Cleave and AOO: What is the problem?

[Scion]

That's at least, what the feat says it does.

SRD:
Cleave (General)
You can follow through with powerful blows.


This little bit just doesnt mean much unfortunately. If you wind up dealing 1 point of damage but that fells them was it a 'powerful blow'?

Still though, even with that aside I am thinking about how to make that mouse spell

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Flanking bonus and having to split ones attacks arent bad enough for you? Needing special training in order to get any bonus isnt enough?

Odd. Those both sounded like bad things to me.

Bad, yes. But bad enough? If we are appealing to realism, no, not even close IMO.

Still, in real life fighting multiple opponents is all about being able to play one against the other. It is possible, and generally it isnt even that hard unless you are fighting very experienced people.

Seems like the abstraction works out fine. Some of the penalties might not be big enough, but then some of the bonuses are not either so I guess they minimized both sides in an effort to keep things more balanced.

It is also not very difficult in real life for three inexperienced people to knock one trained martial artist on the ground at which point raw weight and muscle will win over skill easily. Not necessarily easy, but not difficult either. It is a big downside of being a biped. That is one big reason knights were so fond of horses; being atop a big, physically powerful, moving animal made it very difficult for common folk to gang up on you.

As I see it, the bonus on being able to potentially kill two opponents with one blow on your own turn is a pretty substantial benefit. Do not see a need to add a vague other benefit on top of that as some sort of balancing compensation.

Not saying your arguments are wrong, but I will respectfully disagree.

 

[Thanee]

This little bit just doesnt mean much unfortunately.

Of course not, it's just the flavor text, but it shows the idea behind the feat, which is very much not, what you seem to imagine.

It fails to explain plenty occasions, like when cleaving with a dagger or rapier, but that's not the point. The point is, that Cleave is meant to be an extension of a successful attack (which in game terms is realized with a new attack). Under that light, it feels wrong to allow it in conjunction with an AoO. To me, anyways. No balance problem or whatever else, just besides that intangible "spirit". That's all.

Not a big deal, either way, as it rarely happens to make a difference. It's just a little consistency flaw.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Majere]

Hmm
By the letter of the rules is all good and well and frankly unimportant. The only problem is if the DM lets the players abuse the rules, just dont allow it and the rules arent a problem.

If you want some falvour here it is:

"Damien the destroyer squares off against Harry the hero, swinging his sword of light and fluffyness Harry attacks twice a round and with the help of his comrades begins to press back Damien.
To Damiens aid rushes Charlie the cohort who tries to grab the sword of light and fluffyness but provokes an attack of opportunity. Harry effortly chops off Charlies hand, incapacitating him for the rest of the fight. The blow on charlie is hidden from Damian, the body of the cohort obscuring his view. Damien is unable to see Harry follow through with another attack to Damiens shoe, causing him to fall over. That one last fell blow to the metatarsle sealing his doom. "

Basically, when your friend is 5feet away from you and they fall over dead, it puts you off, they fall on you, they scream, cry, they obscure your vision of the combat. This is liable to open you up to attacks, and an opponent with the right feat can take advantage of this.

On a lighter note.
House rule :
"Monsters summoned by members of the party (or their cohorts) never counts as enemies, unless the player loses control of his summoned minions.

Party memebers never attact attacks of opportunity from one another unless the party member provoking the attack of opportunity caused the AoO because of a compulsion by an NPC, and the AoO was not caused by a deliberate action of a player."

Frankly its just common sense. But if you have rules lawyers, here is a legal document

Majere

 

[Thanee]

I hide my sword behind my back. Do I get an extra attack now?

Bye
Thanee

 

[SableWyvern]

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.

Or, they can keep their preferred picture of how cleave and aoos work, rather than forcing upon themselves something they consider a descriptively inferior viewpoint.

A particular interpretation of the rules doesn't trump personal imaginative versimilitude any more than the reverse.

The fact is, many people in this thread find an interpretation of cleave and aoos that allow for the two to be combined, to make the most sense. Many others find an interpretation that dissallows their use in combination to be much more logical.

There is no reason for one group to give up their ideal visualisation of combat because of your (perhaps technically correct) interpretation of the rules.

