How would this feat interact with a cleave action?
In harms way
Benefit: While using the aid another action to improve an adjacent ally’s AC, you can intercept a successful attack against that ally as an immediate action, taking full damage from that attack and any associated effects (bleed, poison, etc.). A creature cannot benefit from this feat more than once per attack.
Bodyguard feat
Benefit: When an adjacent ally is attacked, you may use an attack of opportunity to attempt the aid another action to improve your ally’s AC. You may not use the aid another action to improve your ally’s attack roll with this attack.
cleave
Benefit: As a standard action, you can make a single attack at your full base attack bonus against a foe within reach. If you hit, you deal damage normally and can make an additional attack (using your full base attack bonus) against a foe that is adjacent to the first and also within reach. You can only make one additional attack per round with this feat. When you use this feat, you take a –2 penalty to your Armor Class until your next turn.
basically if they hit with the first attack against your teammate, you get full damage then they can cleave into you with there second attack.
basically you would potentially get hit 2 times.
i think thats what you were asking.
yes that is what i am wondering about.
But can you cleave same target twice?
Nope. As far as I'm concerned, this kills the cleave.
You'd be hit. The cleave would then proceed to hit your friend. The order just gets reversed... :P
Didn't a dev say that when you hit a Mirror Image you "miss" and therefore cannot Cleave? The same should apply to hitting you instead of your buddy. It's a miss, so no cleavage should occur.
It is not a miss, it is a hit. Just because you are transfering the damage from the target hit to yourself does not mean there was no hit.
A) Guy getting hit
B) guy taking hit.
A and B are standing next to each other. Enemy Cleaves and hits A. B uses his AoO, aids, and then uses an immediate action to take the damage. B then gets the second attack normally.
Note: In Harm's way does not state you take the attack. It states you take the damage. IF you took the attack itself then you would be inelligble to recieve the second attack.
- Gauss
Nope. As far as I'm concerned, this kills the cleave.
this is my school of thought as well, but there is nothing to support either way of thinking really
Agreed.
BEGS: there is something to support cleave continuing.
Cleave is not based on who takes damage. Cleave is based on 'Did I hit you? Great, I can attack the next guy now.'.
Example:
PC 1 takes a cleave attack and gets hit
PC 2 takes the damage meant for PC 1 (but not the hit)
PC 2 takes the next cleave attack normally.
The ability does not remove or transfer the 'hit' it transfers the damage. The hit on PC 1 person remains. Just because the damage was transfered does not mean the hit was. Since the hit on PC 1 is successful proceed normally with the cleave.
- Gauss
you can intercept a successful attack against that ally as an immediate action.
I assumed intercept means you your self get hit and not some supernatural shield other effect.
|
if you are trying to apply logic to this event, then think of it this way.
you see a sword swinging to your friend, you push them out of the way and take the damage, once that occures "cleave", which doesnt have to mean a cleaving motion, allows for an extra hit against you.
it DOES NOT mean a literal interpretation of the word cleave.
by raw it looks like you get hit 2 times(possibly). by rai i see it hitting you 2 times.
BEGS: there is something to support cleave continuing.
Cleave is not based on who takes damage. Cleave is based on 'Did I hit you? Great, I can attack the next guy now.'.
Example:
PC 1 takes a cleave attack and gets hit
PC 2 takes the damage meant for PC 1 (but not the hit)
PC 2 takes the next cleave attack normally.The ability does not remove or transfer the 'hit' it transfers the damage. The hit on PC 1 person remains. Just because the damage was transfered does not mean the hit was. Since the hit on PC 1 is successful proceed normally with the cleave.
- Gauss
I really think that Gauss is correct on this. just because a feat allows you to transfer the damage of a succesful attack from one target to you does not invalidate that successful attack for the purposes of cleave.
