Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Slider33 09-28-05, 05:06 PM	Can you perform a cleave on an attack of opportunity? Say target 1 provokes AoO, and you drop the creature. Are you allowed to make a cleave attack to another target like it was your normal attack? My gut instinct says "no", since the other creatures in your threatened area did not provoke an AoO, you wouldn't be able to make an additional attack against them, cleave or otherwise. I couldn't find where the SRD states one way or another, what are the rules on this?
Nuntius128 09-28-05, 05:22 PM	My guy would tell me 'no,' as well, but it does say that any time you drop an opponent, you're free to make another attack, not really specifying that it must be your turn.
Nom 09-28-05, 05:44 PM	RAW Yes, you can cleave from any melee attack which meets the conditions, including an AoO. Several people (including Tony Vargas and myself) have proposed modifications to prevent non-provoking targets getting attacked by Cleave but still allowing it to function in an AoO. Scroll through the posts on this board to find the most recent discussion.
StevenO 09-29-05, 12:17 AM	As Nom stated the RulesAsWritten allow cleaving of an AoO into any target in reach. This cleave this isn't too terrible but with great cleave could lead to problems. A favored solution is to treat the attack that allow the cleave as if it wasn't taken. In the case of an AoO you would regain the ability to make an AoO at the next opportunity. Normally it is attack and drop opponent and then make another attack just like the one you made. With this change it is attack and drop opponent then reset to right before that attack was made - effecively the cleaving attack was "free". I'd say this solution also work with "cleave on charge" problems which can also come up.
erc1971 09-29-05, 03:54 PM	Nom is correct, you can Cleave if you drop an opponent with an AOO. There was a long thread on this not too long ago. However, I house rule you cannot since there are many ways to abuse it... In a bar fight with a reach weapon, combat reflexes and cleave; all those juicy commoners running around provoking. Kill them as they provoke, cleave into your real enemy. Take a reach weapon, combat reflexes and greater cleave. Now, have a teammate open a bag and throw a dozen hamsters at you. Since the hamsters are moving, they provoke. As you kill them, you cleave into your real opponent. Same thing, charge while mirror imaged. Your images are moving and provoke. Kill all your mirror images and cleave into your real opponent once they are in range.
q'afuu 09-29-05, 04:54 PM	However, I house rule you cannot since there are many ways to abuse it... The ways you mention are either moronic or downright against the rules. I wouldn't worry too much about that kind of silliness, you don't have to have a rule in place to make them impossible when you can simply tell your players you won't allow it. Done.
Bill Bisco: Average Adventurer 09-29-05, 07:13 PM	Uh, Who Cares if they Get a free attack From Cleave As an Attack of Opportunity. Bag of Rats fighters don't work anymore. It the Enemies are weak enough that they die in one hit, then they could all die from a whirlwind attack anyway. Stop worrying about everything. It really doesn't matter. It's fine. Leave it be.
Lord Schpungus 09-29-05, 11:12 PM	Cleave off a Cleave. You guys are pathetic. Oh Noes, it might be good for figiters!!! Nerfban it!
Slider33 09-30-05, 11:11 AM	Thanks for the replies, it was just something I wondered because the RAW doesn't specifically mention the feat regarding AoO's. My first feeling about cleaving on an AoO sort of contradicts what an AoO is all about anyway, which is an extra attack against an opponent who does some sort of action that makes him vulnerable to an extra attack. It still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me that you could technically get extra attacks against other targets, (who are not the individuals opening themselves up for an extra attack) when it's not your turn. So I guess it can still be ruled either way, depending on whether you give cleaving rules a higher priority over the rules of AoO's, or vice-versa. But it's not a serious concern in most cases. On the off chance that this situation will ever arise it's not going to be that critical of an issue, like an above poster said, the enemies would have to all be pretty weak. However, in my particular campaign it might become an issue. If I decide to throw an angry mob of rioting commoners at them and it ends up not even remotely being a challenge or a threat to a melee-heavy party that can great-cleave every single time a rioter does something that incurs an AoO. If they want to cleave when it's their turn, that's all good and fine but I don't want several guys who didn't provoke AoO going down just because one of the others wants to try a grapple or a trip. (I'm just focusing on the combat ECL of a fight like that, not the moral/social/other consequences of such a scenario.)
