Cleave and AOO: What is the problem?

[Scion]

Illustration of the problem:

Player 1: I move to threaten BBEG.
Player 2: I (rogue Combat Reflexes, Sneak Attack +4d6, and Cleave), move to flank.
Player 3: I (using custom spell that seemed reasonable at the time) summon 16 tiny mice and have one of them immediately attack Player 2. I have the rest attack the BBEG. Each round I have one more mouse attack Player 2
DM: Alright, Player 2, the mouse enters your square to attack. You get an AoO.
Player 2: Sweet. I roll a 19 to hit. I cause 3 points of damage if it hit.
DM: You drop the mouse. Cleave on.
Player 2: Sweet. A 19 hits that guy so I cause *rolls* 22 points of damage.

--- rinse, repeat

It's stupid that because the mouse did something to provoke an AoO, the BBEG can be hit an extra time that round. Thank the designers Cleave only works once per round, at least.

Sounds like the problem here is the spell more than anything else.

Still, if it is high enough level then shouldnt be a problem really.

Those mice grant the big bad aoos as well, it took someone one of their rounds to cast it, and the other guy has to have specific feats in order to make it work.

If the big bad is stupid enough to not do anything about it at all and just stands there and takes whatever you want to throw at him then I can list a few dozen different things that are overpowered.

And they dont require making up a custom spell whose sole use is to grant someone aoo's.

 

[Lamoni]

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

I am quite confused that you can still be confused by it.
Let me add another example to the numberless examples already given.

Characters: BBEG, Fred the Fighter, Mike Mook.

Fred is fighting BBEG.
Fred hits BBEG
BBEG hits Fred
Mike tries to disarm Fred
Fred takes AoO against Mike (who doesn't die)
(Next round)
Fred hits Mike and drops him
Fred makes cleave attempt and hits BBEG
BBEG hits Fred

This example showed an AoO. It also showed a Cleave. No one that is saying that Cleave doesn't make sense with an AoO would have a problem with this scenario. The AoO works just like it is supposed to. We LIKE AoO. The Cleave also works just like it is supposed to (the fighter gets an extra attack). We LIKE Cleave. The thing that we say we dislike is the COMBINATION of Cleave with an AoO. Many people have repeated that several times, but you always effectively say, "No, you still just have a problem with Cleave."

In the situation I described above, Mike still gets use of his AoO. He also gets an extra attack from cleave. In the other examples that describe why the combination doesn't make sense, Mike would be getting a third attack against BBEG in two rounds instead of just two. He gets punished by what Mike does. No, it isn't the same as a fireball. The invisible person gets damaged by the fireball based on there being a fireball there. The BBEG got damaged because the fighter was distracted by this other stupid guy trying to disarm him.

You have said yourself that it is a very rare occurance. Therefore would it really be a problem to remove the cleave ability from happening with AoO's? I say no. Then you don't have the problem with someone summoning mice like in the most recent example by reanjr. Of course most DM's would just say "No, I don't think so" to a player who tried to do that, but according to the RAW, it is perfectly legal.

We have explained why we don't like it (which was the topic of the thread). You obviously think we just don't like cleave. I'll continue to play with cleave in my games. We'll also continue to take AoO's. No, I don't think it is unbalanced (unless a player tries to abuse it with the mice trick). Yes, I still think it is a silly rule. I just hope you continue to enjoy your games and I'll continue to enjoy mine.

 

[Pbartender]

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.

Try thinking about it this way...

You are a Bad Guy. You have Loyal Minions to either side of you ready to fight your enemies to the death. During the course of battle, you engage the Heroic Fighter, and your Minions surround him, so that he cannot escape. Eager to show off his prowess with his 6-foot long sword, and engage you in single combat, the Heroic Fighter attacks your Minions.

One of your Minions briefly stops to retie his shoestring, the Hero's sword slides cleanly through the Minion's neck, and continues on unabated... Straight for your head. Regardless of whether you let your guard down or not, you weren't really expecting an attack from that direction, were you?

~~

I've never had a problem with it. The situation happens so rarely in our games that it's not worth worrying about, and it occasionally gives the Cleaving character a heroic way to turn the tide of a battle. If you're having that much of a problem, you probably need to change your Bad Guy tactics a little. Take a 5 ft. step out of reach before you drink a potion. Cast defensively. Let the BBEG lead from the rear.

And remember, making Summoned Creatures attack a friend not only makes the Summoned Creatures enemies... It makes the Summoning Spellcaster an enemy. The players in my group wouldn't stand for such an action, regardless of the circumstances and resulting bonuses and/or extra attacks.

