Cleaving after an AoO

[Hypersmurf]

The attitude of most Americans before 9/11 was that they did NOT have ill will towards Al Qaida. But, that did not stop Al Qaida from deciding that all Americans were their enemies.

They were incorrect at the time, though. The only decision they could make was that they would be the enemies of all Americans. They couldn't simply decide that all Americans were their enemies. Only all Americans can decide that.

Whether they believed it or not doesn't make it true.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Which would be interesting if destroying an illusion triggered the Cleave feat. The "official" ruling (for what its worth) is that it doesn't.

Now, while I disagree with and do not use this ruling, this is the text from the current Main FAQ:

Are the multiple figments from a mirror image spell
legal targets for cleaving? That is, if you have the Cleave
feat and you hit an image and destroy it, can you then
attack another target within reach (such as another figment
from the spell or perhaps the spell user)? What about
Whirlwind Attack? Can you use this feat to attack all the
images around the spell user? What about spells that allow
multiple targets, such as magic missile? Can you aim magic
missiles at different images?

For all intents and purposes, the figments from a foe’s
mirror image spell are your foes. You aim your spells and your
attacks at the figments just as though they were real creatures.
Any spell you can aim at a creature you can aim at an image.
When you use a spell that allows you to select multiple
creatures as targets, such as magic missile, you can choose
multiple images as targets.

If you have the Cleave or Great Cleave feat, destroying an
image with a melee attack triggers the feat (and your cleaving
attack might well strike the spell user instead of another
image). Likewise, you can use Whirlwind Attack to strike at
any image you can reach. A Whirlwind Attack almost certainly
will allow you to strike once at the spell user.

So the FAQ rules that destroying an Illusion (Figment) is a valid trigger for Cleave.

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

However, you are basing your opposition to "Cleaving on an AoO" on a particular, non-rule-based, cinematic (as in, "flavor text the DM says when my character does something") reading of the feat. You then claim that, because this particular point of view leads to undesirable results, the combination itself is undesirable.

Actually, you are mistaken about my opposition.

I could really care less about the cinematic issue. I just brought up the fact in this thread that the cinematic issue doesn't make sense to me and I tried to explain why.


The real issues for me are:

1) This can be abused with the Summon Monster tactic. Just look at what people are discussing now: how to do the tactic with illusions to avoid any alignment issue (which btw, they can do with Astral Constructs anyway).

2) It is inherently unfair that a character can get attacked when an ally is within 25 feet and foobars whereas he cannot get attacked if an ally is not in the area at all. This sounds totally nonsensical and unfair. To me.

Also, in real life, I am heavily motivated by fairness, so concepts in the game that do not seem fair are automatically suspect for me.

As Thanee stated:

"I don't think, that many people here consider it "destroying the game", but rather something, which - even though it certainly does not come up often - just doesn't feel right"

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Actually, you are mistaken about my opposition.

If you say so ...

1) This can be abused with the Summon Monster tactic.

I don't really see it as "abuse" ...

2) It is inherently unfair that a character can get attacked when an ally is within 25 feet and foobars whereas he cannot get attacked if an ally is not in the area at all.

Yep, it's damned unfair that your ally lost his arm and sprayed blood in your eyes, momentarily distracting you.

Yep, it's damned unfair that your opponent, who's spent a great deal of time and training in order to take advantage of such situations, was able to get some free whacks on you.

Yep, it's damned unfair that, had your ally not been there at all, you'd never have gotten that particular spray of blood in your eyes, would not have had to take your concentration off your foe for just the moment required to wipe them clean, would not have been thusly distracted, and would not have recieved an axe to the head for another couple seconds.

On the other hand, it's also damned unfair that you aren't a Grand Wizard, able to destroy your enemies with a thought and a gesture.

I don't buy the "Fairness" argument, as you can see.

Can the PCs do it? Yes.

Can the NPCs do it? Yes.

It is, therefore, "Fair," by any definition of the word that matters.

 

[KarinsDad]

Yep, it's damned unfair that your ally lost his arm and sprayed blood in your eyes, momentarily distracting you.

But that is not what is happening here. I am not distracted enough to lower my guard. If I were, anyone in combat could take advantage of it (i.e. get an AoO on me). So your "cinematic" example here is moot.