Vrellum 09-30-05, 11:17 AM	As far as the guy not giving an opening paying the price when an ally provokes and AoO and gets dropped. Consider a fight where allies depend on each other (I think this is a normal occurrance). If the guy who is defending your flank is suddenly dropped it is likely to open you up to an attack because you are now vulnerable to attack from a previously safe angle.
DarknessEternal 09-30-05, 12:29 PM	Cleave comes up so rarely that I can't see preventing it just because you dropped someone on an AoO. It's pretty dang easy for me to imagine someone else putting you into a situation where you got hit unexpectedly. For example, he died when he was standing behind you. Just be wary of tricks.
Tony Vargas 09-30-05, 12:59 PM	It still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me that you could technically get extra attacks against other targets, (who are not the individuals opening themselves up for an extra attack) when it's not your turn. So I guess it can still be ruled either way, depending on whether you give cleaving rules a higher priority over the rules of AoO's, or vice-versa. Nod. Not only does it not make sense to use what amounts to an AoO on a non-provoking individual, it can be imbalancing or merely 'unfair' to allow it. Not so much because it's overpowering (in order to be overpowering, you need a pretty bizarre set of circumstances), but because it can penalize a character for something that should be modeled as an advantage (however slight), and because it can create a perverse incentive (in the minds of certain sorts of players) to manufacture said bizarre sets of circumstances. If you don't have that certain Wizard-of-Oz-Referent sort of player in your game, you can ignore one of those problems. If you also never set up encounters that consist of a small number of 'real' foes with a larger number of trivial allies, then you can ignore the first one, as well. If you ever want to have 'mixed' combats, with weaker enemies on the board to get in the player's way (and also, incidentally, give them a chance to see how far they've progressed compared to enemies, like orcs, that would once have been a challenge), then you might have to watch out for it. However, in my particular campaign it might become an issue. If I decide to throw an angry mob of rioting commoners at them and it ends up not even remotely being a challenge or a threat to a melee-heavy party that can great-cleave every single time a rioter does something that incurs an AoO.Well, it probably /shouldn't/ be much of a threat. Untrained, unarmed combatants against epic-fantasy warriors. The real challenge (for a typical goodish party), would be dealing with the riot without making it into a bloodbath. But, if you really want it to be a challenge, just crack open the DMGII and look up mobs. Your players will cry. :weep: If they want to cleave when it's their turn, that's all good and fine but I don't want several guys who didn't provoke AoO going down just because one of the others wants to try a grapple or a trip.That's fair, though a mob trying to drag down a warrior probably all /will/ be provoking AoOs as they each try to grapple, anyway. (I'm just focusing on the combat ECL of a fight like that, not the moral/social/other consequences of such a scenario.) I know, but I had to bring it up: circumstances effect EL, and fighting 'enemies' whom you rather not have to kill could be such a circumstance.
Bill Bisco: Average Adventurer 11-30-05, 10:22 PM	Uh, Who Cares if they Get a free attack From Cleave As an Attack of Opportunity. Bag of Rats fighters don't work anymore. It the Enemies are weak enough that they die in one hit, then they could all die from a whirlwind attack anyway. Stop worrying about everything. It really doesn't matter. It's fine. Leave it be. I'm actually going to apologize and say something else. While I think it's important to not worry about tiny things, I have noticed potential abuse with this. While if one enemy drops and you get a cleave off, this might not be a big deal, but what about this scenario. A Super Tripper is fighting a Major Enemy. But, he has all of his minor minions (be they animated dead, summoned monsters, followers, whatever) come into his threat range and he gets attacks of opportunity against them. They each die in one hit, and so he has extra attacks equal to the amount of minions present (or more if you have double hit). So that basically means that any enemy the character fights will be killed.