 

[Scion]

This example showed an AoO. It also showed a Cleave.

True, but some are saying it is silly, overpowered, or doesnt make any sense.

However, I doubt any of these people have a problem with allowing, say, a trip attack.

There really isnt much of a difference there. A situation popped up where one could use a feat, and it might be used.

The only part that could be construed to be 'silly' has to do with the cleave itself. Hence, the real problem people are having lies more on the cleave side than the aoo side.

But, once again, it is just a way to use one of the characters feats when a situation presents itself. Just like any other feat used in such a situation. There isnt any real difference there. If someone is happy enough to allow a trip then why not allow some other feat that works under certain attacking circumstances? Same thing.

In the situation I described above, Mike still gets use of his AoO. He also gets an extra attack from cleave. In the other examples that describe why the combination doesn't make sense, Mike would be getting a third attack against BBEG in two rounds instead of just two.

Because mike has a feat to take advantage of just this situation. Good, his feat is being useful. It isnt a big bonus, it doesnt break anything, it doesnt happen often, and it makes a lot of logical sense that sometimes your buddy can cause you problems. When, of course, someone has the ability to take advantage of it.

He gets punished by what Mike does. No, it isn't the same as a fireball. The invisible person gets damaged by the fireball based on there being a fireball there. The BBEG got damaged because the fighter was distracted by this other stupid guy trying to disarm him.

You are going back to punishment again.

It isnt punishment, it is simply someone with sufficient training taking advantage of a situation.

If you are walking around outside and it starts to rain, you get wet. You arent being punished for walking around outside, it is simply the environment that changed. If you wish to think that some higher power is punishing you then fine, but it seems like a very odd way to look at the world.

The fireball example is perfect here though. The only reason you got hit with it was because your buddy was there. This is exactly the same situation. Wrong place at the wrong time against someone with the ability to do something about it.

You have said yourself that it is a very rare occurance. Therefore would it really be a problem to remove the cleave ability from happening with AoO's? I say no.

Therefore it really isnt a problem to leave more options in and make cleave just a tad more useful, since it is already lacking in uses anyway?

Taking away more options is bad. Especially when the options arent overpowered to begin with.

Eating away at more and more options until nothing is left seems to be the name of the game. Quite a few other threads have posters like that. 'how about we just get rid of this pile of options? oh, and that pile over there, and these, and those, and..' I am just trying to stem the flow of people who wish to nerf everything. There is no need to take away this part of cleave, it is simply one of the perks of taking that feat in the first place.

Then you don't have the problem with someone summoning mice like in the most recent example by reanjr. Of course most DM's would just say "No, I don't think so" to a player who tried to do that, but according to the RAW, it is perfectly legal.

If one defines 'enemy' to be something useable in the game (which has to be done anyway, for a lot of spells and abilities) then there is no problem anyway.

Still, if someone wanted to make such a spell in order to help a buddy take advantage of his abilities where is the problem? In the instance above it is very likely indeed that it 'still' would have been much better to simply cast haste on the guy. Then he would have his aoo's to use each round still, no one would have to worry about the big bad being able to take advantage of the mice, and the fighter type would gain the other benefits of being hasted.

Sounds like that spell is actually the 'inferior' option to begin with, except possibly when someone spends a pile of feats in order to make it work in a good fashion. In other words, good strategy and taking advantage of ones strengths.

You obviously think we just don't like cleave.

Not so much, merely that if no one has a problem with cleave to begin with, and they like aoo's, but somehow putting the two together is a problem then there it is much more likely to be the cleave part that is making people feel it is silly.

However, since it just does exactly what cleave is supposed to do then that means there is at least some part of cleave that people dont like.

In this instance it is apparently that someone might actually get some use out of their feat. Well, I say good for them, they get to use their feat.

Since the circumstances for this to be overpowered are incredibly few and far between (possibly none, as none have been presented yet) I see no reason to disallow it. It is fun, interesting, and doesnt cause any problems (so far).

 

[Scion]

Try thinking about it this way...

You are a Bad Guy. You have Loyal Minions to either side of you ready to fight your enemies to the death. During the course of battle, you engage the Heroic Fighter, and your Minions surround him, so that he cannot escape. Eager to show off his prowess with his 6-foot long sword, and engage you in single combat, the Heroic Fighter attacks your Minions.

One of your Minions briefly stops to retie his shoestring, the Hero's sword slides cleanly through the Minion's neck, and continues on unabated... Straight for your head. Regardless of whether you let your guard down or not, you weren't really expecting an attack from that direction, were you?