Additionally, I have a problem that the disappating Astral Construct 20 feet away is distracting you when it is around the corner and not even visible to you, but it disappating does not distract anyone else on the battlefield.

There is a bit of unfairness about that, regardless of your opinion on it. YMMV.

I don't buy the "Fairness" argument, as you can see.

Can the PCs do it? Yes.

Can the NPCs do it? Yes.

It is, therefore, "Fair," by any definition of the word that matters.

And that's fine for you.

It doesn't make it fair to everyone, it just makes it fair for you.

That doesn't make you right and us wrong, it just means we disagree on the concept of fairness.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

So, you think it is perfectly okay to summon a creature for the express purpose of killing it? I'm left to wonder where your code of morality finds its roots, and to marvel at the depravity that must exist at its core.

That is worth a laugh!

With a views regarding animal sacrifice that are clearly so wildly out of the mainstream for typical ancient/quasi-medieval/fantasy worlds, I'm left to wonder if, in your campaign world, the paladin organizations known as PETA and ALF hunt down those "depraved" Zeus worshippers and YHWH cultists who kill animals in their blashphemous religious rituals.

I would suggest you actually sit down and read the PHB section on summonings. With respect to the rules, a summoned creature and a normal, live & kicking critter are very different things.

And read the section on alignments while you have your book in hand.

Glad to be of help.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

But that is not what is happening here. I am not distracted enough to lower my guard. If I were, anyone in combat could take advantage of it (i.e. get an AoO on me). So your "cinematic" example here is moot.

Incorrect.

*IF* you were really, really distracted by the blood in your eyes, then yes, you'd provoke an AoO from everyone (say, distracted enough to need a Heal check). But you're not really distracted all that much.

Instead, only someone who has specifically trained to take advantage of such small gaps in defense can benefit.

As in, only someone who's picked up the Cleave feat can benefit from this momentary lapse.

Or, to put it another way, you *are* provoking a special kind of AoO, one which only a person with a special version of Combat Reflexes can respond to.

Additionally, I have a problem that the disappating Astral Construct 20 feet away is distracting you when it is around the corner and not even visible to you, but it disappating does not distract anyone else on the battlefield.

You are both threatening the same spearman, therefore his spear point is whirling about, parrying both your swings and those of the astral construct on the other side of the wall.

Suddenly, he doesn't have to worry about the astral construct any more, allowing him to redouble his efforts against you.

Suddenly, that spear point - which, following his normal pattern, should have been about to swing away a poke at something else - is instead coming right back at your face.

There's been a momentum shift in the battle, caused by the fact that the spearman is not only no longer actively engaged with the construct, but that he no longer even needs to keep an eye on it, and can instead focus his attention solely on you.

There is a bit of unfairness about that, regardless of your opinion on it. YMMV.

So, if there's a "bit of unfairness" there, regardless of my opinion, how can MMV?

That's a contradictory statement, sir.

 

[Storyteller01]

Just as acceptable and as lacking in consequences as sending summoned creatures to their death because your character needs a distraction.

Summoned creatures don't have to die to be a distraction

 

[Storyteller01]

I would tell such a DM to go take a hike and easily convince my fellow intelligent gamers that we need a new DM.

WOW!! Lot's of hostility over a message board debate!!

Let's not get insultng here (sorry if this was misinterpretted).

It's just a debate!!

 

[Abraxas]

*IF* you were really, really distracted by the blood in your eyes, then yes, you'd provoke an AoO from everyone (say, distracted enough to need a Heal check). But you're not really distracted all that much.

Instead, only someone who has specifically trained to take advantage of such small gaps in defense can benefit.

As in, only someone who's picked up the Cleave feat can benefit from this momentary lapse.

Or, to put it another way, you *are* provoking a special kind of AoO, one which only a person with a special version of Combat Reflexes can respond to.

So anyone next to the guy with blood in his eyes that has combat refelxes and one or both cleave feats should be able to attack him also.

Summoned creatures don't have to die to be a distraction.

They don't have to die to get an AoO cleave attack either.

So, you think it is perfectly okay to summon a creature for the express purpose of killing it? I'm left to wonder where your code of morality finds its roots, and to marvel at the depravity that must exist at its core.

ROTFLMAO