Did the Errata miss to clarify Cleave and MAP?

[Ghilteras]

Looks like the Errata came out but there is no patch for Cleave feat. The feat does not specify it contributes to Multi Attack Penalty like other feats that do similar things such as Flurry of Blows and Twinned Takedown. For those feats the description specifically says that they contribute to MAP, but in Cleave there is no mention of it. Everyone thought this was an oversight, but the Errata came out and it did not fix it so what do we do? By RAW Cleave is not affected by MAP, but by RAI it is because it's a reaction in your turn, not outside your turn and the feat says to make a Strike and Strike has the Attack tag which is affected by MAP.

I don't really like when things are left up to interpretation so can we have an official clarification about this and can we make this part of the Errata?

[Zapp]

"We should note that not every problem has been addressed in this document. Some are a bit complicated, and the solution is going to take more time to fully test before releasing it to all of you. Just because you don’t see an answer here doesn’t mean that we aren’t aware of and considering the issue—we’re likely just trying to figure out the best way to handle it."
- The blog post introducing the errata

[thenobledrake]

When it comes to feats and MAP, there are two categories: those which explicitly state an exception to the MAP rules (example: how Power Attack counts as 2 strikes for MAP even though it is only 1 strike), and those which follow the general MAP rules.

Don't let that many feats include a redundant reminder of that general rule confuse you into thinking it has to be present for the general rule to apply.

It is RAW as-is that MAP applies to Cleave and is generated by Cleave.

[albadeon]

multi attack penalty wrote:

You take this penalty on all attacks after the first on your turn.

Seems pretty clear, why should Cleave be an exception? It doesn't mention being an exception anywhere. It makes an additional strike attack on your turn => it adds to your MAP.

The addition in Twin Takedown and Flurry of Blows is likely in there to clarify that despite it being two attacks in a single action, you still need to increase the MAP after the first strike. Because it's a single-action "double-attack", people might otherwise mistakenly assume that the same MAP applied to both attacks.

With cleave, that wasn't neccessary to specifiy, because cleave is only one attack in the one (re-)action.

[Ghilteras]

albadeon wrote:

multi attack penalty wrote:

You take this penalty on all attacks after the first on your turn.

Seems pretty clear, why should Cleave be an exception? It doesn't mention being an exception anywhere. It makes an additional strike attack on your turn => it adds to your MAP.

The addition in Twin Takedown and Flurry of Blows is likely in there to clarify that despite it being two attacks in a single action, you still need to increase the MAP after the first strike. Because it's a single-action "double-attack", people might otherwise mistakenly assume that the same MAP applied to both attacks.

With cleave, that wasn't neccessary to specifiy, because cleave is only one attack in the one (re-)action.

This is all interpretation, not RAW. The Feat description should tell you how the Feat works in regards of MAP, like Twin Takedown or Flurry of Blows. This leads to people giving their own interpretation on rules when worded poorly especially because Cleave is a single attack, it's just the same attack that kills the first creature then hits another one, you utilize another Strike roll to check if you hit it but it's not another attack.

It might be clear for you, but for most of others it's not, there is a discussion like this on Reddit and one on the Facebook group as well, which means it's not clear at all. I honestly don't know why the Errata did not address this.

[Squiggit]

Ghilteras wrote:

This is all interpretation, not RAW.

Erm. Yes it is?

RAW says that multiple attacks take penalties. Nothing in the rules for Cleave contradict those rules. So why would it not follow them?

The errata didn't address this because there's nothing to address. Cleave lets you spend a reaction to make a second attack, so you ... do that, following the normal rules for weapon attacks because, again, there's nothing to suggest that you wouldn't.

[Quandary]

Ghilteras wrote:

especially because Cleave is a single attack, it's just the same attack that kills the first creature then hits another one, you utilize another Strike roll to check if you hit it but it's not another attack.

You are getting yourself confused with the fluff text.

The phrase "You swing clear through one foe and into another" doesn't even reference any rules mechanic terms.
It's "visualization" isn't incompatible with how somebody might normally spend two actions on 2 distinct attacks...

The Feat allows you to "make a melee Strike" using Reaction. That isn't the same Strike or other Attack which triggered the Reaction.
If it were, it would be phrased to MODIFY that Attack with additional effect vs 2nd target... But it isn't phrased like that,
it is making a new melee Strike Attack which is no different than any other melee Strike action,
which by definition is additional Attack with standard MAP implications that normally carries,
because MAP doesn't care about what action cost was used, it only carries about the number of "Attacks" which a Strike is.

[Nefreet]

Ghilteras wrote:

This is all interpretation, not RAW.

All text is up to interpretation.

There is no such thing as "Rules as Written".

[Narxiso]

I didn’t notice this, as Omelette in the Knights of Everflame seemed to be making it with the best attack roll without considering MAP. I don’t think Jason has said anything about it either. I honestly wouldn’t take cleave if it is affected by MAP since Swipe isn’t.

