Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sigg" data-source="post: 2683273" data-attributes="member: 30546">By dragging in the non-abilities bit from the MM ya'all are trying to prove figments can't be "creatures" because they have no wis or cha scores, leaving common sense in the dust. Figments are illusions, without existence or substance outside the minds of their perceivers, making cleaving through the image so much simpler (one would think). The Non-abilities nonsense is meant to apply to monsters, hence it's inclusion in the MM...not the DMG, or the PHB. My focus on insisting on wording from the RAW, or anywhere else for that matter, that would ban cleaves from working on images is valid, the precedent has been set by such things as crits and sneak attacks not working on undead....charms and illusions not working on low int creatures, etc.. I suspect that the word "creature" is used in the cleave desc because 99% of the time that's what's going to be targetted with a cleave. NOT because they intended logicians to have something to be annoying about. So then the "official" FAQs clarify this....because it makes sense anyway....but that's still not good enough. These arguements like magic missiles having wis are silly.....how would you attack a magic missile anyway? Completely irrelevent. There's no logical reason one shouldn't be able to cleave through an illusion and still strike something else on the other side. Neither the desc of the feat nor the spell desc, both RAW, deny this. The, declared by WoC, official rules clarifications (not house rules) in the FAQs confirm this.Now some lines to help clear up some things follow:House Rules are new or modified rules used  in a particular campaign and/or by a particular DM in order to personalize or streamline a specific aspect of the game. An example would be changing or eliminating the use of alignments. Another would be creating and using a separate perception stat. Official rules clarifications released by the publisher of the game rules are NOT house rules. Whether you like the vector of their delivery or not is a personal problem.Cleave: pg. 92, PHB "You follow through with powerful blows."Cleave: The Dictionaryv. cleft, (klft) or cleaved or clove (klv) cleft, or cleaved or clo·ven (klvn) cleav·ing, cleavesv. tr.   1. To split with or as if with a sharp instrument. See Synonyms at tear1.   2. To make or accomplish by or as if by cutting: cleave a path through the ice.   3. To pierce or penetrate: The wings cleaved the foggy air.   4. Chemistry. To split (a complex molecule) into simpler molecules.v. intr.   1. Mineralogy. To split or separate, especially along a natural line of division.   2. To penetrate or pass through something, such as water or air.Given the lack of prohibition from the RAW, the confirmation from the FAQs, and just plain common sense, there's little reason to ban cleaving mirror images. To be fair, however, from the wording in the RAW alone I have to be honest and say there's room for interpreting it either way...mainly because of the unfortunate wording of the cleave feat combined with the odd definition from the glossary. All I've been argueing is that the RAW doesn't explicitly ban using cleave on mirror images...but it can be interpreted that way indirectly if one chooses to ignore common sense in their interpretation.</blockquote>

Verification