In this instance I would say Cleave has the potential to damage the same character twice. Cleave can only HIT each character once but it can damage the one character twice. The CHARACTER is choosing to accept the damage. The hit factors are totally unchanged.
|
"Cleave-Benefit: As a standard action, you can make a single attack at your full base attack bonus against a foe within reach. If you hit, you deal damage normally and can make an additional attack (using your full base attack bonus) against a foe that is adjacent to the first and also within reach. You can only make one additional attack per round with this feat. When you use this feat, you take a –2 penalty to your Armor Class until your next turn."
You made your first attack, it hit. Regardless of what happened after that, the Cleave feat entitles the user to a additional attack against a foe who is adjacent to the first. So, he hits your friend, you take the damage, he gets to make his next attack against someone adjacent to the first guy he swung at (potentially you again).
This is how I see it also. The hit, not the damage is what shuts cleave down. That is also the argument I made in the mirror image vs cleave thread.
By the wording of "In Harm's Way" the intended target was successfully attacked, but not who was hit.
Of course the question is whether cleave is based on who was attacked or who was hit.
Cleave states that you can attack a foe adjacent to the first. The first foe was attacked successfully, but not hit.
If the intended target has to be hit then cleave fails. If the target only has to be successfully attacked then it should work.
Now let's see what cleave says
" If you hit, you deal damage normally and can make an additional attack (using your full base attack bonus) against a foe that is adjacent to the first and also within reach."
Was the attack successful? Yes
That means damage was dealt per the cleave feat.
Is the interrupting foe adjacent to the first foe?
Yes, then he can be cleaved despite being hit already. Cleave works by checking who you intend to hit, not who was hit otherwise the cleaver could target the initial target twice*. This is not possible however because the initial target can only be attacked once due to how cleave is worded.
*The initial target is adjacent to the person/creature that was actually hit so if cleave only check who is hit then that would make the intercepter the first target, meaning the initial target is still eligible since they were never attacked.
In short I agree with Gauss.
edit:changed "for" to "foe"
Wraithstrike: you are correct, I should have used 'successfully attacked' rather than the word hit. Hit is a bit ambiguous. Thanks for the clarification.
- Gauss
intercept
Example Sentences Origin
in·ter·cept [v. in-ter-sept; n. in-ter-sept] Show IPA
verb (used with object)
1.
to take, seize, or halt (someone or something on the way from one place to another); cut off from an intended destination: to intercept a messenger.
2.
to see or overhear (a message, transmission, etc., meant for another): We intercepted the enemy's battle plan.
3.
to stop or check (passage, travel, etc.): to intercept the traitor's escape.
4.
Sports . to take possession of (a ball or puck) during an attempted pass by an opposing team.
5.
to stop or interrupt the course, progress, or transmission of.
Maybe i read to much into the word intercept in the feat in harms way.
Cant say i care to strongly either way just nice to follow the intended rules.
If i intercepted a successful attack against my ally, would that not mean that the intent of that attack failed?
intercept
Example Sentences Origin
in·ter·cept [v. in-ter-sept; n. in-ter-sept] Show IPA
verb (used with object)
1.
to take, seize, or halt (someone or something on the way from one place to another); cut off from an intended destination: to intercept a messenger.
2.
to see or overhear (a message, transmission, etc., meant for another): We intercepted the enemy's battle plan.
3.
to stop or check (passage, travel, etc.): to intercept the traitor's escape.
4.
Sports . to take possession of (a ball or puck) during an attempted pass by an opposing team.
5.
to stop or interrupt the course, progress, or transmission of.Maybe i read to much into the word intercept in the feat in harms way.
Cant say i care to strongly either way just nice to follow the intended rules.
If i intercepted a successful attack against my ally, would that not mean that the intent of that attack failed?
By the wording of cleave you must land a hit after attacking the first foe.
The first foe was attacked successfully, and a hit was landed. You may then attack a foe adjacent to the first foe. Guess who is standing next to the first foe?This does work with mirror image for many reasons that I detailed in a very long thread. The short of it is that the interceptor does not have the protections, due to RAI, that images did.