Would you allow this feat?

[Philip]

Atom Crash: I think Philip is just trying to make a point here, it's not a serious feat proposal. He's pointing out that allowing a cleave after an AoO is basically the same as this feat. And as you say, the feat is not reasonable.

Indeed, the feat is not entirely serious, but I am not trying to make a point here. After all the discussion on the boards about AoO + Cleave I was just interested where people stand on the 'fairness issue' of AoO + Cleave.

The proposed feat and attached poll is an attempt to separate the 'fairness' issue from other issues such as 'game balance', 'morality and summoned monsters', 'realism', 'cinematic', 'definition of enemy' etc. IMO the Combat Insight feat does a fairly decent job of that.

I have a fairly good idea where some of the more vocal members of the recent threads stand, but like to know how the silent majority and the lurkers think about it.

 

[atom crash]

Jim: my gut instinct told me it wasn't a serious feat proposal, but i felt like elaborating my position just in case, as well as the fact that it's a nasty habit i have of giving reasons to back up my opinion. i'm a bad, bad monkey.

 

[Aaron2]

I'm about ready to chuck AoO's out in order to save my game. Half my players utterly revolt against them. At the very least, I'm gonna tinker the hell out of them.

Try limiting them to only normal attacks that deal damage, no trips, disarms or stuff like that. This helped me and it eliminated the AoO that draws another AoO.

Aaron

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

Try limiting them to only normal attacks that deal damage, no trips, disarms or stuff like that. This helped me and it eliminated the AoO that draws another AoO.

Aaron

Thanks for the idea. I'm still not sure what I'll do with them, but my own experiences with fencing from my college days and from experiementing with AoO's with a friend who's in the SCA have demonstrated that, in my experience and opinion, the rules governing them don't work in "real life".

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I answered "No, but I do allow Cleave on AoOs."

My reasoning has been explained elsewhere, but I'll reiterate, lest you think this is a clever chance to point at me and say, "Ooh! Ooh! You're contradicting yourself!"

1. Any time you threaten an enemy, it is assumed that you are engaged in battle with them - you are swinging your weapon at them, punching, kicking, grappling, parrying, etc. This is true for all enemies you threaten.

2. Cleave represents an ability to take advantage of a "finishing strike" - the point in real time when the enemy you are fighting falls unconscious, dies, etc., as a result of your actions. This can be described cinematically in any number of ways; it is not limited to "I swing my sword so hard it cuts through Bob and into Joe." It can be, but it can also be "I stab Bob through the heart with my rapier, and as he falls, I guide him into Joe. This fouls Joe's blade, and I take advantage of the opportunity thus presented."

3. An AoO represents nothing more than an additional opening in combat. There are, generally speaking, numerous such occurrences, happening and closing every round. Your ability to take advantage of them normally is represented by your BAB. However, sometimes someone does something that leaves more openings than normal (provokes an AoO). Your ability to take advantage of such an opening is, still, represented by your BAB. (NOTE: I believe being rendered helpless should provoke AoOs but, RAW, it doesn't.)

4. So, why did I say "No," above? Simple. You cannot take advantage of an opening that isn't really there. Therefore, you cannot make an AoO on someone who has not provoked one.

5. But wait, I allow Cleave on an AoO. Isn't this feat the same thing, so aren't I contradicting myself? Not at all. Cleave is the ability to create an opening where there wasn't one - by hacking through Bob and into Joe, by tossing Bob into Joe, by spraying Joe with Bob's blood, by attacking from an unexpected direction (his blade should have been over there), etc. So, someone with Cleave can create that opening, even if the "kill" happens outside of his or her turn (which is a metagame concept, anyway - that character is constantly attacking and constantly defending, even if we need to segment it out to make the game playable).

 

[Nail]

This should go in "House Rules" forum.

If you'd like to argue about cleave-AoO interaction, there's no need to be sneaky about it.

 

[Nail]

BTW: I voted "No, but I allow cleave on AoOs".

I have read the RAW, and the discussion on these boards. I don't see any fundamental problems with the interaction between cleave an AoO.

And plase: leave you "real life" experiences out of this. It's incredibly subjective.

 

[Philip]

I answered "No, but I do allow Cleave on AoOs."

My reasoning has been explained elsewhere, but I'll reiterate, lest you think this is a clever chance to point at me and say, "Ooh! Ooh! You're contradicting yourself!"

I am sorry if it appears like that, and I can image why, but that's not my intention. I think a lot of valid points have been made by many sides about AoO + Cleave in the other threads. I have no desire to continue those discussions.

I do like to know what others think about one particular aspect of it, and how it compares to the general acceptance of Cleave + AoO.

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

And plase: leave you "real life" experiences out of this. It's incredibly subjective.

I believe that as long as I am not posting offensive material or in any other way violating the rules of this message board, I can post what I wish. If my "real life experiences" can demonstrate what I believe to be a flaw in the rules, I will say so. It is, of course, my opinion, but I am entitled to express it.

When you get big glowy letters around your name, we can talk about this again.

 

[Chroma]

Now you've done it!

4. But wait, I allow Cleave on an AoO. Isn't this feat the same thing, so aren't I contradicting myself? Not at all. Cleave is the ability to create an opening where there wasn't one - by hacking through Bob and into Joe, by tossing Bob into Joe, by spraying Joe with Bob's blood, by attacking from an unexpected direction (his blade should have been over there), etc. So, someone with Cleave can create that opening, even if the "kill" happens outside of his or her turn (which is a metagame concept, anyway - that character is constantly attacking and constantly defending, even if we need to segment it out to make the game playable).

Well Patryn, you may have done the impossible... you've changed someone's mind by posting on the internet! Your description of a AoO/Cleave interaction has made me reconsider and change my stance on not allowing Cleaves from AoO kills. My players *may* thank you... depends who Cleaves first!