Cleave Question

[Grug]

Qucik question: if someone with cleave hits you and you feign death, does cleave activate?

[Ikkitosen]

RAW, nope.

[SpiderBrigade]

Heheh, this is where you get into the creative application of what the rules on Cleave mean when they say "enough damage to make a creature drop." It's clearly meant to mean you've killed or rendered unconscious. But if your target purposely drops...well, there's problems either way you rule it. On the one hand, the cleavER would know you were faking, rendering it pointless to feign death. On the other hand, this opens up new versions of the old "bag of rats" trick. Plus you get into people wanting to get cleave attacks after they tripped someone, since they "dropped" the foe.

messy, messy, messy.

[DaMullet]

No, I would think not. An argument could be made for it, but I don't think that's how the rules were intended.

[Gamebird]

Funny side note: No where in the RAW does it stipulate that a dead or dying character falls to the ground or otherwise attains the Prone condition. A dying character is unconscious and can take no actions, but it doesn't say you fall down...

Ditto for Hold Person, which freezes you into place. These aren't entirely academic or comedic questions, as anyone who has ever been affected by Hold Person, or been healed up from negative hit points knows. Right away you want to know if you have to spend an action and provoke an Attack of Opportunity to get up. For a character in negative hit points, the common sense answer is obvious that they fell down, but for a held character it's not so clear.

[kamikasei]

I've always pictured a held character as being like the guard in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon who gets into the fight between Jade Fox and the policeman: frozen dead still mid-pose, looking extremely sheepish.

[I_Got_This_Name]

I'd imagine that a Held character stays standing. It seems more interesting, to me, to have a character simply freeze in place, rather than collapse onto the ground. The mage chanting a spell, then the thief simply stopping in his tracks and not moving looks better than the mage casting and the thief falling, motionless but alive; I'd save the falling for death effects.

Hold is mind-affecting, so it just blocks their ability to decide what they do; think of it as a simple Dominate that can only command them to hold perfectly still.

Regarding Cleave, I'd probably allow it if the person you're attacking is an enemy. An ally intentionally provoking an AoO, then feigning death to get you a free Cleave, nets you a smack across the face. An enemy feigning death after a hit nets you a cleave (and possibly automatic critical damage against the guy feigning). RAW, though, don't allow it.

[El Jaspero, the Pirate King]

It's an interesting question...I'd sum it up to a matter of belief. Make a Bluff check to see if the foe buys it; if they do, sure. Give 'em a free shot at your buddy, I'm sure he'll appreciate it. If they don't buy it, they know they didn't drop you and Cleave doesn't activate, so you could never, for instance, have an ally "Cleave" you since they'd know you weren't dead (at least one hopes).

At least that's how I'd DM it.

[Bears With Lasers]

Funny side note: No where in the RAW does it stipulate that a dead or dying character falls to the ground or otherwise attains the Prone condition. A dying character is unconscious and can take no actions, but it doesn't say you fall down...

I've seen you post "the RAW doesn't say..." a bunch lately, and it doesn't work that way. What it says matters, not what it doesn't say; just because it doesn't say something doesn't mean that isn't the case. The RAW doesn't say that humans have two arms, either; that doesn't mean that you can be a ten-armed human by RAW.

[alchemy.freak]

I say, why not. the enemy dropped. it may open it up for some abuse, but it makes sense if the target tried to play possum.

[Grey Watcher]

Personally, I'd say, no. I always pictured cleave as carrying through the momentum of the blow (which doesn't work so well for piercing weaposn, but whatever). If you didn't do enough damage to push through or past your foe, you simply can't carry through to your other target. Now, I suppose the abstract nature of the rules don't necessarily support this interpretation, but that'd be my reasoning to rule against faking death to prompt Cleave.

And, of course, WHY?

[alchemy.freak]

but what if the person dropped on purpose, that would not cause you to lose momentum on your swing.

and they would drop in order to play dead, much like a possum. either to escape, or to attack you while you let your guard down. in D&D i dont usually check for a pulse i just assume

[Grey Watcher]

but what if the person dropped on purpose, that would not cause you to lose momentum on your swing.

and they would drop in order to play dead, much like a possum. either to escape, or to attack you while you let your guard down. in D&D i dont usually check for a pulse i just assume

I suppose, but I would think (having no experience with combat beyond having toyed with fencing and karate as a child) that the amount of time it takes for a person to realize they've been hit and decide to drop would be just enough time to kill said momentum. But I'm not sure. I think, for balance reasons, SpiderBrigade is on the right track. Allowing this opens the slippery slope to all kinds of cheesey Cleavage. :smallwink:

[Gamebird]

And, of course, WHY?

