicitly saying it can target any number of creatures in an area. The fighter's sword does not.

Why do you even need training to spin in a circle to attack multiple targets though? It's not like I expected it to actually kill more than two people at the most.

At most, I'd expect to take penalties to my hit until I gained the feat or maybe even an AoO if any of my opponents survive if the GM wants to be deadly but not automatically eating four AoO's just because I decided "welp, might as well channel my inner Link and hope for the best" when I was already fucked anyways.

Where's the logic in that?

>tfw no one remembers that interacting with scenery is a free action in 5e

youtu.be/HPPj6viIBmU

Because spinning like that will open you up to being hit hard when you turn your back, side or even just raising your sword arm like the nounce your character is being.

I mean bully for asking but if you lack the ability to see how it won't work so well in a combat scenario you might need to have been cuddled more as a child.

The training is learning how to whip around effectively while keeping yourself free from reprisal,

1) I'm spinning in a fucking circle while holding a piece of metal, it's not like I'm enflaming it while increasing the size of it or anything. How is basic bullshit considered an "ability" to you when anyone could do it?
2) I do if I'm taking multiple penalties for doing so and I don't expect to survive anyways. I mean, I take down maybe 2 guys and the other 998 enemies kill me next turn anyways, so what's the issue?
3) The point was, why can't I perform a stupid action that probably won't kill more than two people, at best, while the wizard can pop a spell that deals more damage to more people at the cost of a spell slot and nobody bat an eye?

I understand that it's magic but if we're supposed to be the same level, why is the gap between of our abilities so large for achieving the goal of striking multiple opponents in one turn?

>How is basic bullshit considered an "ability" to you when anyone could do it?
Fucking prove you can do it, faget.

>replying to trolls

Only trolls do that at this point. This thread is just faggots.

...

So you basically ignored the part where I said that I,

1) Expected massive penalties for doing said action without the feat.
2) Expected for this move to fail at performing what I wanted to do.

Maybe your parents should've taught you how read properly, not to immediately jump to conclusions, and not be an asshole.

>I'm spinning in a fucking circle while holding a piece of metal
And you're not going to come close to hitting a single person. You're not going to do anything but look stupid, because you're not aiming at any body part in particular. Have you ever seen a swordfight outside of Star Wars? Do you not understand how big a 5-foot square is?

Are you saying you can't spin in a circle while swinging a weapon?

Can you even wipe yourself anymore?

>trolls trolling trolls

Kill yourselves.

For the umpteenth time, I don't expect it to work and I don't expect to do this without taking on penalties for it.

It's the principle of, why is this stupid tactic listed as a special ability that's worthy of a feat with multiple prereqs for it?

Third party user.
I present the case that spinning with a weapon in hand is completely different from striking in a full circle.

The momentum you'd need to keep going past the first hit would be ridiculous. All of your inertia would be lost. It's a dumb way to try and smack someone down.

I don't even own a weapon. Now take that Genuine ™ katana off your wall, bust out the ol' webcam, and show us what you've got.

I don't see where I failed? I explained why you'd eat 4 AoO and why performing it without the feat will cause those attacks, the actual technique will not make swinging it more deadly or less likely to make contact, only protect yourself from counter attacks.

As you've mentioned any retard can spin in a circle slashing wildly, the feat exists solely so you can defend against the AoOs while you do so.

4th party user.

You're all acting like retarded cunts. Grow the fuck up.

5e doesn't have these problems

Yeah, it is pretty dope in it's simplicity and homebrewability.

Hence the penalties and lack of confidence in striking down more than maybe two people without a feat.

>realism

Thank christ for that.

Not having to know half a dozen useless feats just to do one thing that's obsolete by the time it's learned is one of the reasons I love it so much.

Because actually doing it EFFECTIVELY requires significant training and practice. Thus the feat.

They don't really give you the option to do it sans-feat because they probably didn't want to expand the rulebook 3 times over listing all the dumb shit you can try at -20 penalties or w/e.

So many morons that think whirlwind attack is just spinning in place with your weapon extended... It's actually making several quick and accurate attacks among different targets while not presenting any openings, which is actually extremely impressive.

Go get 4 buddies. Tell them to double flank you. Tell them to attempt to tag you with whatever object in hand when you try to spin with your "weapon" and attempt to tag them at the same time. It does NOT turn out well for the guy surrounded.

Indeed. There's like 25 feats and odds are you have at most one or two.

Just decide what you want to do have have the dm decide the cost of it.

seeThe actual example was SHIT. And I mean pure, unaltered shit. Spinning in a circle is autismo-tier figther.

Whine because you can't half-sword or mordhau. That's better.

>realism

>If you complain about shitty unrealistic fighters, you must like shitty omnipotent wizard

Because I'm not the habitual Barbarian in game.