[thenobledrake]

This is why I hate it when game authors decide to put helpful reminders on things - they miss one somewhere and somebody thinks that means something other than "the helpful but entirely unnecessary reminder is missing."

[Tim Schneider 908]

Page 462 says that if an ability uses a basic action as a subordinate action, it still has it's action. Therefore the Strike does have the attack trait.

Page 446 makes it clear the multiple attack penalty applies to all attacks on your turn, which will apply based on the rule above.

While some feats call out specifically how they interact with this (typically the ones that make multiple attacks), it doesn't make them not apply if it doesn't as that's part of the Attack trait. And by having strike as a subordinate action the penalty applies.

Cleave is in an odd category as a reaction on your own turn, but it won't change how the rules work with it. Whether it should or shouldn't apply is another question, but I think the rules are pretty clear so they'd only need to errata it if their desired interpretation was the other way around.

[Squiggit]

Narxiso wrote:

I honestly wouldn’t take cleave if it is affected by MAP since Swipe isn’t.

Yeah but Swipe is two actions for two attacks. Better accuracy than two Strikes, but you're not gaining attacks while Cleave effectively gives you another one.

[K1]

I wonder in terms of balance about MAP and number of attacks.

A barbarian is mostly like to hit twice per round.

A fighter could do 3x with a high chance with an agile weapon.

Both of then could go for a aoo sometimes.

Let's consider a standard scenario where a barbarian hit and kill a target.

1 action out of 3 used.

2 left.

Why should be use his reaction instead of one of the other actions?

Maybe during the first round with rage + open charge, if rage is not instant, he could consider using his reaction as second attack, but would be a particular situation.

What I am trying to say is that it would be more common to kill a target and having at least 1 or 2 actions still available.

And in a similar context, using a reaction would be not Wise ( if the reaction will suffer from map, that's it ).

Try for a second not to stick with raw and check the utility of a similar skill in a normal context.

To me something seems off.

[Squiggit]

Quote:

Why should be use his reaction instead of one of the other actions?

The barbarian with Cleave could do both. Or Attack, Cleave and then still have actions left over to Stride, Raise a Shield, or do something like Dragon's Breath or Renewed Vigor or Terrifying Howl or Furious Sprint etc. Or Sudden Charge > Cleave and have one action left over for something like that.

Barbarians have a LOT of alternate actions accessible from feats.

But whether or not it's a good feat isn't really the purview of this thread to begin with.

[albadeon]

Ghilteras wrote:

...because Cleave is a single attack, it's just the same attack that kills the first creature then hits another one, you utilize another Strike roll to check if you hit it but it's not another attack.

You're reading too much into the flavor text which doesn't mention anything relevant mechanicswise. The rules text as written is quite clear: "make a melee strike". And the strike action is very clearly defined as an attack on p.471 of the CRB.

Similarly, Great Cleave lets you potentially make multiple additional melee strikes. Each one adds to your MAP as normal.

NB, all this is true only as long as it happens on your turn. I'm not sure if there is some way to get an additional reaction that might enable you to use cleave in conjunction with AoO outside of your turn; in that exceptional case, it wouldn't add to your MAP. Which I admit seems odd, but is definitely RAW.

There are lots of bits of flavor text in there that use no rules terminology. Cleave says you swing through an enemy. That would preclude all melee weapons that don't swing when they attack, right? So it doesn't work with rapiers or lances? For the same limitation to swinging weapons, see Sudden Charge, Knockback, Swipe and many others. Similarly, with AoO, you swat at an enemy and swatting with a rapier wouldn't do any damage, right? No escape claims it let's you keep pace with an enemy, except he leaves you behind easily if his speed is higher than yours. Also, keep in mind before using that Reckless Abandon that "your blood boils" is instantly deadly for most beings.

None of this flavor text involves any actual rules text, and none of it is part of the RAW. It's just fluff. I sure hope they don't "fix" this. Leaving the flavor text out, because some people desperately try to read something into it that it isn't, would make for a much more boring read.

[K1]

Squiggit wrote:

Quote:

Why should be use his reaction instead of one of the other actions?

The barbarian with Cleave could do both. Or Attack, Cleave and then still have actions left over to Stride, Raise a Shield, or do something like Dragon's Breath or Renewed Vigor or Terrifying Howl or Furious Sprint etc. Or Sudden Charge > Cleave and have one action left over for something like that.

Barbarians have a LOT of alternate actions accessible from feats.

But whether or not it's a good feat isn't really the purview of this thread to begin with.

Dragon breath is a specific kind if barbarian.

As for shields, since the ac reduction from rage and how their temporary hp and resistances work, it is unlikely that a barbarian. Last but more important, shield block is not something a barbarian starts with.

So both things are out of questions.

About the other possibilities, the mostly require you to use 1 action, which would be your last one ( map -10 ). Also because for using cleave the enemy should be adiacent to you, so you won't move.

However, this was just a consideration about the the outcome in knights of everflame which somebody pointed out.