Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ridley's Cohort" data-source="post: 693908" data-attributes="member: 545">From a narrow technical POV, that is the exact line of defense for the bucket of snails trick.  Fair is fair, right?  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes    :rolleyes:"  data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /> The weird thing about AoO + Cleave is target X can end up dying just because target Y does something reckless when X would have been adequately safe if ally Y were not in the combat at all.  The reason is that AoOs can generate extra attacks outside the combat sequence.Personally, I find that assaults my common sense.  For some people it doesn't.Let me state it another way: Should it be easier to kill the Evil Boss plus mooks than Evil Boss alone?My answer is a guarded "no".  There should be no way to trick the basic mechanics into making an asset into a liability (although enormous active stupidity is still fair game to exploit).That is the way I view the summoned blind kobold game: a perfectly legal way of giving the Evil Boss a mook, so you can kill it trick the mechanics into giving you a free attack.AoO + Cleave works by the letter of the rules.  The summoned blind kobold trick works as a direct result of the "logic" of AoO +  Cleave.  IMNSHO, the best thing to do is remove the AoO + Cleave from the game.(Yes, summoned creatures are normally allies, but you can direct them to attack who you please.  Therefore, you can carefully place them and direct them to attack your ally.  All perfectly legal.  And perfectly stupid.)</blockquote>

Verification