 

[Scion]

Bad, yes. But bad enough? If we are appealing to realism, no, not even close IMO.

Since the benefits of each situation are reduced then this is fine. Granting a +2 to all attacks by multiple people can definately be pretty rough.

It is also not very difficult in real life for three inexperienced people to knock one trained martial artist on the ground at which point raw weight and muscle will win over skill easily.

Ahh, grappling rules. Definately not on the same subject here at all. Since in order to do much of anything the person being grappled must overcome several grapple checks in one round this is decently simulated by the rules. Someone with a great deal of skill will be able to do something still though, which is good since having a great deal of skill should be what makes it possible to do something more regularly than not.

Or, they can keep their preferred picture of how cleave and aoos work

Everyone can keep what they choose. But if they start changing the game and taking out a pile of things in order to fit that pattern then eventually game balance is going to be compromised.

Or, just as bad, someone will get a feat thinking it means something (that is what it says after all) and then the dm will say, 'nope, I changed it so it does nothing like that, sorry, try again'. Much like the dm I mentioned above who got rid of 5' steps.

 

[Elvinis75]

Adding a little back into the conversation

I started this thread and have taken a lot of time reading the responses that you have all taken the time to post and I have to say that Scion is right on this one IMHO. The problem is that people keep trying to tie this situation being a punishment issue. The fact is that the BBEG is no more or less defending himself at any point during the round assuming that we are beyond the flat footed phase. He is not more letting his guard down during the cleavers turn and you don’t have a problem with that attack slicing through a minion then and hitting him. So I have concluded that the recipient of the cleave is not being punished.

It is also clear then it is the cleaver that is granted a special ability not the cleave recipient a punishment.

Then there is the idea that the cleaver is somehow more in control of the way in the attacks made during his turn. The rules don’t backup this assertion. The AOO is made at the highest attack bonus without limitations assigned. If the designer had wanted the AOO to be a lesser attack they very easily can have assigned a minus to the roll. So the facts don’t back up the assertion. The facts are that an AOO is made with all the same skill as any other attack that you take during your turn given no movement.

I don’t think that one should throw out the ability to make cleaves during an AOO because of possible stretches of loopholes in the rules. So we have a couple of different scenarios:
1. The phantom foes
2. The summoned allies turned into foes

The issue that I have with the first one is the illusions are not real and thus allowing a
real affect to take place off from them is smelly stinky cheese. While it is within the rules? to do so it doesn’t pass the DM smell test. It seems a lot easier to me for the DM of the game to ban this situation. It falls into the category of on the fly subjective rulings that I hate but the players are trying to make the rules do something that they were never intended for. So as a DM I would take the hard decision to be the player nemesis and say no.

The second situation follows the first a guess accept I find it a lot more believable that it would work within the rules than the first. I agree with Scion that is a spell that would have limited use and would be at least a medium spell.

Either way it seems to me to be a better solution to get rid of the ridiculous combos than the situation that rarely comes up.

Can someone answer me the question of why the BBEG is going to even bother to get into combat? It seems like his best option is to let the battle go and attack after. Or better yet shoot or throw into melee while the battle is going on. If he hit the minions so what? If he hits the players then good. I think that in the end the minion will do something stupid once in a while but not all of them and not all of the time and thus this isn’t going to be an issue in most campaigns.

So I guess in closing I’m still thinking as Scion seems to that most of your problems are with cleave and not with AOO cleave. Feats are extraordinary abilities that allow the characters to do the fantastic. Cleave and GC are good feats in the lower levels but lose their zing in the higher levels. I think of cleave as sort of a battlefield presence. He is a master of knowing how to hit such that he can carom his attacks to others. For some that is hard to see, imagine or believe but the truth is that the game all about believing in things that seem impossible. Fireballs, Lightning bolts, guys that can shoot 3 or 4 arrows with one pull of the string. Thank you for your time. I’ll try to answer questions when I can but I’m busy a lot of this weekend and gone this weekend. I seems like this was a good topic though as it got a lot of replies. Thanks all

 

[Pbartender]

I hide my sword behind my back. Do I get an extra attack now?

No, but you can make a Bluff check to feint your opponent into flatfootedness.

 

[Elvinis75]

Adding a little back into the conversation

< Double post sorry >