Cleaving with arrows?

[Oko and Qailee]

So the feat cleave:


Prerequisites
Str 13, Power Attack.

Benefit
If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature. You can use this ability once per round.

Special
A fighter may select Cleave as one of his fighter bonus feats.

Interestingly enough, the feat doesn't say the first attack has to be made with a melee weapon. The new extra attack though, has to be melee and with the same weapon.

So, lets say you have an elvencraft longbow (behaves as a quarter staff as well as a longbow). Does this mean that if you drop an enemy with an arrow you can then immediately make a melee attack with the bow if you have another enemy adjacent to you?

I'm not saying this is useful at all. I just think the imagery of firing an arrow to cleave some is funny in a ridiculous sort of way. I think by RAW it works unless someone has a good counter argument.

[Daishain]

RAW, most bows don't have a melee attack for you to use with cleave. Even if you could convince the DM that firing into melee could trigger a cleave, you wouldn't end up doing anything with it. You might be able to houserule that swinging a bow does something on the order of 1d4 blunt damage, but that leads to the next bit.

RAI, a cleave involves making an attack that strikes through a target and hits another, and is not actually two separate attacks. While it might be possible to achieve a similar effect with a particularly powerful ranged attack that hits soft tissue, the second victim would be behind the first one, not next to you.

There is at least one bow that has a melee attack (blades integrated along its length), I forget the name but I believe it was in Races of the Wild. But then you aren't using arrows for it, just a gimped backup melee weapon.

[Oko and Qailee]

I mean an elvencraft bow has a melee attack.

I understand it's certainly now RAI, and def the imagery of cleave is to cut through an opponent... but I think it works RAW wise with a elvencraft bow.

[SethoMarkus]

I'm on the fence with this one... Although it sounds ridiculous to use a bow and arrow to initiate Cleave, I can't see any real reason why it wouldn't work if there is an in-game mechanic making the bow act as both a ranged and melee weapon...

However, as a counter-counter-argument, the imagery of a cleave attack being a single attack that strikes through one opponent and into a second means that most bludgeoning weapons would not be able to cleave as well, although the most certainly are accepted as doing such. Or how about a smaller weapon, such as a punching dagger?

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Query: using the same logic, is there any reason you couldn't use this for weaponlike spells?

[Lightlawbliss]

However, as a counter-counter-argument, the imagery of a cleave attack being a single attack that strikes through one opponent and into a second means that most bludgeoning weapons would not be able to cleave as well, although the most certainly are accepted as doing such. Or how about a smaller weapon, such as a punching dagger?

You think bludgeoning is bad? Most piercing weapons aren't even going the right direction!
(and this is after we ignore the fact that cleaving through an opponent with no loss of force is next to impossible irl)

[Knaight]

RAI, a cleave involves making an attack that strikes through a target and hits another, and is not actually two separate attacks. While it might be possible to achieve a similar effect with a particularly powerful ranged attack that hits soft tissue, the second victim would be behind the first one, not next to you.

There is at least one bow that has a melee attack (blades integrated along its length), I forget the name but I believe it was in Races of the Wild. But then you aren't using arrows for it, just a gimped backup melee weapon.
This is debatable at best. The name was chosen to be evocative of that imagery, but then there's the issues with bludgeoning and piercing weapons already highlighted, along with how it's not necessarily even applicable to slashing weapons - if a more realistic aesthetic is in play it makes more sense to think of it as two attacks, for characters that are supposed to be more dextrous it makes more sense for separate attacks, etc. Plus, it makes sense. If you've got a spear, are adept in fighting multiple people, and stab someone you might be able to get in a hit on someone else because they aren't expecting it, precisely because you just stabbed at their ally.

Then there's the aesthetic of the bow and the shot. For some games it is entirely inappropriate. In any game where a club-bow is a thing though, the image of someone smacking one person down with a bow, then shooting over their body at someone else oncoming fits just fine.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

It doesn't work. The bow portion and each end of the quarterstaff portion of an elvencraft longbow are not counted as the same weapon. They're counted as separate weapons for effects related to weapons (buying masterwork, buying magical upgrades, casting Greater Magic Weapon, etc.), and they're only counted as part of a single item for effects that affect non-weapon objects (sunder, disarm).

If you drop an opponent with the blunt end of your Gnome Hooked Hammer, you would be expected to make the cleave attack with the blunt end as well. If you attack with the bow portion of your elvencraft longbow and drop an opponent, you would be expected to make your cleave attack with the bow portion as well.

Furthermore, the cleave attack is made both with the same weapon as well as with the same attack bonus as the original attack. You would get BAB + Dex + weapon bonuses + feats/class features to hit with the bow portion, and BAB + Str + weapon bonuses + feats/class features to hit with the staff portion, so it would not use the same attack bonus (it may happen to be the same number, but the total does not come from the same place). They're both parts of the same single item, but they're counted as separate weapons for any game mechanic that involves weapons specifically.

[Caligstro Smith]

It doesn't work. The bow portion and each end of the quarterstaff portion of an elvencraft longbow are not counted as the same weapon. They're counted as separate weapons for effects related to weapons (buying masterwork, buying magical upgrades, casting Greater Magic Weapon, etc.), and they're only counted as part of a single item for effects that affect non-weapon objects (sunder, disarm).
Just because they're considered separate for the purposes of specific weapon upgrades doesn't mean they are treated as not the same weapon for all things. This is a case of specific trumps general.

