THF and Cleave / Gr Cleave


Rules Questions


10 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

So... looking at the RAW. This is for a PFS character, so please keep it RAW.

Can a THF archetype using cleave apply his 3rd level ability Overhand Chop to both opponents? or does he have to wait until 7th level when he gets Backswing?

CRB Cleave (Combat) wrote:


You can strike two adjacent foes with a single swing.

Prerequisites: Str 13, Power Attack, base attack bonus +1.

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.

APG Overhand Chop wrote:
(Ex): At 3rd level, when a two-handed fighter makes a single attack (with the attack action or a charge) with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls. This ability replaces armor training 1.
APG Backswing wrote:
(Ex): At 7th level, when a two-handed fighter makes a full attack with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls for all attacks after the first. This ability replaces armor training 2.


Have you looked here?


I did... that devolved into a dev quote about vital strike and charge, which I know you can't do.

I'm asking about an ability that modifies a standard. (overhand chop), and an action that uses a standard (cleave)
Not 2 separate standard actions, which both cleave and vital strike would be. (and the charge question was overkill, since that's a full round action unless you happen to be staggered or otherwise limited to standards alone)

Vital strike can't modify a charge, or a cleave.

Overhand Chop can modify a vital strike, or a charge, so making sure it can modify a cleave is just for extra clarity.


As Pirate and Grick stated in the other thread, Cleave is not an attack action. It is a Use Feat action. Overhand Chop only modifies an attack action or a charge, therefore it won't modify Cleave.


Ok... does he get to use double his Str damage on AoO's?

Liberty's Edge

TGMaxMaxer wrote:
Ok... does he get to use double his Str damage on AoO's?

An AOO is neither a 'attack action' or a 'charge'. It is simply a free attack.

Unfortunately Overhand Chop does not apply.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

I actually completely disagree with the ruling thus far on Cleave and Overhand chop.

Quote:
Cleave: Benefit: As a standard action, you can make a single attack at your full base attack bonus against a foe within reach.
Quote:
Overhand chop: when a two-handed fighter makes a single attack (with the attack action or a charge) with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls.

So let's read the attack action.

Quote:

Attack

Making an attack is a standard action.

Putting it all together.

Making an attack is a standard action.
Cleave, as a standard action, make a single attack. (Now that attack is qualified as the aforementioned attack action)
Overhand chop, double strength on a single attack (done with the attack action).

So if this were math,
Attack = Attack Action
Cleave = as a standard action make a single attack.
Overhand chop = double strength on a single attack.
So
Cleave = as a standard action make a single (attack action)
Overhand chop = double strength on a (cleave)

That's how I see it anyways.
On the other thread they were looking at the high level actions rather than the actual wording.

Regardless I'm flagging this as an FAQ candidate.


You cannot cleave from an overhand chop nor can you overhand chop from a cleave. Here is why:

1. Cleaving from an overhand chop is not possible because to make an overhand chop, you must declare you are either making an attack action (or a charge) as a standard action. But now, because you've declared what your standard action is, you cannot possibly perform a cleave as it requires a standard action which you've already used up to make the overhand chop.

2. Overhand chopping from a cleave is not possible because to make a cleave, you must declare you are making a cleave as a standard action. But now, because you've declared what your standard action is, you cannot possibly perform an overhand chop because to use overhand chop, you have to use the attack action (or a charge) which requires a standard action which you've already used up to make the cleave.

Because overhand chop makes the explicit statement that you must use the attack action (or a charge), you cannot combine it with any other standard action because you'll be using your standard action to either make the attack action for the overhand chop or the other standard action that you're trying to combine it with and you cannot take two standard actions in one turn.


Oh, backswing doesn't help either since it requires a full attack action and cleave is a standard action. You could use the bonus that backswing grants with your iterative attacks when performing a full attack action, however.


Okay you are saying the exact same thing as in the other thread and I understand where you are going, I am not disputing the full attack action of backswing.
However,
Declaring a cleave, which takes a standard action to do, which allows you to make an attack.
Then you declare overhand chop as part of that attack.

Because you are making an attack, overhand chopping qualifies.