I've had enemies reduced to exactly 0 hit points fall down and pretend to be dead hoping the PCs would move on and give them a chance to crawl away to safety and hide. In none of those cases did it involve Cleave, but if it had, I'd have allowed the Cleave. I always resolved it with a free action Heal roll vs. the target's Bluff check (which usually sucked). But a Sense Motive vs. Bluff would also work.

Edit: And Bears, I'll think about that. (Actually, I'm pretty RAW does stipulate that people have two arms, two legs and one head in the description of the Humanoid type. Of course it doesn't say you don't have fully functional wings and lay golden eggs everyday, so you have a point.)

[alchemy.freak]

Allowing this opens the slippery slope to all kinds of cheesey Cleavage. :smallwink:

Very true, but from a realism stand point it works. they would probably have to ready an action to do it, though.

and conversely it can actually disadvantage the person doing the attack, or the party even. if the target dropped the party will almost definitely assume they are dead, or at least incapable of fighting back. while in fact they are capable of hitting you hard, and when you and the party looks away you are flat footed and surprised when the enemy attacks you from behind. and since this seems like a very rougeish tactic they probably get in a sneak attack as well.

yes it may help you get in some cheap attacks, but then it opens you up to some other really cheap attacks.

[Fawsto]

I personaly Houserule that if you manage to make a foe fall down during you attack, you may cleave. Mostly because of the Knock Down Feat and the translation of the books to my lenguage, where tripping and dropping are the same thing.

But to feint death... Hmmm sounds difficult here. In one hand you are "dropping" so the atack is "going by you". But in the other, this is something too voluntary. Very hard to houserule at a plausible way.

[Grug]

The way I would rule it is that hitting an opponent who feigns death immediately afterwards would allow Cleave, because the idea of cleave is that the first opponent you strike is no longer inhibiting the stroke of your weapon, allowing you to use the momentum for another attack. If someone falls prone the same thing happens. That would make an interesting boss fight with two fighters with cleave. If you fall prone to dodge (attack roll against you with only dodge and insight AC) they automatically cleave eachother.

[SpiderBrigade]

I think that the character would have to have readied an action to feign being killed by your blow. In other words, when you hit him he'd go limp, and your momentum could continue into the cleave. So it wouldn't work to just say, oh, btw I feign death now, you' d have to get set to do it properly.

[brian c]

The way I would rule it is that hitting an opponent who feigns death immediately afterwards would allow Cleave, because the idea of cleave is that the first opponent you strike is no longer inhibiting the stroke of your weapon, allowing you to use the momentum for another attack. If someone falls prone the same thing happens. That would make an interesting boss fight with two fighters with cleave. If you fall prone to dodge (attack roll against you with only dodge and insight AC) they automatically cleave eachother.

Um... I don't think that would work? What do you mean they cleave each other? If they aren't enemies, you aren't required to take an additional attack after dropping a foe with cleave, it's optional. I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here.

[Erom]

I always figured cleaving referred to, well, cleaving. As it cutting one opponent right open/ in two, and smaking the guy next to him when you "carried through" on the stroke. So if the guy goes limp when you hit him, that's not really the same situation as you cutting through him.

I wouldn't allow a cleave there.

[Diggorian]

Mmmmmm ... cheesy cleavage. :smalltongue:

I'd say definately not since the feat description specifically defines drop as taking them out of the fight through damage (typically to negative hp or killing, but I'd allow it with sudual forcing a KO too).

From the nature of hitpoints I think it'll hard to feign death as an attack that leaves postive hitpoints is a scratch, while a downing attack is pretty gruesome being life-threatening trauma. Wouldnt an experienced meleer know the feel of hitting meat too? Maybe +10-15 to Sense Motive vs the Bluff.

[Grug]

It doesn't have to cut them in half, it just has to hit soft enough parts to not have to change direction.

Oh yeah, the maneuver would defenitely require a readied action. In fact, the feigner would have to voluntarily take the hit at a reduced AC, which might clue in the attacker that something is wrong.

As for the 2 fighter cleaving, they're NPCs so they have to cleave when i tell them to.

[Indon]

Well, thinking about what Cleave is meant to represent, I get the impression of smashing/cutting through a target to strike the next one. Someone couldn't just say, "I let his axe sever my torso", or at least they wouldn't want to.

I'd say if someone actively wants to make someone with cleave think they've been dropped, I'd require them to ready a Tumble check to drop without _actively_ being cut in half or whathaveyou. A failure on the Tumble check means the character being struck would take more damage; probably an auto-threat.