EDIT : FFG has issued a ruling on this, which is provided here .

I submitted this question to FFG probably a month ago now, but never got a response back. So I'll pose it to you all, and I apologize for the vagueness, I don't have the cards in front of me at the moment.

"Cleave" is a keyword found on many melee weapons, and its behavior is fairly well defined in that context: the extra damage can only be applied to a figure that the attacker could have attacked (so it must be adjacent, or within 1 space if the attacker has Reach).

However, Gaarkhan has an XP upgrade that gives him access to Cleave without a dependency on any particular weapon. Rebels are also permitted to bring more than one weapon on a mission, and although Gaarkhan starts with a melee weapon, I don't see any rule that says he can't use ranged weapons.

So what happens when he makes a ranged attack and uses the Cleave upgrade from his XP card? The rules for Cleave never specify that it only works for melee attacks, so as-written, it seems like he could Cleave onto any figure he "could target for an attack", which means anyone in his line of sight, at any range. For example, he could shoot someone at short range (assuming he passes the range check on the dice roll and inflicts at least 1 damage), and then put the Cleave damage on another figure 10 spaces away, without any additional range check.

You could even argue that the wording of Cleave ("a different hostile figure or object that he could target for an attack") doesn't even necessarily say that it has to be with the same weapon. So if Gaarkhan is carrying both a melee and a ranged weapon, he could make a melee attack and then Cleave onto a figure at extreme range, since his second (ranged) weapon makes that figure valid to "target for an attack".

That seems ridiculous, but I can't see any rule that forbids it. Thoughts?

Your assumptions are correct. Gaarkhan is able to cleave with a range weapon using "Wookie Loyalty" as long as he has LOS with the target. As well as the 1 melee/1 range weapon scenario.

I am not sure if this was the intent - but rules-wise, you are correct.

We have a good Fizzgrid™ example of this exact question. Lemme see if I can dig it up.

I submitted this question to FFG probably a month ago now, but never got a response back. So I'll pose it to you all, and I apologize for the vagueness, I don't have the cards in front of me at the moment.

"Cleave" is a keyword found on many melee weapons, and its behavior is fairly well defined in that context: the extra damage can only be applied to a figure that the attacker could have attacked (so it must be adjacent, or within 1 space if the attacker has Reach).

However, Gaarkhan has an XP upgrade that gives him access to Cleave without a dependency on any particular weapon. Rebels are also permitted to bring more than one weapon on a mission, and although Gaarkhan starts with a melee weapon, I don't see any rule that says he can't use ranged weapons.

So what happens when he makes a ranged attack and uses the Cleave upgrade from his XP card? The rules for Cleave never specify that it only works for melee attacks, so as-written, it seems like he could Cleave onto any figure he "could target for an attack", which means anyone in his line of sight, at any range. For example, he could shoot someone at short range (assuming he passes the range check on the dice roll and inflicts at least 1 damage), and then put the Cleave damage on another figure 10 spaces away, without any additional range check.

You could even argue that the wording of Cleave ("a different hostile figure or object that he could target for an attack") doesn't even necessarily say that it has to be with the same weapon. So if Gaarkhan is carrying both a melee and a ranged weapon, he could make a melee attack and then Cleave onto a figure at extreme range, since his second (ranged) weapon makes that figure valid to "target for an attack".

That seems ridiculous, but I can't see any rule that forbids it. Thoughts?

So, if garkan is doing a melee attack, then the cleave would be associated with the type of attack done (melee or range). Thus if garkan did a melee attack using reach, the cleave would be limited to the melee/reach limitations.

The type of attack is determined by the weapon used.

So if using a melee weapon, then that is the attack type.

RRG page 5 goes over the attack steps.

1. Declare target: based upon its attack type melee or ranged etc etc

So now we have determined that the attack type is established with step 1 of the attack sequence.

Now let's go to cleave RRG page 8:

If the target of this figures attack (my comment here is that the figure attacking has determined the attack type based on attack rule 1) suffers one or more damage, the attacker may choose a different hostile figure or object that he could target for an attack.

So you can use the range weapon to cleave 2 los targets on near opposite sides of board provided you have los to each target and whatever other conditions that would make that cleaved unit an eligible target.

