Open Hand Flurry & Sweeping Attack

[Grixis]

Battlemaster's Sweeping Attack - "When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to damage another creature with the same attack. Choose another creature within 5 feet of the original target and within your reach. If the original attack roll would hit the second creature, it takes damage equal to the number you roll on your superiority die. The damage is the same type dealt by the original attack."

Monk's Open Hand Technique - Whenever you hit a creature with one of the attacks granted by your Flurry of Blows, you can impose one of the following effects:"

Seems to me that if you do an Open Hand Flurry and use the Battlemaster's Sweeping Attack to hit another creature within 5 feet, you can impose of the flurry effects on both creatures. If this is in fact the case;

1. What other abilities synergize with Sweeping Attack?

2. What other abilities synergize with Open Hand Technique?

[JumboWheat01]

Flurry of Blows creates an Unarmed Strike, which is a non-weapon attack, so it wouldn't work with Sweeping Attack at all. There was the note in one of the erratas a while back about how you couldn't sneak attack with our fists because an Unarmed Strike isn't a weapon attack.

[RickAllison]

Flurry of Blows creates an Unarmed Strike, which is a non-weapon attack, so it wouldn't work with Sweeping Attack at all. There was the note in one of the erratas a while back about how you couldn't sneak attack with our fists because an Unarmed Strike isn't a weapon attack.

This has been clarified in Sage Advice, PHB errata, and the SRD. Fists aren't weapons and so cannot qualify for "melee attacks with a weapon" (this includes such items as Green-Flame Blade) but they do qualify for "melee weapon attacks". So yes, Sweeping Attack works.

If I had a dollar for every time in the past three months I have or seen others have to correct this mistake, I would be able to buy a few new games...

[AmbientRaven]

I feel this wouldn't work/. As the secondary attack ins't being rolled to hit that creature specifically.

I may be wrong though

[Ruslan]

Seems to me that if you do an Open Hand Flurry and use the Battlemaster's Sweeping Attack to hit another creature within 5 feet, you can impose of the flurry effects on both creatures.
Rule of Cool says heck yes.


1. What other abilities synergize with Sweeping Attack?AFB right now, but I believe Poison would work. It's the same attack, so both targets would be poisoned.

[RickAllison]

I feel this wouldn't work/. As the secondary attack ins't being rolled to hit that creature specifically.

I may be wrong though

No; it is still an attack from Flurry of Blows ("attempt to damage another creature with the same attack") which hits the second creature ("Whenever you hit a creature with one of the attacks granted by your Flurry of Blows"), thus it fits all the criteria to inflict one of the effects of the Open Hand Technique. Also, remember that it is not an automatic hit for the second creature, that the roll still has to be sufficient to strike the second creature.

[Zalabim]

It doesn't work because Sweeping Attack doesn't hit the other creature. Rule of Cool still says go for it though.

[BladeWing81]

It doesn't work because Sweeping Attack doesn't hit the other creature. Rule of Cool still says go for it though.

What is this... rule of cool you speak of:smalleek:?

[JumboWheat01]

What is this... rule of cool you speak of:smalleek:?

I apologize for doing this to you, and we may indeed never hear from you again, but since you asked, THIS (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfCool) is what we speak of when we say Rule of Cool.

[NewDM]

What is this... rule of cool you speak of:smalleek:?

Its basically the idea of letting some 'cool' idea break all the rules and bypass everything. It usually ends up breaking a game or having players attempt to out 'cool' each other in order to bypass challenges instead of dealing with them using the rule based adjudication system. It gets really bad when the players repeatedly try to use the 'cool' idea to regularly bypass the game system.

Its generally frowned upon by software game developers.

[Waffle_Iron]

I apologize for doing this to you, and we may indeed never hear from you again, but since you asked, THIS (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfCool) is what we speak of when we say Rule of Cool.

Oh no, I'm not falling for that again. Last time I followed a tv tropes link and subsequently escaped, I was informed I needed to upgrade my Nokia for an Android.

[Ruslan]

Its basically the idea of letting some 'cool' idea break all the rules and bypass everything. It usually ends up breaking a game or having players attempt to out 'cool' each other in order to bypass challenges instead of dealing with them using the rule based adjudication system. It gets really bad when the players repeatedly try to use the 'cool' idea to regularly bypass the game system.
Or, alternatively, if judiciously applied by a thinking DM and a thinking playgroup, it leads to players enjoying the game. That could happen too.