Generally, it is the same weapon. It has a single listing in the table of weapons where it is printed/introduced, it has a single text block of description for it beneath/around that table. It has a single name. It is the same object.

However, there are *more specific* rules which govern the enchantment of these types of "double weapons." The exception to the way enchanting/weapon upgrading works for them is explicitly stated as an extra bit of rules aside from normal/*general* rules of weapon enhancement.

The statement that they are only counted as part of a single item for effects that affect non-weapon objects is an incorrect assumption, however intuitive it may or may not seem. Just because there are specific extra rules for some specific ways that certain actions/effects/options interact with the object "as a weapon" doesn't mean that the general idea of that exception applies to all other rules interact with it "as a weapon."

This is a similar kind of confusion case to that sometimes be seen about monk unarmed strikes. The reader has a general thought/understanding that the monk's unarmed strike is considered both a natural and manufactured weapon, and all kinds of weird edge cases and confusions are brought up with this in mind. But what is often forgotten or not clearly understood is that this is not an all encompassing aspect of monk unarmed strikes. They are only treated as both manufactured and natural weapons in the *specific* case of "spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons." In all other cases the unarmed strike is still considered a natural weapon only.


If you drop an opponent with the blunt end of your Gnome Hooked Hammer, you would be expected to make the cleave attack with the blunt end as well. If you attack with the bow portion of your elvencraft longbow and drop an opponent, you would be expected to make your cleave attack with the bow portion as well.

This is a purely RAI argument. The extra attack from cleave simply states that the extra attack must be a melee attack and be an attack with the same weapon. Since it is the same weapon in *general* and because there is no specific rule within cleave singling out interaction between the feat's extra attack and double weapons or similar, this is not actually true by RAW.


Furthermore, the cleave attack is made both with the same weapon as well as with the same attack bonus as the original attack. You would get BAB + Dex + weapon bonuses + feats/class features to hit with the bow portion, and BAB + Str + weapon bonuses + feats/class features to hit with the staff portion, so it would not use the same attack bonus (it may happen to be the same number, but the total does not come from the same place). They're both parts of the same single item, but they're counted as separate weapons for any game mechanic that involves weapons specifically.

Again it's not treated as separate weapons for ALL rules that involve weapons, just the rules where this type of weapon is singled out.

And generally this is true, in the case of a weapon which could be used in melee or as a ranged weapon. When used as ranged, it uses dex, melee it uses strength. This special elven bow is not the only case where that is a concern either. Any weapon which may be a thrown weapon or a melee weapon (ie: dagger) also brings this into question (more about that below). But the extra attack from cleave is a special rule and special attack unique to and granted by the cleave feat. The rules which govern that attack, where explicitly different from the general rules for attacks, take precedence. Thus, while it makes no intuitive or RAI sense, a person with this fancy elven bow and the cleave feat could make a ranged attack 50' away with his dex mod being used to calculate attack bonus, drop the first target, and then make a cleave attack in melee against someone adjacent to him, and the attack bonus used, because the cleave feat explicitly, *specifically* says so, would be the same bonus he used on the first attack, regardless of how it was calculated.

Going back to the dagger for a minute, to get the same sort of rule case you would need to have a dagger which returned immediately after being thrown to be used in the same round/same character's turn, of course, or else you wouldn't have the same weapon to use for the cleave attack.

There are several other interesting cases related to this that could be brought up, involving things like (again) returning weapons or weapons with similar effects, bloodstorm blades, and possibly the spell blood wind.

[bjoern]

If you strike someone with an elvencraft longbow in melee as a quarter staff, you don't provoke an AoO, because you're not using it as a bow.
It counts as three separate weapons. Not all three at the same time. I agree with Biff.

[Ettina]

If there's someone in melee range, shooting an arrow would give them an attack of opportunity on you.

[bjoern]

If there's someone in melee range, shooting an arrow would give them an attack of opportunity on you.

Yes. But an elven craft bow is both a quarterstaff and a longbow. If I use it as a staff and smack someone with it, I don't provoke just because its also a bow.....I'm not using the bow portion of it.
Likewise if I hit someone with an arrow from it (the bow portion) any cleave would have to be made with the same weapon (the bow portion) and since cleave only grants a melee attack, I am unable to make the attack since "the same weapon" (the bow) is ineligible for a melee attack.

[Lightlawbliss]

Yes. But an elven craft bow is both a quarterstaff and a longbow. If I use it as a staff and smack someone with it, I don't provoke just because its also a bow.....I'm not using the bow portion of it.
Likewise if I hit someone with an arrow from it (the bow portion) any cleave would have to be made with the same weapon (the bow portion) and since cleave only grants a melee attack, I am unable to make the attack since "the same weapon" (the bow) is ineligible for a melee attack.

The elvencraft longbow is as much a staff+bow as a quarterstaff is club+club. The weapon used to make the kill is the elvencraft longbow, the entire elvencraft longbow is one weapon with multiple "striking surfaces". I place your argument along side saying that the tip of a longsword is a different weapon from the edge of the same longsword.

