Cleave and AOO: What is the problem?

[Elvinis75]

I have heard a lot of people that don’t like the idea of being able to cleave off an AOO but I don’t for the life of me understand why. The whole idea of cleave is that a person with this feat is able to attack again after they drop a creature. Some of the people that describe the abuse of this and the GC feats use method that is easily struck down by a mindful DM. They assume that “an enemy” means anyone they attack. I’m pretty sure that summoned creatures that are fighting for your side are not “enemies”. They frankly don’t pass the English language test. An enemy is:
1 : one that is antagonistic to another; especially : one seeking to injure, overthrow, or confound an opponent
2 : something harmful or deadly
3 a : a military adversary b : a hostile unit or force

If you are going to use 2 that is one heck of a stretch. A summoned creature could be made to attack an ally and thus become an enemy but then I doubt that he is going to run past the melee person and draw the AOO.
So what is the big beef?

Have there been any rulings that you can take AOO on allies?

 

[rkanodia]

Even ignoring the cheapness hinging on the definition of 'enemy' (which a good DM wouldn't allow enemy), cleaving on attacks of opportunity has some logic/balance issues.

Fred Fighter has Cleave and is going up against Bennie Big Bad Evil Guy. Fred gets one attack per round against Bennie.

Now, Michael Mook shows up to lend Bennie a hand. He figures Fred won't be so tough without his sword, so he attempts to disarm it. Lacking the Improved Disarm feat, he draws an attack of opportunity from Fred. Fred kills Michael easily, then uses Cleave to take an extra attack against Bennie.

So now, we have a scenario where Cleave let Fred make a second attack against Bennie in one round - even though Bennie didn't do anything to make himself vulnerable. Michael was the one who made himself open with the disarm attempt, but Bennie is taking the penalty also. If you think that's fine - Michael 'gets in Bennie's way', or is otherwise inhibiting Bennie's ability to defend himself via ineptitude, or whatever - then play it like it's written. Personally, I want my BBEGs to send in their mooks without stopping to think 'Hmm, I'll bet that guy in the platemail has Great Cleave; I'm going to get my butt kicked if I bring minions!'

 

[Scion]

It seems to me that most people who get upset about cleave on aoo mainly just dont like cleave to begin with and so place a lot of extra hate on anything dealing with cleave.

The situation where this sort of thing becomes bad are generally either 1)very rare or 2) hinging on dms letting anything and everything be deemed an 'enemy'.

So long as one doesnt have a problem with cleave to begin with then there really isnt much of a problem allowing cleave on it. It is just an extension of the feat.

Really, I think that bbeg's with henchmen so weak that the reliably die with a single hit are the problem, not cleave or aoo's. Having weak minions should be a weakness, that is why getting good help is a benefit and having bad help a drawback (such as low level grunts guarding your secret entrance.. the pc's can fight them, or simply talk past them since they dont have the skills to resist, weak minions are a weakness in just about any circumstance).

 

[Chimera]

It seems to me that most people who get upset about cleave on aoo mainly just dont like cleave to begin with and so place a lot of extra hate on anything dealing with cleave.

I disagree. I like cleave. Have no problem with it other than possibly the idea that you get to choose which other opponent gets hit with the cleave - although I can live with that quite well.

Really, I think that bbeg's with henchmen so weak that the reliably die with a single hit are the problem, not cleave or aoo's. Having weak minions should be a weakness,

Yeah, well, depends on how much damage the PC does in one stroke, doesn't it? As well as a lot of other factors.

I think rkanodia hit the nail on the head. In reading the OP, I was thinking of writing a similar response, down to "Mike the Mook". I just don't like Cleave and AoO combinations.

 

[Lamoni]

Really, I think that bbeg's with henchmen so weak that the reliably die with a single hit are the problem, not cleave or aoo's. Having weak minions should be a weakness, that is why getting good help is a benefit and having bad help a drawback (such as low level grunts guarding your secret entrance.. the pc's can fight them, or simply talk past them since they dont have the skills to resist, weak minions are a weakness in just about any circumstance).

I disagree. I think that low level minions aren't the best help, but they aren't bad help. Bad help is when you ask for help guarding your treasure and the help takes half the treasure when they leave.