BTW, your bias is showing through the cracks of your argument.

[JumboWheat01]

Oh no, I'm not falling for that again. Last time I followed a tv tropes link and subsequently escaped, I was informed I needed to upgrade my Nokia for an Android.

Hey, at least I warned them. I remember my first foray into TVtropes. Still not sure how I managed to escape.

[PeteNutButter]

Unfortunately, RAW I don't think it'd work. "When you hit a creature with a weapon attack... ...attempt to damage another creature with the same attack. ...if the attack would hit the creature, it takes damage..." Emphasis mine.

You aren't actually hitting the creature RAW, even though you need to meet or exceed its AC, you are not explicitly hitting its AC. Notice the verbiage, "if the attack would hit the creature." It does not say you hit the creature, it says you deal damage. Compare it to Greenflame Blade.

A BM/Hunter could attack enemy A, sweep it to adjacent enemy B, and then since he hit enemy B, could activate Horde Breaker to attack enemy A again. Effectively it lets him use Horde Breaker to attack the same enemy twice, since his sweeping attack hits both A+B.
(I'm guessing that's why they made whirlwind attack specifically make individual attacks so that it explicitly works with Horde Breaker.)

A BM/Paladin could smite two different targets with a sweeping attack(likely by spending two spells).

A BM with GWM could argue that since his dealing damage with a 2handed weapon and took the -5/+10 he should get +10 damage on the sweeping attack.

A BM/Rogue could potentially sneak attack a sweeped target.

A BM/Barb could add his rage damage to the sweep, assuming he used a str attack... etc

Of course all these work with just taking martial adept feat as well.
All those make me think the wording is on purpose not that you are actually hitting the foe with the sweeping attack.

[JackPhoenix]

Flurry of Blows creates an Unarmed Strike, which is a non-weapon attack, so it wouldn't work with Sweeping Attack at all. There was the note in one of the erratas a while back about how you couldn't sneak attack with our fists because an Unarmed Strike isn't a weapon attack.

Unarmed Strike is not a weapon, it is, however, melee weapon attack

You can't sneak attack with Unarmed Strike because its not ranged or finesse weapon, not because it's not a weapon attack. (confusing terminology is confusing)

[JumboWheat01]

This has been clarified in Sage Advice, PHB errata, and the SRD. Fists aren't weapons and so cannot qualify for "melee attacks with a weapon" (this includes such items as Green-Flame Blade) but they do qualify for "melee weapon attacks". So yes, Sweeping Attack works.

If I had a dollar for every time in the past three months I have or seen others have to correct this mistake, I would be able to buy a few new games...


Unarmed Strike is not a weapon, it is, however, melee weapon attack

You can't sneak attack with Unarmed Strike because its not ranged or finesse weapon, not because it's not a weapon attack. (confusing terminology is confusing)

I'll never get that right. Probably a good thing I don't really play monks.

[RickAllison]

I'll never get that right. Probably a good thing I don't really play monks.

It pops up in many areas so you will never be safe! Mwahahahahahah!!!!

Ahem. One area it pops up in is the Sharpshooter feat. The first two effects work for thrown weapons like daggers just fine, but the -5/+10 does not. This is because thrown daggers or javelins are melee weapons making ranged attacks while that effect is only available for attacks with ranged weapons. Interestingly, that means that while a dagger cannot gain that effect, a crossbow or other ranged weapon used in melee still benefits from the attack. If one has Tavern Brawler, one can whack enemies with a sling to deal 1d4+10+Str damage at a -5 to-hit.

[JumboWheat01]

It pops up in many areas so you will never be safe! Mwahahahahahah!!!!

Ahem. One area it pops up in is the Sharpshooter feat. The first two effects work for thrown weapons like daggers just fine, but the -5/+10 does not. This is because thrown daggers or javelins are melee weapons making ranged attacks while that effect is only available for attacks with ranged weapons. Interestingly, that means that while a dagger cannot gain that effect, a crossbow or other ranged weapon used in melee still benefits from the attack. If one has Tavern Brawler, one can whack enemies with a sling to deal 1d4+10+Str damage at a -5 to-hit.

I'll admit, that comes off as rather silly to me. Using a melee weapon to make a ranged attack (not even improvised,) is no good, but a ranged weapon being used to make an improvised melee attack is.

...I think I'll just stick with using weapons for their intended purpose and avoid the weirdly worded things. Simpler that way.