But you can't do a melee attack and cleave with a ranged weapon because the melee attack would impose the restrictions of that attack to being melee restrictions.

I'm in agreement with all that you said except for the second to last paragraph.

I can see your reasoning about not being able to mix weapons, but I still think it's silly and probably unintentional for Gaarkhan to be able to shoot one target in one direction and then "cleave" some damage onto another target all the way across the map, especially since that would bypass the regular range checks to apply damage at literally any distance.

I suspect that FFG intended "cleave" to be for melee and "blast" to be for ranged attacks, and as far as I'm aware, those keywords only ever appear on weapons of those respective types -- that is, there is no ranged weapon with "cleave" and no melee weapon with "blast". The only exception I know of is Gaarkhan's XP card, where FFG perhaps just forgot that he doesn't necessarily have to always use melee weapons, even though he starts with one.

But you can't do a melee attack and cleave with a ranged weapon because the melee attack would impose the restrictions of that attack to being melee restrictions.

You would not be restricted to the attack type.

Cleave states:

"The chosen figure or object must be an eligible target. "

and Target states:

"When declaring an attack, the attacker chooses a figure to attack. This figure is referred to as the target."

So what you are actually doing when you cleave is essentially doing is going back to step one and declaring an attack, which you are able to switch to a ranged weapon.

You are able to attack with a melee and cleave with a ranged.

Again - this may or may not be how it was intended, but for now that is what the rules state.

Diala's lightsaber throw ability turns her melee weapon into a ranged weapon, so it is not like the designers didnt think about this kind of situation during playtesting.

If you think about it, Cleave isnt that big of a deal. It's a single legal target taking Cleave X damage. If they didnt think of this situation ahead of time, they would have worded Cleave to state that the figure must be either adjacent to the attacker or the target, and they did not.

But you can't do a melee attack and cleave with a ranged weapon because the melee attack would impose the restrictions of that attack to being melee restrictions.

You would not be restricted to the attack type.

Cleave states:

"The chosen figure or object must be an eligible target. "

and Target states:

"When declaring an attack, the attacker chooses a figure to attack. This figure is referred to as the target."

So what you are actually doing when you cleave is essentially doing is going back to step one and declaring an attack, which you are able to switch to a ranged weapon.

You are able to attack with a melee and cleave with a ranged.

Again - this may or may not be how it was intended, but for now that is what the rules state.

I disagree. I don't read the rules as allowing you to switch attack types from melee to ranged to determine other non-attack damage.

Once the attack type is determined in the attack step one, then you are limited to that attack type's limitations for what is eligible for a target when cleaving.

Also, note the limitation in RRG on page 8:

The chosen figure or object must be an eligible target. For example, for a melee attack (without reach), the chosen figure must be adjacent to the attacker.

Thus as you can see, you can't switch to a ranged cleave if the original target of the attack was declared using melee.

The example could be assuming the figure did not also have a ranged weapon equipped. I could see it both both ways. Either way, it would be a nice question to submit to FFG.

Additionally:

"Special situations regarding attacks", RRG, Page 6:

During a campaign, when a hero declares the target of his attack he must also declare one of his weapons to use for this attack.

He/she cannot swap weapons mid-attack.

Diala's lightsaber throw ability turns her melee weapon into a ranged weapon, so it is not like the designers didnt think about this kind of situation during playtesting.

If you think about it, Cleave isnt that big of a deal. It's a single legal target taking Cleave X damage. If they didnt think of this situation ahead of time, they would have worded Cleave to state that the figure must be either adjacent to the attacker or the target, and they did not.

No, they said it would need to be adjacent to the attacker during a melee attack

It means that if you range attack, then the target just needs to be in los and whatever other eligible conditions must be met and you can cleave another target.

So long as you apply the limitations to the cleaved target set forth in the original attack. Melee limitation, melee with reach limitations and range limitations such as los.

The example could be assuming the figure did not also have a ranged weapon equipped. I could see it both both ways. Either way, it would be a nice question to submit to FFG.

I disagree again.

They would not have used the word must when talking about selecting a melee ranged cleave target.

In fact, if you could switch attack types for the cleave target, then the whole rule setting forth the melee restriction wouldn't make sense at all.