You're looking at it too general.
Once again,
Attack Action: Making an attack is a standard action.
If cleave reads: "you can make a single attack"
Then suddenly that cleave is an attack. Let's go back and read attack.
Attack action = single attack.
Cleave = single attack.

The explicit callout of "attack action (or charge, which I do not dispute anything having to do with charge)" is a moot point, why? Math.
Cleave = Standard action to make a single attack
Standard action = Attack action = make a single attack.

It is very well that I could also be insane.

Regardless of the disagreement, like I said before, I think this needs some FAQ attention.

Liberty's Edge

The rules are clear, just often misunderstood. No FAQ is needed IMO.

Overhand Chop specifically states it can be used with an Attack Action or Charge. When used, it grants a single attack for bonus damage. You are confusing requirements with benefits.
.
.
Consider the following:
- Overhand Chop can be used with an Attack Action or Charge.
- Making an attack is a Standard Action (or Full-round). That is what an 'Attack Action' is.
- Charge uses a Standard Action or Full-round Action (depending on the amount of time you have).
- Cleave uses a Standard Action allowing a single attack.
So, each of the above actions 'cost' a minimum of a Standard Action.

Therefore...
If you use your Standard Action to attack normally, there is no action left in which to apply Overhand Chop.
If you use your Standard Action to use Overhand Chop, there is no action left in which to apply Cleave.
If you use your Standard Action to use Cleave, there is no action left in which to apply Overhand Chop.
If you use your Standard or Full-round Action to use Charge, there is no action left in which to apply Overhand Chop or Cleave.


I will agree with Ansel.

Cleave = Standard Action
Overhand chop = Standard Action

You couldn't use both in a single turn unless you had two standard actions, even then they wouldn't modify one another, you could simply make a cleave attack and then make a overhand chop attack.


I'm just reading it differently I guess.

English writing, when using (), says that the statement in the () can be removed without changing the meaning. The () is used to clarify, or give examples of other portions of the statement. (i.e. ... etc)

So, by that, we should also be able to take the statement (Ex): At 3rd level, when a two-handed fighter makes a single attack with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls.
This ability replaces armor training 1.

This would also mean that it applies to any single attack, but not iteratives or (if you were able to somehow dual wield 2h weapons) when twf or whatever.

The difference I see is the vital strike says when you use the attack action, x happens. Cleave says you use a standard action to make a single attack, then x happens.

Overhand chop says when you make a single attack, x happens. The () are possible ways to do it, not the only ways. It specifically calls out the attack action to differentiate it from backswing, which is when you get to do it on all attacks in a full attack. It also gives the charge exception, because at the end of a charge (without pounce) you get to make a -single- attack.

The way you're describing it, it will only work on your turn. It makes no sense that someone who is super specialized in 2h weapon fighting is only better at it than a normal fighter on their turn not everyones.

If it were meant to say what you say it does, why would it not read

(Ex): At 3rd level, when using the attack action or a charge to make a single attack with a two-handed weapon, a two-handed fighter adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls. This ability replaces armor training 1.

This would be the same wording as vital strike, and have no possible misinterpretation.

Liberty's Edge

You know, it's annoying when someone asks a question and multiple people respond with similar answers...only to find out that the OP already formed an opinion that he will not move from; and then, the OP uses obscure incorrect arguments to defend a position that is incorrect, yet in his best interest. It's also funny how often people try to use grammar rules to win an argument.

<<anyway, grammatical parry and reposte>>
In most cases, content within parens could be removed without changing the meaning of a sentence. However, this does not mean that the phrase maintains the exact same menaing. Parens may be used to clarify a passage. In those cases, the removal of the content should not change the general meaning, but can change leave out important information. This is one of those cases. Paizo uses the parens to CLARIFY the ability to state that it can be used WITH AND ATTACK ACTION OR A CHARGE. If the portion in the parens did not matter, they would not have put it there.

To give an alternate example, if someone advertises they are giving away free twinkies (on Tuesday), don't whine when you show up on Friday and don't get a twinkie.

Shadow Lodge

I will actually through out that I agree with TGMaxMaxer.

