Can you cleave after making an AoO?

[kreynolds]

I disagree.

We agree to disagree then.

Isn't the simplest 'fix' for this cleaving business to simply ban cleaving off AoOs (and WWA)?

Probably. I won't do that in my games, however, but only because I don't see the problem in the first place, not with WWA + Cleave, WWA + Great Cleave, AoO + Cleave, or even AoO + Great Cleave. But the main thing is that I really don't have a problem with WWA + Cleave/Great Cleave at all, so I won't restrict it because something else is supposedly "broken".

 

[mikebr99]

Back on topic:
Isn't the simplest 'fix' for this cleaving business to simply ban cleaving off AoOs (and WWA)? I think that would be quite reasonable, too. Are there any official examples of Cleave or Great Cleave being triggered by an AoO or WWA? Either way, I would see that as an indication of the intention behind the feats.

Did you read any of the 6 other pages???

 

[kreynolds]

Please.

Did you fall down or something? Need a hand up? No? Oh! Right...that's sarcasm. Took me a sec to see that...

I get your point though. All I was saying is that alignment is most definately a factor. I never said it completely prevented such activity. I merely said if you did such a thing with a good character, that just doesn't fly in my book.

 

[kreynolds]

Did you read any of the 6 other pages???

Makes you wonder.

 

[KarinsDad]

Wow. I thought I had loose morals.

Well you might, I don't know.

But, just because arguments that the ends justify the means are typically morally inferior does not mean that arguments that different means for the exact same ends (across the board) are somehow morally superior are necessarily true. In fact, they typically are not if the ends are truly identical.

Same for Summon Creature type spells. The ends (destroying the enemy) justify the means (summoned creature dies) for most players. Morally though, this is very amoral. Summoning in the game should typically be considered an evil act, but it is not.

I personally find it more amoral to summon a creature than I do to animate dead. In the first case, death often occurs and a living creature has no choice. In the second, the remains are disturbed, but a living creature is not affected. In fact, I find enchantment spells more amoral than animating dead. YMMV.

 

[kreynolds]

Are there any official examples of Cleave or Great Cleave being triggered by an AoO or WWA?

From the D&D FAQ...

Do the Whirlwind Attack and Cleave feats stack? For example, can I use Cleave to get extra attacks if a Whirlwind Attack kills one of my targets?
You can use Cleave only once a round. If you have the Great Cleave feat, however, you can cleave each time you drop an opponent, even when the opponent drops in a Whirlwind Attack. (When a foe drops, resolve the extra cleave attack before finishing the rest of the attack rolls in the Whirlwind Attacks.)

 

[kreynolds]

The ends (destroying the enemy) justify the means (summoned creature dies) for most players.

I don't care what the moral stance is of the player/players. I care about the moral stance of the character. They are not always the same.

By the way, I'm glad you finally responded. I feared you had bitten off more than you could chew when you used a "Word Of The Day" up there and I asked you to explain.

 

[AGGEMAM]

I disagree. The creature doesn't die, doesn't remember what has happened, is in no way affected by having been summoned. I'd say Summon Monster has about as many moral implications as Fireball.

Correct, that is the general mindset for an evil character.

Isn't the simplest 'fix' for this cleaving business to simply ban cleaving off AoOs (and WWA)?

I case you didn't know this is the rules forum, fixes aka house rules have thier own forum. Btw if you do want a fix that actually works then just change the word 'creature' to 'opponent' in the cleave feat description.

Cleaving off an AoO (or off a WWA) is perfect legal by the rules and when it comes to the cleave off an AoO there isn't really any problem with it balancewise.

Best advice is try not to provoke AoOs in combat.

 

[Tony Vargas]

PS. On what thread page is Tony's suggestion. I want to read it without reading everything in the thread.

My settings give me a different page count, but the basic idea is simply that the 'bonus' attack you get from a Cleave is, in a sense, just like the original attack, and that the only valid targets for such an attack are therefore those that the Cleaver could have chosen to attack /instead of/ the creature he dropped.

Aplication to AoO: When you're handed an AoO, you only have the option of attacking or not attacking the enemy that provoked it. Therefor, you can't cleave off an AoO into an enemy who hasn't also provoked an AoO. Depending on how you handle initiative, this could reduce or completely eliminate the aplicabilty of Cleave to AoOs. That is, if you don't tweak the initiative system to allow simultaneous actions (as many DMs do with masses of critters) and don't allow the Cleaver to 'save' his cleave for a few beats until another AoO is provoked, characters may technically get Cleaves from AoOs, but will never have a valid target to use them against.

Aplication to Whirlwind: A bit more of a stretch but, consider that, in a Whirlwind Attack you can only attack each enemy /once/. Thus, any enemy you've already attacked with the Whirlwind is no longer a valid target. Furthermore, your only valid target is the next character you're about to Whirlwind (who that is up to you, though). Effectively, then, when you drop someone with a whirlwind and Cleave off it, you must use the extra attack on someone you haven't Whirlwinded yet, and, if he survives, he must be the next target of your Whirlwind. This prevents you from getting more than one extra attack on someone by Whirlwinding others near him.


In both cases, I think, they're viable interpretations, rather than outright rule changes, though, in the first, I think an outright (but minor) rule-0 on initiative order or the 'immediate' use of Cleave would be nice, to keep the Cleave feat useable, in a reasonable way, with AoOs.

Of course, I think that 'just allow it' is also a valid interpretation of the rules as written - just one that leads to undesireable consequences. And, really, 'just don't allow it' isn't entirely off base, either.

FWIW.

 

[Storm Raven]

Same for Summon Creature type spells. The ends (destroying the enemy) justify the means (summoned creature dies) for most players. Morally though, this is very amoral. Summoning in the game should typically be considered an evil act, but it is not.

Summoned creatures don't "die" when they are reduced to zeor hit points. As outsiders, they are returned to their original plane of existence. That is all.