Iron Heart Surge vs. Frenzy

[molten_dragon]

Like a lot of people I've had the idea that Iron Heart Surge would be perfect for ending a frenzy before you go off half cocked and kill your party. I've heard a couple people on here mention that it won't work by RAW due to the wording of frenzy requiring you to attack things to the best of your ability on your turn. However, the whole point of Iron Heart Surge is to allow you to end conditions that might normally prevent you from acting as you wish. I've never heard anyone argue for example that you shouldn't be able to use iron heart surge to end a dominate person spell.

What is your opinion. Will Iron Heart Surge end a frenzy or not?

[Big Fau]

If you can talk your DM into letting you initiate a non-Strike/Boost/Counter maneuver, then yes.

Personally? I allow it. Hell, I've contemplated removing that entire clause from the FB because of how disruptive it can be.

[Madcrafter]

I would say yes as well. IHS is using your training and determination to overcome an effect, which is in essence the same as succeeding on your will save to end the frenzy prematurely. Though just buffing your save or having the wizard cast hold person on you might be easier than dipping a level or two in warblade to pick up IHS, depending on one's character.

[jiriku]

I'd support it. A forced PvP clause is, frankly, bad class design. I would rule very leniently for anything that fixes that issue in FB. Moreover, encouraging a dip into martial maneuvers increases the versatility of the traditional barbarian/berserker, and versatile characters make the game more fun and interesting for everyone.

For those really concerned about the FB wording, the +2 bonus on attack rolls from IHS arguably allows you to slip under the "attack to the best of your ability" clause, since applying a self-buff to your attack rolls does improve your offensive ability.

[Ernir]

However, the whole point of Iron Heart Surge is to allow you to end conditions that might normally prevent you from acting as you wish.
Iron Heart Surge is also notorious for not doing that. That is, for not being usable when something is impeding your standard actions.

For those really concerned about the FB wording, the +2 bonus on attack rolls from IHS arguably allows you to slip under the "attack to the best of your ability" clause, since applying a self-buff to your attack rolls does improve your offensive ability.

II call that argument thin. "Attacking to the best of your ability" is, when you're a Frenzied Berserker, not very likely to include anything other than charging the nearest legal target. In mid-late combat, is adding +2 to your already +yes attack roll modifier as a standard action really your best offensive move? :smallconfused:
Maybe if you could, for some reason, not attack this turn, but can foresee being able to attack next turn?


In any case, I doubt it works.
Whether it should is another question entirely.

[Adrayll]

Is there any way to drop the effect with a Contingent Spell of any sort? Off topic maybe, but could accomplish the effect. Is "no active enemies in an X' radius" too specific a contingent clause?

[Madcrafter]

That is most definitely overkill probably. There are many easier ways to finish a frenzy or prevent a pvp situation.

EDIT: But a contingent calm emotions or something might work.

[Douglas]

I've never heard anyone argue for example that you shouldn't be able to use iron heart surge to end a dominate person spell.
Actually, it is perfectly clear by RAW that IHS is not normally usable against Dominate Person - the maneuver is capable of ending the spell, but the dominator is unlikely to give orders that would allow the victim to use it for that purpose. This is just one example of many things IHS is well known without debate to be useless against by RAW.

RAI and what makes sense by the fluff is a very different matter.

[Daftendirekt]

EDIT: But a contingent calm emotions or something might work.

So, FBs just need a half-elf bard cohort.