~~

I've never had a problem with it. The situation happens so rarely in our games that it's not worth worrying about, and it occasionally gives the Cleaving character a heroic way to turn the tide of a battle. If you're having that much of a problem, you probably need to change your Bad Guy tactics a little. Take a 5 ft. step out of reach before you drink a potion. Cast defensively. Let the BBEG lead from the rear.

And remember, making Summoned Creatures attack a friend not only makes the Summoned Creatures enemies... It makes the Summoning Spellcaster an enemy. The players in my group wouldn't stand for such an action, regardless of the circumstances and resulting bonuses and/or extra attacks.

Exactly

 

[Lamoni]

One of your Minions briefly stops to retie his shoestring, the Hero's sword slides cleanly through the Minion's neck, and continues on unabated... Straight for your head. Regardless of whether you let your guard down or not, you weren't really expecting an attack from that direction, were you?

Or you could say that since I was watching the fighter swing at the minion, and since his sword was slowed down by the minion's neck, I'd be even more ready to defend against that attack than I normally would be. To me it would make more sense if I (as the bad guy) got to take an extra swing against the fighter as the fighter focused his attention momentarily on the minion.

I am not suggesting changing the rules to grant AoO's to all the surrounding opponents that you don't attack in any given round. That would make sense to me, but they already have enough of an advantage since they collectively get more attacks than you do anyway.

When the minions don't act stupidly, they should be helpful at best, and indifferent at worst. In my opinion of course. They should only be a liability when they are stupid (like dropping a fireball into the fight when the master has a vulnerability to fire).

Having the environment change like having it start to rain is quite different than having it change because your buddy ran over to help you fight the fighter. Rain obscures visibility, makes things slippery, etc. which would hamper things. Having your buddy run over to help would HELP things. You are saying that it makes perfect sense that it will almost always HURT and almost never help. I agree that the environment changed, but being 'punished' (by the rules, not some higher power) rather than helped is quite strange. I think that I'd much rather be fighting an enemy when I also had a bunch of friends helping (in real life). Having it always translate to a disadvantage means there is something strange going on.

 

[Scion]

Or you could say that since I was watching the fighter swing at the minion, and since his sword was slowed down by the minion's neck, I'd be even more ready to defend against that attack than I normally would be. To me it would make more sense if I (as the bad guy) got to take an extra swing against the fighter as the fighter focused his attention momentarily on the minion.

Another statement that seems to state that your problem is actually with the cleave mechanic itself. I realize that you have said this is not your intention as you like cleave, but that is still how it sounds. Especially considering the rest of the post.

When the minions don't act stupidly

The only time this entire subject even comes up is when someone is acting stupidly. So, when they are acting stupidly people can take advantage.

Otherwise, if they dont act stupidly then there is no aoo to worry about. Or, if the person doesnt have cleave then they cant take advantage of it. Or, if the big bad is smarter then he cant be taken advantage of. Or.. any number of other things.

Rain obscures visibility, makes things slippery, etc. which would hamper things. Having your buddy run over to help would HELP things. You are saying that it makes perfect sense that it will almost always HURT and almost never help.

A psychic warrior build I had not too long ago would actually not be effected by the rain at all (no loss of visibility, no chance of slipping, etc) sounds like he would want it to be raining for all of his battles

Also, your buddy running over might help things. But then, if he does something dumb then it 'wont'. It may very well be that him not doing anything at all would have been a better solution.

Almost always hurt???? You are completely making things up now. We are talking about a rare situation which grants a bonus to someone with the correct feat. If your buddy comes over and flanks the character and does not provoke an aoo then this situation does not come up at all. If the enemy does not have an aoo to use then this situation does not come up at all. If the character does not have cleave then this situation does not come up at all.

We are talking about a very specific case for someone trained to take advantage of something just like this. Not something that will happen all of the time (if it does it is time to get new buddies, the ones with the brains of slugs when it comes to tactics just arent good to get into fights with).

I agree that the environment changed, but being 'punished' (by the rules, not some higher power) rather than helped is quite strange. I think that I'd much rather be fighting an enemy when I also had a bunch of friends helping (in real life). Having it always translate to a disadvantage means there is something strange going on.

Sometimes your friends hinder more than help, this happens in real life and in the game. There is no 'punishment' involved here, it is simply someone making use of their abilities.

The system has very few ways currently for someone to turn being up against multiple opponents into some sort of disadvantage for his side. Even though in real life this can happen (and in fact does, I have seen it quite often, especially in martial arts). So, having a feat that can help simulate this in proper conditions makes perfect sense.

