Cleaving: Are a horse and rider "adjacent"?

[Captain Trek]

Hokay. So this situation came up in our game (right at the end of a session, fortuitously) just today and we were wondering whether a horse and rider (or, in our case, a goblin dog and goblin rider) count as "adjacent" for the purposes of using the Cleave feat?

Additionally, what would happen if the cleaving character were to drop the mount first? The rider would fall prone in the space he counted as being in before the mount fell, right? Could the cleaver still cleave the rider in that instance?

Actually, that raises another question... Are there any rules against taking a Cleave against an enemy who is in the same space as the enemy you just dropped generally speaking? This wouldn't come up very often (tiny creatures?) except for the horse-and-rider example, but it seems to bare worth mentioning as long as we're on the subject.

Thanks...

 

[WHW4]

ad·ja·cent/əˈjāsənt/

Adjective:

• Next to or adjoining something else: "adjacent rooms".
• (of angles) Having a common vertex and a common side.

Yes, a rider is adjacent to the mount; even "more adjacent" (if that's a term, heh) than you normally are when in combat (generally five feet away from someone in melee range). Now that might change if, say, you were fighting like an oliphaunt or dinosaur. You may be unable to reach the rider (in which case he isn't adjacent to you is he?)

Yes, you can cleave the rider after you slay the mount. You are literally cleaving through someone to the next target; It gets it's own attack roll, but the modifiers are all the same. Thematically it's a continuation of the first swing.

No, I am not aware of any rule against cleaving a target that shared a space with another creature. They may have cover or some other situational bonus or penalty, but they should be imminently able to be attacked just like every other adjacent target.

 

[frankthedm]

No, the square you occupy is not adjacent to you. The rules treat that as the target's space. An important rules distinction that a clever player* can use to protect their character from a cleaving.

Drop an Item
Dropping an item in your space or into an adjacent square is a free action.


*Or is that douchebag rules lawyer? With d20 systems, that line is so thin.

 

[enrious]

Cleave (Combat)
You can strike two adjacent foes with a single swing.
Prerequisites: Str 13, Power Attack, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: As a standard action, you can make a single attack at your full base attack bonus against a foe within reach. If you hit, you deal damage normally and can make an additional attack (using your full base attack bonus) against a foe that is adjacent to the first and also within reach. You can only make one additional attack per round with this feat. When you use this feat, you take a –2 penalty to your Armor Class until your next turn.

No, the square you occupy is not adjacent to you. The rules treat that as the target's space. An important rules distinction that a clever player* can use to protect their character from a cleaving.

Note the difference between the two: Cleave merely states the requirement to be that a foe that is adjacent to the first and also within [your] reach. Nowhere does it state adjacent squares, thus I think you can safely disregard that argument against being able to cleave when two foes occupy the same square, assuming the other criteria are met (reach, etc.)

Again, notice the distinction between what Cleave says (simply "adjacent") and the above example,

Drop an Item
Dropping an item in your space or into an adjacent square is a free action.

which specifies an adjacent square so clearly it's a further restriction than merely "adjacent".


I also submit the following:

Melee Attacks: With a normal melee weapon, you can strike any opponent within 5 feet. (Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you.)

Okay, so yes the square you occupy is considered to be adjacent to you as well, as it is within 5'. And it is from your foe's perspective, thus allowing you to cleave opponents occupying the same square.


As to your question regarding the rider going prone, I see nothing prohibiting cleave from occurring, and if your foe is prone, likely subject to the +4 bonus you'd get from melee attacking a prone foe.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Yes, the rider is adjacent to the mount. D&D is written in 2D, but that doesn't make 3D stop existing. Rider is above the mount's space and is a legal target.

And in any case, being able to cleave adjacent but not into the same square is silly as hell anyway.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

I am in total agreement with Stream here. We have to think 3D even though the game and the mat are in 2D. The rider and mount are definitely adjacent to each other. Try to think of it as another 5 foot square above the square that the mount is on, which makes it adjacent by the rules as well.

Any other way of trying to rule that this isn't adjacent is rules lawyering to the extreme and splitting hairs because it isn't printed in black and white in the book, it should come down to more common sense for this type of combat.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

If you're not "on" the horse, and instead "share its space," then why do you potentially get the higher ground bonus on your melee attacks?

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

Hmm. Too bad there are no rules allowing you to target an individual member of a swarm-- that would be some mighty fine swordslinging right there.

 

[Squire James]

A rider is essentially in a square adjacent to the mount - upward. There might be some reach issues in some cases, but they are certainly adjacent! For instance, if you follow the rule that the rider can choose which square of the mount he is on, he might be too far away for the potential Cleave attempt to work.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Hmm. Too bad there are no rules allowing you to target an individual member of a swarm-- that would be some mighty fine swordslinging right there.

I allow (Great) Cleave and WWA to work on swarms. WWA is really simple: roll once to hit swarm AC, if you do, roll 1 damage at 150% (as if an area attack) and inflict that on the swarm. Easy. Great Cleave I'm not as set on how to adjudicate, I'm thinking of just allowing it to ignore the half weapon damage of some swarms and do half weapon damage to swarms normally immune to weapon damage, but I don't know if that's the best way to do it. But I seldom DM, and they're not good feats, so it's never come up yet. Last time I DMed, I had to stop using swarms cause one of the players was a Dragonfire Adept and could do an area -6 str breath weapon at will, which...is basically auto-win against nearly every swarm (it had no "minimum str 1" restrictions).

A rider is essentially in a square adjacent to the mount - upward. There might be some reach issues in some cases, but they are certainly adjacent! For instance, if you follow the rule that the rider can choose which square of the mount he is on, he might be too far away for the potential Cleave attempt to work.

Rider counts as being on all the spaces the mount is in. For both good (larger threatened area) and ill (more spaces to be flanked or provoke from).