Cleave of Oppurtunity?
- Thread starter Goldmoon
- Start date
Infiniti2000
First Post
It has been discussed many time in long and heated debates.Goldmoon said:
I'd guess that the "consensus" is split 50/50 either way.Goldmoon said:
frankthedm
First Post
By the rules yes.
Many people object to this and change it since AoOs are supposed to because the person being AoO'd dropped thier guard.
A Happy medium would be letting someone with cleave "keep" thier AoO if thier AoO drops thier foe, letting them "cleave" through those who do draw the AoOs.
A less generous way to change it is to declare the use of "Cleave" is a free action, thus only performable on one's own turn, like improved grab.
Many people object to this and change it since AoOs are supposed to because the person being AoO'd dropped thier guard.
A Happy medium would be letting someone with cleave "keep" thier AoO if thier AoO drops thier foe, letting them "cleave" through those who do draw the AoOs.
A less generous way to change it is to declare the use of "Cleave" is a free action, thus only performable on one's own turn, like improved grab.
Last edited:
starwed
First Post
By the RAW, it's absolutely possible.
But it's bad for both flavor and balance. Flavor, because why does enemy A moving away from you allow you an extra attack on enemy B, whose just standing their defending? Think how annoyed you'd be as a player if this happened to you because an NPC did something stupid. Balance, because you can get extra, full BAB attacks on a powerful creature by cleaving through his minions. (Or, in the most munchkiny of cases, a bag of rats held for the occasion.)
The idea that you can only cleave onto people who also provoke an AoO is attractive, but I'm not sure how that would work in practice. (Do you delay the cleave until a later initiative? Or is it only useful against foes acting in unison?)
But it's bad for both flavor and balance. Flavor, because why does enemy A moving away from you allow you an extra attack on enemy B, whose just standing their defending? Think how annoyed you'd be as a player if this happened to you because an NPC did something stupid. Balance, because you can get extra, full BAB attacks on a powerful creature by cleaving through his minions. (Or, in the most munchkiny of cases, a bag of rats held for the occasion.)
The idea that you can only cleave onto people who also provoke an AoO is attractive, but I'm not sure how that would work in practice. (Do you delay the cleave until a later initiative? Or is it only useful against foes acting in unison?)
frankthedm
First Post
The way to work that is the person with cleave, if they kill the foe on the AoO. can count that as a cleave, rather than their one AoO.starwed said:
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
Yes, by the RAW, it is allowed.
There is a wild diversity of opinion on whether this is a net positive or net negative with respect to how this meshes with the flavor of the game.
Balancewise... This kind of thing probably helps PCs more frequently than their foes. OTOH, when it works against the PCs, because very strong monsters with immense reach are not exactly rare, it could easily result in 2 (or 3) heroes dead/unconscious heroes instead of 1, and that can cascade into a TPK. While that is not unfair in itself, you may or may not consider this a desirable element in your campaign.
My personal opinion is that the D&D combat mechanics systematically minimizes other comparable situational advantages/disadvantages that seem more realistic and obvious (e.g. outnumbered and flanked by your enemy gives a miserly +2 to hit), so AoO Cleaving clashes with what I perceive as the heroic style of the game.
YMMV.
There is a wild diversity of opinion on whether this is a net positive or net negative with respect to how this meshes with the flavor of the game.
Balancewise... This kind of thing probably helps PCs more frequently than their foes. OTOH, when it works against the PCs, because very strong monsters with immense reach are not exactly rare, it could easily result in 2 (or 3) heroes dead/unconscious heroes instead of 1, and that can cascade into a TPK. While that is not unfair in itself, you may or may not consider this a desirable element in your campaign.
My personal opinion is that the D&D combat mechanics systematically minimizes other comparable situational advantages/disadvantages that seem more realistic and obvious (e.g. outnumbered and flanked by your enemy gives a miserly +2 to hit), so AoO Cleaving clashes with what I perceive as the heroic style of the game.
YMMV.
The Forsaken One
Explorer
By the rules, a definate yes. Flavor and common sense wise, meehh....
I'd go for a yes anyway, no need to start this train of thought or you'll start houseruling everything and its mother cause it doesnt stroke with your idea of something. Keep it straight, keep it simple, keep combat something that isnt too complicated.
Just my 2 cents.
I'd go for a yes anyway, no need to start this train of thought or you'll start houseruling everything and its mother cause it doesnt stroke with your idea of something. Keep it straight, keep it simple, keep combat something that isnt too complicated.
Just my 2 cents.
Similar Threads