 

[Lamoni]

One last thing.... Scion, you still seem to be arguing about balance. I don't know who you are arguing with. Those who don't like it do so because of the idea behind it. It doesn't make sense to a lot of people that cleave should work on an attack of opportunity. Obviously you have a different opinion. I am sorry if you think that Cleave becomes no good if you take that option away. In my games it is much more important to have fun... and it is easier for us to have fun when combat makes sense to us. Cleaving on an attack of opportunity would make us all drop our jaws and go "huh?" Therefore we don't do so.

We aren't out to nerf Cleave. We don't want to nerf Attacks of Opportunity. We want the game to be fun to play and easy to imagine. When something happens that we just can't imagine at all, it moves to game to just a mechanical number crunching activity which we could have just fed to a computer and had it determine the outcome of the fight for us. Obviously that is an exaggeration, but hopefully you will finally get the point we are trying to make... well, at least the point I am trying to make. So to repeat one more time, it makes no sense that the BBEG in that situation would be 'punished' BY THE RULES for a situation that seems beneficial to him. How I play it, the mook would be dropped first round and make no difference, or they would be dropped second round and the fighter would cleave on the BBEG (again making no difference). If the fighter didn't have cleave, then if the mook survived the first AoO, he would actually provide a benefit (provide flanking). The great training of the fighter in choosing cleave for a feat just removed the advantage that would have otherwise been there.

Okay, I have stayed on this topic long enough. Time to move on... Again, I just hope you enjoy your games. I'll continue to enjoy mine. I am not trying to change your games, all I was doing was answering the question posed by the thread topic. "Why do some people have a problem with Cleave and AoO." I feel I answered that.

 

[reanjr]

Sounds like the problem here is the spell more than anything else.

You're seriously trying to say that spell that summons 16 <em>mice</em> is overpowering?

Then let's use Summon Nature's Ally III instead. Summon 1d4+1 eagles. Same issue. Just not so many rounds in a row.

Still, if it is high enough level then shouldnt be a problem really.

I still can't believe you are trying to say summoning mice should be high level... THEY'RE MICE!!!

Those mice grant the big bad aoos as well, it took someone one of their rounds to cast it, and the other guy has to have specific feats in order to make it work.

True, but Cleave is a pretty common feat. Combat Reflexes, while nice, isn't even necessary for this to work. I was just illustrating that the rogue wouldn't even lose his AoO for the round. And the BBEG <em>probably</em> can only AoO once. It's a matter of tactics. If the BBEG had Cleave, you wouldn't do this.

If the big bad is stupid enough to not do anything about it at all and just stands there and takes whatever you want to throw at him then I can list a few dozen different things that are overpowered.

True, but this is hard to avoid. Given that most creatures have speeds around 30 ft., anyone will probably be able to keep up with him if he tries to move. If the BBEG is a melee fighter, he can't even do much about it, since he has to close to do combat.

And they dont require making up a custom spell whose sole use is to grant someone aoo's.

Well, like I said, use Summon Nature's Ally III instead. It doesn't sound like you have a good grasp of the rules and their implications if you didn't realize you could use that in its place. And you are not a very creative spellcaster if you think summoning 16 mice has only the purpose of causing AoOs. I can think of plenty of uses for a spell like that.

 

[Scion]

One last thing.... Scion, you still seem to be arguing about balance. I don't know who you are arguing with.

Some have mentioned that it is overpowered, I have demonstrated that it is not. If you feel that it isnt unbalanced then you may feel free to ignore those comments. However, that does not mean that they are unnecissary.

Those who don't like it do so because of the idea behind it. It doesn't make sense to a lot of people that cleave should work on an attack of opportunity.

But the reasons that are usually given for it not making sense dont make any sense. They tend to state things like, 'but that isnt how I picture it!'. Fine then, pick a new picture to describe it. Cleave is a pretty general, and difficult to imagine, ability to begin with. But, just because it cannot be easily pictured in this case does not mean that it isnt how it works.

I have known dm's to get rid of any number of things because they dont know how to visualize it (one of the bigger offenders is getting rid of the 5' step because they didnt like the idea of it and it seemed silly to them).

However, going through what the ability does and how it works and what exactly the consequences of it are should allow people to understand.

But, that doesnt mean people still wont get rid of it, just like the dm mentioned above got rid of the 5' step because he couldnt live with it. These things happen. But it is important to realize that it can be made to work properly, and work well within the system at hand.

Cleaving on an attack of opportunity would make us all drop our jaws and go "huh?" Therefore we don't do so.

