Why use cleave (in PF) if you have multiple attacks?

[Fitch3k]

say a high level character can attack one monster 4 times why attack 2 or 3 monster 1 time? Also can't you designate your multiple hits against different monsters you threaten? So is cleave just a melee classes way of getting an extra attack early on but becomes a wasted feat when you get your 2nd attack? I understand full attack and standard attack, but it seem melee in PF is built around standing in place and swinging it out.

[Lemmy]

You can use it after a move action.

Also, it uses your highest BAB, so before you get your 3rd iterative attack (so, at least 11th level) it's always better use cleave when attacking 2 creatures.

It's a decent feat. Greater Cleave is a bit of overkill, though.

In my table we ruled that Cleave can be used as part of a full attack, but the cleave uses the BAB of the last attack you made against the 1st target and choosing to use cleave stops you from making any other interative attacks, so a 11th fighter could make 3 attacks with +11/+6/+1 or use cleave and attack 2 creatures with either +11(1st target)/+11 (2nd target) or +11 (1st target)/+6 (1st target)/+6 (2nd target).

It was a good way to buff melee warriors.

[navar100]

If you only get one attack anyway because you moved/will move, then Cleave. If you can full attack then full attack. You don't need to use a feat every round of combat. However, there are some tactics with it to use instead of a full attack. Power Attack is a prerequisite. Using a greatsword, at 8th level you are -3 to hit for +9 damage. Since your second attack on a full attack is already -5 your highest BAB, you could be better off cleaving two opponents with Power Attack. Your second attack on one opponent on a full attack has a good chance of missing anyway, so you lose a small chance to hit an opponent a second time and gain a high chance of hitting a second opponent. In addition, you might also have a critical hit feat that applies an affliction against an opponent you hit with a critical hit. Obviously it's no guarantee, but it is cool to hit both opponents with a critical hit feat effect when it does happen.

[Starbuck_II]

PF Cleave is if you move before attacking.
PF Cleaving Finish is 3.5 Cleave.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/cleaving-finish-combat

Sadly it has Cleave as a Preq, but otherwise better for full attackers.

[navar100]

PF Cleave is if you move before attacking.
PF Cleaving Finish is 3.5 Cleave.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/cleaving-finish-combat

Sadly it has Cleave as a Preq, but otherwise better for full attackers.

I don't find it "sadly" at all. Pathfinder Cleave is better than 3E Cleave because you get to use it more often.

[Boci]

I don't find it "sadly" at all. Pathfinder Cleave is better than 3E Cleave because you get to use it more often.

I prefer 3.5 cleave. It can be used on full attacks, doesn't require the targets to be adjacent and doesn't lower your AC. At lower level the PF version is better though. Still, shame they made cleave a preq for finishing cleave, it should have been two seperate feats.

[Lycar]

I prefer 3.5 cleave. It can be used on full attacks, doesn't require the targets to be adjacent and doesn't lower your AC. At lower level the PF version is better though. Still, shame they made cleave a preq for finishing cleave, it should have been two seperate feats.

Uh really? 3.5 Cleave only triggers if you drop an opponent. This means it is only useful at lower levels where you can expect to drop a foe with every or every other hit or so. PF Cleave only requires an actual hit, not a killing hit.

Imagine you fight a small number of foes with high HP, then you may have to hit a foe 3 or 4 times, and you may not even be the one to score the killing blow and never get to use 3.5 Cleave. As long as there is still another target in reach, PF Cleave will still work. Stays useful & relevant much longer that way.

The hit to AC is a tradeoff. Like, you know, Punishing Stance from ToB for example.

[Boci]

Uh really? 3.5 Cleave only triggers if you drop an opponent. This means it is only useful at lower levels where you can expect to drop a foe with every or every other hit or so. PF Cleave only requires an actual hit, not a killing hit. Imagine you fight a small number of foes with high HP, then you may have to hit a foe 3 or 4 times,

So full attack + haste. Also allows you to kill a mook and attack the BBEG in the same attack, including an AoO.


and you may not even be the one to score the killing blow and never get to use 3.5 Cleave.

So your point is "Imagine a situation in which 3.5 cleave isn't that useful. Ergo, PF cleave is better?" Convincing.


As long as there is still another target in reach, PF Cleave will still work.

Nope. They need to be adjacent, meaning enemies may avoid being so once they see you use cleave the first time, assuming that position even comes up in the fight.


