Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I am facing a hobgoblin and a goblin. I want to attack the hobgoblin and cleave the goblin. But I CANNOT cleave the goblin unless I hit the Hobgoblin first. It is just not possible. In fact I do not even qualify to attempt to cleave the goblin until I do hit the hobgoblin.
If I miss the hobgoblin I NEVER qualify to cleave the goblin. Yet I am expected to suffer the penalties for an action I never qualified to execute.
In essence I must declare my intentions before I am even qualified to consider that possible option. Logically then if I must declare my intention to cleave something for which I am not qualified to cleave, I must also declare my intention to attack the hobgoblin before I move and qualify to hit it, therefore I must declare the entirety of my action before I can execute any portion of it. Therefore I must declare I am moving to a position to attack the hobgoblin and cleave the goblin before I make any action at all, even my move. My declaration has been made, I now suffer the -2 AC at the beginning of my movement...
Others have touched on this above, but I don't think this is the correct framework. The cleave is not the second attack, it's the initial attack. In order to even have the opportunity to hit the goblin, you must take the penalty on your AC when you swing at the hobgoblin. So, you announce a cleave before you roll any dice at all.
That's different from the move then cleave situation. You declare your move, you resolve the move (or attempt to resolve the move - if you can't move due to other conditions, the move just ends early). Once the move has resolved, you declare your standard action, which can be changed from what you thought it would be when you began your move (so, if you had originally intended to move and then make a cleave attack, you can move and then do something else - including moving some more).
There are a pretty small number of declared actions that lock out other options - 5' adjustments preclude movement (and vice versa), a double move retreat precludes the option of taking a non-move standard action, a full attack (usually) precludes taking a move action at all.
|
stuff about my last post.I saw where you agreed, and I tried to delete the post you quoted, but I was to late.
lol
no problem.
really I have no problem with declaring actions ahead of time. I really don't. In fact it would benefit my tank immensely if we did.
However, there are no rules that require or even suggest we must declare actions (with some very limited feats that expressly state you must decide to use the feat before any attack is made). In general there is no declaration of intent in 3.x its been removed from the game years ago.
It did exist prior to 3.x and I LIKED it! But the point is 3.x does not require declaration of intent, and with the complexity of 3.x are we really sure we want to involve that degree of complexity in the game.
Rather it seems to be the reality that people play without declarations but under certain circumstances (such as Cleave) that do not say they are declared want them declared anyway based upon the concept that you must declare your actions first anyway.
Now we have from James that it was the intention of the designers to declare cleave at the beginning. Okay that is fine. But that means ALL actions need to be declared at the beginning. That is fine also, but in practice not the way the game is played.
So we have the intention of the game designers conflicting with the practice of actual play.
What am I trying to do?
I am trying to make people think is all. I can play either way, makes no difference to me. But there are repercussions to either style of play. You run the risk of cheaters if you do not declare your intentions first, but you run the risk of running into complex situations on a regular basis if you do declare your intentions first.
I suspect that people wanting declarations ahead of time have not considered the full ramifications of that. I just want people to think about it, the added complexity that adds, and be sure they really want to go that route.
BUT THEN the GM points out that since I used Cleave my AC was in fact two points lower and the AoO actually did hit. I take retro damage.I don't think I agree with that ruling. You wouldn't take the AC penalty until you used Cleave, which could not have happened until after you completed your Move (which is when the AoO was provoked).I agree... BUT If the first attack misses, then there is no opportunity to Cleave, but since we must declare we are Cleaving whether we have an opportunity to do so or not, we still incur the penalty.
It makes sense then that if the penalty is the result of intention and not the ability to actually perform the action then the movement phase should suffer the same penalty... You are supposed to declare your intent before your action, so movement was part of the action so it too should incur the penalty.
I guess I'm confused as to what was provoking the AoO. Here's what I think you said:
Move Action: Moved into position, provoked AoO.
Standard Action: Made a cleave attack, took a -2 penalty to AC.
DM: -2 penalty applies to AC earlier in the round.I don't think that's the case. The -2 penalty would only apply once you took the standard action - that's what (and when) you are declaring it.
EXACTLY my point.
and yet it seems others require your intentions be declared before any action at all in your turn is executed.
The way I see it, you "declare" you action as it becomes relevant to the moment at hand. Others want you to declare your action in advance, failing to do so results in retro results.
here is my logic as to why you do not declare cleave (or other similar actions)
I am facing a hobgoblin and a goblin. I want to attack the hobgoblin and cleave the goblin. But I CANNOT cleave the goblin unless I hit the Hobgoblin first. It is just not possible. In fact I do not even qualify to attempt to cleave the goblin until I do hit the...