Cayl 11-30-05, 10:45 PM	First and foremost this is a game. So consider what kind of effect this will have on the balance of the game. What do you gain by nerfing a key feat for fighter types? Do you feel that taking three feats (Combat Reflexes and Cleave and Great Cleave) should allow a fighter to do interesting things? Do you feel Fighters are too powerful? If not, do you plan on giving them somthing in return for this house rule? I don't really see this as affecting flavor or roleplaying consistency of a world, so I don't think that consideration really plays a factor. I think there's been a lack of creativity in thinking up why this might work. Of course that Cleave attack is catching you a bit by surprise. Its coming from an unexpected angle. Out the back of your friend. However, in my particular campaign it might become an issue. If I decide to throw an angry mob of rioting commoners at them and it ends up not even remotely being a challenge or a threat to a melee-heavy party that can great-cleave every single time a rioter does something that incurs an AoO. I can't really compose a civil reply to a DM who intends to throw waves of commoners at Lv 4+ melee fighters and is upset that they might lose too easily.
syntaxerror37 11-30-05, 10:47 PM	Cleave comes up so rarely that I can't see preventing it just because you dropped someone on an AoO. Any time a PC is squared off against more than one opponent is a cleave in the making. You don't have to be fighting hoards of badies for this to happen either. A Super Tripper is fighting a Major Enemy. But, he has all of his minor minions (be they animated dead, summoned monsters, followers, whatever) come into his threat range and he gets attacks of opportunity against them. They each die in one hit, and so he has extra attacks equal to the amount of minions present (or more if you have double hit). So that basically means that any enemy the character fights will be killed. Assuming he has combat reflexes, he could only pull that trick up to his dex bonus. Not to mention after seeing their first couple friends get shreaded the minnions may change their tatics (assuming they are inteligent) I played with cleave working off an AOO, I did't find any problems with it. In fact, that situation didn't come up that much.
LaoKhanWei 11-30-05, 10:58 PM	I have a general rule I like to stick to, it clears up all of these problems. If I can't explain it logically in flavorfull description, you can't do it. If I wouldn't put it in a movie because it looks so amazingly stupid, you can't do it. This generally translates to no multiple attacks of opportunity gained against the same target through cleave. So they could cut through all the minor minions in a path towards 'boss' and perhaps get one attack of opportunity against him. I'd also give the 'boss' a +4 or so to AC against an attack incurred due to the death of his minion. This just seems right and encourages him expend them.
Cayl 11-30-05, 11:01 PM	If I can't explain it logically in flavorfull description, you can't do it. If I wouldn't put it in a movie because it looks so amazingly stupid, you can't do it. <snip> I'd also give the 'boss' a +4 or so to AC against an attack incurred due to the death of his minion. This just seems right and encourages him expend them. What? How would your movie explain that?
LaoKhanWei 12-01-05, 12:19 AM	What? How would your movie explain that? An attack upon this 'boss' individual that occurs as a result of one of these lesser enemies being struck down should not succeed! There's no logical reason for it, it's simply a matter of storytelling.
PurdueDave 12-01-05, 12:46 AM	Can you perform a cleave on an attack of opportunity? Say target 1 provokes AoO, and you drop the creature. Are you allowed to make a cleave attack to another target like it was your normal attack? My gut instinct says "no", since the other creatures in your threatened area did not provoke an AoO, you wouldn't be able to make an additional attack against them, cleave or otherwise. I couldn't find where the SRD states one way or another, what are the rules on this? Yes. In practical play, the scenarios that might seem overpowered are not. If your fighter is "one-shotting" things then chances are very good that they pose no real threat anyway. If the encounter is mixed and thus threatening (low-level minions with boss) then it is likely that the party mage will cull the minions with area effect anyway.