[bjoern]

The elvencraft longbow is as much a staff+bow as a quarterstaff is club+club. The weapon used to make the kill is the elvencraft longbow, the entire elvencraft longbow is one weapon with multiple "striking surfaces". I place your argument along side saying that the tip of a longsword is a different weapon from the edge of the same longsword.

Then why do you have to masterwork it 3 times? Magic weapon it 3 times?

A sword has two edges to a blade and a point. But its still the same weapon.

The description of elven craft longbow is pretty clear that they want it to be counted as 3 separate weapons. Propably to avoid situations such as this.....

[Caligstro Smith]

Regarding the attack of opportunity issue:

Whether it provokes an attack of opportunity or not isn't really relevant. I understand that you're arguing that because using it "as a bow" is what causes it to provoke an attack of opportunity and thus because in one attack method with the elven longbow it provokes an AoO and in another attack method it does not, they must count as separate weapons. This is *not the case.*

The rule that attacking with a bow in melee provokes an AoO has NOTHING to do with the weapon being used (ie: is it a bow, is it some other weapon, w/e). The rule is that if you make a *ranged attack* you provoke an attack of opportunity. Whether you're doing that with a bow, a thrown dagger, a thrown beer tankard, or your willing halfling friend doesn't matter.

Look at the dagger then as an example. You can throw a dagger as a ranged attack. You can stab someone with it as a melee attack. The fact that you can do either one does NOT mean that when you use a dagger as a thrown weapon in a ranged attack that it no longer counts as being a dagger, or that it's no longer the same dagger you used last turn to stab someone. It is the *same weapon.* You're just using it a different way.

Similarly if you hit someone with a quarterstaff and drop them, you could hit them with either end of the quarter staff in making your cleave attack. Using the opposite end you used for the first attack doesn't suddenly make it a *different* quarterstaff. It's just a different option when using the weapon.

Likewise, the elvencraft bow lets you use it in melee as if it was a club or staff, but it's just another way of using the weapon. You can actually do this strange use of the cleave feat with ANY bow, it's just that using it in melee for the cleave attack would count as an improvised weapon, rather than a club or staff, and you couldn't enchant it with melee enhancements (since as an improvised weapon it couldn't be masterwork for those purposes).

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

The elvencraft longbow is as much a staff+bow as a quarterstaff is club+club. The weapon used to make the kill is the elvencraft longbow, the entire elvencraft longbow is one weapon with multiple "striking surfaces". I place your argument along side saying that the tip of a longsword is a different weapon from the edge of the same longsword.

You don't cast Greater Magic Weapon to just enhance the tip of a sword, though. Being a single item is not the same as being a single weapon. Casting Shillelagh on the quarterstaff portion won't make its ranged attacks with the bow portion do more damage. A troll has two claws and a bite, they're all part of that same troll, so if he drops an opponent with a claw attack can he cleave with his bite?

Multiple weapons on a single object does not mean you get to count them all as the same weapon for any game mechanic involving separate, individual weapons. For all purposes each weapon portion of an elvencraft bow is counted as a separate weapon whenever a game mechanic is concerned, and they're only counted as a single item for effects which equally affect non-weapon items. There has been no specific rule cited that can override this general rule, so this is the RAW as it stands.

A +1 Dagger is still a +1 weapon whether it's used to make melee or ranged attacks. That it can be used in multiple modes is not the same thing as a single item being able to make attacks as though it were multiple different weapons. If you throw a dagger you're attacking with a dagger, if you stab with a dagger you're still attacking with a dagger. If you fire a shot from an elvencraft longbow you're attacking with a longbow, if you strike someone in melee with an elvencraft longbow you're attacking with a quarterstaff. If the bow portion is a +1 weapon that doesn't apply to quarterstaff attacks with it, and if you have Weapon Focus: Longbow it doesn't apply to quarterstaff attacks with it. It's a different weapon.

[bjoern]

You don't cast Greater Magic Weapon to just enhance the tip of a sword, though. Being a single item is not the same as being a single weapon. Casting Shillelagh on the quarterstaff portion won't make its ranged attacks with the bow portion do more damage. A troll has two claws and a bite, they're all part of that same troll, so if he drops an opponent with a claw attack can he cleave with his bite?

Multiple weapons on a single object does not mean you get to count them all as the same weapon for any game mechanic involving separate, individual weapons. For all purposes each weapon portion of an elvencraft bow is counted as a separate weapon whenever a game mechanic is concerned, and they're only counted as a single item for effects which equally affect non-weapon items. There has been no specific rule cited that can override this general rule, so this is the RAW as it stands.

Well said. That's what I was trying to get at. The troll thing is a great example.

And no, if you down a foe with a quarterstaff, you must cleave with the same end as the end used to initiate the cleave. It is TWO weapons. Hence the term "double weapon"

[Caligstro Smith]

Then why do you have to masterwork it 3 times? Magic weapon it 3 times?

Because there is a separate, specific rule that says so. It is not a general property of the weapon that its different uses are "not the same weapon"


A sword has two edges to a blade and a point. But its still the same weapon.

The description of elven craft longbow is pretty clear that they want it to be counted as 3 separate weapons. Propably to avoid situations such as this.....

I would say that the longsword edge/point argument isn't a great analogy.

