Cleaving after an AoO

[Abstraction]

Now let's allow cleaving off of AoO's. Fighter (level 3) attacks on his turn and hits Orc1 (level 5). Orc 2 drinks potion, fighter makes AoO, kills him and attacks Orc1 again. Orc3 drinks potion, fighter makes AoO, kills him and attacks Orc1 again. Orc 4 does the same thing and fighter is finally able to kill off Orc1 after 4 attacks in one round. Granted, this is a hypothetical situation and would never come up in actual play.

Note that this fighter has Cleave and Combat Reflexes and a high Dex. Looked at it through that light, it sounds fine to me. Especially considering how rarely somebody is surrounded by 8 orcs and lives.

 

[KarinsDad]

Yep, it's pretty much the same. The only difference is the situation, which creates the original attack in the first place, which is why I have no problem with cleaving after a charge, but with cleaving after an AoO.

But technically both work just fine.

Precisely.

From a game mechanics point of view, they both work.

From a fairness / common sense point of view, one works and one doesn't.

 

[Scion]

All of your examples could be replaced with a non-existent character

You are saying that my examples have problems because you can make up a completely ridiculous example which goes against the rules of the game and come up with a situation in which it is overpowered?

Ok. Then, going by your example of making up things, every single aspect of the game is broken and overpowered because someone could make up something that breaks it.

If, however, we go by the actual rules of the game where one cannot simply make up random foes which are then defeated in some virtual space allowing various combat actions to just happen for no reason then there isnt any problem.

My way, going by the rules and there arent any problems in this situation. Except that people have issues with the flavor or cant picture it, that is for their games if they wish to change it.

Or, there is the way it seems you are touting, which is to make up an impossible scenario (impossible because it goes against the rules) to prove that things dont work logically. At that point however there is no useful logic being used.


As for your bottom line however, the same could be said for any target, enemy, foe, friend, ally, peice of terrain, bottle cap, weapon, or anything else that is in existance at the same time. Why does it change things? Because that is the way things work in that world. Those who can take advantage of specific circumstances can get those advantages when those circumstances are in play.

How come a player behind a wall gains a benefit? If that wall wasnt there they wouldnt get it. How come this guy gets an attack? if he didnt have that feat he wouldnt get it. Etc etc etc etc adnauseum.

A situation happens that a character is specifically trained to use to his advantage and he gets an advantage. Good for him.

 

[Scion]

From a fairness / common sense point of view, one works and one doesn't.

But why?

They both work in the same way. It is someone who has spent the resources to gain a benefit. The benefit isnt exactly huge, but it is nice on occasion.

Fair? why would it not be fair? not fair to who? I could use the wall example again, it works in exactly the same way. If that wall wasnt there then he wouldnt get a benefit, so why should he get a benefit if the wall is there? That arguement is just as illogical as the one you are trying to present.

So why? why is it against fairness? why is it against common sense? The arguments about someone being 'punished' just dont hold water, what else is there?

 

[Veritas]

I've allowed cleave attempts whenever a character who has the feat kills an opponent (or drops it below 0 hit points), no matter what. Well, okay, with a melee weapon.

Cleave to me isn't truly another attack, it's just the character following through on his swing. So, he slashes an orc, for example, and if he doesn't kill it, his attack stops there since the orc's body effectively stops his weapon, and he must withdraw the weapon and attack again. If he kills the orc with that hit, he slices through (at least part of it) and continues on with his swing into the cleave, which uses the same attack bonus as the attack that just killed the previous opponent, but a new attack roll is needed because of the potential for the new opponent to dodge out of the way or for his armor to turn aside the follow-through.

I see nothing wrong with this same thing working for an attack of opportunity. Someone in front of him tries to cast a spell without taking a 5' step, or by drinking a potion or whatever, he slashes them, kills them, and follows through on the swing, having a change to hit the guy standing right next to him too. It's all the same to me. *shrug*

 

[atom crash]

AoO is a single melee attack. Once this single melee attack is done (and the opponent dropped), Cleave kicks in and another immediate single melee attack is spawned, which is completely seperate from the single AoO attack. You still got only one attack from the AoO. The other attack you got is from Cleave.

Excellent point.

But what about this?

If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character’s turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character’s turn).

By my reading, this doesn't leave much room for Cleave to kick in. Get your attack of opportunity, then you're done. The option to "complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character’s turn" might open the door for Cleave, but I read that as meaning to continue on to your other iterative attacks or actions you haven't yet done because combat was interrupted by an AoO.

Resolve your AoO, then get back to the combat at hand. Do not pass go, do not collect $200, do not get an additional attack.

We've seen in the FAQ that if an attack during an AoO provokes an AoO, then you should immediately resolve it in order -- though I find the example in the FAQ extremely silly, I won't refute it. But we've seen no example in which an AoO grants an additional attack. I'll freely admit that the lack of an example isn't proof that none exists. And I'll also freely admit that my interpretation of the intent of the designers could be wrong.

The crux of my argument -- and I guess I didn't do a good enough job of explicitly spelling it out before -- is that attacks of opportunity exist outside the realm of normal combat. That's how they are presented in the rules. The SRD says that "an attack of opportunity 'interrupts' the normal flow of actions in the round."

Therefore, I maintain that the normal rules (and the exceptions to the rules, such as those allowed by Cleave) do not necessarily apply during an AoO.

 

[Scion]

SRD:
If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate , extra melee attack against another creature within reach.


There you are, there is the rule you are looking for. Cleave says so and so it is.

 

[Veritas]

Whoops... should have hit "preview"... oh well, it just supports you anyways, Scion. *thumbs up*

Cleave:
If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature. You can use this ability once per round.

The bolded part seems to be fairly universal... all you have to do is drop the opponent and you get an immediate extra melee attack.

Normally, you just resolve your melee attacks and then continue on with the next turn or finish the turn your in, but if you drop an opponent on any of those attacks, you get a cleave attempt. This seems to apply to the AoO text you quoted above... you make your AoO, if you drop your opponent you get the extra melee attack for the cleave, and then you continue on with the next round or finish the current round.

 

[Thanee]

But why?

They both work in the same way. It is someone who has spent the resources to gain a benefit. The benefit isnt exactly huge, but it is nice on occasion.

The benefit might not be huge for the character with Cleave, it's just one more attack, but the penalty surely is, for the character that gets hit from an attack of opportunity, essentially, without provoking it.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

By my reading, this doesn't leave much room for Cleave to kick in.

Well, immediate is pretty fast after all.

Bye
Thanee