Cleave of Oppurtunity?

[Goolpsy]

It can absolutely not be allowed! You cannot gain such actions.. when it isn't your turn... By allowing this you can start a chain of reactions leaving to lots of attack on someone else turn... this is going against EVERY mechanic in the game...

 

[mikebr99]

It can absolutely not be allowed! You cannot gain such actions.. when it isn't your turn... By allowing this you can start a chain of reactions leaving to lots of attack on someone else turn... this is going against EVERY mechanic in the game...

The power attacking cleave monster always fights like that.. with great swings in every direction, so when one of them lands (for whatever reason) and the opponent drops... the swing always continues into the next opponent.

I don't mean to single you out specifically... but how is a warrior type, even with cleaving via an AoO, suddenly a broken character concept?

Cleaves happen less and less, as you proceed in levels... And stupid monsters, who do stupid things while threatened should happen less and less also... a Wizard (fireball anyone?) is way more effective at killing mooks then a cleave via an AoO is ever going to be.


Mike

 

[werk]

this is going against EVERY mechanic in the game...

Except mechanics regarding AoO, which, conveniently, is when it occurs.

 

[moritheil]

I think Goolspy is being facetious.

 

[The Forsaken One]

I think Goolspy is being facetious.

I think he indeed just might be

 

[Goldmoon]

I figured it was legal. We did a one-shot with level 10 characters Sunday and I played a 3Monk/7 Forsaker with VoP. I got an AoO off a felling opponent, dropped him and wanted to use cleave and someone else called it "Rediculous"

 

[Dross]

I figured it was legal. We did a one-shot with level 10 characters Sunday and I played a 3Monk/7 Forsaker with VoP. I got an AoO off a felling opponent, dropped him and wanted to use cleave and someone else called it "Rediculous"

Did that someone else say why it was rediculous? (curious is all really)

I'm firmly in the camp that the Cleave of a AoO is allowed. However I would not be upset over a house rule that said it wasn't.

It seems to be on of those things that can grate on some people's sensibilities.

 

[El Ravager]

It never even occurred to me to question this rule. We have always played cleaves (and great cleaves) off of AoOs. There's a phrase relating to Warhammer 40k, 'fluff ain't rules'. If you think too hard about it, about what an AoO is or cleave, and are a slave to the tiltes of the rules, they often dont make much sense. It's just a name for a rule. Like not all assassins have to be 'assassins', not everyone who fights is a 'fighter'.

Take cleave, for example. To really go by the name of the feat you should have to use the attack on an adjacent foe to the one that was slain. But you don't. You can happily bounce all around you're threatened zone, 'cleave' right past people into people you want to hit. And who cares? It works. Combat is still pretty abstract. The rules are the rules, the description of how it happens in the game isn't always exactly what the rule name says. Don't let that limit how you interpret events. Just roll with it, mang.

 

[Goolpsy]

Well... all the mechanics are based upon making the turn based game TURN BASED... each player should have an equal opportunity within each turn (unless because of factor x or x or x....) Thats why there's no class with 2x standard action and 1 moveaction etc. AND thats why everyone disliked/changed/banned 3.0 Haste...

By allowing to cleave of AOO you simply let a player have a turn in another players turn... --> going against the turn based, ruinning the effective turn balance etc.
You might as well just allow 3.0 Haste again...

 

[shilsen]

By allowing to cleave of AOO you simply let a player have a turn in another players turn... --> going against the turn based, ruinning the effective turn balance etc.
You might as well just allow 3.0 Haste again...

Isn't an AoO itself already a case of a PC getting a turn during another PC's turn?