*However*, as your own language points out ("is pretty clear that they want it to be"), you are making a RAI argument. Just because it seems like this is how you would think it should work, or seems intuitive, or it's probably what the writer was imagining, or whatever, doesn't mean that's what it actually does or how it actually works.

An elvencraft bow is an elvencraft bow. It has one name. It is one object. It is a single weapon. It has a single total market value. It has a single weapon description.

If you were in a contest where the rule was, "you may only use one weapon in this fight" you would be allowed to use an elvencraft longbow, just like you would be allowed to use a quarterstaff, or dire flail, or whatever, regardless of how many different parts of it are paid extra to be masterwork, or how many different parts of it are enchanted. It's just a more useful, more versatile weapon than a longsword, but it is just one weapon.

[Lightlawbliss]

(snip)

can you show me (us) a rule other then enchantment that states the ends are treated as separate weapons? All I have been able to find or remember is that they are separate for enchanting

[DarkWhisper]

They're both parts of the same single item, but they're counted as separate weapons for any game mechanic that involves weapons specifically.
Emphasis added

:smallconfused: :smallamused:



Link (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#disarm)
Consequences. If you beat the defender, the defender is disarmed. If you attempted the disarm action unarmed, you now have the weapon. If you were armed, the defender’s weapon is on the ground in the defender’s square.
Emphasis added



Linky (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#sunder)
Consequences. If you beat the defender, roll damage and deal it to the weapon or shield. See Table: Common Armor, Weapon, and Shield Hardness and Hit Points to determine how much damage you must deal to destroy the weapon or shield.
Emphasis added

So... if a character with an elvencraft longbow is disarmed, he either still holds the (usable) elvencraft longbow [quarterstaff-function] if he's been shooting arrows before or he still holds the (usable) elvencraft longbow [longbow-function] if he's been using it as melee weapon before ?

:smallbiggrin:

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Emphasis added

:smallconfused: :smallamused:

Emphasis added

Emphasis added

So... if a character with an elvencraft longbow is disarmed, he either still holds the (usable) elvencraft longbow [quarterstaff-function] if he's been shooting arrows before or he still holds the (usable) elvencraft longbow [longbow-function] if he's been using it as melee weapon before ?

:smallbiggrin:

As I already stated, Disarm and Sunder can be used on non-weapon objects, and game mechanics which can affect non-weapon objects will count it as a single object. Game mechanics which specifically only affect weapons and not non-weapon objects count it as three separate weapons. If Cleave stated you must make the attack with the same object then it would work, but it states that you must make the attack with the same weapon and a bow is not the same weapon as a quarterstaff.

There's no such thing as Weapon Focus: Elvencraft Longbow, there's no such weapon as an Elvencraft Longbow where game mechanics are concerned. An Elvencraft Longbow is an object which counts as both a longbow and a quarterstaff, you can take Weapon Focus: Longbow to gain a bonus to its bow portion and Weapon Focus: Quarterstaff to gain a bonus to its quarterstaff portion, because they're different weapons.

Granted if you have Cleave and you make an attack with any type of bow that drops an opponent, you can make a melee attack with the bow as an improvised weapon and use the same attack bonus as the shot. But you cannot make an attack with a bow that drops an opponent and make your cleave attack with a quarterstaff, even if they're the same object, because those are not the same weapon.

[Caligstro Smith]

You don't cast Greater Magic Weapon to just enhance the tip of a sword, though. Being a single item is not the same as being a single weapon. Casting Shillelagh on the quarterstaff portion won't make its ranged attacks with the bow portion do more damage. A troll has two claws and a bite, they're all part of that same troll, so if he drops an opponent with a claw attack can he cleave with his bite?

The troll example is not actually a good example at all. It *seems* like it's a good example, but a troll isn't a weapon at all. A troll is a creature, and explicitly is stated to have separate natural weapons. An elvencraft longbow is a weapon, and just because it's used in multiple way to make different kinds of attacks (melee attack, ranged attack), doesn't mean it's not the same weapon.


Multiple weapons on a single object does not mean you get to count them all as the same weapon for any game mechanic involving separate, individual weapons. For all purposes each weapon portion of an elvencraft bow is counted as a separate weapon whenever a game mechanic is concerned, and they're only counted as a single item for effects which equally affect non-weapon items. There has been no specific rule cited that can override this general rule, so this is the RAW as it stands.

Please cite then where this supposed general rule is. Where does it explicitly say that double weapons are treated as separate weapons for all game mechanic purposes. Likewise where does it say that it is only counted as a single item for things that equally affect non-weapon items? Because I and others have pointed out the fact that your argument seems to be based entirely on the *specific* weapon enchantment rules which have *extra* explicit cases for when you're enchanting a double weapon. Nowhere in the definition of double weapons does it say this. Nowhere in the general rules for weapons does it say this. The rule is in regard to enchanting only. It is effectively, "*when enchanting,* this is how you enchant a double weapon."


A +1 Dagger is still a +1 weapon whether it's used to make melee or ranged attacks. That it can be used in multiple modes is not the same thing as a single item being able to make attacks as though it were multiple different weapons. If you throw a dagger you're attacking with a dagger, if you stab with a dagger you're still attacking with a dagger. If you fire a shot from an elvencraft longbow you're attacking with a longbow, if you strike someone in melee with an elvencraft longbow you're attacking with a quarterstaff. If the bow portion is a +1 weapon that doesn't apply to quarterstaff attacks with it, and if you have Weapon Focus: Longbow it doesn't apply to quarterstaff attacks with it. It's a different weapon.