[jas61292]

It pops up in many areas so you will never be safe! Mwahahahahahah!!!!

Ahem. One area it pops up in is the Sharpshooter feat. The first two effects work for thrown weapons like daggers just fine, but the -5/+10 does not. This is because thrown daggers or javelins are melee weapons making ranged attacks while that effect is only available for attacks with ranged weapons. Interestingly, that means that while a dagger cannot gain that effect, a crossbow or other ranged weapon used in melee still benefits from the attack. If one has Tavern Brawler, one can whack enemies with a sling to deal 1d4+10+Str damage at a -5 to-hit.

This is very questionable RAW. Its very easy for a DM to look right at the book and tell you that you are attacking with an improvised weapon, maybe considered a club or something, and not a crossbow. Though, if you actually tried to do it, I feel many DMs would have other choice words for you.

[RickAllison]

This is very questionable RAW. Its very easy for a DM to look right at the book and tell you that you are attacking with an improvised weapon, maybe considered a club or something, and not a crossbow. Though, if you actually tried to do it, I feel many DMs would have other choice words for you.

Agreed, but it does fit RAW! Now, the odds of this showing are minuscule anyway ("So you have the option of firing that bow from 150' away as a 1d8... And you want to get right next to him and smack him with it to do less damage?" ), but it is within the rules. I really don't know why anyone would do it, to be honest. To use that, you have spent two feats (Sharpshooter+Tavern Brawler) and your own safety to be less effective than normal.

[Zalabim]

You would do it so you can use Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master (melee attack with a Heavy weapon) when you hit someone with your heavy crossbow for -10 to hit and +20 damage.

[PeteNutButter]

You would do it so you can use Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master (melee attack with a Heavy weapon) when you hit someone with your heavy crossbow for -10 to hit and +20 damage.

Pointed that out above, in my list of examples why the OP thing has to be not legal. Since no one replied at all, it's occurring to me that people don't click spoilers. :smallannoyed:

A BM/Hunter could attack enemy A, sweep it to adjacent enemy B, and then since he hit enemy B, could activate Horde Breaker to attack enemy A again. Effectively it lets him use Horde Breaker to attack the same enemy twice, since his sweeping attack hits both A+B.
(I'm guessing that's why they made whirlwind attack specifically make individual attacks so that it explicitly works with Horde Breaker.)

A BM/Paladin could smite two different targets with a sweeping attack(likely by spending two spells).

A BM with GWM could argue that since his dealing damage with a 2handed weapon and took the -5/+10 he should get +10 damage on the sweeping attack.

A BM/Rogue could potentially sneak attack a sweeped target.

A BM/Barb could add his rage damage to the sweep, assuming he used a str attack... etc

Of course all these work with just taking martial adept feat as well.

[RickAllison]

Pointed that out above, in my list of examples why the OP thing has to be not legal. Since no one replied at all, it's occurring to me that people don't click spoilers. :smallannoyed:

A BM/Hunter could attack enemy A, sweep it to adjacent enemy B, and then since he hit enemy B, could activate Horde Breaker to attack enemy A again. Effectively it lets him use Horde Breaker to attack the same enemy twice, since his sweeping attack hits both A+B.
(I'm guessing that's why they made whirlwind attack specifically make individual attacks so that it explicitly works with Horde Breaker.)

A BM/Paladin could smite two different targets with a sweeping attack(likely by spending two spells).

A BM with GWM could argue that since his dealing damage with a 2handed weapon and took the -5/+10 he should get +10 damage on the sweeping attack.

A BM/Rogue could potentially sneak attack a sweeped target.

A BM/Barb could add his rage damage to the sweep, assuming he used a str attack... etc

Of course all these work with just taking martial adept feat as well.

See, maybe I am just being naive, but those seem like features. It makes sense to me that if you multi-class into one of the highest DPR classes in the game, you will get some bang for your buck.

[PeteNutButter]

See, maybe I am just being naive, but those seem like features. It makes sense to me that if you multi-class into one of the highest DPR classes in the game, you will get some bang for your buck.

The GWM isn't MC. Should he really get to add 10 damage to an ability that specifically specifies how much damage it does? What about magic weapons? What about str mod? The ability tells you exactly what it does. If you would hit their AC, then you deal this amount of damage. You do not "hit" the secondary target.

Essentially what you are doing is making the ability as good as Horde Breaker, which is a ranger feature because rangers don't get as many attacks.