digoraccoon 12-01-05, 09:29 AM	I've left Cleave as is. It's just one extra attack for free which doesn't seem overbalancing from my experiences. Greater Cleave only becomes weird if you're surrounded by enemies you could drop in just one hit, but it's still not that bad since you have area spells and other abilities that can potentially drop groups of enemies too. So I say let the fighters have their cleavage. :D
Finarin Panjoro 12-01-05, 10:31 AM	I've got a great cleaving barbarian in the campaign I run who regularly gets enlarged (giving him reach). The AoO cleaves have been very useful to him, but they have never resulted in the death of a BBEG. Also if you use the mob rules (essentially treating a mob like a swarm) then great cleaving does not allow commoners to be mowed down like wheat. In fact it becomes so useless that I implemented a house rule for reach, cleave, great cleave, and whirlwind attack for use against mobs. Each of these feats or abilities gives you an extra +1d6 damage against mobs. So a great cleaving barbarian fighting a mob would not get multiple attacks from cleaving but he would do an extra +2d6 damage per hit to a mob.
tarkin 12-01-05, 10:58 AM	Some of you are ignoring the blatant abuses. Examples of blatant abuse, using Cleave (no Great Cleave required) 1) Thrown Gerbil. Hire a commoner to throw small animals at you while you fight, one per round. Each time they enter your area, take an AoO on them for moving, kill them, then Cleave into real target. 2) Activate Mirror Image spell. Any round you move more than 5ft, kill a mirror image and cleave into an enemy (Sage officially ruled this is allowable). Yes, you can make up a stupid House Rule to prevent these abuses. Then when I come up with a third abuse, you could make anew House Rule to prevent that one, and when I came up with a 4th, .... Or you could get smart and simply solve the real problem, cleaving on an AoO is stupid, illogical, and abusive. More importantly Cleave is ALREADY a powerfull feat, well worth taking. The ability to destroy sets of Mirror Images (a powerfull 2nd level spell), on top of the ability to get extra attacks each time you battle more than one enemey is a HUGE ability and does not need a boost. I personally have made tremoundous use of Cleave in battle, it just takes some intelligence and planning, along with reach. It is well worth it on it's own.
Finarin Panjoro 12-01-05, 11:15 AM	Yes, Cleave is clearly extremely useful. It is Great Cleave that is difficult to use. Certainly if the player builds a combat reflexing enlarged spiked chain wielder then great cleave and AoOs is going to have a significant effect. But if the player is playing a medium barbarian with a great axe then great cleave, which fits very well with his character concept, is VERY hard to use except in cases where it barely matters (against low threat popcorn minions). Nerfing great cleave by disallowing AoO-cleaves may be logical, but it is not fair to the non-abusive player.
Cayl 12-01-05, 01:51 PM	An attack upon this 'boss' individual that occurs as a result of one of these lesser enemies being struck down should not succeed! There's no logical reason for it, it's simply a matter of storytelling. Right... so looking at dictionary.com we get. feat # A notable act or deed, especially an act of courage; an exploit. # An act of skill, endurance, imagination, or strength; an achievement. So by taking a "feat" (Cleave) don't you think your character should be able to achieve a noteable act, something cinematic, like blowing his Axe totally through some little minion and getting an -attempt- to carry that axe through to the next bad guy in line, whether its another boss or minion? Man I'd not enjoy your games... "You can't trip him! He's a -Boss-" "But I have Improved Trip!" "Maybe you didn't hear me, he's a BOSS"
the artful dodger 12-01-05, 02:17 PM	Or you could get smart and simply solve the real problem, cleaving on an AoO is stupid, illogical, and abusive. IMO the same can be said for cleaving period, so that's not much of an argument.