No, if you shoot an arrow from an Elvencraft Longbow, you're attacking with an *Elvencraft Longbow.* If you strike someone in melee with an Elvencraft Longbow, you're attacking with *an Elvencraft Longbow.* You may use it *AS* a quarterstaff or club. But it is still *an Elvencraft Longbow.*

Your weapon focus point is also incorrect. I actually hadn't explicitly thought about it before, but you are still attacking with a Longbow, even if you use it in melee. You get the +1 attack rolls to ALL attack rolls with that weapon if you have weapon focus with it. Even if you're using it in a way not intended. Even if you threw the longbow at someone, if you have Weapon Focus: Longbow, you would still get a +1 on the attack roll. It would do garbage for damage, but you'd get the +1 on attack rolls.


As I already stated, Disarm and Sunder can be used on non-weapon objects, and game mechanics which can affect non-weapon objects will count it as a single object. Game mechanics which specifically only affect weapons and not non-weapon objects count it as three separate weapons. If Cleave stated you must make the attack with the same object then it would work, but it states that you must make the attack with the same weapon and a bow is not the same weapon as a quarterstaff.

Here's the thing though: Sunder (for example) has separate uses for targeting weapons and for targeting other things. So you're saying that if someone is wielding an Elvencraft Longbow, and his opponent wants to sunder the longbow, he must EITHER: choose to sunder the "object" which would require 1 sunder attack, OR he could sunder the (supposedly) "separate" weapons?

Because this makes no sense. Just because a weapon is a double weapon, or an Elvencraft Longbow, or something like that, it is somehow considered both several different weapons AND/OR a single non-weapon item? So it's UNBELIEVABLY easier to sunder such weapons than it is to sunder all other weapons, since the attacker could choose to sunder it as a "carried object" instead of a "weapon" and not have to make an opposed attack roll? Becaues *as a whole* the object is not its own weapon? Because that is what follows from your argument.
There's no such thing as Weapon Focus: Elvencraft Longbow, there's no such weapon as an Elvencraft Longbow where game mechanics are concerned. An Elvencraft Longbow is an object which counts as both a longbow and a quarterstaff, you can take Weapon Focus: Longbow to gain a bonus to its bow portion and Weapon Focus: Quarterstaff to gain a bonus to its quarterstaff portion, because they're different weapons.

Granted if you have Cleave and you make an attack with any type of bow that drops an opponent, you can make a melee attack with the bow as an improvised weapon and use the same attack bonus as the shot. But you cannot make an attack with a bow that drops an opponent and make your cleave attack with a quarterstaff, even if they're the same object, because those are not the same weapon.

I'm just going to ask again here, where does it actually say they are separate weapons/are not the same weapon?


And no, if you down a foe with a quarterstaff, you must cleave with the same end as the end used to initiate the cleave. It is TWO weapons. Hence the term "double weapon"

Where does it say this? It's called a double weapon because that's the name of this type of weapon which has the extra rules/effects described under the rules for "double weapons." This is again a RAI argument which you're grounding simply in the name of the weapon type, rather than the rules which are explicitly stated for the weapon type.

[Oko and Qailee]

So, wow. I'm amazed this got so much of a response.

I really want to reply further in depth, but I'm at my lab. I do think people need to separate RAI from RAW here though, of course it doesn't work RAI, the entire reason why I said the imagery is dumb was to illustrate that.

My point is, does it work by RAW? I'm leaning to yes. An Elvencraft bow is one weapon. I'll say more after work and stuff.

[Oko and Qailee]

The description of elven craft longbow is pretty clear that they want it to be counted as 3 separate weapons. Propably to avoid situations such as this.....

Quite the opposite actually, as a matter of face, an elven craft bow isn't even called a double weapon AT ALL within the text. It is a bow, that can function as a quarter staff.

Why do you have to masterwork double weapons 3 times? because the rules say so for that specific case, it doesn't mean it applies to any other rule. A quarter staff is ONE weapon, not two. Hell even the text on double weapons implies that it is one weapon that can behave as two.


A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons

Note that it has to specifically say "as if fighting with two weapons." Not "you can use both weapons on a double weapon."

A double weapon is one weapon that has specific rules applied to it.



You don't cast Greater Magic Weapon to just enhance the tip of a sword, though. Being a single item is not the same as being a single weapon. Casting Shillelagh on the quarterstaff portion won't make its ranged attacks with the bow portion do more damage. A troll has two claws and a bite, they're all part of that same troll, so if he drops an opponent with a claw attack can he cleave with his bite?

Multiple weapons on a single object does not mean you get to count them all as the same weapon for any game mechanic involving separate, individual weapons. For all purposes each weapon portion of an elvencraft bow is counted as a separate weapon whenever a game mechanic is concerned, and they're only counted as a single item for effects which equally affect non-weapon items. There has been no specific rule cited that can override this general rule, so this is the RAW as it stands.


Wrong, multiple modes of usage of a double weapon/regular weapon do not count as a single weapon only where the rules say they do not. Everything else is extrapolation.

There is such thing as an Elvencraft Longbow as a weapon. It's called an Elvencraft bow.


