Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 2746432" data-attributes="member: 3424">To me, a Cleave is an attack (or sequence of attacks) so powerful that a weak opponent is dropped effortlessly - he might as well not be there. From the turn-based perspective, if it's the attacker's turn, the opponent he attacked is irrelevant. He can continue to make an attack on someone else as if the opponent was not there. From the continuous time perspective, the fact that he made an attack roll against the weak opponent (representing his efforts over the relevant round) is irrelevant. He can make another attack roll against another opponent.To me, an AOO is a lapse in defences which allows an attacker to make an additional swing (turn-based) or makes the defender more vulnerable (continuous time). Both cases are represented by the additional attack roll that the attacker gets. However, in both cases, one defender's lapse in defences shouldn't make any other defender more vulnerable. In the turn-based case, the other defender still blocks the attacker's swing as if the cleaved opponent was not there, and in the continuous time case, the attacker still only gets one attack roll against the other defender for the round, as if the cleaved defender was not there.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FireLance, post: 2746432, member: 3424"] To me, a Cleave is an attack (or sequence of attacks) so powerful that a weak opponent is dropped effortlessly - he might as well not be there. From the turn-based perspective, if it's the attacker's turn, the opponent he attacked is irrelevant. He can continue to make an attack on someone else as if the opponent was not there. From the continuous time perspective, the fact that he made an attack roll against the weak opponent (representing his efforts over the relevant round) is irrelevant. He can make another attack roll against another opponent. To me, an AOO is a lapse in defences which allows an attacker to make an additional swing (turn-based) or makes the defender more vulnerable (continuous time). Both cases are represented by the additional attack roll that the attacker gets. However, in both cases, one defender's lapse in defences shouldn't make any other defender more vulnerable. In the turn-based case, the other defender still blocks the attacker's swing as if the cleaved opponent was not there, and in the continuous time case, the attacker still only gets one attack roll against the other defender for the round, as if the cleaved defender was not there. [/QUOTE]

Verification