I've not been happy with how Cleaving works with ranged weapons, specifically with how it is rationalized. However, I cannot see just removing Cleaving, and to do so against just ranged weapons favors melee weapons to no good purpose. Has anyone worked on any alternatives?
One I’m thinking about is that Cleaving occurs only when a natural 20 is rolled on the initial attack establishing that a Cleaving attack is occurring. If the attack is melee and the target does not die then the attacker can continue to make attack rolls against the original target until he rolls a miss up to the number of Cleave attacks allowed rolling damage for each hit. So a 6th level Fighter who rolls a 20 on his initial to hit roll against a tough opponent, and then rolls two more successful attacks before missing would apply his damage rolls 3 times to the opponent. If the opponent does before he finishes Cleaving he does NOT get to continue his Cleaving attacks against another nearby opponent. Alternatively, if the target of the initial natural 20 melee attack roll dies as a result of the initial damage then the attacker may continue to Cleave as the ACKS rules currently state.
For missile weapons they would only be able to Cleave using the option above where the damage is applied against a single target. It seems more rational, but I haven’t put this into actual play. Some consequences of this change I foresee are:
Cleaving occurring less often against low hit point opponents, but happening more often against high hit point opponents.
This could model a scenario similar Bard of Lake Town taking out Smaug with a single arrow as is done in The Hobbit.
PCs, even mid to high level, could get taken out with 1-shot if they get Cleaved. Especially those with a low AC.
Point 3 above is causing me to hesitate implementing this alternate form of Cleaving. Has anyone else made an alteration to Cleaving that they’ve found satisfactory?
You could use your proposed alterna-cleave just for ranged attacks, but leave melee cleaves the same. This creates a bit of an odd niche where melee attackers are strongest against many small foes while ranged attackers have the possibility of being strong against very large foes.
You probably need to do some tweaking on the numbers though. Cleaving in part exists in order to give fighters something to try desperate to keep up with mages (I personally think it still doesn't go far enough, but that's a law unto itself for my own campaign). I couldn't say what the general math scenario is, but consider a situation of a fighter with +2 strength vs. goblins with 1 AC and 1-1HD. they're going to hit 60% of the time, doing 1d6+2 damage, which is going to be more than 1d8-1 X% of the time, and then have a chance to repeat for an increasingly small %. I'm not sure what the overall total is, but it's got to be better than 5% for rolling a natural 20. I suppose the odds get substantially worse as monsters get more HP, though.
If I increase the range of the roll to Cleave I'm afraid that'll exasperate my concerns about PCs going down with a single hit as it will happen more often. I could make a HR that Cleaving is something that only PCs can do as the protagonists of the campaign, but that seems a bit more 'narrativist' than I'm comfortable with. I'd also need to look at reducing the XP of the opponents if I take Cleave away from them. As it currently stands I guess I'm going to keep the Cleaving rules by the book. Any other alternatives that are suggested would still be welcome as food for thought.
Is this why you’re considering this change? Maybe we could look at what you are experiencing in play more closely to suggest alternatives?
I think I might list Fighter Damage Bonus and Cleave as ACKS’ greatest feature. Definitely it can make being a low level PC against higher HD monsters deadly. And you’ll not likely hear, “Eh, it’s just a ghoul …” But I personally hesitate to dramatically change Cleave …
Maybe monsters/fighters half HD Cleave, clerics/rogues quarter HD Cleave and no “breakthrough” spells for spell casters (RAW Sleep 3rd level, etc.). A big change that lowers lethality across the board.
On rationalization, I believe it’s important to remember the combat mechanics are an abstraction, best evaluated in total, not blow for blow.
For example, I love that a crossbow can Cleave in ACKS. On its face, this is patently absurd. However, it could be an abstraction for many different actual outcomes: a well-placed shot, a penetrating shot (bolts did penetrate rider and horse) or a tumbling shot (bolts tumbled, causing nasty wounds).
There is an absurdity to a shot from a longbow killing 4 orcs standing abreast of the attacker that I don't like. The book states it could be viewed as attacker having a zen moment where he temporarily improves his rate of fire, but t seems weird that this happens only on occasion. These zen moments also happen usually against weak/near dead opponents. It hurts my head more when I consider an attacker cranking the windlass on an arbalest multiple times in a round. However, I agree Fighters need something akin to Cleaving to stay useful at higher levels. I'm not going to drop Cleave unless I find something "better", but I haven't found that yet. I'm still looking/hoping.
perhaps the solution is a nerf to ranged attacks where the arrow has to be able to logically shoot through all of the would be victims. you could even limit it to just crossbows and let regular bows be unaffected. it just means there have to be at least 2 ranks of foes for the crossbow to get to cleave.
