Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="atom crash" data-source="post: 1907863" data-attributes="member: 22162">ok, so through the use of this feat, if goblin #1 bends over to tie his shoe in the middle of combat, you can use this momentary opening to instead attack goblin #2? no, i wouldn't allow it because a) it doesn't make much sense, b) it totally corrupts the concept of attacks of opportunity and c) it's way too powerful with no pre-requisites.even if hefty (or at least logical) pre-requisites were added, i'd probably still disallow it based on the first two points.a) it doesn't make much sense: consider in particular the case of a disarm, trip, grapple or bull-rush attempt. where is the sense in being able to take an additional (free) attack on a foe because a different foe attempts these specific actions?b) it totally corrupts the concept of attacks of opportunity. the AoO is a risk vs. gain tactical decision between the person taking the action and the person threatening him. i want to take a certain action, so i'll take the risk. how can you weigh the risk of an action vs the AoO when potentially you won't be the one taking the attack?the AoO is not a penalty for taking certain actions, but this concept turns it into one. however, this feat would reinforce party cohesion, since it would make every character responsible for every other character during combat. if the wording of the feat were such that it explicitly allowed the use of Cleave on an AoO rather than allowing a person to attack any foe in range when one foe attempted a bull rush, it would make more sense, but it would also be superfluous, as Cleave on an AoO is already allowed by the letter of the rules.</blockquote>

Verification