Cleave and AOO: What is the problem?

[hero4hire]

How about a figment? Think about it.

I can think of plenty of reasons why I would explain this away. But really I wouldn't have a figment that felt real, provoked an AoO, dropped in one blow...yada yada.

But IF I did I guess the UNreality of it would have somehow threw off the Cleaver's timing if I did happen to do such a thing.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

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

But that is simply houserule territory..lol

No comment.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I can think of plenty of reasons why I would explain this away. But really I wouldn't have a figment that felt real, provoked an AoO, dropped in one blow...yada yada.

But IF I did I guess the UNreality of it would have somehow threw off the Cleaver's timing if I did happen to do such a thing.

These are all arguments appealing to a subjective opinion about what a Cleave or an AoO really is apart from what is actually in the rules. I am not saying you are wrong; just that once we scratch the surface, your opinion of how Cleave and AoOs should really work is no less subjective than my own.

In truth, I doubt adding another rule to be memorized in order to cover this corner case is worth it to the average gaming group. In that sense I suppose the RAW is perfectly correct. But allow me the conceit that my own gaming group is exceptional...

 

[Scion]

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.

You dont see how an arguement that is talking about how silly it is to attack one guy and then cleave into the next isnt an arguement saying that cleave is the problem instead of the cleave on an aoo?

Then I guess I am confused, they seem pretty directly related to me

(maybe you didnt realize I was talking about the comment you were responding to with your comment, which I found pretty odd and didnt want to discuss directly as it doesnt make any sense to me).

 

[hero4hire]

I am not saying you are wrong; just that once we scratch the surface, your opinion of how Cleave and AoOs should really work is no less subjective than my own.

Yep...I thought was clear. Never did I say "This is the way you should do it." I just said "this is the way it works in my game and it seems to work well for us."

Of course my group really doesn't give a crap..They are more interested in my plots.

 

[sfedi]

Ok, so you let to Cleave during an AoO.

Would you let your players do this:

The Wizard of the group creates illusions around the fighter, that provokes AoOs, so that they can be brought down in one hit, so the fighter can use his AoOs against the enemies he's fighting.

Or something similar but with summoned creatures.

The summoner could even make the summoned creature attack the fighter, just in case...

Now, would you allow this?

This would be possible in the RAW.

The same arguments could be used: the party is creating a favorable condition so as to put it's enemies in further disadvantage, such as climbing on higher ground to get a +1 bonus.

 

[Thanee]

In this instance it isnt completely about you being punished for someone else so much as someone else having the skill to pull off a heroic stunt.

Yeah, but I just fail to see how the presence of another opponent should make this easier. If anything, Cleave should just give an extra attack every round then, the hard training and all that.

It takes a lot of training and sacrifice to get that to work properly (I feel that the cleave tree is pretty weak generally, not too bad at lower levels but at higher levels it hardly ever comes up in a useful situation) and even then it is pretty circumstantial.

Your usual argument. It isn't too great, so every mechanical advantage is good. That's fine, but it's very far from what I meant.

Cleave is the "extension" of a successful attack, which needed only very little of your power to execute it, so to say, and this can be carried on against another target. It's still "the same attack", however (not mechanically, of course). An AoO is a limited attack, which cannot be used against other targets, but the one, that provoked it, thus, even if you could use "this" attack against someone else, it would be useless.

I can only guess you see Cleave as a kind of rejuvenation after such a successful attack, which dropped a creature, so you actually gain a completely new attack (still not mechanically speaking). In that case cleaving off AoO works fine, of course.

It is not really only a matter of how Cleave works, but also a matter of how AoO work. To me AoO is a limited attack, not a regular attack like any other. It is completely not under your control and thus anything spawned off it, should inherit the same attributes (much like Cleave lets you inherit the same attack bonus, a hint, that it is actually meant to be the extension of the very same attack - I'm just taking it further here).

It's a difference in projection, modeling the situation with the rules mechanics. That's all. I don't agree with this particular part of the rules, therefore I change it. Simple. There's nothing to argue whether it is good or bad, that's just one opinion or the other. Its effect is marginal enough to be ignorable, anyways, as long as you have your 16-ton weights ready for the players trying to abuse it.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Of course my group really doesn't give a crap..They are more interested in my plots.

I bet you are right.

 

[hero4hire]

Ok, so you let to Cleave during an AoO.

Would you let your players do this:

--snip--.

No I wouldn't play with players who do this.

 

[FireLance]

Well, to me, I see an AOO as happening whenever an opponent lets down his guard, and I see Cleave as lining up an attack so powerful that if you down one opponent, you still have enough momentum to make another.

While I can see the cinematic quality of a hero taking advantage of a minion's mistake to land a solid blow on the BBEG, I'm still not quite comfortable with the idea of cleaving on an AOO. I guess fundamentally, I'm okay with the idea that a minion can be irrelevant, but not with the idea that he's a liability.

Anyone remember the original version of Expert Tactician, which gave the character an extra standard action whenever one of his opponents was denied his Dexterity bonus to Armor Class? The character could in theory make a melee attack (or even cast a spell, but that bit of idocy is irrelevant to the current discussion) against any opponent, even one who still had his Dexterity bonus. After it was changed, the standard action could only be used to make a melee attack (or anything that could be done as a melee attack, such as a disarm attempt) against the opponent who lost his Dexterity bonus.

Cleaving on an AOO gives me the same feeling as the original version of Expert Tactician.