So in my opinion, the issue is not too problematic for bows, especially composite bows and short bows. The historical record recounts numerous examples of "fast firing" and recent tests have shown that skilled archers using low-pull bows (short bows) can unleash arrows at a rate of more than 1 per second.
Even using a longbow, a skilled archer could fire perhaps 11 arrows in sixty seconds. That's about 2 shots per combat round. It's within my suspension of disbelief to allow cleaving with longbows.
But even a skilled crossbowman can only fire perhaps 6 bolts in a minute. It just seems impossible to imagine cleaving with a crossbow unless you imagine one shot doing multiple kills.
Here's a couple of possible approaches.
Increase longbow, crossbow, and arbalest damage by one die code each.
Characters receive only one-half their cleaves with longbows, but gain double their fighter damage bonus and their STR bonus, if any.
Characters cannot cleave with crossbows or arbalests, but gain triple their fighter damage bonus.
Now, this would make longbows and crossbows wielded by skilled characters *very dangerous*. There is a trope that "bows kill dragons and crossbows kill knights" so this is not per se an unacceptable outcome, but it does change the game to one where melee weapons are used to sweep away large numbers of weak foes, while missile weapons target solitary tough foes.
Another idea:
Characters cannot cleave with crossbows or arbalests, but increase crossbow and arbalest damage by one die code each.
Characters receive only one-half their cleaves with longbows, but can add their STR bonus, if any, to damage.
If a character wielding a longbow, crossbow, or arbalest hits a target with a natural 20, the target must make an immediate saving throw v. Death. If it fails, the target suffers damage as if it had been hit by ever cleave the attacker possesses. (For instance, a 10th level fighter would do 10d6 damage). (This is the "Bard kills Smaug" rule, I guess.)
Along these lines (riffing, etc) consider giving crossbows “armor penetration” of an amount equal to the cleave number. Skilled shooters can hit Smaug in the weak spot.
On a related note, how awesome was that bowcaster?
I'm taking another stab at alternate rules for "cleaving" with missile weapons. I need to get them to be less wordy and more concise, but any feedback from anyone would be appreciated.
The Cleaving rules for missile weapons BTB are weird. The idea that an arbalest can be
fired up to 3 times in a round (10 seconds) using these rules is not credible. However,
removing cleaving entirely from missile weapons is also a poor option. The following
changes are being made:
a. Arbalest, crossbows and dwarven firearms (too expensive and hard to find for
any of the starting PCs to have anyway) increase their damage by one die type
so that arbalests and firearms cause d10 damage and crossbows d8.
b. Arbalests, crossbows and firearms may not cleave.
c. Combatants may add their Strength bonus to their damage rolls when using
longbows or thrown weapons, including slings.
d. Cleave attacks by missile weapons are triggered by a successful attack throw,
regardless of whether the target is killed or incapacitated. So long as the
subsequent attack throws are successful the combatant may continue to make
cleave attacks up to the maximum limit as determined by either character class
or weapon type. This represents the character entering a zen state of mind that
gets disrupted by missing the target.
i. Characters that have moved on their turn may not make cleave attacks
with missile weapons. An exception to this are mounted characters who
have the Riding proficiency.
ii. Combatants that use the fighter attack throw progression or better may make a maximum
number of cleave attacks per round equal to their Hit Dice (not level),
excluding the 0-level ‘kicker’ d8 hit dice every character is getting. Clerics,
thieves and other characters that use the cleric/thief attack throw
progression may make a maximum number of cleave
attacks per round equal to half their Hit Dice (rounded down). Mages and characters that use the Mage attack throw progression may not make
cleave attacks.
iii. When making cleave attacks with missile weapons, combatants are
limited to a maximum of 3 with longbow and 4 with composite bow,
shortbow, sling, darts, daggers or javelins. Other missile weapons such
as the hand axe, spear, holy water or oil are not capable of cleave attacks as missile attacks.
Apologies for the formatting above, but trying to copy paste from a docx to the forum on my phone has been more difficult than it should be.
An advantage that missile troops will gain from the above rule is that they don't have to kill an opponent to cleave. They can cleave so long as they don't miss, which interrupts their zen state of mind. I'm trying to rebalance this by requiring them to not move when cleaving.
I've always interpreted the cleaving rules for ranged weapons to mean hitting someone with the same arrow by traveling straight through. it's about as unrealistic as reloading that quickly, but it's also really epic to imagine. In turn, I loosely enforce that the kills should go in something resembling a straight line, which since a lot of my battles just involve describing how many ranks the kobolds are currently formed into, is not that hard.
Ok, but on to actually commenting on your rules. These are interesting, and vaguely reminiscent of rules that exist for the Gunslinger from Pathfinder. If you've never played 3.x, every +6 bonus you get translates into an extra attack per turn at a lower bonus, so high level fighter types will have bonuses like +6/+1 or even +12/+6/+1. They had long since allowed feats to shrink the reload time of crossbows, but for guns it seemed like a bridge too far without allowing six-shooters. Instead, gunslingers could take feats that permitted them to roll all of their attacks against a single target, doing all the damage from all the hits, representing a single shot that had been extremely carefully aimed.
Much like those rules, yours make ranged attackers ideal for quickly dispatching much higher level/tough foes. Bugbears and Ogres could quickly be at risk of getting dropped by a fighter taking aim with a rifle. Maybe this is intended, as the fighter would have to be similarly high level to reliably achieve so many cleaves, but it does mean that two high level foes at a high distance are likely to end before one reaches the other, and there's not a large incentive to close if they both have ranged weapons.
And thank you for taking the time to give such a detailed response! I had not thought that my rule would steer fighters into stationary figures plugging away at each other with their longbows. I think in this case I might have to back of the urge for greater realism a bit.
And thank you for taking the time to give such a detailed response! I had not thought that my rule would steer fighters into stationary figures plugging away at each other with their longbows. I think in this case I might have to back of the urge for greater realism a bit.
[/quote]
it can be easy to forget that fighters are the best archers, and are not relegated to melee. Once again, 3.x helped a lot of my outlook on this. Or rather, a 3.x era running joke called "Legolas was a fighter, not a ranger" that dissected everything he did in the movies that proved he needed too many feats to be a ranger.
c. Combatants may add their Strength bonus to their damage rolls when using longbows or thrown weapons, including slings.
I might use a rule like this, but I'd require that it be a weapon specifically crafted for the character, e.g. a bow with a heavy pull, at a higher cost. Magic bows might always have a pull that adjusts to the character.
d. Cleave attacks by missile weapons are triggered by a successful attack throw, regardless of whether the target is killed or incapacitated. So long as the subsequent attack throws are successful the combatant may continue to make cleave attacks up to the maximum limit as determined by either character class or weapon type. This represents the character entering a zen state of mind that gets disrupted by missing the target.
Jard has already pointed out why this will cause unwanted effects. We ran into these problems in various ACKS playtests.
Here is the rule we almost went with. You are welcome to givie it a go. A character receives a number of attacks equal to his HD. However, to make an attack he must expend a number of attacks equal to the target's Hit Dice.
EXAMPLE: 8th level fighter fighting 16 orcs (1HD), an ogre (4HD), and a giant (8HD). He could fire 8 shots at orcs, or 2 shots at the ogre, or 1 shot at the giant, or 4 shots at the orcs and 1 at the ogre.
In-world, the idea is that tougher targets require more time to aim, either tracking them because they are so fast-moving or looking for the weak spot because they are so tough.
i. Characters that have moved on their turn may not make cleave attacks with missile weapons. An exception to this are mounted characters who have the Riding proficiency.
Thoughts for less intrusive houserules regarding crossbows:
Crossbow cleaves can only be made with specially made repeating crossbows (whether these are magical or simply excellent engineering is up to you). These weapons were not unknown in antiquity either, being utilized by the ancient Chinese. Kind of clunky, but provides a different layer of wealth differentiation. You can decrease the cost of regular crossbows if you think they become too expensive for what they provide.
Increase the damage die of crossbows by one size, but only allow Cleaving attacks up to the number of pre-loaded crossbows the character has handy (either readied in a sling, or in the hands of a nearby retainer that can hand it off to him) - sort of a "crossbow gunslinger" image of a character slinging multiple hand crossbows out at once. This can also be used with the presence of repeating crossbows (which may be reduced in damage to compensate if you so choose). Generally this will make a crossbow-focused character more expensive than a bow character, but with the potential for more damage.
Keep in mind cleaves are restricted to 2 for crossbows, 3 for longbows, and 4 for other ranged weapons, so your crossbow-slinger isn't *that* ridiculous. And it certainly feels very lordly to fire off a crossbow then grab a second one from your designated crossbow-holding retrainer. These rules would also work well for Cleaving with early firearms like matchlock pistols and model the idea of carrying a brace of pistols very well.