Stays useful & relevant much longer that way.

Depends how good your enemies are at negating full attacks.


The hit to AC is a tradeoff. Like, you know, Punishing Stance from ToB for example.

The AC trade off is very minor, but its still something to consider.

[ericgrau]

As pointed out it's only a trade-off starting at level 11 and/or haste. Full BAB is better than -5, usually even if it makes you spread out the damage. Even at level 11+ you have a use for it every time you move.

It's also better than 3.5 cleave because it triggers way more often. 3.5 cleave is pretty much good at level 1 when you can 1 shot things and then after that not so much. It takes 2 or 3 rounds to drop a foe after, so at its very best it might be as good as PF cleave at level 11+. You need to use a move action about as often as you kill something. Actually even then 3.5 cleave is worse because maybe you dropped the foe with one of your secondary attacks so your cleave attack carries the same penalty to attack rolls.

[Arbane]

How does Power Attack + Furious Focus work with Cleave?

[Lycar]

So full attack + haste. Also allows you to kill a mook and attack the BBEG in the same attack, including an AoO.
If your mage can afford to haste the entire party all the time then Cleave loses effectiveness. If.


So your point is "Imagine a situation in which 3.5 cleave isn't that useful. Ergo, PF cleave is better?" Convincing.
Yes that is the idea of a comparison:

Move + Attack -> 3.5 = PF (Advantage 3.5 because no AC loss but PF Cleave is slightly more likely to actually trigger. But at those levels you still can score 1-hit-kills fairly often.)

Full Attack, BAB <= 5 -> Same as above.

Full Attack, BAB >6 <11 -> 3.5 < PF (You don't get an iterative attack but a cleave is at full BAB, thus more likely to hit if it is triggered. Also you are less and less likely to get the 3.5 Cleave to trigger at higher levels.)

Full Attack, BAB > 11 -> 3.5 <= PF (You lose 2 iterative attacks but that only matters if those have a chance to hit in the first place. If you can still hit reliably with a -1, then the extra iterative attack matters.

Full Attack, BAB > 15 -> 3.5 >= PF (First of all, only relevant for full BAB classes. Also, if your 3rd iterative is actually fairly likely to hit, 3.5 Cleave now pulls ahead.)

And you complain about me pointing out that needing a hit to trigger is better then needing a kill on top of everything else?


Nope. They need to be adjacent, meaning enemies may avoid being so once they see you use cleave the first time, assuming that position even comes up in the fight.
Opps, my bad. Cleave indeed requires the secondary target to be adjacent to the primary one. I was thinking of Cleaving Finish. This one allows an extra attack on a target in reach.


Depends how good your enemies are at negating full attacks.Or, for that matter, how much you have to do with your Move action. There are a few things that need a Move action to work after all.


The AC trade off is very minor, but its still something to consider.And this point is advantage: 3.5 Cleave. As usual, it is a trade-off. More offensive power at the cost of defense. But look at at other options that do the same thing: Charge and Punishing Stance. It fits right in.



How does Power Attack + Furious Focus work with Cleave?
Furious Focus makes you ignore the Power Attack penalty on your first attack in a round (when wielding two-handed). So since an attack triggered by Cleave is never the first attack, that one is made with the penalties from PA.

[Boci]

If your mage can afford to haste the entire party all the time then Cleave loses effectiveness. If.

It’s one of the most power spells for its level. When wizards can first cast it, it last for 5 rounds (so at worse 2 rounds less than the entire combat) and affects 5 targets, which should be everyone. Plus there are other ways to gain extra attacks.
On balance neither side is clearly superior, and PF cleave has one major advantage, but there are numerous if smaller advantages to the 3.5, which I think overall add up.

[Longcat]

3.5 (Great) Cleave is better if you have Knockdown.

[Lycar]

It’s one of the most power spells for its level.

Sure, but every slot you fill with Haste you don't fill with

- Dispel Magic
- Protection from Energy
- Phantom Steed
- Sleet Storm
- Wind Wall (favourite of wizards to gain immunity from ranged attacks)
- Displacement
- Invisibility Sphere
- Ray of Exhaustion
- Fly (also important for defensive-minded wizards)
- Magic Weapon, greater

So yeah, you can fill 4 slots with Haste but it comes at a certain opportunity cost. And even then there is a certain kind of wizard who believes that casting spells on anyone but himself and the things he wants to kill is a wasted spell slot *shrug*.