Tony Vargas 12-01-05, 02:38 PM	Even if you ban Cleaving off an AoO, Great Cleave still lets you do some awesome things, even with a 'Boss' involved. For instance, if you're meleeing a BBEG and are surrounded by his throwaway minions, you can make a full attack, Great Cleaving through the minions and into the boss - you end up making the same full attack against the boss that you would have had the minions not been there, and whiped out a bunch of the minions in the process. Very impressive, not at all abusive, and quite apropriate. The abuses Tarkin points out are of a different character. If the minions somehow provoked AoOs (say, you have reach, the minions are minor undead, and the Cleric in your party turns them; or if the BBEG commands "Sieze HIM!" and they all try to grapple you), and you had combat reflexes, then you'd get multiple full-BAB attacks against the non-provoking BBEG. Now, throwaway minions can be of little, even virtually no value, they can even get in the way at times, but they shouldn't be quite that massive a liability, or BBEGs'd just never have 'em - and hordes of minions are a classic fantasy bit that you don't want quirks in the game mechanics to nix that way. Conversely, blasting through hordes of such minions is also a classic fantasy bit, and outright banning cleave on AoO would similarly get in the way of apropriately-designed mighty warriors (Combat Reflexes, Great Cleave) holding back onrushing hordes single handed. So, the best ruling is to allow Cleave of an AoO - but /only/ into an enemy who also provokes that round. It requires that you either move minion hordes simultaneously (as many DMs do for convenience), or allow the Cleave to be 'saved' until the next AoO is provoked. Neither is particularly difficult to do. The result is that Combat Reflexes and Great Cleave can be used to mow down orcs trying to rush past you in great numbers, but not exploited to gain multiple free full-BAB attacks against more powerful foes.
Ash the blackcowl 12-01-05, 02:56 PM	I love cleaving off of AoO. It half the fun of taking the feat. My fighters often set their opponents up for just such a stroke of luck. I dont think it is abusive, I think it is smart tactics. But good DM's usually have the evil minions (the intelligent ones, or those lead by intelligent leaders) learn to look for this tactic.
Bill Bisco: Average Adventurer 12-01-05, 03:08 PM	Assuming he has combat reflexes, he could only pull that trick up to his dex bonus. Not to mention after seeing their first couple friends get shreaded the minnions may change their tatics (assuming they are inteligent) I played with cleave working off an AOO, I did't find any problems with it. In fact, that situation didn't come up that much. Ah good point. However, at Epic Levels Epic Combat Reflexes comes into play and there are no limits to AoOs.
the artful dodger 12-01-05, 05:39 PM	Very impressive, not at all abusive, and quite apropriate. That's debatable. ;) But I have more problems with the arbitrary character of Cleave. It doesn't matter if you dropped a helpless opponent with an attack roll of 2 and the lowest possible damage or if you were lucky enough to crit with a scythe thanks to 2 natural 20s and maxxed out your damage, which was just enough to drop an opponent to -1: Cleave works the same way in both cases. The generally accepted explanation for how Cleave works is that the attack that dropped an opponent didn't take enough effort and as such didn't 'count'. That's just nonsense IMO. You commit yourself to an attack, no way you can recover completely merely because your opponent goes down. Besides, the actual attacks you make are part of a largely undefined attacking process (that's what WotC says). What you roll for are the attacks that have a shot of getting through. If that's the case, I don't see how you'd need to work one opponent to get a couple of 'real' attacks but get a shot at another one without having to work him. The whole mechanic is just off, if you ask me (which I realize nobody did). Those things you mention that are appropriate and (Great) Cleave allows could probably be dealt with in a more consistent manner. But I've always felt that certain feats and class abilities should be generally available techniques anyway, things any character can try rather than something you need to take a feat for.