You should not be taking a penalty to cleave until the you get to the goblin. If you get a penalty for moving before you get to try to cleave then your DM is wrong(ruleswise).
|
|
EXACTLY my point.and yet it seems others require your intentions be declared before any action at all in your turn is executed.
The way I see it, you "declare" you action as it becomes relevant to the moment at hand. Others want you to declare your action in advance, failing to do so results in retro results.
here is my logic as to why you do not declare cleave (or other similar actions)
I am facing a hobgoblin and a goblin. I want to attack the hobgoblin and cleave the goblin. But I CANNOT cleave the goblin unless I hit the Hobgoblin first. It is just not possible. In fact I do not even qualify to attempt to cleave the goblin until I do hit the...
I don't think people are saying you have to declare all your actions at the start of your turn. Just before you go to do the action.
Again I think I hit the disconnect in my last post.
yep... but again logic here...
I want to cleave the goblin, so must declare my intent before I hit the Hobgoblin. Makes sense. It does!
BUT why then change the rule...
To hit the Hobgoblin I must move first... so shouldn't I have to declare my intention to hit the Hobgoblin before I move... if not, then why?
this results in a full declaration of intent before any action is executed. Other wise the requirement for declaration makes no sense at all.
In essence I am saying it is an all or nothing. Unless what most people are saying is that you declare sometimes and sometimes you don't; there is no rhyme or reason to when you do and don't and don't worry about it. Just sometimes do, and other times don't. There's no rule requiring it, but it is required on a random basis.
|
|
Others have touched on this above, but I don't think this is the correct framework. The cleave is not the second attack, it's the initial attack. In order to even have the opportunity to hit the goblin, you must take the penalty on your AC when you swing at the hobgoblin. So, you announce a cleave before you roll any dice at all.
That's different from the move then cleave situation. You declare your move, you resolve the move (or attempt to resolve the move - if you can't move due to other conditions, the move just ends early). Once the move has resolved, you declare your standard action, which can be changed from what you thought it would be when you began your move (so, if you had originally intended to move and then make a cleave attack, you can move and then do something else - including moving some more).
There are a pretty small number of declared actions that lock out other options - 5' adjustments preclude movement (and vice...
Lunge requires a declaration says so in its description.
And you win the prize!
you just convinced me!
Change the way of looking at the cleave from the second attack to the cleave being the first and now it works. Even the declaration part of it works.
Okay you guys win all around :)
See I am not a jerk about it, you just have to find the right way to twist my little noggin around what you guys mean :)
stuff about my last post.I saw where you agreed, and I tried to delete the post you quoted, but I was to late.lol
no problem.
really I have no problem with declaring actions ahead of time. I really don't. In fact it would benefit my tank immensely if we did.
However, there are no rules that require or even suggest we must declare actions (with some very limited feats that expressly state you must decide to use the feat before any attack is made). In general there is no declaration of intent in 3.x its been removed from the game years ago.
It did exist prior to 3.x and I LIKED it! But the point is 3.x does not require declaration of intent, and with the complexity of 3.x are we really sure we want to involve that degree of complexity in the game.
Rather it seems to be the reality that people play without declarations but under certain circumstances (such as Cleave) that do not say they are declared want them declared anyway based upon the concept that you must declare your actions first anyway.
Now we have from James that it was the intention of the designers to declare cleave at the beginning. Okay that is fine. But that means ALL actions need to be declared at the beginning. That is fine also, but in practice not the way the game is played.
So we have the intention of the game designers conflicting with the practice of actual play.
What am I trying to do?
I am trying to make people think is all. I can play either way, makes no difference to me. But there are repercussions to either style of play. You run the risk of cheaters if you do not declare your intentions first, but you run the risk of running into complex situations on a regular basis if you do declare your intentions first.
I suspect that people wanting declarations ahead of time have not considered the full ramifications of that. I just want people to think about it, the added complexity that adds, and be sure they really want to go that route.
Most people do declare ahead of time. I did not even know there was anyone that did not until the other post came up. You don't have to state every action at the beginning of your turn, but you do have to declare the one you are about to take right then.
Using your goblin example. If I move up to the goblin that is a move action. Once I get there I can decide to cleave, vital strike, do a regular attack and so on.
I can't wait for the hit and then declare an action because a vanilla attack is a standard action, and so is cleave.
Pretty much, everything you do takes an action, that is why you have to declare it ahead of time.
Look at is like this a free action is 5 cents.