The fact that sample single attacks are listed in parenthesis do not remove other single attacks from working. Overhand chop is not an action it is a modifier that is automatically applied when an single attack is used.

That being said I would say that overhand shop does not apply to any additional attacks that may be made after the first in a cleave line. The Cleave attack is a single attack but anything made after that is not.


I agree with everyone else that since you have to call out that you are doing a cleave OR an overhand chop you can do one OR the other, you cannot do both as both are the same kind of action.

Another way to look at is this -

Q: What kind of fighting movement does a fighter do to hit with the overhand chop?
A: He basically moves or charges in and chops DOWNWARD with all his power to hit with 2x his strength on a single hit!

Q: What kind of fighting movement does a fighter do when he hits with a cleave?
A: He cuts SIDEWAYS THROUGH the first opponent and hits into an adjacent second opponent, hence the word "cleave."

Use your imagination and see that you can only attack the one time with one OR the other. You have committed yourself to either cleaving sideways or overhand chopping downwards. You cannot reverse your momentum in mid-swing and with that overhand chop and you cannot get the amount of strength into a cleave that someone who is chopping downwards would get to deal that extra damage. It's really that simple.

So as a fighter the way you want to do this is:
1) Charge in and overhand chop the guy you want to, deal your 2x strength damage.
2) Stand your place and cleave away, hitting your main opponent and an adjacent enemy to your heart's content.
3) Kill enemies
4) Rinse/Repeat


Rulebooks and their writers are imperfect. *shrug* You can't make an argument from RAW with the stipulation that we all have to ignore seven words as written in order for your argument to have merit. Overhand Chop requires a standard action (or a full-round, if you're charging) and Cleave requires a standard action. You get one standard action per turn. This has been discussed before on the forum.

Cleaving or chopping from one to the other or vice-versa just doesn't make any sense. Imagine swinging an axe over your head down onto a log to split it... and then somehow diverting the blade sideways to chop down a tree.

And no, it doesn't suddenly mean that a super specialized 2h weapon fighter is now only as good as a normal fighter. Overhand Chop, especially when combined with Power Attack, is dynamite! Just stride on over to your hapless enemy with manly Kate Moss confidence and make this his worst day ever with a single swing.

Did you not see that episode of Game of Thrones? What Gregor Clegane did to his horse during the joust? Overhand chop, dude! Overhand chop!


Actually, I found an even better link:

Jason Nelson, the guy who wrote the rule for Overhand Chop, wrote:
Cleave is actually an example of the "use feat" action, defined in the feat description for Cleave as a standard action, not an attack action. Therefore, it can't be combined with Overhand Chop.

He goes on later in the thread to explain the parenthetical statement that you mentioned:

Jason Nelson wrote:

However, from a RAW and RAI perspective, the two examples listed for Overhand Chop are not open-ended examples, they are specific and exhaustive examples. That is to say, that list of examples is the full, explicit, and complete list of examples to which the ability applies. Attack action and charge action are the sole and only examples of where OC may be used when making a single attack.

If they had been meant merely as representative examples, it would have been phrased ("such as with the attack action or a charge"; or
"with the attack action, a charge, or other actions that result in a single attack per round); that would have left the case open to include other situations in which a single attack can occur. It is intentionally not phrased that way to avoid the kind of ambiguity that some seem to want to read into it.

At the risk of sounding abrupt, it says what it does and it does what it says. It affects a single attack (with the attack action or a charge). Period. End of sentence. That's it. That's all. Nothing else.

Shadow Lodge

@Ansel
"(Ex): At 3rd level, when a two-handed fighter makes a single attack (with the attack action or a charge) with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls. This ability replaces armor training 1."
No where in that ability does it say it is an action of any kind to use. On top of that:
Overhand Chop:"when a two-handed fighter makes a single attack"
Cleave: "As a standard action, you can make a single attack"

Cleave makes a single attack (with adders if you hit) and overhand chop affects any single attack you make. It is right there in the description of the ability

@ub3r_n3rd
While I agree with you fluff wise and would likely house rule it if it came up, the RAW (and if I had to judge it in PFS) says they would work.