Izzak 12-01-05, 06:35 PM	Maybe put a limit on how many Cleave /GreatCleaving attacks you can get off of AoO as a house rule.If the character has Combat Reflexes give him like 2 more or something like that. Im in favor of letting the attacks go I mean a guy choping through orcs (or whatever that falls easy) should be able to swath'em down. If he has the ability let him do it. Just a couple of options
Tony Vargas 12-01-05, 09:01 PM	The generally accepted explanation for how Cleave works is that the attack that dropped an opponent didn't take enough effort and as such didn't 'count'. That's just nonsense IMO. You commit yourself to an attack, no way you can recover completely merely because your opponent goes down. You're not recovering /completely/, you still only get to attack. Cleave doesn't actually give you the action back... Besides, the actual attacks you make are part of a largely undefined attacking process (that's what WotC says). What you roll for are the attacks that have a shot of getting through. If that's the case, I don't see how you'd need to work one opponent to get a couple of 'real' attacks but get a shot at another one without having to work him. Under the explanation, above, it's not that hard to see: you're doing just the opposite, if an opponent is 'weak' enough that you can kill him that round, and you do, you're left with enough time to 'work' an additional opponent enough to get off a 'real' attack - it's the enemy you dropped that you didn't 'work' as much. Each attack roll /can/ represent a number of actual swings. The more attacks you can launch in a single round, the fewer the number of swings each roll probably represents. If you have Cleave, you press your attacks a little more agressively, and if you drop someone, are more likely to have dropped him with 'time' left to press an ordinary attack. If you have great cleave, you're slicing down the opposition at - possibly /at most/ - one swing per victim. When you finally get to someone you miss or don't drop, you're back to pressing a 'normal' (multi-blow) attack. The whole mechanic is just off, if you ask me (which I realize nobody did). Those things you mention that are appropriate and (Great) Cleave allows could probably be dealt with in a more consistent manner. Possibly. You might have mechanics allowing more attacks the greater your BAB advantage over your opponents or the more easily you hit, for instance. :shrug: I don't see (Great) Cleave as that inconsistent with the (very abstract) way D&D resolves melee, though (you just have to keep in mind that Cleave must be equally abstract).
Wharin 12-01-05, 10:01 PM	Personally, I'd allow it as is. No changes. Here's my thoughts First, to take advantage of this to the fullest/abuse it to the fullest, you need power attack, cleave, great cleave, combat reflexes AND a really decent dex score. Now, assuming something resembling a 32 point buy, be it an avg dice rolled character, or an actual poin buy character, chances are that between his STR and CON and DEX, somthing is going to be mediocre. If his STR is too low, how likely is someone going to drop an opponent in one hit? Even with a one hit die creature, thats really only about 50/50 chance per hit (note: that per hit, not per swing). If your DEX is too low, how often do you really plan on getting to use it. After all, it took three feats to get there, and you really only get deminished returns for it. And if he CON is too low... well... yeah... Now if I would add any addition/limit to the feat, I would only change it to work only on hostile targets. This would fix the flung hamster and silent image cheese. Which only leaves us with the bumbling minions who do more harm than good. Personally I see no problem with this. First of all, any BBEG who would hire goons who go down with one swing isnt that "B" or "B", probably not all that "E", and his "G"-hood is definately in jeopardy. And second, though I can't claim any stake in realism, but often in the Movies (often Comedies, or Comedic Action), the goons often do more harm then good, and whos actions often get their bosses indirectly killed with their ineptitude. Either way, you can't fault the hero if the baddies are that stupid. Again, he spent at 4 feats to get where he is.
Mangekyouoo SharingGan 12-01-05, 11:49 PM	Honestly we follow that rule.They created that feat and maybe there is a counter for it. My question what if a Dervish performs a dervish dance then it attacks a guy adjacent to him and as the rule of dervish dance you can make Full attack while moving but only 5ft.What if your surrounded and kill/Drop another guy and you have a Cleave or Great cleave as your Feats then after executing or using your cleave in your opponent do you still have an attack to that guy?As for me yes, because of the dervish dance where in you can make full attack while moving.But a glance its abusive...Imagine.. :D *If your fighting 3 guys, first you active dervish dance then can make full attacks on them while moving.So if you have cleave and great cleave you can make another attack on them if you kill one guy and make another attack coz of the dervish dance.