"Thanks to elven ingenuities these [Elvencraft bows] weapons, function just as well as melee weapons as they do ranged weapons.

The quote explicitly is saying it is a weapon that can two the same role as 2 other weapons. The ONLY time is says anything about split usage is that the rules within the text explicitly say the staff and bow part must enhanced separately.

There is no general rule saying that for all purposes a double weapon is two weapons. There is only a specific rule saying that different damage portions must be enhanced separately.

If you use Call Weaponry (spell) you don't call half a quarter staff.


IMO, is this Arrow cleave RAI? No. Is it stupid? Yes. Is it RAW? Yes.

[YossarianLives]

You don't need to cut through something to cleave. I once DMed for a monk with the cleave feat.

He liked describing how he punched through the enemies chest and into someone else.:smalleek:

[Caligstro Smith]

You don't need to cut through something to cleave. I once DMed for a monk with the cleave feat.

He liked describing how he punched through the enemies chest and into someone else.:smalleek:

Yep. Really because d20 combat is such an abstraction of actual "real" actions, we don't know necessarily that the use of cleave EVER cuts/involves passing through a target. It's just the imagery the name and mechanical effect/description calls up.

[Fax Celestis]

I know how we're all arguing about elvencraft bows, but why can't you take your cleave with another arrow?


Arrows
An arrow used as a melee weapon is treated as a light improvised weapon (-4 penalty on attack rolls) and deals damage as a dagger of its size (critical multiplier ×2). Arrows come in a leather quiver that holds 20 arrows. An arrow that hits its target is destroyed; one that misses has a 50% chance of being destroyed or lost.
Sure, it's an improvised weapon, but I don't see why you couldn't.

[bjoern]

I know how we're all arguing about elvencraft bows, but why can't you take your cleave with another arrow?


Sure, it's an improvised weapon, but I don't see why you couldn't.

Because your cleave must be made with the same weapon. An improvised arrow isn't thessame weapon that triggered the cleave. The bow did.

[Fax Celestis]

Because your cleave must be made with the same weapon. An improvised arrow isn't thessame weapon that triggered the cleave. The bow did.

Technically, the arrow that is now sticking out of your opponent's corpse did. If we're assuming that the arrow fired from the bow is for the purposes of cleave part of the bow, then that would mean that a newly nocked arrow is also part of the bow, and therefore eligible to cleave with. However, since cleave requires a melee attack, you'd have to stab someone with the arrow rather than shoot them in the face.

EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is, either the arrow itself is the weapon that caused the cleave, and you can't cleave with it because it is thirty feet away sticking out of an orc's face instead of in your hand; or the bow caused the cleave, and the arrow you're now holding is eligible for an extra attack, albeit an improvised one.

[Necroticplague]

I'm not sure this works, but for reasons that have nothing to do with the bow. The way I see it, you didn't drop the enemy with the bow, you dropped them with the arrow. Thus, barring some form of "greater returning", you wouldn't have the weapon you used to drop them anymore.

[Psyren]

Would this work with a gun too? Say, you blow someone away and then quickly pistol whip the guy next to you. Or a throwing knife that could quickly return to your hand somehow - you nail the orc at the other end of the bar and then pivot and shank his goblin buddy that was sneaking up on you.

I don't really have a dog in this fight either way (personally though I think Cleave was meant to be initiated only by melee attacks) but I was just brainstorming other situations where this could apply besides the bow thing in case people were getting hung up on that.

[Fax Celestis]

I'm not sure this works, but for reasons that have nothing to do with the bow. The way I see it, you didn't drop the enemy with the bow, you dropped them with the arrow. Thus, barring some form of "greater returning", you wouldn't have the weapon you used to drop them anymore.

That's my point. It doesn't matter if the bow is elvencraft or not: the thing that did the killing was the arrow that you no longer have in your hands.

[bjoern]

Technically, the arrow that is now sticking out of your opponent's corpse did. If we're assuming that the arrow fired from the bow is for the purposes of cleave part of the bow, then that would mean that a newly nocked arrow is also part of the bow, and therefore eligible to cleave with. However, since cleave requires a melee attack, you'd have to stab someone with the arrow rather than shoot them in the face.

EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is, either the arrow itself is the weapon that caused the cleave, and you can't cleave with it because it is thirty feet away sticking out of an orc's face instead of in your hand; or the bow caused the cleave, and the arrow you're now holding is eligible for an extra attack, albeit an improvised one.

An arrow isn't a weapon (unless improvised for melee or thrown) its ammunition. This relationship between ammunition and weapon is what allows a weapon (the bow) to bestow its enchantment properties onto its ammunition.

Also, it prevents needing MWP: arrow

[Fax Celestis]

An arrow isn't a weapon (unless improvised for melee or thrown) its ammunition. This relationship between ammunition and weapon is what allows a weapon (the bow) to bestow its enchantment properties onto its ammunition.

Also, it prevents needing MWP: arrow

So then if they are inextricably related, I should be able to cleave by stabbing a new arrow into the orc who's standing next to me (because obviously I'm Legolas).

[bjoern]

So then if they are inextricably related, I should be able to cleave by stabbing a new arrow into the orc who's standing next to me (because obviously I'm Legolas).

Lol, if you took MWP: arrow, sure why not.