Seriphim84 wrote:

@Ansel

"(Ex): At 3rd level, when a two-handed fighter makes a single attack (with the attack action or a charge) with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls. This ability replaces armor training 1."
No where in that ability does it say it is an action of any kind to use.

Yes. Yes it does. You even quoted it, "with the attack action" (that's takes a standard action per the combat rules) "or a charge" (that's a full-attack action which takes a full-round action again, per the combat rules).

Please read the thread I linked above with the responses by Jason Nelson. He explains it quite clearly.


Ansel Krulwich wrote:
Seriphim84 wrote:

@Ansel

"(Ex): At 3rd level, when a two-handed fighter makes a single attack (with the attack action or a charge) with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls. This ability replaces armor training 1."
No where in that ability does it say it is an action of any kind to use.

Yes. Yes it does. You even quoted it, "with the attack action" (that's takes a standard action per the combat rules) "or a charge" (that's a full-attack action which takes a full-round action again, per the combat rules).

Please read the thread I linked above with the responses by Jason Nelson. He explains it quite clearly.

This is exactly right.

Edit:

I can see how someone can become confused on something like this, I really can. I also can see why someone would want something like this to work as it would be pretty cool. There are a lot of people (myself included) that have read these RAW and then attempted to apply them to something else and get them to fit together, it just doesn't work that way no matter how much you want it to.

If you read what the devs have said about attack actions/standard actions and what can be used with what and what cannot be used, it makes sense. To me, this question has now been answered by several people about how attack actions work and I'm done with the topic as any more arguments will just mean that we are running around in circles restating our arguments.

Shadow Lodge

The post I wrote took too long -_- and i didn't see your second post.

Author intent is a big deal. Though I wouldn't mark it as a official answer because it isn't from a Dev I will succeed the point. I think if that is how they want it to be by raw they need change the verbiage.

But anyways. thanks for the links


If that's the way they want it to stand, fine.

It means the THF is useless for what I want it for, since I was looking at it as applying to the first target of a cleave, and then using surprise follow thru to apply sneak attack damage and normal 1.5 str to all the rest.

They really need to remove the "attack action" verbiage from their materials, and either say standard action to use x or "on an attack x happens" to apply to all.

It just seems that they make several things to make mobile fighters viable, then say that you can't use more than one of them at a time, which basically puts a mobile melee build back into to position of chasing a pounce mechanic in order to keep up.


Or work your way into cleaving finish...which should work I believe.


You might be able to overhand chop and then cleaving finish, but expect table variation if you're trying to do this in PFS. If your GM lets you in a home game, hey... Go nuts.

Don't expect to get the overhand chop bonus on the second attack, though.


An attack action is what happens when you attack. You can attack as a standard action, in which case you take a single attack action. You can attack as a full-round action, in which case you can get multiple attack actions.

Overhand chop says you get 2x strength when you make only one attack action.

Unfortunately, the rules for overhand chop don't define what a "single attack" is. In fact, since in a full attack you make multiple attack actions, overhand chop would actually apply on all of them. This is clearly not what the author meant though.

What the author probably meant was:

Overhand Chop (Ex): At 3rd level, as a standard action, a two-handed fighter may make a single attack with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on the damage roll instead of adding 1.5 his strength. Further, this ability may be combined with other abilities that allow you to make only a single attack, such as Charge and Vital Strike.


TGMaxMaxer wrote:

They really need to remove the "attack action" verbiage from their materials, and either say standard action to use x or "on an attack x happens" to apply to all.

The "attack action" verbiage is needed so that you can make disarms, trips and the like as part of a full attack. We need to be able to refer to individual attack in a sequence.


Knight Magenta wrote:

An attack action is what happens when you attack. You can attack as a standard action, in which case you take a single attack action. You can attack as a full-round action, in which case you can get multiple attack actions.

Overhand chop says you get 2x strength when you make only one attack action.

Unfortunately, the rules for overhand chop don't define what a "single attack" is. In fact, since in a full attack you make multiple attack actions, overhand chop would actually apply on all of them. This is clearly not what the author meant though.

What the author probably meant was:

Overhand Chop (Ex): At 3rd level, as a standard action, a two-handed fighter may make a single attack with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on the damage roll instead of adding 1.5 his strength. Further, this ability may be combined with other abilities that allow you to make only a single attack, such as Charge and Vital Strike.