Cayl 12-02-05, 10:37 AM	something about Dervishes and cleave Yes, a Dervish would take his dance step, make his attack, drop his opponent, make a Cleave on an eligible opponent, and with this attack resolved, continue on with this next dance movement and possibly other opponents with other attacks (including one thats just been cleaved into)
Slider33 12-02-05, 03:33 PM	I can't really compose a civil reply to a DM who intends to throw waves of commoners at Lv 4+ melee fighters and is upset that they might lose too easily. Well, I'm not sure that's exactly how I planned to come across, but nonetheless it still raised a concern. (After all, isn't it the DM's job to challenge the players?) If I did happen to throw this situation at players I would simply like to have all my bases covered, and limit the amount of surprises when my "mob" (which was supposed to be threatening) gets wiped out by one guy all by his lonesome. I simply want my players to *think* rather than shrug and start swinging all the time. I just want to think of a little more creative ways to challenge my players is all. If great cleave on AoO's turns something that's supposed to be challenging into a cakewalk I'll simply have to reconsider my options. I'm definitely not trying to "nerf" fighters, only trying to figure out whether or not throwing this encounter at them will be fun and worthwhile.
Tony Vargas 12-02-05, 03:49 PM	If I did happen to throw this situation at players I would simply like to have all my bases covered, and limit the amount of surprises when my "mob" (which was supposed to be threatening) gets wiped out by one guy all by his lonesome.WWA or Great Cleave (even if you don't allow it off AoOs) is going to let a fighter deal pretty handily with a small horde of fairly weak enemies, and it becomes available as early as 4th-6th level. Similarly, a Fireball - available at 5th or 6th level - can whipe out a lot of such enemies. Neither is that out of place in a fantasy setting - heros (and villains) are supposed to be larger than life, and able to take on overwhelming numbers and win (or at least stand up to them for a time). I simply want my players to *think* rather than shrug and start swinging all the time. I just want to think of a little more creative ways to challenge my players is all. If great cleave on AoO's turns something that's supposed to be challenging into a cakewalk I'll simply have to reconsider my options. A crowd of untrained foes would mainly constitute a logistical challenge. The PC will probably be able to destroy them, that's not in question (and, really, the outcome of most same-CR encounters should be more or less certain in the PC's favor - just how much it'll cost them is in question). You can make it more interesting, though, by giving the horde an objective other than squishing the PCs, that thier numbers /do/ give them a real chance of accomplishing. For instance, destroying a fragile sacred object in a temple the PCs are gaurding, or kidnapping an innocent in thier care. You can limmit the PCs options if the mob itself is basically innocents (who are misguided or magically controlled) - well, if the PCs are good, anyway. I'm definitely not trying to "nerf" fighters, only trying to figure out whether or not throwing this encounter at them will be fun and worthwhile. By mid-level, a number of classes can become quite effective against large numbers of enemies - giving them a chance to show that off by throwing such encounters against them isn't a bad idea at all. Throw a horde at the party and the reach/WWA fighter, great-cleaving barbarian, and fireball-tossing arcanist can shine brighter than the flaking-sneak-attacking rogue, tripping/stunning monk, and self-buffing cleric, who do so well against lone high-power foes.
Slider33 12-02-05, 03:58 PM	Thanks, That does make a lot of sense. Kinda goes to show that powerful heroes vs. mobs of cannon fodder may not prove to be as challenging as I first thought due to scaling factors. I'm not saying a lot of mob-participants aren't going to die (which they will) but my thought was eventually they would be overwhelmed at a certain time (if they fought) Spellcasters would eventually run out of spells, fighters would eventually succumb to a dogpile and/or hit point loss. Which, after this discussion leads me to believe I will have to carefully tailor the moral implications in which I place in front of the characters to make this challenging, rather than simple threat of force....