Yah, a cleave isn't a new attack, that means you use whatever weapon you initiated that attack with. However I don't see any issue with it working on a ranged attack. I would however submit it to FFG for clarification as its a pretty odd situation.

I stand corrected! But we all agree on the first point that Gaarkhan is able to cleave with a range weapon using "Wookie Loyalty" as long as he has LOS with the target?

I stand corrected! But we all agree on the first point that Gaarkhan is able to cleave with a range weapon using "Wookie Loyalty" as long as he has LOS with the target?

I agree. As long as he has los and any other restrictions are met to make the target eligible.

It's an odd thing and I wonder if it will get adjusted in a FAQ.

I stand corrected! But we all agree on the first point that Gaarkhan is able to cleave with a range weapon using "Wookie Loyalty" as long as he has LOS with the target?

I agree. As long as he has los and any other restrictions are met to make the target eligible.

It's an odd thing and I wonder if it will get adjusted in a FAQ.

If I had to guess I'm thinking Cleave will be limited to melee and blast to ranged attacks in an upcoming FAQ.We'll find out soon before nationals hopefully.

It may only be a small amount of damage, but it's completely unblockable damage, and it bypasses the normal balance of having to roll a range check to hurt things that are far away. As for the wording, if they had in mind "cleave only appears on melee weapons anyway" then saying the cleave target must be eligible to target for an attack would be equivalent to an adjacency requirement. It's just this one place where cleave isn't on a melee weapon that makes it an issue at all.

it would be a nice question to submit to FFG.

I would however submit it to FFG for clarification as its a pretty odd situation.

I did submit it to them about a month ago and got no response, but I suppose I can try again.

As for the wording, if they had in mind "cleave only appears on melee weapons anyway" then saying the cleave target must be eligible to target for an attack would be equivalent to an adjacency requirement. It's just this one place where cleave isn't on a melee weapon that makes it an issue at all.

FWIW They do address adjacency by mentioning reach in the cleave section. I think that's why cleave is written as loosely as it is. To allow for reach or things like light saber throws. The whole wookie loyalty bit probably just slipped through the cracks.

it would be a nice question to submit to FFG.

I would however submit it to FFG for clarification as its a pretty odd situation.

I did submit it to them about a month ago and got no response, but I suppose I can try again.

--If only there were a link to that in my signature....oh wait....there IS!

When you submit questions and get responses (if they are worded well, you usually get a response in a few days), PM me the content and I can add it to the official FAQ post.

I stand corrected! But we all agree on the first point that Gaarkhan is able to cleave with a range weapon using "Wookie Loyalty" as long as he has LOS with the target?

I would think the accuracy rolled would come into account here, would it not?

He'd need enough accuracy to hit his primary target and apply at least 1 damage before he'd be eligible to Cleave in the first place. But after that, the wording of Cleave specifically says that the secondary target only has to be valid "to target with an attack", and with a ranged weapon he can certainly *target* anyone in his line-of-sight, even if they're too far away to possibly hit on a regular shot.

That's part of what makes me think Cleave was never intended to work on ranged attacks at all, or else they would surely have mentioned something about the range check in the Cleave rules.

He'd need enough accuracy to hit his primary target and apply at least 1 damage before he'd be eligible to Cleave in the first place. But after that, the wording of Cleave specifically says that the secondary target only has to be valid "to target with an attack", and with a ranged weapon he can certainly *target* anyone in his line-of-sight, even if they're too far away to possibly hit on a regular shot.

That's part of what makes me think Cleave was never intended to work on ranged attacks at all, or else they would surely have mentioned something about the range check in the Cleave rules.

That and hitting a target on the opposite site of the map from your primary target....

Your assumptions are correct. Gaarkhan is able to cleave with a range weapon using "Wookie Loyalty" as long as he has LOS with the target. As well as the 1 melee/1 range weapon scenario.

I am not sure if this was the intent - but rules-wise, you are correct.

I think the card is Ferocity and not Wookiee Loyalty.

Even if he is allowed to cleave at range how many would actually do it? This is just one of those things I dislike, when you use a lophole to game the game. It is obvious to everyone I think that cleave is meant to be melee only, using it for range is just wrong, I would never play this way.