As there are probably dozens or hundreds of other things that are just as unlikely in the game and yet those are allowed this reasoning seems a bit odd. Everyone has their personal limits of suspesion of disbelief of course, but that this happens to be what causes the 'huh?' seems very odd indeed. (create a fireball from thin air? np! train yourself to take advantage of someone doing something dumb? now you are just going too far!).

So to repeat one more time, it makes no sense that the BBEG in that situation would be 'punished' BY THE RULES for a situation that seems beneficial to him.

So the big bad hires some muscle, seems like a good idea at the time. Halfogre brute with the strength of 10 men, and cheap too! (let him eat whoever he kills and he is happy to do whatever you like).

Along comes a caster of some sort and dominates the big brute. Suddenly THE RULES are 'punishing' the big bad from a situation which seemed beneficial! Uh oh!

So I repeat one more time It isnt the big bad being punished, it is someone else who is able to take advantage of a situation that is favorable for them.

You're seriously trying to say that spell that summons 16 <em>mice</em> is overpowering?

Then let's use Summon Nature's Ally III instead. Summon 1d4+1 eagles. Same issue. Just not so many rounds in a row.

No, you are misinterpreting. I said that the only thing that sounded the most out of whack in the scenario was making up a custom spell purposefully designed for this situation.

Otherwise the whole thing sounds fine. One person spent a good amount of resources to help another guy get some extra abilities. Going by the other summon natures ally that is fine. You are talking about taking one person out of the game every couple of rounds to let another guy use several feats in combination in order to get a couple of extra attacks.

Which could just as easily have been done by a single hast spell and no need for feats nor lots of other castings.

The only reason that the mice one is extreme is because it summons so many. Effectively this spell only has a couple of incredibly limited uses. 1) it can be used to torture someone, 2) it can be used to help someone gain extra cleave attacks.. that is pretty much it, likely they wont even be able to set off traps, and the spell will be around 3rd level anyway, possibly fourth (because there are so many of them again, even at fifth level having someone get swarmed by 16 mice that deal 1 damage each is a pretty major attack spell, they can even fall under the swarm rules almost or with enough castings) So, you have someone who spent resources to make a spell, then used a slot, then time, and directing it and the other guy who has to use the appropriate feats just to get any real benefit from this point and he still has to give up his aoo's which could go to other targets in order to get the benefit. That is still assuming that the dm is incredibly lax about 'opponent' and 'enemy' which is yet another problem.

Cleave is a pretty common feat. And the BBEG <em>probably</em> can only AoO once. It's a matter of tactics. If the BBEG had Cleave, you wouldn't do this.

Cleave is a nice feat early on, but really loses its power as creatures get more and more hp (hp increase incredibly fast after all). So, I have not seen cleave to be a common feat. In fact, I think my character awhile back was the only one in the group to have ever gotten it. Other feats simply do more and are more reliable. Which would you rather have? A feat that you can count on everytime whenever you need it, or one that has a list of requirements that may never come true in a time that matters. Depends on the character, but many people prefer to have something that isnt incredibly dependent on the dm + random chance to boot.

About the big bad having cleave, do you know every feat that the bad guys have? all equipment? so how exactly are you going to know? just hope? Not a good plan, you would effectively have to wait and see if the big bad cleaves anything or not. If he doesnt he might or might not have it. If he does then you know not to use this combo. This does not sound like a good plan.

Well, like I said, use Summon Nature's Ally III instead. It doesn't sound like you have a good grasp of the rules and their implications if you didn't realize you could use that in its place. And you are not a very creative spellcaster if you think summoning 16 mice has only the purpose of causing AoOs. I can think of plenty of uses for a spell like that.

Where is the eye rolling smiley when it is needed.

I know exactly how these things work, and I can see the implications. However, they just are not that impressive.

The list of requirements needed in order for it to work, and then the benefits gained from that, pale in comparison to so many other available tactics that it makes this particular one just another option to use now and then.

It is not all powerful or menacing. Even your best examples with this hypothetical spell which is pretty much solely made for this purpose shows that. It has drawbacks, if you have a list of uses for this spell besides this go ahead and list them, they arent likely to be able to set off traps, mice make a lot of noise when in groups and frightened, you said nothing about them having disease or some other special attack so there isnt any, it is a summoning spell so likely takes a full round, and who knows what other limitations. against low level guys they can swarm and cause a lot of mischief, hence why it would be at least level 3 which is in line with other summon spells and at that point its offensive capabilities are lessened.


::shrugs:: balance issues show that it isnt unbalanced. Flavor issues can be argued either way for anything and everything. It fits with what the feat is supposed to do and is allowed by the raw.