DragonsArt 12-02-05, 06:08 PM	Thanks for the replies, it was just something I wondered because the RAW doesn't specifically mention the feat regarding AoO's. Yes... it does... it says ANYTIME. That means... er... ANYTIME. Had it menat something else like... Anytime you make a regular attack and drop an opponent... or... anytime you drop an opponent on your first attack... It IS specific. You just don't like what it says. My first feeling about cleaving on an AoO sort of contradicts what an AoO is all about anyway, which is an extra attack against an opponent who does some sort of action that makes him vulnerable to an extra attack. Imagine it this way, you opponent and his friend are in front of you. Your opponent tries to move around back and flank you, provoking an AoO. You hit him so hard, that he drops. Your forceful strike carries through from the victim, and with a slight adjustment... hits his friend. Not too hard to imagine. You see scenarios like this all the time in martial arts flciks. It still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me that you could technically get extra attacks against other targets, (who are not the individuals opening themselves up for an extra attack) when it's not your turn. So I guess it can still be ruled either way, depending on whether you give cleaving rules a higher priority over the rules of AoO's, or vice-versa. It's using existing momentum to fuel your strike. It has nothing to do with them being unprepared, anymore than the people behind someone setting off a freiball trap being responsible for the trap going off... it still damages them. But it's not a serious concern in most cases. On the off chance that this situation will ever arise it's not going to be that critical of an issue, like an above poster said, the enemies would have to all be pretty weak. Plus... as a DM... you get to say "No" to moronic uses of bags of rats. However, in my particular campaign it might become an issue. If I decide to throw an angry mob of rioting commoners at them and it ends up not even remotely being a challenge or a threat to a melee-heavy party that can great-cleave every single time a rioter does something that incurs an AoO. So let him. Then let him pay the FULL penalties for becoming a mass murdering butcher. See how well he uses cleave when he's hanging from the gallows. Murder is muder in most cities... and there's always someone mighty than the PCs to bring them to justice. If they want to cleave when it's their turn, that's all good and fine but I don't want several guys who didn't provoke AoO going down just because one of the others wants to try a grapple or a trip. Again... either don't let them... have them step back... or better yet... have THEM use reach weapons. (I'm just focusing on the combat ECL of a fight like that, not the moral/social/other consequences of such a scenario.) No ECL for a combat like that. The player do what they do. If that means they break rules and shift in alignment, then so be it. You as the DM have to enforce the rules of the society the players live in. Then, the players won't do it for the same reason we don't... it's wrong... and it will get us thrown in jail... or worse.
Deckeon 12-02-05, 06:48 PM	:bigeyes: I gotta finally say something on this topic this time(it comes up every other week and never fails to **** me off). First and foremost this is a game. So consider what kind of effect this will have on the balance of the game. What do you gain by nerfing a key feat for fighter types? Do you feel that taking three feats (Combat Reflexes and Cleave and Great Cleave) should allow a fighter to do interesting things? Do you feel Fighters are too powerful? If not, do you plan on giving them somthing in return for this house rule? BINGO That's all that needs to be said, really. Some of you even go so far as to say b-b-butbut what if he's got a spiked chain(another feat) a-a-andand maybe his retarded DM will let him hire a commoner to throw gerbils at him. JEEZ! Maybe he can just hide the gerbils up his :censored: and :censored: them while he's fighting! This is the fighter's shtick! Wasting enemy peons! Ohhhh no that's too much power for the fighter says the druid and wastes the Dragon with a quill blast. Let's look at what a cleric can do with 3 feats. Extend spell, persistent spell, divine metamagic. Let's give him 18 cha using a +4buff item. Bingo Persistant divine power. Ok the DM naturally disallows that. So don't even spend the feats, still got Divine Power don't ya?