A move action is 15 cents
A standard action is 50 cents
A full found action is 70 cents.
Every action is worthy a certain amount. That vanilla swing is 50 cents, but if you decide to get the cleave feat that 50 cents can now be used to cleave so you can hit two people. You can't turn your regular attack into a cleave because your 50 cents is gone, and you don't have enough money left anymore.
Edit: you can potentially hit two people. The price for trying this will drop your AC by 2, but its worth it most of the time. Make sure you swing at the lower AC'd guy first to increase your chances of making it happen.
|
|
I get what you guys are saying now.
Seriously I wasn't trying to be a jerk I just didn't "get it."
what it looked like was some crazy random application of declaration.
yeah, in any game I have seen, you "declare" each portion of turn as it comes up, movement, then action or whatever, but not declare it like we did in the old days, which required full declaration.
It seemed like Cleave being used as a weird exception because we just want to do it this way rather than by any rule.
I can still see Cleave being the 2nd attack of the action, but as Sebastian explained I can now see it being the 1st part as well. Looking at it from THAT perspective it makes sense. Looking at it from the 2nd attack perspective it made no sense at all.
:)
|
|
Others have touched on this above, but I don't think this is the correct framework. The cleave is not the second attack, it's the initial attack. In order to even have the opportunity to hit the goblin, you must take the penalty on your AC when you swing at the hobgoblin. So, you announce a cleave before you roll any dice at all.
That's different from the move then cleave situation. You declare your move, you resolve the move (or attempt to resolve the move - if you can't move due to other conditions, the move just ends early). Once the move has resolved, you declare your standard action, which can be changed from what you thought it would be when you began your move (so, if you had originally intended to move and then make a cleave attack, you can move and then do something else - including moving some more).
There are a pretty small number of declared actions that lock out other options - 5' adjustments preclude movement (and vice...
Lunge requires a declaration says so in its description.
And you win the prize!
you just convinced me!
Should have read farther down before posting all that other stuff :P
No you definitely were not being jerky at all. :)
Change the way of looking at the cleave from the second attack to the cleave being the first and now it works. Even the declaration part of it works.
Okay you guys win all around :)
See I am not a jerk about it, you just have to find the right way to twist my little noggin around what you guys mean :) You were very cool about the disagreement.
Thanks! :)
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Edit: Woot. Glad to help Krome.:)
seriously guys was not trying to be a jerk about it all. And thanks for being patient.
No worries at all - you weren't a jerk in my book. You can tell because I didn't go crinos halfway through my posts and start insulting your mother. ;-)
James I need to apologize profusely.
Apparently my simple question has broken the intertubes and caused the question to start spilling into other threads. Really, I never intended to have it become this heated of a debate.
The other thread hit almost 400 posts, here's to hoping you're able to stick your finger in the hole before the leak makes this thread 400 posts too.
I dunno if it helps any, but since leaving the other thread, I've pretty much come around to TriOmegaZero's point of view.
It's common sense. Your initiative is 17, your turn comes up and what do you? There is when you tell the DM what you are doing. It's called declaring your actions or telling the DM what you are doing. If you don't tell the DM you are using Cleave then you aren't using Cleave. It's that simple. It's not like you can keep it secret, we DM's aren't mind readers.Actually not common sense at all. :) Just an assumption. Declaration of intent has not been part of the rules since 2nd edition. A GM does not need to be a mind reader at all to not use declaration. In the case of Cleave, I can declare I am making a Cleave, or I can roll to attack (stating which target I am attacking), and once the condition for Cleave becomes evident I can then say I am now Cleaving this other valid target. No mind reading needed. The GM now knows my action and can do whatever needs to be done.
If you don't tell me you are using Cleave the you aren't using Cleave. The condition for cleave is two adjacent targets. Once you've met that you can use cleave. The you can say you are cleaving take the -2 AC penalty and roll to hit the first target. If you successful you can make a second attack against the next target who is adjacent. That's how it works.
You way allows you state to attack and if you hit decide to cleave and take the -2 AC penalty is with no risk of missing. You will always hit with first attack because if you do miss you just say nothing let the DM assume you used a standard melee attack.
Same situation can come up with Full Attacks vs Cleave.
My players tell me what they are doing. It's not difficult. They just say they are using cleave then make the first roll and if successful make the second. As well I apply the -2 AC penalty.
I do have one player who doesn't always tell me but has made it known that when he rolls two dice the red one is the cleave if the blue hits. So when he rolls two dice like that I know he's using cleave. That's his way of declaring Cleave, using the red and blue D20. He made it clear day one and I know that so I go with that.