I just fucking hate the 'le creative' combat shit people try, I do not expect you to be able to cut off someones armor, or slaughter a room in one go any more than I expect the Apprentice Wizard to cast Wish.

Y'know what, let's agree to disagree and say that the retarded spin attack move done in desperation is not something you'd do as your go-to melee attack.

Let me rephrase the question, why do I have to wait until level 10, at the latest, to learn how to attack people in an AoE that only goes as far as melee while the wizard can learn multiple spells that can deal more damage and attack multiple targets, at ranged, as early as level 5?

Level 5 is supposed to be the point where you stop being ordinary people and start becoming fucking badasses who can perform herculean feats of might and magic, if one class learns an AoE ability then the other classes should have access to an AoE ability as well, even if it's just something that works against a group of enemies if they're within melee range of you.

And if that's not the case then why is that? Because it's certainly not for balance, otherwise the wizard wouldn't have a 20 ft. AoE spell at level 5 in the first place.

Because D&D is garbage. That's kind of the subject of the thread.

>I don't expect it to work
No, you expected it to have a chance to KILL TWO PEOPLE.

Crits are an amazing thing user.

Whcih is why I said "at the most."

youtube.com/watch?v=zi5mcvn2C_c
Sure why not.

That's rather retarded. And fucking yeah it should provoke and AoO - you're literally showing your back to everyone.

>I was already surrounded.
Which means that you should've applied your creativity beforehand - in your attempts to NOT get surrounded. If the enemies are roughly the same level and you're on your own than you're totally fucked when you get surrounded by them regardless of what you do, and that's the way it should be.

> I should be able to attack four opponent who are tightly bunched around me in a DESPERATE attempt to take at least one of them down with me.
4 AoOs sound desperate enough to me.
> The wizard's fireball can
Of course. He's a fucking wizard and you're a dude with a stabber. The fuck did you expect? If you don't like the power gap go ask your GM for a Holy Flamin' Frost-Brand Gronk-Slayin' Vorpal Hammer o' Woundin' an' Returnin' an' Shootin'-Lightnin'-Out-Yer-Bum
>Consider that this entire thread was about "when you realized D&D was shit"
It's shit if you desire power balance in the party, but the situation was just you being amazingly dumb.

No, hitting someone is a bit harder than that. Your weapon prof is a reflection of how well your char knows all the techniques required for landing blows in the enemy. It's not just "he swings it and they suffer", just landing a blow on someone resisting is REALLY DAMN HARD and requires a lot of focus and effort.

>I, as an out of shape nerd, could take a stick or a piece of rhubarb and spin in a circle to attack multiple people around me
And if you actually take a solid hold on your Exotic Weapon and try to hit something big and heavy while spinning in one place, you're gonna fall down on your ass. I fucking guarantee that. Even someone really well trained would fall on his ass, which is why trained people don't try that shit and it requires le epic fightan levels to be able to perform something like that.

First, the wizard spell in question comes with its own set of drawbacks. For example:
-He has to have gotten a full night's sleep and an hour of "me-time" in the morning.
-An enemy grappling him, or even a fierce storm can make him unable to use the ability. Similarly, anything making him unable to retrieve the bat guano from his pouch also nixes the spell.
-He can't make the fireball distinguish between allies and enemies, (including himself at short range!) while the fighter whirlwinding can.
-He suffers from the usual caster class drawbacks, which include danger HP and crappy AC.
-The spell slot used to do a single fireball is done for the day. A whirlwinding fighter can keep throwing the tactic as long as seems sensible.

Now I'm not saying the game is actually balanced. Good players can definitely do more when sitting behind a caster character sheet than an equivalent melee, but don't try to pretend that melees are never ever needed.

You ever try to be a wizard in an anti-magic area? How about when golems show up? Or when the enemy has some good monks that will pass their saves and be in your face grappling instantly? Melees can be relevant. Maybe your DM just doesn't know how to deal with good caster PC's.

>but don't try to pretend that melees are never ever needed.

They are needed, but there's plenty of options that can both melee and caster, often at the same time.

Listen, we've already moved on at this point.

I wasn't even arguing that spinning in place like a retard was a good idea, just that I should've been able to attempt it without the feat while taking on shitloads of penalties for doing something incredibly stupid in desperation in the first place.

But anyways, it's really only an issue for 3.X so it's really nothing that I have to worry about anymore now that we moved on to 5e.

>realism
Literally a non-argument.

If your only justification for attempting this action was "I might roll a crit", then you didn't expect it to work. This is "I intimidate the avalanche" level of desperation.
Furthermore, a natural 20 is only a crit if you would've hit without the "nat 20 always hits" rule.
You attempted an action that you expected to fail, and it failed. No problem here!

well yeah, if you wanted to take -4 to hit and -20 to hit any further guys after hitting one, as well as being flat-footed for the round, I'd let you swing that.

That sounds both sad and fun at the same time. How did it work out?