Cleave and AOO: What is the problem?

[Scion]

I have participated in a number of heated discussion on this topic and IMO your generalization is baseless. As I see it, the real problem is a fundamental disagreement about what is an AoO.

I have been in a number of threads about this as well, and I would have to say that my presented opinion works very well within those confines.

Many people dislike and misunderstand cleave to begin with. A good portion of those keep it around anyway but then they feel other parts of the game should not interact with it.

Then there are those who are not quite comfortable with aoo's, and so anything dealing with those is automatically suspect.

Then there are those that feel that cleaves somehow punish someone else, instead of looking at it as someone who is highly trained simply taking advantage of a favorable environment.

After that we have people who feel getting more than X number of attacks in a round should never happen no matter what.

There are still other categories of people which fall into place who dislike each of these in general ways.

Hence the comparison.

You can disagree of course, that is your wont. However, I definately feel that it fits in very well in all of the threads I have been in for this particular discussion. Even the second post here basically states something that can be read as not liking cleave, although the poster says later that he actually likes cleave that is not how his post reads.

Actually, the BBEG is being punished.

No more than a nearly unbounded other ways in the system that just so happen to make things unfavorable for something.

It isnt about being 'punished' so much as someone who has the proper training being able to take advantage of a favorable situation.

Not really any different than catching an opponent that you didnt even know was there in your fireball because you wanted to hit his buddy.

Although this particular situation takes a whole lot more effort.

Once again though: The opponent must draw an aoo (generally not likely), he must be in your melee range (ie provoking an aoo from you), the big bad must also be within your melee range, you must hit, you must have the cleave feat, you must succeed in the conditions for cleave (if this is 'easy' then the minion was meant to be fodder anyway, this feat eats fodder, that is what it is 'for'), you get an attack on the big bad (assuming you still can, there are ways around this, but very few), you must hit (yet another chance to miss).

This is not a very common occurance and all it does is let a player take advantage of his feat choices and training in order to gain a decent, but incredibly unreliable, benefit.

Where is the problem again? Fairly minor boost because of its incredible unlikelyness to happen. If something gets you a free hit on the big bad less than 1% of the time for the cost of a feat I certainly see no big problem here.

 

[rkanodia]

I really don't mind that the sorry bloke getting Cleaved didn't do anything to deserve an attack. In my mind Cleave is following through with a momentum of a blow..Chopping someone in half an your blade keeps on going (or whatever), but I don't like giving away something for nothing.

In the spirit of snarkiness, would you allow a player with Cleave fighting a single opponent to say "I slice through the air, then Cleave into my opponent"? Cause presumably, cutting through the air where a mook would have been is much easier than cutting through the mook.

Scion, I don't think AOO/Cleave is an unbalanced combination. I just think it's silly. My BBEGs don't let their guard down when a low-level flunkie is standing next to them any more than my players do.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

It isnt about being 'punished' so much as someone who has the proper training being able to take advantage of a favorable situation.

That is a reasonable POV. As I see it, D&D has taken pains to remove "whoops, you are all dead" instabilities such as this, even if they might be realistic. To rephrase the old saw: in for 99 cents, in for a dollar. Why not be consistent?

Where is the problem again? Fairly minor boost because of its incredible unlikelyness to happen. If something gets you a free hit on the big bad less than 1% of the time for the cost of a feat I certainly see no big problem here.

In normal play, it would be a very minor detriment to the PCs. Even the coolest BBEGs are disposable enough to not worry over weird luck against them. However my DMs have a strong preference for fewer & much tougher battles; most of the party running around the battlefield one hit from unconsciousness is a common enough occurence. A cacade of annihilation does not seem farfetched at all.

In abnormal play, it would be easy to purposely provoke several free AoOs per combat with proper planning.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Scion, I don't think AOO/Cleave is an unbalanced combination. I just think it's silly. My BBEGs don't let their guard down when a low-level flunkie is standing next to them any more than my players do.

I think that is a good point worth emphasizing. There are plenty of perfectly balanced potential rules that outright suck. Balance is only one measure of whether a rule is good or not, and it is not necessarily the most important.

 

[Scion]

In this case it isnt about letting ones guard down, it is about circumstances causeing your opponent to gain some sort of advantage, with proper training.

I still dont see any problem with that.

Also, this isnt a case of 'whoops, you are all dead', merely changing circumstances. This happens all of the time, all over the game. Sometimes things just happen that are bad or effect things poorly (even simple things like someone casting a darkness spell).

Going once again to the example of the invisible guy next to his buddy. He got hit with the fireball simply because his buddy was there. Should he be immune to the fireball because the opponent does not know that the invisible guy is there?

Also, if the pc's (and I am trying to make it fair for both sides, so I dont like focusing only on one side or the other for this sort of thing if at all possible) are running around the battle field in the single digits then they already have serious problems, but it sounds like they will be far enough apart not to have to worry about cleaves anyway.

Still though, we are talking about a single attack in very, very strict circumstances. Where is the imbalance?

As for being silly, that is why I said that rkanodia's post sounded like a rant against cleave more than anything else. It is simply a direct effect of something that is already very difficult to visualize. So, something difficult to visualize has an extra effect coming on under very exacting circumstances. I think it is simly incredibly abstract and cinematic more than realistic. Same with cleave to begin with really. So, sure, it can seem 'silly', but mainly only because it is difficult to visualize. Then again, I have a hard time with someone being able to make a fireball appear out of no where that moves out in a ball but exerts no force. Pure insanity. But, it is a game, and a very abstract one at that

 

[Scion]

I think that is a good point worth emphasizing. There are plenty of perfectly balanced potential rules that outright suck. Balance is only one measure of whether a rule is good or not, and it is not necessarily the most important.

That is still pretty much an arguement against cleave and not directly against the cleave with aoo.

The guy with the feat is taking advantage of favorable circumstances. Much like the guy with the higher ground bonus (but my character isnt doing anything to be punished from the other guy being higher!) or the inept guards (what do you mean that the guards not only let you in, but told you the passwords and the layout of the whole place? why am I paying these guys??).

Seems more like the guy with the feat is being punished by calling it 'silly' that he can actually use his abilities

 

[hero4hire]

In the spirit of snarkiness, would you allow a player with Cleave fighting a single opponent to say "I slice through the air, then Cleave into my opponent"? Cause presumably, cutting through the air where a mook would have been is much easier than cutting through the mook..

I suppose if the air provoked an AoO and the player dropped the air in one blow than I would.

I see Cleave as a by-product of Dropping someone. The way I describe it however may vary. The poor Cleaved guy dropping his defenses is irrelevant to me.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I suppose if the air provoked an AoO and the person dropped the air in one blow than I would.

How about a figment? Think about it.

 

[Scion]

How about a figment? Think about it.

Personally I think a high level fighter being nearly immune to mirror image simply makes sense

But that is simply houserule territory..lol

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

That is still pretty much an arguement against cleave and not directly against the cleave with aoo.

I do not see how. All I am saying is a rule can still suck even if it is perfectly balanced. And that is coming from the mouth of a Balance Nazi.