[Oko and Qailee]

That's my point. It doesn't matter if the bow is elvencraft or not: the thing that did the killing was the arrow that you no longer have in your hands.

This is the best argument I've seen so far.

Is there any cases that would make a ruling like this inconsistent with something else that should work? (Ex. A feat that only works if you drop an enemy with a bow, that obviously isn't cleave)

[Oko and Qailee]

An arrow isn't a weapon (unless improvised for melee or thrown) its ammunition. This relationship between ammunition and weapon is what allows a weapon (the bow) to bestow its enchantment properties onto its ammunition.

Also, it prevents needing MWP: arrow

Actually arrows are "projectile weapons" I'm pretty sure. Unless you'd argue that Woodland Archer feat doesn't work with bows...

Edit: Ignore me I'm dumb

[Psyren]

This is the best argument I've seen so far.

Is there any cases that would make a ruling like this inconsistent with something else that should work?

1) The obvious corner case would be some way of causing a weapon that is usable both for a ranged and a melee attack to return to your hand after being launched. Something that strikes with the weapon itself rather than a projectile. Like the returning property, if it was somehow possible to make that work during iteratives.

2) Another option is a ranged weapon that harms a distant foe without firing a separate projectile - like a laser rifle for instance - which you can then pivot and pistol whip with, or something.

[Oko and Qailee]

1) The obvious corner case would be some way of causing a weapon that is usable both for a ranged and a melee attack to return to your hand after being launched. Something that strikes with the weapon itself rather than a projectile.

2) Another option is a ranged weapon that harms a distant foe without firing a separate projectile - like a laser rifle for instance - which you can then pivot and pistol whip with, or something.

Well since arrows aren't really listed as weapons except in melee cases I'd probably still argue the bow did the dropping of the foe.

Or you can use something like an energy bow, which doesn't use arrows, so it has to be the bow dropping the opponent.

[Oko and Qailee]

Assuming this works

Is there a usable build that can be made focused on this trick? Assuming it doesn't care about taking AOO's.

[Fax Celestis]

1) The obvious corner case would be some way of causing a weapon that is usable both for a ranged and a melee attack to return to your hand after being launched. Something that strikes with the weapon itself rather than a projectile. Like the returning property, if it was somehow possible to make that work during iteratives.

How about Bloodstorm Blade throwing about a greatsword?

EDIT: although hilariously in that case, Bloodstorm Blades get to make ranged cleaves because of their bizarre class features.


2) Another option is a ranged weapon that harms a distant foe without firing a separate projectile - like a laser rifle for instance - which you can then pivot and pistol whip with, or something.

Wand of disintegrate + Wandstrike?

[Psyren]

Assuming this works

Is there a usable build that can be made focused on this trick? Assuming it doesn't care about taking AOO's.

Not taking AoOs is a pretty major consideration for this concept - but beyond that, we can't come up with a build until we find a way of pulling it off to begin with. (Hank's Energy Bow doesn't count - it creates arrows made of force, but they are still arrows.)


How about Bloodstorm Blade throwing about a greatsword?

EDIT: although hilariously in that case, Bloodstorm Blades get to make ranged cleaves because of their bizarre class features.

Can it do that? I honestly am not that familiar with ToB.

[Fax Celestis]

Not taking AoOs is a pretty major consideration for this concept - but beyond that, we can't come up with a build until we find a way of pulling it off to begin with. (Hank's Energy Bow doesn't count - it creates arrows made of force, but they are still arrows.)



Can it do that? I honestly am not that familiar with ToB.

Sure can!


Thunderous Throw (Ex): Beginning at 2nd level, you build up incredible tension as you ready yourself to throw your weapon, which becomes visible around you like heat waves. When you release your weapon, that power rushes out with your weapon. As a swift action, you can choose to treat your ranged attack rolls with thrown weapons as melee attacks for the rest of your turn. You use your melee attack bonus, including Strength bonus, feats, and so forth, to determine your attack bonus for each attack as normal, but you apply the standard modifiers for range penalties. Attacking into melee, through cover, and so forth incurs the standard penalties. In addition, you can apply 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus to damage if you wield the thrown weapon with two hands, and you can use Power Attack with your thrown weapon attacks (adding two times the number subtracted from attack rolls as a bonus on damage rolls when throwing a twohanded weapon).

[...]

Lightning Ricochet (Ex): From 4th level on, you can throw your weapon at a nearby foe and command it to immediately bounce back to your grasp. Any time you make a ranged attack with a thrown weapon on your turn, the weapon immediately returns to you, and you can catch it as a free action. This ability allows you to make a full attack entirely with thrown weapon attacks, or with a mix of thrown and melee attacks.

Just look at that weirdness.

[arclance]

Not taking AoOs is a pretty major consideration for this concept - but beyond that, we can't come up with a build until we find a way of pulling it off to begin with. (Hank's Energy Bow doesn't count - it creates arrows made of force, but they are still arrows.)
There are several ways to eliminate the AoO with bows at least.
I can think of three of the top of my head but there might be more.

1. The Arrow Mind spell.
Ranger 1, Sorcerer/Wizard 1
You threaten at normal (not using a reach weapon) melee range for a creature of your size category with a projectile weapon that fires arrows and can make AoO with the ranged weapon against those squares.
You also do not provoke a AoO when attacking with a projectile weapon that works with this spell.