No, the author (Jason Nelson, quoted and linked to above), meant for it to work with the attack action and with a charge. The attack action is a standard attack.

When you use a full-round action to make several attacks, such as with two-weapon fighting or when you're making iterative attacks, that's called a full attack action--not "multiple attack actions". If it was defined as "multiple attack actions" you'd be able to do something like make a vital strike on each iterative attack swing.

Vital Strike cannot be combined with Overhand Chop because both feats require an attack action which means they both require a standard action. One standard action per turn means you can only use one or the other but not both.

Shadow Lodge

Ansel, you went a bit to far on that. Vital Strike and Overhand Chop work together as they both modify the attack action. Jason even said so in the forum you linked to.

"IOW, VS (which modifies the attack action) *IS* compatible with OC (which also modifies the attack action). Neither requires its own independent action; both modify the existing attack action."


If he did say that, then it -would- work on cleave, but only on the first attack not the cleave attacks.


Oh. Well that's good then. Chop their Vitals away.


Working with vital strike which specifically uses your (standard) attack action, means that I was correct in believing that it does not -require- a (standard) "attack" action on it's own, but is instead a rider on a normal "attack" action or charge which works on a single attack. I.E. it would work on the first swing of cleave, but not any extras from cleave/great cleave.


TGMaxMaxer wrote:
Working with vital strike which specifically uses your (standard) attack action, means that I was correct in believing that it does not -require- a (standard) "attack" action on it's own, but is instead a rider on a normal "attack" action or charge which works on a single attack. I.E. it would work on the first swing of cleave, but not any extras from cleave/great cleave.

Everybody, please click the FAQ flag on the thread linked here. The more people who click FAQ there, the more likely we'll get an official answer.


as a random passerby I would chip in, I always thought, the reason cleave was incompatible with overhand chop(3rd lvl) was due to overhand chop requiring the character to make a single attack where cleave allows an additional attack breaking the single attack requirement of overhand chop. Even if they could modify the same action, the single attack requirement is broken disallowing overhand chop.


What needs to be understood is that making an attack =/= taking the Attack Action. What they should do is change the name of the Attack Action to something like Standard Attack Action. Or maybe something that uses a synonym of the word "attack" (I like wallop myself) so have the [Standard] Wallop Action and the Full-Wallop Action, while still calling individual attacks "attacks".

Overhand Chop (Ex) wrote:
At 3rd level, when a two-handed fighter makes a single attack (with the wallop action or a charge) with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls. This ability replaces armor training 1.


TGMaxMaxer wrote:

If he did say that, then it -would- work on cleave, but only on the first attack not the cleave attacks.

I'm afraid not. You need to use your standard action to attempt to cleave at all. You are making a cleave attack, not using the attack action.

Neither Overhand Chop nor Vital strike say "as a standard action, do X," they both say "when using the attack action, [add X effect]"
And cleave does not say "when using the attack action" it says "as a standard action."

One more time, the first attack roll of cleave is not the attack action, it is a specific standard action that imparts a -2 to your Armor Class and then allows you to roll against a 2nd foe if the first hit is a success.


Thread necro.
It says this is answered in the FAQ, can anyone find the link?
As I cannot.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nope. I don't see anything in the Core or APG FAQ either. I am curious to see what view they took.


It's answered indirectly in answers about other abilities that use Standard actions vs the Attack action.

Vital Strike and Overhand Chop both trigger when you make a Standard Attack action (the standard action called "Attack"). They could both be used together because they both can activate on the Attack action. Cleave, on the other hand, requires you use the Standard Use Feat action. Use Feat isn't Attack; they're mechanically separate actions and you must subsume your Standard Action to make one of them. So Cleave (and any other ability that is its own specific action such as Grapple, Two-Weapon Warrior's Doublestrike, etc) is an action all its own while Attack is an action all its own and Vital Strike, Overhand Chop, and other similar abilities will modify the Attack action (and OC, additionally, can modify the Charge action).

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / THF and Cleave / Gr Cleave All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.