Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wrathamon" data-source="post: 1906869" data-attributes="member: 7989">I sort a agree with your assertionI agree that people would follow the rules and defend them if the rules were changed, but there is nothing wrong with that, just as there is nothing wrong with saying a rule is wrong and you go about trying to find a reasonable change to fix it.In this instance, some people feel there is no reason to fix what isn't broken in their minds and those of the design team, while in the anti cleave aoo camp it doesn’t matter what people think, they feel its wrong and no one is going to change your mind.I do disagree with the for balance and fairness argument, not that you aren’t for that... Because, I think most people "should" be.My disagreement is that I don’t believe Cleave and AoO is not balanced. You get one free attack if you drop someone from your attack. So whether you got this free attack on your turn or off an AoO doesn’t matter, you would have still received it. Now, is getting a free attack from dropping someone Fair? Fair is very subjective, more so than the term balanced.I also don’t think it's NOT balance to house rule that you CANT Cleave off AoO. I don’t really see it hurting anything that much considering AoO and dropping someone from that attack is a rare occurrence. This would weaken certain builds and make them obsolete (combat reflex, reach, great cleave fighters) who specialize in the AoO cleave tactic.So, if you HR that you can't, sure I am not going to argue it if I was in your game. You had your reasons, but I won't be changing it for my games because I dont see it as being an unfair or unbalanced.I will agree with you here, but it seems that people haven’t beaten the horse enough... is that an evil act? Beating a dead horse? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />I really only have one more question and then I am done with this topic unless a post perks my interest.have you read anywhere that they did this on purpose? Can you show a designer interview or faq or anything supporting this claim or is this your opinion of the matter? If it is your opinion then you really should state that this is your opinion and not make it sound as if it’s RAW. But, if you did read this someone please show this because I would be VERY interested in that because that is a very conscious design choice and I am curious about what goes into choices like that. I can see your interpretation of this and it does make sense.By no means am I trying to put you on the spot, I would just like clarification, and if there are specifics from wotc supporting this, that would be nice reading. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification