Can you cleave after making an AoO?

[kreynolds]

It is a question of what "justifies" gaining a free out of initiative sequence action like an AoO.

That seems to be a poor excuse. Technically, anytime you cleave, you are getting a free action. The matter of initiative is neither here nor there. If getting actions outside of initiative sequence was the real problem, AoOs would be banned.

As SableWyvern pointed out, you can:
1) You can hit and kill A and cleave into B during your round.
2) You can hit and kill A and cleave into B when you take your AoO.

If you don't like 2, you should ban 1 as well.

 

[AGGEMAM]

Why is this a big deal anyway, it is still only one chain of attacks, in contrast to the WWA-GC dilemma, and it is broken by the first opponent who isn't dropped.

As for the lame example present earlier, if you're dumb enough to provoke an AoO while fighting a fighter in combat, you deserve to die, that is the law of the jungle. Period.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Can you cleave after making an AoO?

The problem is that your chance of dodging or parrying is passively represented by your AC and your attackers attack /roll/ - including how /often/ he makes that attack roll.

What you see in red, I already stated. But I do have one question for you...where and what is the problem exactly?

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

As for the lame example present earlier, if you're dumb enough to provoke an AoO while fighting a fighter in combat, you deserve to die, that is the law of the jungle. Period.

No one is arguing or even discussing that. Look at previous posts again.

 

[kreynolds]

No one is arguing or even discussing that. Look at previous posts again.

Tony brought it up. That's why it came up again.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

That seems to be a poor excuse. Technically, anytime you cleave, you are getting a free action. The matter of initiative is neither here nor there. If getting actions outside of initiative sequence was the real problem, AoOs would be banned.

As SableWyvern pointed out, you can:
1) You can hit and kill A and cleave into B during your round.
2) You can hit and kill A and cleave into B when you take your AoO.

If you don't like 2, you should ban 1 as well.

You are arguing that either we must have AoOs with all the quirks in the present rules or no AoOs whatsoever, and there is no possible inbetween. That is obviously wrong.

The initiative only matters if you care if a character or creature lives or dies. In other words, it only matters if you care about the results.

To me the initiative issue is actually very important. Maybe I have not been clear on that point? By tracking initiative I have shown you can get radically different combat results by tossing in a "kobold" who provokes an AoO. The peculiar thing is this "kobold" still affects the combat even when the two main adversaries scale up to epic levels in fighting prowess.

(Aside: I wonder if Gods call it the Bucket of Villagers Trick? )

The example with the Evil fighters cleaving fleeing bar patrons is not a trivial problem if you take the rules as written at face value. You can bandaid over that problem or you can look at what actually causes it.

 

[mikebr99]

You are arguing that either we must have AoOs with all the quirks in the present rules or no AoOs whatsoever, and there is no possible inbetween. That is obviously wrong.

Nope... the argument here is that they are the same thing. So if you want to drop one, you would have to drop both... as they are the same.

The initiative only matters if you care if a character or creature lives or dies. In other words, it only matters if you care about the results.

To me the initiative issue is actually very important. Maybe I have not been clear on that point? By tracking initiative I have shown you can get radically different combat results by tossing in a "kobold" who provokes an AoO. The peculiar thing is this "kobold" still affects the combat even when the two main adversaries scale up to epic levels in fighting prowess.

(Aside: I wonder if Gods call it the Bucket of Villagers Trick? )

The example with the Evil fighters cleaving fleeing bar patrons is not a trivial problem if you take the rules as written at face value. You can bandaid over that problem or you can look at what actually causes it.

If I was a leader of little Kobolds... I'd be sending them ahead and then I'd go in after, by myself and clean up the mess...

 

[AGGEMAM]

nevermind

 

[mikebr99]

Ah ... but if you were the leader of the kobolds they wouldn't be opponents would they?

But under the rules... if they are beside me and do something stupid... I am going to pay for it!!! So the moral of the story is... contrary to the Beatles... I don't get by with a little help from my friends!!!

 

[AGGEMAM]

But under the rules... if they are beside me and do something stupid... I am going to pay for it!!! So the moral of the story is... contrary to the Beatles... I don't get by with a little help from my friends!!!

You know I deleted my post because they don't have to be opponents anyway, the feat just says creature, so my point was irrelevant.