2. One level of Exotic Weapon Master taking the Close-Quarters Ranged Combat Exotic Weapon Stunt and using an exotic ranged weapon.
Do not provoke a AoO when attacking with a exotic ranged weapon, I recommend a Elvencraft Greatbow.

3. Two levels of Order of the Bow Initiate to get the Close Combat Shot class feature.
"At 2nd level, an initiate can attack with a ranged weapon while in a threatened square and not provoke an attack of opportunity."
This should work with any ranged weapon, possibly even strange things like Fling Ally ("You can launch your comrades into the air as if they were thrown weapons.").

[Psyren]

That 4th level ability looks like just what the OP needs. Though it doesn't actually answer the question, because it specifically allows you to make a mix of thrown and melee attacks, ergo cleaving from a ranged attack would probably be allowed regardless.

[Fax Celestis]

That 4th level ability looks like just what the OP needs. Though it doesn't actually answer the question, because it specifically allows you to make a mix of thrown and melee attacks, ergo cleaving from a ranged attack would probably be allowed regardless.

Sure, but combine it with the 2nd level ability. Throw your greatsword, kill an orc with it, it snaps back to your hands, cleave by throwing it into the brainpan of another orc.

[Caligstro Smith]

So first on the arrow vs bow thing: While the rule about using the arrow itself as an improvised melee weapon mean that it can be used in melee, bjoern hit the nail on the head about the weapon - ammunition distinction. The weapon in this case is the bow, and the arrow is just the ammunition for the bow. It's distinctly separate from the weapon and it's given its own keyword name "ammunition" to make that clear.


Technically, the arrow that is now sticking out of your opponent's corpse did. If we're assuming that the arrow fired from the bow is for the purposes of cleave part of the bow, then that would mean that a newly nocked arrow is also part of the bow, and therefore eligible to cleave with. However, since cleave requires a melee attack, you'd have to stab someone with the arrow rather than shoot them in the face.

EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is, either the arrow itself is the weapon that caused the cleave, and you can't cleave with it because it is thirty feet away sticking out of an orc's face instead of in your hand; or the bow caused the cleave, and the arrow you're now holding is eligible for an extra attack, albeit an improvised one.

The idea of considering the arrow to be part of the bow and thus part of the same weapon is a completely RAI type of reasoning, however. RAW it is a distinct item. You cannot have a multi-distinct-item singular "weapon" in 3.5.

When you make a ranged attack with a bow, you are using a weapon (bow) with ammunition for it (arrow).



Would this work with a gun too? Say, you blow someone away and then quickly pistol whip the guy next to you. Or a throwing knife that could quickly return to your hand somehow - you nail the orc at the other end of the bar and then pivot and shank his goblin buddy that was sneaking up on you.

I don't really have a dog in this fight either way (personally though I think Cleave was meant to be initiated only by melee attacks) but I was just brainstorming other situations where this could apply besides the bow thing in case people were getting hung up on that.

Yes it would work with a gun. Unless guns have some kind of special rule/property that allows them to be used for pistol whipping though (I'm not aware if they do) , The melee attack would also be as with an improvised weapon. This would then be exactly analogous to the case I mentioned earlier when I pointed out you could do this with a NORMAL longbow and just whack someone with it as an improvised weapon.

I actually already mentioned the returning throwing knife example too, along with other sorts of situations where this could be interesting to look at (just as an aside at the end of a post):


There are several other interesting cases related to this that could be brought up, involving things like (again) returning weapons or weapons with similar effects, bloodstorm blades, and possibly the spell blood wind.


How about Bloodstorm Blade throwing about a greatsword?

EDIT: although hilariously in that case, Bloodstorm Blades get to make ranged cleaves because of their bizarre class features.

Exactly. Man, I love all the weird things bloodstorm blades do to/with rules. Always interesting and funny to think about. :smallbiggrin:


Wand of disintegrate + Wandstrike?

I'm not sure if the normal use of a wand counts as a weapon. I'm pretty sure it's its own item type "wand." I could be wrong about this though..?



Regarding builds we can use/build around this. To be honest, building around this is your CORE trick would be very difficult (bloodstorm blade excepted), because you are specializing in situations where you have multiple opponents, some of which are in melee and some of which are at range. This isn't really something you'd want to rely on being the case all the time I wouldn't think.

In the bloodstorm blade case, it's really more about optimizing bloodstorm blades in general. I've kicked around the idea of doing one myself before, but never actually sat down and planned it out exactly how I'd want to do one, but just googling bloodstorm blade handbook will find you all kinds of cool tricks that are like/related to this and/or could synergize with it. Master Thrower PrC ofc being a good option. IIRC Haberdash (I think it was that build? w/e I'm sure googling something like "iajutsu focus bloodstorm blade master thrower" would find you the build w/o too much trouble) slapped on iajutsu focus and did the same thing with a gnomish quickrazor for many lulz.

Regarding AoOs there's also all kinds of things you can do about/with them/with provoking them. Tome of battle has cool stuff IIRC (it's another build type I've kicked around but never fleshed out so I can't give specific suggestions as easily), and Dictum Mortum's Fighter's handbook has a section on AoO fighting style too (just pay attention to the stuff that works on provoking them)