Let's change the scenario given by rkanodia (which I think is very good), and instead have the Fighter with cleave surrounded by 5 weaker opponents. Alone, they wouldn't stand a chance, but together they have a good chance of winning. Fred the fighter knows some tactics and focuses on one opponent to drop him out of the fight. After 2 rounds the enemy he has focused on is almost dead and decides to drink a potion and heal up before continuing the fight. Well, Fred takes his AoO, drops him and then gets an extra free attack on one of the other opponents -- all because their friend dropped his guard. That doesn't make much sense to me and goes against what an attack of opportunity should represent. You get extra attacks when it isn't your turn when they lower their guard. You should cleave when it is your turn to be hitting.

I don't see my example being an example of how it breaks the game, just how it doesn't make much sense. I don't see either cleave or combat reflexes becoming underpowered if cleave isn't allowed off of AoO's.

 

[rkanodia]

Scion, I actually think Cleave is a cool mechanic, lending itself to cinematic combat. But I still think it's unfair to cleave on an attack of opportunity.

If I could re-write the SRD, I would mash Cleave and Great Cleave into one feat (honestly, the marginal utility of Great Cleave tends to be pretty small in my experience, YMMV), so you could make unlimited extra attacks, but only on standard attack, full attack, or readied attack options.

 

[Thanee]

Well, I don't like, that you are then punished for something you havn't done. An AoO only happens when someone lets his or her guard down, but the Cleave afterwards then is a regular attack, which can attack anyone, even those, that you could not attack in the first place.

Thus, if you are alone, you are then basically better off, as compared to having an ally with you in this situation who spawns extra attacks for the opponent (<- there, a politically correct version of "enemy" !! ), which is just silly.

That's why I don't like it.

The Great Cleave basket of snakes example is only an exaggeration to illustrate the silliness within this concept. Of course this specific example will never happen in a reasonable game.


And therefore I (as a house rule) only allow a Cleave against a target, which you could have attacked initially, with the attack that spawned the Cleave attack. Needless to say, that this never happens with an AoO, since two creatures cannot provoke AoO's simultaneously.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

weak minions are a weakness in just about any circumstance.

Nah. They might not be a big advantage, but they definitely should not be a disadvantage. They should at least give a marginal or even irrelevant advantage, but not a disadvantage.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Scharlata]

[...]So now, we have a scenario where Cleave let Fred make a second attack against Bennie in one round - even though Bennie didn't do anything to make himself vulnerable. Michael was the one who made himself open with the disarm attempt, but Bennie is taking the penalty also. [...]

Hi!

It may be the other way around: It's not Bennie's "absolute" weakness that allows Fred to cleave, but it's Fred's "absolute" strength that allows him to cleave, and that results in Bennies "relative" weakness.

Cleave allows you to do something you otherwise aren't allowed to do. If Fred had learned the proper way to bend his strike after downing the first opponent/enemy it is not more than fair to interpret this "skill" as a "absolute" strength that results in somebody other's "weakness".

So, don't let the weak minions stay to close to the BiBEL (Big Bad Evil Lady). Weak minions do have a habit to stay around in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Kind regards

 

[Lord Zardoz]

If I could re-write the SRD, I would mash Cleave and Great Cleave into one feat (honestly, the marginal utility of Great Cleave tends to be pretty small in my experience, YMMV), so you could make unlimited extra attacks, but only on standard attack, full attack, or readied attack options.

Actually, that depends on the DM's tastes and preferences when creating combats.

I tend to use Orcs / Goblins / Etc alot more then other DMs, I think (Though in all honesty, I dont play much outside of games I DM).

Now, Great Cleave is not too useful in a high level game. But in a mid level game (say, 4 to 8) where fights involving 10 or more low Hp opponents are common? What about a Raging barbarian with a high str from magic items / buff spells using a 2 handed magical weapon? What about fights againts opponents where your surrounded by giants, and your mage has dropped area of effect spells that bring most of the opponents to low HP?

The difference between cleave and great cleave in such situations is the difference between being able to keep a warrior surrounded and isolated with minion grade meat without losing more then 2 or 3 minions per round. Taking down 8 Orcs is a larger tactical benefit then dropping 2.

As for the topic of this thread, its just another one of those pseudo problems that bother some DM's more then others, and can be fixed with a house rule. The only complication being that players really tend to argue about having a useful trick taken away when its in a 'core' book, as opposed to a splat book.

END COMMUNICATION