Cleave and Full Attack

[hong]

I guess my problem is that based on the quality of his advice, Skip Williams doesn't deserve to be the primary authoritative source on the 'true meaning' of the PHB.

The job of the Sage is to clarify situations where the rules are ambiguous. He isn't going to be consulted in situations where the rules are clear-cut, because there's no need.

If the rules are ambiguous enough to start a war in the first place, then appealing to the Sage is hardly going to end it, because that's not how flamewars work. All that happens is that one party puts on their "Skip agrees with me therefore I'm right" hat, and the other party puts on their "Skip disagrees with me therefore he's wrong" hat. None of this is a reflection on Skip himself, but has to do with the nature of online discourse.

By and large, I think Skip does a pretty good job, and I think most people here would agree with me. And yes, I've put on my "Skip disagrees with me therefore he's wrong" hat a few times.

Re Feats - the PHB says that to get multiple attacks, whether iterative, off-hand, or from Feats, you need to take the Full Attack action. Disappointing to powergamers perhaps (When I'm playing I'd love to Cleave off a charge!) but hardly ambiguous.

Get off your high horse already. Just because you've put on your "Skip disagrees with me therefore he's wrong" hat doesn't mean the rules aren't ambiguous. It certainly doesn't make everyone else who disagrees with you a powergamer.

In fact, a feature of Sage Advice that more than a few people have noted is that if there's a choice between powering up an ability and nerfing it, then more than likely Skip will go for nerfing it. He seems to have an aversion to power inflation, something possibly resulting from 20+ years of watching the game evolve.

 

[IceBear]

Oh, I've never disagreed that the Sage sometimes makes bad rulings and I never meant to imply to take his word as gospel. In general, though, the poorer rulings on his part come as response to email questions in which he emails the answer back. What's in Dragon and the DNDFAQ *tends* to be of better quality.

Back on topic, where does it say that you can't take multiple attacks off of a Feat, EXPLICITLY? The general rule is, no, you can't take multiple attacks without a Full Attack action, but Feats are EXCEPTIONS to the rules.

To say that you can't take a cleave unless you haven't moved more than 5ft makes the feat relatively useless.

Again the rules state clearly that if you have +12 BAB, you get three attacks +12/+7/+2, but the WWA feat gives you up to 8 attacks with +12. This is an exception to the rules, which is why feats exisit - to give you an ability that you normally can't perform.

IceBear

 

[S'mon]

Back on topic, where does it say that you can't take multiple attacks off of a Feat, EXPLICITLY

PHB pg 124, bottom left of page under Full Attack:

"If you get more than one attack per action because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons, because you're using a double weapon, or for some special reason (such as a feat or a magic item) you must use the full attack action to get your additional attacks."

pg. 80, Cleave:
"...you get an immediate, extra melee attack..."

 

[IceBear]

Hmmmm - yup, but since in all other ways a cleave is considered an extension of the original attack I don't see it requiring a Full Attack action, just like a AoO doesn't require it.

IceBear

 

[S'mon]

Hey, I had another idea - Great Cleave off a Spring Attack! Haven't read far enough in the FAQ to see if Skip allows it, but on past form presumably so. The munchkin part of me can't wait to play again so I can try that on some poor GM...

 

[Magic Rub]

I guess my problem is that based on the quality of his advice, Skip Williams doesn't deserve to be the primary authoritative source on the 'true meaning' of the PHB. But many people seem happy with his rulings. As long as none of my players ever tries to enforce the FAQ on me, I'm happy.

I was under the impression that the official D&D faq releases were actually reviewed & ratified by some type of ruling body at WotC, not just something (& I mean this with all due respect) spewed forth from the sage. There by making it an official addition/clarification to what ever misc. WotC book. Actually I remember being told as much by someone on this board. Can't find, or remember what thread it was in though.

I might be wrong?

Your player's have every right to try & change the way things are done. You may (or may not?) have final say, but if they're not happy then you must addapt, or your sessions will fall apart. My group tends to vote on things. In the case of an outright impass, then it comes down to my ruling. In the end it doesn't matter as long as you're following the same rules for Cleave & Great cleave as the PC's are.

 

[SpikeyFreak]

Honestly, there has only been one time when the sage has made a totally backwards ruling, that was his, "Without a weapon you don't threaten an area." ruling.

All the other times it was obviously because the person asking the question hadn't gone to the trouble of explaining WHY they are having the question, and the sage, who likely answers dozens of email a day, and he says the obvious thing.

If you give him the reasons that the rules are in question, 99% of the time he gives a good responce.

IMO cleave deviates from the normal "only one attack on a partial action" for 2 reasons.

1.) Its really one attack. According to the rules, its treated like 2 attacks, but In Game(tm) it is one attack.

2.) The rule says "you get an immediate, extra melee attack" which sounds to me like the designers meant for it to over-ride that rule.

--Pro-Sage Spikey

 

[IceBear]

It isn't munckin - it's how it was intended to be used.

IceBear

 

[Magic Rub]

Hmmmm - yup, but since in all other ways a cleave is considered an extension of the original attack I don't see it requiring a Full Attack action, just like a AoO doesn't require it.

IceBear

Correct.

You would still be able to use your remaining extra attacks after a cleave (assuming you have any).



S'mon,

Think of Cleave/great cleave like this...

You're a martial artist (lets say Taekwon do because it rules!) & your punching/kicking through 3 - 1" thick boards. You throw your punch or kick at the first board, it breaks, your power carries through to the next board, it breaks, finally the force reaches the final board, & it breaks. You now have 3 broken boards in the time it took you to execute 1 attack. The force in that one attack is enough to carry through & damage/drop another target so long as that target is close enough.

 

[SpikeyFreak]

Hey, I had another idea - Great Cleave off a Spring Attack! Haven't read far enough in the FAQ to see if Skip allows it, but on past form presumably so. The munchkin part of me can't wait to play again so I can try that on some poor GM...

Yeah, you use that great cleave (requires what, 4th level?) and spring attack (what, 6th? 8th level?) on that group of 1 hit die monsters and see if your DM cries "Munchkin!"

--Realistic Spikey